Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Simsung Padecain
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 14:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
It has come to my attention that CCP has another glorious feature making it's way into WH space. (currently on sisi)
The distance that your ship will be ejected out of a wormhole after you jump, is based on it's mass. Capital ships go up to 40km off the wormhole!
I am very, very curious what's the thought process behind this change, because as a 2+ years old inhabitant of WH space, I can think of ONE positive aspect and numerous negative ones.
Positive: No more combat rolling (there was counter play to it - going all in)
Negative: Even more tedious finding active wormholes for fights / other activities Less confidence in using capital ships in fights as they will almost surely get rolled out by the other party. (Very rare occurence, but still) jumping 2 carriers possibly could eject them outside of rep range. Less activity in chains / less ragerolling - less fights Pretty much invincible scouts (if the distance for frigates also has changed, ejecting them at a distance will let them cloak up 100% of the time after jumping a hole without possibility of reliable counter play). A fleet jumping a hole will possibly have an option to just moonwalk out of there. Bubbles are only this big. Unacceptable "random" factor level. It's just impossible to find a reliable counterplay to this change. (probably many, many more that I cannot think of at the moment)
If an entity doesn't want to fight you, they won't fight anyway, combat rolling was their only option to carry on whatever they had planned in the first place. |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:03:00 -
[2] - Quote
I was struggling to think of a firm reason behind this change. It doesn't drive conflict: scouts are always cloaky in wormhole space and letting them spawn at cloaking-distance consistently means that they aren't going to get caught in the majority of scenarios (they already barely ever get caught as it is. "Catch the Cov Ops" is basically an art form). Rolling holes with active pilots in will now require you to be prepared to fight the inhabitants, which would defeat the purpose of rolling the hole in the first place, ragerolling will now take longer, committing caps to fights seems more risky, given that you now spawn at a random point in space away from the fight (which is nearly always at 0m).
I'd tempted to say that this is a bug on sisi, rather than a deliberate feature being brought into the game. Anyone got any discussion from fanfest or similar about it that I've just missed? |
Dark Armata
Bookmark Both Sides Exit Strategy..
99
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Beaten to the punch, will modify my thread to keep it all in the same place.
This was mentioned at fanfest as a feature to encourage fights.
Want to go on record that I am 100% against this change. even if the range limit is shortened.
For PvP-based entities; Ragerolling will take longer per hole. Going baseballs deep with your own caps could be utterly useless due to where you spawn in relation to the fight. Subcap fleets wouldn't be immune either, jumping into an already set up enemy fleet could see your own fleet scattered. Catching someone on the other side of a wormhole would be harder. Scout ships (already slippery little devils) would have their levels of slipperiness increased dramatically).
For PvE-based entities; Implications here are obvious. But rolling wormholes would crazy dangerous (not that it already isn't)
Would this change see more fights in the immediate future? Probably as wormholes are rolled as smaller groups vacate wormholes.
This change benefits the biggest corps/alliances the most. And even then only in the short term.
The basic wormhole mechanics are great. In fact. it is why wormholers are still here.
Wormhole content is not dead, extreme measures are not required. W-Space IS Best Space |
Simsung Padecain
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
Traiori wrote:. I'd tempted to say that this is a bug on sisi, rather than a deliberate feature being brought into the game. Anyone got any discussion from fanfest or similar about it that I've just missed?
It was confirmed by a CSM member, I haven't asked for his permission to post his words here though. |
Hidden Fremen
Lazerhawks
451
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
Confirming: CCP hates wspace. Snipped signature for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne |
Dark Armata
Bookmark Both Sides Exit Strategy..
99
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:12:00 -
[6] - Quote
For all those that asked CCP to interfere with W-Space. Words can not express the hatred.
I honestly thought this was one of "those" ideas when it was brought up here.
You know the ones you instantly file under - haha nice troll ... try again. W-Space IS Best Space |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:16:00 -
[7] - Quote
I'll add that Combat Rolling has a point to it as well: it means that smaller groups can take a fight for long enough to shove people out of their hole when they can't take it or to stop reinforcements from being added as a fight is prolonged.
Which given that the larger groups are running fleets that occasionally hit 40-50 people is almost an essential. Stopping reinforcements was a tactic in wormhole space that this would remove. Which means that groups without reinforcements will take less fights, I suppose. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
617
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
Hidden Fremen wrote:Confirming: CCP hates wspace. Truth level: over 9000
This is NOT the way to do it CCP. This won't help create interesting fights as no one is going to jump caps into a hostile setup fleet now because there is no way to predict positioning or whether they spawn close enough to support. You've handed yet another advantage to people (the larger groups) who didn't need it....... just like 00 hmmmmmm
[Sarcasm]GG CCP, GG[/Sarcasm]
I'm right behind you |
Zara Arran
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
94
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:25:00 -
[9] - Quote
When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! |
Gunner GzR
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
27
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:27:00 -
[10] - Quote
I hope ccp is paying attention.
This is 100% wrong.
I can only echo what has been posted above by other Experienced WH pilots that have posted.
This will drive more people out of wh space and by this take away content. Corps that are less Confident in pvp and only fight because they can fight on a mass reduced wh or with there cap support will be less likely to fight.
Pvp corps will not want to jump a Fleet into another Fleet via A wh due to the scattering of the jump and caps possible spawning 40 km apart. Makes bumping carriers apart to easy for the GÇ£DefendingGÇ¥ corp and isolating them to kill off. Dreads will not be able to be in refit range of carriers.
Bad idea ccp very bad. I see No wormhole pilot liking this idea as it hurts all of us in the long run and will drive more pilots to get out of wh space or just cancel there subscriptions .
With the upstart of Star citizen which is a big buzz in your community now. You should not be doing this as it will reduce the number of pilots in game
One possible ideas to help conflict would be to install a class 7 wh with capital sleepers in sights, no moons and a 10 billion wh with multi statics to incress the chance of someone seeing you farming it.
Just my thoughts here but every person i talk to Dislikes this Change |
|
Murashj
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:32:00 -
[11] - Quote
Gunner GzR wrote:...due to the scattering of the jump and caps possible spawning 40 km apart.
Worst case scenario, 80k |
HerrBert
V0LTA Triumvirate.
482
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:32:00 -
[12] - Quote
Drama Timeline established:
HK on reddit Meanwhile on the lovely Island Island Myself included
Only wormholes goes Community-Challenge: Make Jack Miton sing a Duett with me. http://www.youtube.com/user/HerrBertism Jibbychiggawooooow - CSM 9 Corbexx
|
Zlorthishen
Blue-Fire
39
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:33:00 -
[13] - Quote
pls no CCP Blue-Fire : Best Fire |
Angsty Teenager
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
520
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
Hi CCP,
This is a formal friendly letter to
F U C K R I G H T O F F
It's clear that nobody at CCP actually plays the game in wormholes so why don't you just take your nose out of stuff you know nothing about. Pretty much every single change made to wormholes recently has been in the wrong direction, so feel free to change your thinking on w-space because you clearly aren't on the correct train of thought. |
Franky Saken
Hard Knocks Inc.
46
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:38:00 -
[15] - Quote
taking away an essential tool for smaller groups to even take a fight: less fights taking away expos where you can't defend your rolling group: less fights
less people in wormhole space: even less fights
no reason we get 90% of our fights in nullsec jesus |
Antimatter0097
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:42:00 -
[16] - Quote
100% against this change. This doesnt increase content, it slows it down for those who rageroll for it. |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
487
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:42:00 -
[17] - Quote
ok so some stuff is up on reddit.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2ci5ue/dear_ccp_stop_fucking_with_wormholes_please/
I'll be totally honest I'm not sure what I can and can't say about stuff (i'm checking now on skype).
What would really help is for people to discuss it and put feed back in a calm and meaning full way. Raging and calling people names won't help me at all.
I see several issues.
it makes a boring job rolling holes more boring. This favours bigger groups over smaller groups. C2 to C4 orcas could be a issue.
It probably wont affect farmers at all cos if they connect to a big group they will just not bother to roll and log.
Chitsa Jason wrote:Hey Corby,
I would like to pint out a few ideas. Some of those have been pointed out previously but I think it is important to mentions them. So here is my list of small things.
18. Make it so that the higher of the ship mass the further it spawns from the wormhole by jumping through. Would increase the ability to catch rolling ships, would make rage rolling slower.
This didn't make it on to my little things sheet btw.
Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better |
Carlos Agathon
Grumpy Bastards No Response
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:44:00 -
[18] - Quote
Can a Dev please elaborate wether this is a bug or actually intended - which I hope it is not. Now I usually don't complain that much about changes that are being made to w-space and I don't like throwing phrases like 'this will break wormholes' around, but I am sure that this will completely disrupt how wormholes work.
So please, with the recent attention given to this subforum by the devs, please let us know what your intention is and why you'd like to see this change. |
Lyron-Baktos
Hard Knocks Inc.
453
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:44:00 -
[19] - Quote
Whoever at CCP came up with this idea, please respond here with why you are doing it.
thanks How the **** do you remove a signature? |
Liberty Prime
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exit Strategy..
34
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:44:00 -
[20] - Quote
I had to check to see if this was an April Fool's joke because I couldn't believe such a thing would really be implemented. |
|
Vasyamba
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:46:00 -
[21] - Quote
Lol CCP, i dont even live in wormholes and this sounds terrible. |
Annie Gardet
V0LTA Triumvirate.
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:46:00 -
[22] - Quote
CCP |
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:48:00 -
[23] - Quote
Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!!
It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it. |
Zara Arran
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
97
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:49:00 -
[24] - Quote
Wouldn't it make more sense to have it the other way around? High mass being spawned less far, and the smaller ships further? This would be less bad at the least... |
Angsty Teenager
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
520
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:50:00 -
[25] - Quote
I just wish that CCP would actually play the game in wormholes and base their opinion of what needs to be done off that rather than sitting and listening to CSM candidates who have no idea what they're talking about (in this case I'm specifically talking about Chitsa).
I just want to slam my fist to my desk any time I see stupid changes being made w-space just willy nilly (I'm looking at you CCP FoxFour). "OH ITS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THE GAME, LETS TAKE IT OUT" They just don't even pay any attention to balance or meta-game implications.
If you really want to have mass have an impact, why not apply to in k-space to gates? So frigs can land at like 5 km, and BS at like 30 km. Even better, apply it to cynos. Titans at 100 km, supers at 50 km, carriers/dreads at 5-10 km. OH WAIT, that won't happen because everybody knows it would ruin a lot of small gang pvp. I just cannot even fathom the thought process being the supposed veteran game designers at CCP. How long have you been doing this? Why can't you get it right for once, or even better, if you don't know if you can, how about you go and do research by playing the game.
If the reasons why this change is bad have to be explained to you, then you shouldn't be in charge of making the decisions on gameplay changes in W-space. This is very very very clear when EVREY SINGLE PERSON in this thread is saying the change is bad. Are they all extremely analytic metagamers? NO THEY'RE NOT, they're normal wormhole players. That alone tells me that whoever is in charge of wormholes at the moment has no clue what they're doing and does not even play the game in the area they're in charge of designing.
Baffling. |
Torval Shank
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:50:00 -
[26] - Quote
This is a bad idea for all of the reasons mentioned above. Rolling holes with caps will now be so risky, that most won't even bother to attempt it; just run more battleships through it. Less risk to caps, less content for everyone.
You'll NEVER catch a cloaky scout again. It's already nigh impossible; now it really will be.
I agree that this will drive some groups completely out of WH space, which is already pretty desolate as it is.
100% against this change. |
Freya Myst
Negative Density No Response
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:50:00 -
[27] - Quote
I DO not acknowledge this .. as it would RUIN WH space.. Id suggest reversing it at least with bigger mass closer u are.. but having caps ending up 40km off a wh.. thats just disappointing.. maybe allow frigs and such end up at further range would make more sense.. |
Janus Nanzikambe
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
67
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:51:00 -
[28] - Quote
Do Not Want |
Lord Blacksmith
Midnight Conclave
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:52:00 -
[29] - Quote
Corbexx, as a career wormholer, the problem is that this is a breaking enough change that the first response, a little bit kneejerk I will admit, is to sigh and unsubscribe, because it's actually pretty hard to think that folks who thought that
a) this was a good idea b) was perfectly fine to just toss in unannounced
are going to not kill w-space in some way, and I really don't want to watch the trainwreck - I'd prefer the years of good memories. You're going to have to work through a ton of people's pure white-hot, unmitigated rage before real civilized discourse becomes linkely. This will take time.
|
Laurici
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
60
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:53:00 -
[30] - Quote
Fights like the one we just had with exit strategy would and could never happen with a system implemented like this.
If the objective is to stop capital fights in w-space, you've hit the nail on the head. Why you would want that, is a separate issue. |
|
Zara Arran
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
97
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:54:00 -
[31] - Quote
Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it.
I am all for making things more risky, I don't mind change.. when its a good thing. But in my opinion, letting caps spawn 40k off the WH and two caps being 80k off etc I think will stagnate WHs more. Thats why I wonder if letting smaller ships spwn further and heavier ships spawn less far isnt that better. It iwll increase risk, but not to a point that people wont fight no more or stop rolling. Especially for smaller groups, this not a good change. |
Hatshepsut IV
Cascading Failure Un.Bound
176
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:55:00 -
[32] - Quote
corbexx wrote:Chitsa Jason wrote:Hey Corby,
I would like to pint out a few ideas. Some of those have been pointed out previously but I think it is important to mentions them. So here is my list of small things.
18. Make it so that the higher of the ship mass the further it spawns from the wormhole by jumping through. Would increase the ability to catch rolling ships, would make rage rolling slower.
This didn't make it on to my little things sheet btw.
This is the last thing I could ever think to want for w-space. I'm glad your against this then, I knew I voted for you for a reason. ;)
Rolling/closing holes would become almost impossibly dangerous for small groups with this change. Using orcas would be completely out of the question which is a double nut shot to smaller low class groups as that's basically your only option for rolling a hole in a efficient/speedy manner.
This would basically remove the ability to bring a triage carrier into a fight with null people(or wh for that matter). It's basically handing a free kill to put a carrier 40k off a hole if your going to get. 30 domi blob or other things bridged into you.
Part of what makes w-space so unique and fun is the polarity mechanic and ability to jump holes. It's not a simple game of bring more in reserve get them to aggress on gate.
Whoever CCP told you this change would make w-space more noob friendly is either outright lieing to you or just plain going trolling you. You too can start failing today! Reddit-áad | Cascading Failure Public Channel | Aspiring Failure
|
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
267
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:56:00 -
[33] - Quote
Pros: This will make ganking people rolling WHs easier
Cons: Rolling a WH will take forever People ( especially farmers) may be less likely to just roll Whs given the difficulty and just log when scary K16s pop up The Wormhole Kid |
D3m0n sam
Negative Density No Response
46
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:57:00 -
[34] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/nojWx.gif
All i have to say |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:59:00 -
[35] - Quote
corbexx wrote: What would really help is for people to discuss it and put feed back in a calm and meaning full way. Raging and calling people names won't help me at all.
For all of our sake's sanity, I'll summarise everything that I've seen mentioned about it:
- Ragerolling (one of the primary methods of finding content) will be slowed down - Capital rolling (one of the primary methods of smaller groups controlling fights against larger groups) will be completely removed - Commiting capitals to fights will be impossible, or at least highly stupid. Archons will spawn away from support groups. Dreads will spawn away from Archons (which they use to refit into combat fits) - Sub-C5 rolling will be ridiculous. Orcas/Battleships will be easier to point. Orcas are a big enough problem. - Rolling (at all) will be slowed down. You'll have to build up hole control outside of the immediate hole to prevent people from tackling your caps.
This isn't going to make wormholes any more attractive to new people, which is what we need. The problem with wormholes isn't the mechanics. The problem is the population density. We need more small-mid sized groups, and this doesn't favour them at all and removes one of the few things that they can do to balance out the 30-50 man gangs that are starting to appear in wormsec.
I don't understand the intent of this change. I can't see what this brings to the game. At the moment, when a new wormhole appears in our home system we have what is essentially a flowchart.
1. Establish where the wormhole is 2. Establish who lives in the wormhole 3. Check how many people they have online, compared to how many we have online 4. Decide if we can take a fight 5. If yes, form up and bait 6. If no, form up to roll their hole 7. Once fight is over, roll hole to find new content 8. Go back to sig watch
This change removes Step 6 from the chain, and replaces it with "If no, POS spin until they establish hole control to roll it". That isn't a healthy change. No game should be based around AFK'ing for four hours and doing nothing. Wormholes already have problems with content, and creating a situation in which corps can't get rid of blocks to content (people that they can't deal with because they're too big or because they don't have people online to deal with it) will make it even more tedious.
Fix the problems with wormholes first. The terrible POS mechanics, for instance, and the necessity on caps to make C5/C6 more profitable than C4 holes. Increase the number of random holes further: bigger chains means more availability of content. We've asked for short-duration holes to be a thing, and I'd love to see short-duration high-mass holes to do J->J links. But this isn't the thread to talk about solutions, it's a thread to talk about how bad this idea is.
Larger groups want to be able to rage roll, smaller groups want to be able to counter roll. Who does this benefit? |
Notmo
0ne Percent. Odin's Call
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:00:00 -
[36] - Quote
I could get behind this if it was applied to capital ships jumping to a cyno too.
Mostly because the null rage would be awesome.
Given that half the wormholes we spawn into are empty, I can't see the logic behind this change. It just means everyone has to take longer to rage roll anything.
Rolling capitals will be fit for align time, be webbed up to a perch and back down again instead of just jumping back through.
Forget about ever jumping into another group of hostiles. |
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:00:00 -
[37] - Quote
Zara Arran wrote:Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it. I am all for making things more risky, I don't mind change.. when its a good thing. But in my opinion, letting caps spawn 40k off the WH and two caps being 80k off etc I think will stagnate WHs more. Thats why I wonder if letting smaller ships spwn further and heavier ships spawn less far isnt that better. It iwll increase risk, but not to a point that people wont fight no more or stop rolling. Especially for smaller groups, this not a good change. Perhaps the numbers are off, perhaps smaller should spawn further instead or perhaps everyone should be in a fixed radius distance, but the mere idea of changing spawns to be further out does not sound terrible. In fact I can think of lots of interesting advantages. |
Beffah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:01:00 -
[38] - Quote
Dear CCP,
Are you seriously trying to make this game COMPLETELY unplayable? What was the reasoning behind this crackpot idea? Because seriously, that's what it is: literally pants-on-head-********. Do any of you spend any time in wormholes whatsoever, as a normal account/player? Its clear you don't, because this potentially breaks wormholes.
As the people before me have expressed (rather eloquently, I might add) this can really only lead to the stagnation of wormholes. So much combat comes into play when you have caps on holes, and a random-distant spawn point is going to lead risk-averse groups into not committing caps, full-stop.
Wormholes aren't broken (comparitively speaking) - stop trying to fix them. Instead, please focus your attention on things that DO need fixing: POS mechanics, corporation mechanics, sovereignty, the still-soul-crushing new player experience. |
Maverick Capasso
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:01:00 -
[39] - Quote
-1 Interesting concept, but it seems like it will just discourage PvP in WH space. |
O'nira
United System's Commonwealth
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:03:00 -
[40] - Quote
think i might leave whs if this change goes through or join a blob. basically the only 2 choices if i want to have any control of the content i get. |
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
617
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:06:00 -
[41] - Quote
Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it.
In kspace (different meta) Capital ships do not use gates. Gates do not have mass. Mass does not affect spawn ranges on cynos or jump bridges.
In wspace(our meta) Caps need support ships more than anywhere else already (and this is how it should be) because there is no easy exit cyno escape. This change places them out side of support ship range and effectively has their asses hanging out blowing in the breeze.
Furthermore, this spreads sub caps immediately. To what purpose? In heavy armor fights (most of them) multiple dps ships are needed to kill another setup group with logi support. This means it will be even easier to tank incoming damage for the defenders since the attackers will be all spread out.
Jumping capitals into a hostile fleet in wspace is a dicey proposition already with a very common tactic to attempt to bump them out of refit range, cap range, or range of the wh. With this change all of that is unnecessary now because CCP has decided to do it for the defenders, unasked for I might add.
I'm right behind you |
dexter xio
TURN LEFT
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:11:00 -
[42] - Quote
Thanks Dexter xio - That cool guy |
Xyllo
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:11:00 -
[43] - Quote
This is rly bad idea, bad bad idea ;/ |
Aelias Zero
Jaded.
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:12:00 -
[44] - Quote
Makes it easier to camp a wormhole and nothing more. Also makes it so the smaller corps/fleets have less control in picking their fights.
-1 to the idea, all this is going to do is frustrate lots of people and get them to leave an already-empty wormhole space. "Is probably the best person alive." -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á -Ron Paul |
Adarnof
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:12:00 -
[45] - Quote
Dear CCP,
Although you never intended for wormholes to be colonized, it's happened, and you need to accept this. What's made them such a fantastic content creator is the ability to connect to random areas of space on a whim, which is only truly possible by rolling wormholes.
Groups set up shop in specific systems to take advantage of the static connection. Our current ability to roll statics means we can generate our own content with ease, whenever we please. Your proposed change greatly hinders smaller groups' abilities to roll and hence would be detrimental to the wormhole community as a whole.
My group, for example, thrives off rolling our C3 static. If we jumped an orca through and it appeared 40km off the hole, it would most certainly discourage us from continuing to do so. With content disappearing, our member base will grow bored and move on. Assuming this is the norm for most smaller groups, this would lead to an exodus of wormhole space.
Now I'm sure this is not the intended effect, but this is just the latest in a long line of "features" that hurt wormhole space. There's already frustration over the jump fuel changes; the industry taxation; API kill data; and we all remember the ESS. We're all for promoting content in wormhole space, however breaking such a fundamental part of life out here is not the way to do so.
If you want to promote content in wormhole space, you need to listen to your member base. There are already lists of features requested by the community you could be working on instead of generating Sunday morning threadnaughts. This change adds no real content aside from the occasional rolling ship kill, and instead removes it by discouraging groups from utilizing statics (and even content at home).
Sincerely, A concerned wormhole resident. |
Ziirn
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:17:00 -
[46] - Quote
Janus Nanzikambe wrote:Do Not Want +1 |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
112
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:17:00 -
[47] - Quote
This is a bad, bad idea. It's going to lead to people just sitting and orbiting their towers instead of taking the risk to roll a hole and go do something, be that trying to find a fight or doing some PvE. People are going to extract from fights instead of committing caps to try and win them. It's punishing smaller groups who need the advantage of caps, and it's going to lead to less people doing things in wormholes in general, which is the exact opposite of what you should be trying to do.
Don't make the things people are already doing more tedious, add in new things for them to do that are riskier. |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
58
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:19:00 -
[48] - Quote
So wormholes should be the unknown, so CCP doesn-¦t even communicate planned changes. Yeah that-¦s gonna work out great. Maybe you can add that as the new space with constructable gates: R-Space aka everything is random. Why not also add this change to cynos in k-space for an even bigger shitstorm? Imagine capitals or JFs even landing 10 km off the cynoship. Or a titan suddenly not landing on the FFedge.
Quick reflection on this change: If your dread really spawns 40km off the hole and goes 126 m/s with MWD it takes it about 6 minutes (combatfit about 70% longer) to get back to the hole. An orca should spawn around 7-9km, better selfdestruct, will save you alot of time. If you jump a dread and carrier into a fight chances are good they will not be in reprange to each other. Same for the subcaps brawling it out on the dread. Gives a completely new meaning to the word suicidetriage. Isn-¦t it fun to do the maths on a fight, decide it is doable, then jump in (attack something, defender has perfect positioning) and then get told by your triagepilot "Sorry guys, can-¦t help you. RNG made me useless." Good thing there are never any weblokis there to make sure you will stay where you are. Want to annoy a roller that you can-¦t kill: Webloki full of WCS 50 off the roller and keep him there until the hole dies of old age. Add a handful of ishtars to that and the carrier is forefeight every time you jump. While this change will definitely shake things up it will need a lot of thinking and debate wether it is helpful. It-¦s not like there is a list of small changes that people are begging for or a fully outlined and debated scenario (sigspawntimings) that this devtime could have been put into. What are the three major differences between gates and wormholes: You can jump with aggression, you get polarization and unless you are really unlucky you can jump back with one pulse of your propmod. So after this change it is "J-space: Now with 33% more gates" |
Mealtime
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:22:00 -
[49] - Quote
D3m0n sam wrote:http://i.imgur.com/nojWx.gif
All i have to say
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
10845
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:24:00 -
[50] - Quote
Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:25:00 -
[51] - Quote
Alundil wrote:Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it. In kspace (different meta) Capital ships do not use gates. Gates do not have mass. Mass does not affect spawn ranges on cynos or jump bridges. In wspace(our meta) Caps need support ships more than anywhere else already (and this is how it should be) because there is no easy exit cyno escape. This change places them out side of support ship range and effectively has their asses hanging out blowing in the breeze. Furthermore, this spreads sub caps immediately. To what purpose? In heavy armor fights (most of them) multiple dps ships are needed to kill another setup group with logi support. This means it will be even easier to tank incoming damage for the defenders since the attackers will be all spread out. Jumping capitals into a hostile fleet in wspace is a dicey proposition already with a very common tactic to attempt to bump them out of refit range, cap range, or range of the wh. With this change all of that is unnecessary now because CCP has decided to do it for the defenders, unasked for I might add.
With most of the doctrines I fly I would prefer to be a bit further out on the other side. It certainly is not the end of the world. Yes it would change doctrines and tactics but that is not the same as being the end of wormholes. Instead of rolling with caps try nano - phoons or panthers or cloak-tricking a battleship or preparing advance and making some pings to cloak trick a warp to and then cloak trick a warp back down. I regularly roll 3 bil mass holes with only subcaps and it is not a big deal.
The current spawning at zero is a significant disadvantage to nano fleets, sniper fleets, Frig fleets and such. It would be more fun to see more of those than the current universal-t3-meta. As I said perhaps it needs to be inverted with smaller spawning further or a fixed distance for all or maybe even make spawn distance proportional to remaining wormhole mass. But the mere idea of the change doesn't sound like the end of the world. |
Crispinius
Negative Density No Response
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:26:00 -
[52] - Quote
Mealtime wrote:D3m0n sam wrote:http://i.imgur.com/nojWx.gif
All i have to say
Lets go and Shoot the Monuments again.
|
Mrs Curtain
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:26:00 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Good, Well you can remove this " Change " from the dev/new build. I wonder what were in store for this time around guys.... Sov in WHs? We are still masters of our fate. We are still captains of our souls |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
112
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:27:00 -
[54] - Quote
Sniper fleets work for defense, extremely well... So well that they usually just make the attackers go "screw this" and jump back, because they know they can't counter a bunch of ishtars at 80KM. |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:27:00 -
[55] - Quote
In the interests of proving a point, I'm going to continue updating my reddit post with all the groups that immediately said no to this change: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2ci5ue/dear_ccp_stop_fucking_with_wormholes_please/cjfq2pi
I suspect that your feedback will come down to "no, don't do this".
Could we perhaps work on having changes as fundamental as this announced before we discover them? It's becoming a running trend that wormholers find out these things as they're being implemented, rather than before they're being implemented, and it makes planning out workarounds much more difficult. |
Mizhir
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
66484
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:28:00 -
[56] - Quote
Would be hilarious if the same things happened to everything that jumps to a cyno. Nullsec would burn when their precious supers suddenly lands over 50km away from the cyno. One Man Crew - Collective solo pvp |
kashkaisha
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:29:00 -
[57] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone. Nobody is out to get you.
If there is one harsh environnement for player in eve, its wh. Why would you do anything to make it harder ?
Why dont you work on stuff more important like finding a alternative on the ongoing nerf of nanoship... #stopKillingMyWayofPewPew |
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:29:00 -
[58] - Quote
Aelias Zero wrote:Makes it easier to camp a wormhole and nothing more. Also makes it so the smaller corps/fleets have less control in picking their fights.
-1 to the idea, all this is going to do is frustrate lots of people and get them to leave an already-empty wormhole space.
You might have more control and better opportunities as a small gang as you can more easily get outside of scram range and if you fall back through you have new disengagement options which you do not have now. |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:30:00 -
[59] - Quote
Kynric wrote: Instead of rolling with caps try nano - phoons or panthers or cloak-tricking a battleship or preparing advance and making some pings to cloak trick a warp to and then cloak trick a warp back down. I regularly roll 3 bil mass holes with only subcaps and it is not a big deal.
3 bil hole needs 5 consecutive round trips with an orca (give or take). That's 10-20 minutes longer than it takes at the minute with capitals. It's fine if you have the pilots to bring tons of battleships. If you don't, then you're going to have problems. Nano-phoons would require even more jumps (15 round trips). I'm fairly sure it would take at least 30 minutes to collapse using 3 pilots.
|
Beffah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:31:00 -
[60] - Quote
(I checked, I didn't see it, so don't crucify me if I'm wrong on this, but...)
It would be nice if the Features and Ideas subforum was used for... you know, new features and ideas. You'd think that feedback before the work into putting these changes onto Sisi would make some sense. |
|
Mcpate
Cascading Failure Un.Bound
27
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:33:00 -
[61] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Quote:If you ask me, it's time for CCP to go back to working on Walking-In-Stations full time, every developer, everybody that can hold a pencil or click a mouse button! Every cotton-picking one of them. |
Finarfin
Reconfiguration Nation
31
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:33:00 -
[62] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Thanks and ignore the raging basement trolls in here. I belong to one of these small groups which would supposedly be driven out of WH space within days of this change and I am not thinking about canceling my sccounts. I don't think the current iteration is the best idea but any change to freshen up WH space is welcome. To be honest, I live in a WH with a 3bn static and always found it a bit strange how easy it is to roll it by myself with 2 Orcas and a scout.
Looking forward to the dev blog. |
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective
1241
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:33:00 -
[63] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Still sounds bad.
But I kind of like the idea of CCP taking a look at wormholes.
Signature Tanking - Best Tanking. Beware the french guy!
|
Chesterfield Fancypantz
Radical Astronauts Plundering Eve WormHole Occupation and Resource Exploitation
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:34:00 -
[64] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Ill just quote you fozzie to give you my input.
My corporation is relatively new to WH space, and I think I can offer a viewpoint of a reasonably experienced PVP corporation making the move to WH space.
Its already ******* hard. You need to have good numbers, good skillpoints, and a good combined shipclasses to even start to make a dent in WH space. You need to have decent numbers online to accomplish anything, and even then it is risky as hell.
I love this part about WH space, and the only thing that even comes close to making it manageable is the ability for me to quickly and easily close holes. Either rolling for new PvE, closing hostile holes, or rolling for kspace connections.
With lower numbers, making my dread spawn up to 40km away from the wormhole means that I now have a very expensive asset that I am unable to protect. You are basically making it so my time to roll a hole is 10x as long, where someone like hard knocks who has numbers is able to endlessly roll with impunity because of their access to numbers. I need to use battleships and hics to close, when they can just roll with dreads knowing the can support it if it gets tackled. Others have commented on fleet stuff so I wont bother.
Not only is this a bad design idea in the first place, but it HEAVILY favors established and numerous corporations. Its basically making it impossible for smaller corps/alliances from putting their foot in the door in wormhole space which is exactly the opposite direction you should be making. We need MORE bodies and groups into WH space, not more super large groups.
Chester |
Necharo Rackham
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:35:00 -
[65] - Quote
Kynric wrote: The current spawning at zero is a significant disadvantage to nano fleets, sniper fleets, Frig fleets and such. It would be more fun to see more of those than the current universal-t3-meta. As I said perhaps it needs to be inverted with smaller spawning further or a fixed distance for all or maybe even make spawn distance proportional to remaining wormhole mass. But the mere idea of the change doesn't sound like the end of the world.
Sniper attacking fleets would still be at a disadvantage. You still only have limited mass - so everything on the other side will just stay in a single ball within rep range of each other and you won't be able to kill anything. |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
112
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:35:00 -
[66] - Quote
I'll hold further judgement until I see the actual plans, and the full list of other proposed changes. I hope we'll be listened to at that point if we disagree with some or all of them. |
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
464
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:38:00 -
[67] - Quote
I'm gonna play a bit of a devil's advocate here. I kinda like the purpose of the whole thing, but the implementation could use "some tweaking": - I totally approve of trying to make rolling more risky. It should not be as easy and as risk free as it is now to sever connections to someone who might threaten you.
BUT any change trying to fix that should not screw up existing "healthy" activities, such as rolling for content or pvp, so:
- Quite apparently, the distance is waaay too extreme. To a degree that rolling holes would need rewarping caps on the other side, which even with webs would take quite some time. - WH pvp is distinct by its close range WH brawling and the distinctivness should remain. This 40km scattering would just make everyone fly kitey ishtars. Depending on distances for subs, this would seriously upset hole control as so that catching scouts would be impossible. Jumping brawling fleet into a brawling fleet on the other side would be suicide. But also without bubbles, it would be hard to prevent much of the fleet to simply jump in and warp/burn off. The fights would become much more like fighting on kspace gates, which is imho bad.
I could see it however tuned down. I think sub-BS hull should be barely affected, if at all. They should all spawn pretty much as they do now with about the same risk of being so close they cant cloak and so far they cannot jump, I think thats a good balance. BS and caps could spawn farther out so they wouldnt be able to jump right back, but it should be a "slowboatable" distance... like 10km at most? Its kinda hard to think of a way to make rolling riskier but not more time consuming...
Or do it the other way around and increase the deviation on a warpin to the hole. So more massive ships would land farther away from their target when theres a WH on grid?
So basically it is a bad step in the right direction. W-Space Realtor |
Neu Bastian
Hard Knocks Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:38:00 -
[68] - Quote
I could maybe be convinced that spawning a cap between 8k and 6k from a hole would be a good idea (would prevent them from immediately jumping back, but keeps them within what could already happen). Any further than that is just ridiculous and would make it far more difficult to use caps in w-space than it already is. |
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:41:00 -
[69] - Quote
Traiori wrote:Kynric wrote: Instead of rolling with caps try nano - phoons or panthers or cloak-tricking a battleship or preparing advance and making some pings to cloak trick a warp to and then cloak trick a warp back down. I regularly roll 3 bil mass holes with only subcaps and it is not a big deal. 3 bil hole needs 5 consecutive round trips with an orca (give or take). That's 10-20 minutes longer than it takes at the minute with capitals. It's fine if you have the pilots to bring tons of battleships. If you don't, then you're going to have problems. Nano-phoons would require even more jumps (15 round trips). I'm fairly sure it would take at least 30 minutes to collapse using 3 pilots.
A battleship with prop mod on is 150 mil or so (ignoring nestor which is lighter and blops which are heavier. ) That's 300 a round trip so 10 round trips plus however you deal with the variation. So 5 pilots and it's done inside of 5 minutes which is not exactly a tragedy. 10 man gangs can go a bit faster and 3 man gangs would need a few extra minutes both of which are still not a tragedy. Oh the horror of needing a dozen pilots to rage roll (do people honestly rage roll with a gang smaller than that?) |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
112
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:48:00 -
[70] - Quote
People roll with a gang larger than that, except they're in the correct ships for the fight they're looking for instead of all being in rolling battleships. Having to wait for half your fleet to go back to their poses and change ships is going to lead to losing fights. |
|
Dorijan
Hoover Inc. Pandemic Legion
57
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:48:00 -
[71] - Quote
Beffah wrote:(I checked, I didn't see it, so don't crucify me if I'm wrong on this, but...)
It would be nice if the Features and Ideas subforum was used for... you know, new features and ideas. You'd think that feedback before the work into putting these changes onto Sisi would make some sense.
You've been playing this game for how long and still expect logic and reason from CCP? ;-) |
HerrBert
V0LTA Triumvirate.
482
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:52:00 -
[72] - Quote
Well you know whats silly? People complain about "logic" and ccp...
Meanwhile on reddit?
What are you thinking with this change? 38 Points (74 % liked this)
Guys you are sending mixed signals Community-Challenge: Make Jack Miton sing a Duett with me. http://www.youtube.com/user/HerrBertism Jibbychiggawooooow - CSM 9 Corbexx
|
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:53:00 -
[73] - Quote
[quote=Kynric] Oh the horror of needing a dozen pilots to rage roll (do people honestly rage roll with a gang smaller than that?)/quote]
I wouldn't say rage roll so much as refreshing the chain to find new content. I've rolled chains with only a couple of people online to find gas sites to harvest, or nice null/shopping links to use whilst there's no one online to do gang PvP/sites.
I wouldn't really want to roll six or seven holes in a row to find an appropriate chain for it if it took me 20 minutes, rather than 2 minutes, every time. It would mean that I AFK if there was anything less than half a dozen people online to roll the hole, which means that you're less likely to find me running C1-3s in my Tengu, or hunting nullsec denizens or doing any of those things that we all do when there aren't that many people around that opens me up to you killing me. |
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
209
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:55:00 -
[74] - Quote
Not a fan of this plan. I remember it coming up at Fanfest and there was a lot of interest in shaking things up a little, but I don't remember *anyone* liking the idea of things appearing further from the hole the heavier they are... |
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:56:00 -
[75] - Quote
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:People roll with a gang larger than that, except they're in the correct ships for the fight they're looking for instead of all being in rolling battleships. Having to wait for half your fleet to go back to their poses and change ships is going to lead to losing fights.
Lots of obvious solutions: Use alts for the battleships or have the proper ships in a carrier and just leave the battleships floating in your hole (ghost riding for wormholers), or make a battleship doctrine or send some interdictors in to hold them down while you re-ship. Once again its not the end of your playstyle. |
Lord Blacksmith
Midnight Conclave
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:57:00 -
[76] - Quote
One of the reasons this absolutely kills smaller groups is that (for those anywhere else than a C2) you only have one static.
If you can't roll your hole for content, rolling into a large group is the kiss of death for your entire corporation for a 24hr period or whenever the larger group decides it doesn't want to be able to camp you in with a single scout. (From personal experience, there are lots of folks that will do this all day until you go suicide enough isk to them that maybe they decide to be nice and roll your static for you).
This sort of meta is what stops smaller groups from either coming to w-space at all, or coming for a brief time and leaving in disgust before they have the time to get established, grow, and join the community. This specific change makes this meta much stronger, which is one reason I firmly believe that it's going to be a net negative for the health of w-space, regardless of whether it generates more ~content~ for large groups that have already become established.
Additionally, all of the discourse so far has revolved around PVP. I know that most of you aren't in corp leadership currently or haven't been in the past, but there's an awful lot of logistics that happens to keep your towers fueled and ships available for purchase, loot hauled out, etc. This change, as it currently stands, means that no one in their right mind would take a freighter or JF into w-space. As an example, we currently do things like "put enough mass on the hole that two JF passes will close it", bring the JF in, if it gets tackled, it instantly jumps out and back to the exit cyno. This is BASIC precautions for throwing around 6bil + contents in wormhole space... it's a giant pain in the ass to do things this way as is, but it's nice to not subject corp members to a fleet where everyone gets in iterons and ferries things up and down a decently-sized chain. For multiple hours.
tl;dr making rolling harder makes it easier to camp small groups, who will get bored and leave w-space. also makes large-scale logistics even more suicidal and subjects members to hauling fleets on a regular basis, which makes members get bored and leave w-space.
- Corbexx, I hope this is reasonable discussion enough for you. I tried hard not to rage. - CCP Fozzie, please stop just randomly letting us find stuff on Sisi when you're changing w-space mechanics in major ways. The fact that all the CSM folks seemed to be just as surprised as we were is a incredibly large red-flag for players and says terrible things for the state of the relationship between the game designers and the CSM.
|
Simsung Padecain
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:58:00 -
[77] - Quote
Kynric wrote:]battleship doctrine we're talking wormholes Kynric |
MD74
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:58:00 -
[78] - Quote
So, if you get jumped further away from the wh depending on shipclass, does this also mean that bigger ships can jump a wh from a bigger distance? Would make sense, wouldnt it.
Anyway, stop messing around, and fix our POS'es! |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
112
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:58:00 -
[79] - Quote
Not everyone has alts or is happy to multibox. Saying "Just give CCP more money because they broke the game" isn't a helpful perspective.
HerrBert wrote:
Meanwhile on reddit?
What are you thinking with this change? 38 Points (74 % liked this)
Guys you are sending mixed signals
I don't really understand what you're trying to say here... |
Lord Blacksmith
Midnight Conclave
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:59:00 -
[80] - Quote
Kynric wrote: A battleship with prop mod on is 150 mil or so (ignoring nestor which is lighter and blops which are heavier. ) That's 300 a round trip so 10 round trips plus however you deal with the variation. So 5 pilots and it's done inside of 5 minutes which is not exactly a tragedy. 10 man gangs can go a bit faster and 3 man gangs would need a few extra minutes both of which are still not a tragedy. Oh the horror of needing a dozen pilots to rage roll (do people honestly rage roll with a gang smaller than that?)
Lots of people rageroll with gangs smaller than a dozen pilots. Actually, a good chunk of corps in low-class w-space would be ecstatic if they had a dozen pilots in fleet for an op scheduled weeks in advance. Not everyone is your size, far from it. |
|
Neckbeard Nolyfe
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:59:00 -
[81] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
STOP DESTROYING EVE JESUS CHRIST |
Chesterfield Fancypantz
Radical Astronauts Plundering Eve WormHole Occupation and Resource Exploitation
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:01:00 -
[82] - Quote
Lord Blacksmith wrote:One of the reasons this absolutely kills smaller groups is that (for those anywhere else than a C2) you only have one static.
If you can't roll your hole for content, rolling into a large group is the kiss of death for your entire corporation for a 24hr period or whenever the larger group decides it doesn't want to be able to camp you in with a single scout. (From personal experience, there are lots of folks that will do this all day until you go suicide enough isk to them that maybe they decide to be nice and roll your static for you).
This sort of meta is what stops smaller groups from either coming to w-space at all, or coming for a brief time and leaving in disgust before they have the time to get established, grow, and join the community. This specific change makes this meta much stronger, which is one reason I firmly believe that it's going to be a net negative for the health of w-space, regardless of whether it generates more ~content~ for large groups that have already become established.
Additionally, all of the discourse so far has revolved around PVP. I know that most of you aren't in corp leadership currently or haven't been in the past, but there's an awful lot of logistics that happens to keep your towers fueled and ships available for purchase, loot hauled out, etc. This change, as it currently stands, means that no one in their right mind would take a freighter or JF into w-space. As an example, we currently do things like "put enough mass on the hole that two JF passes will close it", bring the JF in, if it gets tackled, it instantly jumps out and back to the exit cyno. This is BASIC precautions for throwing around 6bil + contents in wormhole space... it's a giant pain in the ass to do things this way as is, but it's nice to not subject corp members to a fleet where everyone gets in iterons and ferries things up and down a decently-sized chain. For multiple hours.
tl;dr making rolling harder makes it easier to camp small groups, who will get bored and leave w-space. also makes large-scale logistics even more suicidal and subjects members to hauling fleets on a regular basis, which makes members get bored and leave w-space.
- Corbexx, I hope this is reasonable discussion enough for you. I tried hard not to rage. - CCP Fozzie, please stop just randomly letting us find stuff on Sisi when you're changing w-space mechanics in major ways. The fact that all the CSM folks seemed to be just as surprised as we were is a incredibly large red-flag for players and says terrible things for the state of the relationship between the game designers and the CSM.
Completely agree, the most important thing about the capital rolling is about speed!
If I roll into hard knocks or someone else and I dont want to fight or get locked down (for smaller corps etc), then I can quickly defensive bubble, throw 3 battleships, and a dread through and blap its closed.
This change obliterates that and I need to slowboat 10+ battleships through and then hic it?
Come on. |
Xtrah
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
173
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:02:00 -
[83] - Quote
Figured I'd take a look, as this is a serious dealbreaker on one of our main PVP activities in wormhole space - ragerolling.
Video of Archon, Thanatos and Nidhoggur jumping through a wormhole on sisi Latest video: http://youtu.be/UYPqMPt1aeM
http://www.youtube.com/NoHolesBarredEVE |
Hatshepsut IV
Cascading Failure Un.Bound
176
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:09:00 -
[84] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon...
Does that list of changes include making the Nestor the only ship to spawn in jump range now?
Yes I know its a comical statement that but sums up about how seriously I think this idea has been thought through and presented to its constituent community.
You too can start failing today! Reddit-áad | Cascading Failure Public Channel | Aspiring Failure
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
617
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:10:00 -
[85] - Quote
HerrBert wrote:Well you know whats silly? People complain about "logic" and ccp...
Meanwhile on reddit?
What are you thinking with this change? 38 Points (74 % liked this)
Guys you are sending mixed signals The upvotes are not always likes. It's not Facebook. If a post on reddit doesn't get upvoted it doesn't get seen. It's the way it works.
I'm right behind you |
Apollo Eros
Daktaklakpak.
119
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:11:00 -
[86] - Quote
My Dear CCP, Please keep up the good work!
See guys what is great about this new patch process is that it can kind of bring you back to the beginning of Wormholes? When CCP was all. "Hello internet space people here is this space. Go figure it out."
Being a predominant leader for the wormhole community. I would like to be on the forefront of this and express the communities gratitude of what you have been doing.
Further more I would like to take this step in letting you know. Hey I do not need a dev-blog or anything regarding changes to WH space. It would be much better if we just discover the changes to an dangerous and unstable environment on our own.
As the great Kirk use to say. "Toooooo INFINITY ANDDD BEYONDD!!!!" [Triple OG LVL 5 Space Wizard] |
Susitna
Negative Density No Response
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:12:00 -
[87] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
A random spawning distance really looks like a very bad mechanic for any type of gate. Who would ever jump into an evenly matched fight when the jumping fleet will be all spread out? It would also probably kill any short range type of fit. Totally changes HIC mechanics too? Why for Worm Holes only? If you think it is good for worm holes - why not for all null gates or cynos?
Not sure what your intent is here. However, it certainly appears like you do not want players living in worm holes. I have heard you really want WH to be group exploration encounters. If that is the case, just fix it and do not allow POS in Worm holes and remove intra worm connections.
I hope you really listen to the feedback you get. This is a bad change please do not do it.
|
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
126
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:15:00 -
[88] - Quote
How much does this really effect ragerolling?
You keep a cloaked scout at a tac with a couple rapiers and bounce the caps. The effort is increased, no doubt, but I don't think the time is significantly increased compared to the current use. It does change how you collapse in the face of hostiles, how you commit, and basically everything else around how engagements happen in wormholes.
I guess I'm pretty interested in the devblog, but I don't think people should jump out the window just yet. |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:15:00 -
[89] - Quote
don't even joke about removing poses, they'll probably do it. |
WoAz
Dark Mason Society Trapped.
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:16:00 -
[90] - Quote
A change of this type would be incredibly prohibitive to fights in wormholes. Rage-rolling c5/c6 statics becomes a time-intensive affair and handicaps fights that do happen. Dreads can't refit off their carriers that are 30km away, and all mobile depots will be quickly blapped before they online. |
|
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
740
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:17:00 -
[91] - Quote
you could get CCP to delete 2/3 of wormhole systems if you want more fights? and shouldn't there be an announcement about this on F&I, rather than just player discussion in this little irrelevant subforum I've never heard of? |
Jess Tanner
Bangworks Systems Inc.
111
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:20:00 -
[92] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
RIP WH's cap fights, jumping into someone's home system, WH Freighter Logistics, WH Orca Logistics and the corps that rely on people being able to find something to do without spending half an hour to roll one c5 black hole...
Go with Bob, keep Him always in your heart. He is your Sword, Shield, and the Knife in your back. |
Moo Moocow
Hard Knocks Inc.
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:20:00 -
[93] - Quote
I like the idea of CCP getting around to looking at Wormholes, Its been far too long.
IMO you should be enhancing gameplay (or even income in lower class wh's if you have to.)
Something that will encourage more people to try wormholes and hopefully move into them full time.
This won't create content and is a pretty useless idea.
I'm looking forward to seeing this Dev blog though.
(people finding out on sisi isn't the way to go btw, I thought that would have been obvious by now)
btw how is the pos revamp coming :P |
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox Low-Class
342
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:20:00 -
[94] - Quote
This might make kiting viable in wspace. Whereas now you're forced to spawn within web/scram range and thus heavy armor fleets are favored, this might make faster nanoshield kiting setups more viable. I do agree that it will make it harder for smaller corps not interested in a fight to roll the hole, but give even the bears credit: they're still wormholers and can be clever adapters. As long as the profit incentive is still there, the farmers will find ways. All this really means for people on the hunt is that dictors and inties/Keres/Arazu will become more valuable for catching ships at longer ranges (30km bubble and extended longpoint range). We might even see a use for blops (FINALLY ) in that they can cloak after spawning 40km away and MWD+cloak back.
I'm pretty indifferent to these changes. They're kinda scary, but I came to wormhole space to be paranoid and scared We'll see how it goes? I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.
Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
740
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:22:00 -
[95] - Quote
Moo Moocow wrote:I like the idea of CCP getting around to looking at Wormholes, Its been far too long.
IMO you should be enhancing gameplay (or even income in lower class wh's if you have to.)
hopefully they get around to removing capital escalations |
Tritanium Amaranth
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:22:00 -
[96] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
When you change things for ANY OTHER REGION OF SPACE, you post devblogs first, iterate on design, talk to CSM, and then implement a final design that's generally pretty good. THIS PROCESS WORKS. When you do anything at all to wormhole space, it seems to be okay to ninja change it on Sisi, and then only release a devblog at all if someone notices and calls you on it.
You don't want people to think that someone is out to get them? Really?
Un-screw your PR and you'll get a lot less rage, unless CCP already fired all the people who helped you not screw that up.
If you're not getting the point, how about this: I prefer not to be woken up in the morning on a Sunday by people who called me on the telephone, having seen this, asking if CCP is killing wormholes and it's still okay to live there, and would I please ask around on their behalf. There's lots of people who would rather be enjoying their weekend today who are now talking about / discussing / reacting to this instead: it's a big deal and pretty much the definition of a PR disaster.
|
Lemonades
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
53
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:23:00 -
[97] - Quote
Rest in peace W-Space 10/03/2009 - 08/03/2014 |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:24:00 -
[98] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:Moo Moocow wrote:I like the idea of CCP getting around to looking at Wormholes, Its been far too long.
IMO you should be enhancing gameplay (or even income in lower class wh's if you have to.)
hopefully they get around to removing capital escalations
Sure. and make cynos work in wormholes. and make it so you can have titans there. And add gates and stations!
|
Freya Myst
Negative Density No Response
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:26:00 -
[99] - Quote
My suggestion would be to INCREASE the statics to each WH system or DYNAMICS maybe give all 2 statics or 1 static and 2 dynamics.. but that would change the fact that we cant find pvp.. alot of people would agree that increasing static's would give any pvp corp an easier way to find others for a fight.. whether or not u change this 40km wh jump issue is up to you but alot of people will either quit or leave wh space due to major changes.. first we dont allow super caps into wh space.. thats one restriction.. now u want to make us move 40km away from the wh in caps?? wheres the nerf in Null sec??? at least do sumthing that is WORTH changing.. (would be decent if u only did this to battleship class and below and remove caps from this change.. i do not agree with the change and hope u guys realize the drastic hit wh'ers will have if this comes into fruition.. |
Sari Jasra
Hard Knocks Inc.
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:27:00 -
[100] - Quote
Where were you when wormholes was kill? |
|
biz Antollare
Merchants Trade Consortium Disavowed.
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:29:00 -
[101] - Quote
all the reasons that I thought made this change terrible were already mentioned.
Fozzie I know you have wanted to make changes to WH space for a while. Have some devs move into a 6-6 or a 5-5 for 3-6 months and have them give you feedback on the changes we need, and more importantly the ones we DONT need.
Get involved in WH pvp and WH logistics. Its very obvious the amount of time spent in WH space is much different from the way we spend our time.
You guys would then probably have better ideas for once. or just break the game and watch people quit which will start the failscade of CCP.
If this is just the beginning of ridiculous change.... I will move out of WH space. I will then most likely quit the game and book a plane ticket to Iceland and remove my name from that monument.
|
Lemonades
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
54
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:32:00 -
[102] - Quote
Sari Jasra wrote:Where were you when wormholes was kill? at work my work is sell fish in fish stand sell fish friend call to me while at working 'enter wh is kill' 'no' |
Thom Mangum
Blue-Fire
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:40:00 -
[103] - Quote
Counterproductive Conniving People
-1 |
xpaulx
Codename-47
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:45:00 -
[104] - Quote
CCP please get out.
- Codename-47 |
Crispinius
Negative Density No Response
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:45:00 -
[105] - Quote
Go and Shoot the Monument in Jita to Get more Attention.
I'll be there - this can't stay hidden.
Go out and Fight for your Space! |
Jess Tanner
Bangworks Systems Inc.
111
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:48:00 -
[106] - Quote
corbexx wrote:Chitsa Jason wrote:Hey Corby,
I would like to pint out a few ideas. Some of those have been pointed out previously but I think it is important to mentions them. So here is my list of small things.
18. Make it so that the higher of the ship mass the further it spawns from the wormhole by jumping through. Would increase the ability to catch rolling ships, would make rage rolling slower.
This didn't make it on to my little things sheet btw.
Not surprised, given that his only other contributions to W-space was trying to get all of w-space involved in nullsec politics and tidi fleets, or go mining in a black hole system because " "industry buffs" "........ Go with Bob, keep Him always in your heart. He is your Sword, Shield, and the Knife in your back. |
Brutus Crendraven
Stryker Industries
24
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:53:00 -
[107] - Quote
CCP,
Before you expend significant effort on effecting changes on Wormholes may I suggest that you consider what your customer requires from Wormhole space.
The occupation of wormholes to my mind has dropped off, last night I even found a C3 with a static HS and no one lived there. I couldn't believe it and had to jump around the system several times to confirm. The WH had excellent PI and no effects (no I'm not selling it's entrance).
A number of customers have already made significant comment on forums in respect of ideas for changing Wormholes. I'm sure there wasn't a lot of support if any for such a change to wh dynamics. Was this even an idea suggested by the customer base.
The problem with wh's is that not enough people are setting up home in them. When poeple setup home they will create their own content.
A few thoughts,
PVP (method of destroying isk to generate a level of income for CCP) A lot is found by rage rolling but this was nert'd when CCP introduced sigs appearing automatically. Maybe CCP could provide anaylsis on how previous changes have impacted Wormholes. Such as ISK lost. Post Patches
Covops is the equivalant (fair to my mind) of the idle pod sitting on a low sec gate. Maybe something new that wouldn't take a lot of coding but a bomb or ECM burst that disrupts cloaks with in a small radius. ( thought I should provide positive ideas aswell)
POS mechanics - small fixes but the major overhaul is still pending (coming soon)
Maybe even a new mechanic of random wormholes that only allow entry.
Debatable ideas, cloak polarization. You jump into a wh your cloak won't function for 20 seconds you jump in a second or back and it won't function for 40 seconds.
Anyways, don't for pity sakes nerf fundamentals look for new code or improvements;.
Oh anyone seeing many ghost sites?
|
Pseudo Ucksth
B0rthole
189
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:53:00 -
[108] - Quote
Beffah wrote:Dear CCP,
Are you seriously trying to make this game COMPLETELY unplayable? What was the reasoning behind this crackpot idea? Because seriously, that's what it is: literally pants-on-head-********. Do any of you spend any time in wormholes whatsoever, as a normal account/player? Its clear you don't, because this potentially breaks wormholes.
As the people before me have expressed (rather eloquently, I might add) this can really only lead to the stagnation of wormholes. So much combat comes into play when you have caps on holes, and a random-distant spawn point is going to lead risk-averse groups into not committing caps, full-stop.
Wormholes aren't broken (comparitively speaking) - stop trying to fix them. Instead, please focus your attention on things that DO need fixing: POS mechanics, corporation mechanics, sovereignty, the still-soul-crushing new player experience.
What Her Pointiness Queen LaBeefah said.
Like most recent attempted changes to wormhole mechanics, the spirit of the change is good, but the execution leaves something to be desired. It just doesn't feel like a reasonable change.
|
a DAMN PATRIOT
Dropbears Anonymous Brave Collective
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:56:00 -
[109] - Quote
For me one of the great things about wormholes is that they behave in variable but somewhat predictable ways. This rewards the experienced player who can calculate jump mass on the fly, and use the mechanics to their advantage.
Like many players have said, this change would make rage rolling a pain in the ass, and prevent smaller groups from being able to manipulate hole mass to their advantage, and make yoloswag420ing caps into a brawl much less favorable.
This is one change basically everyone seems to agree is a horrible idea. CCP what are you doing, plz stop |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:56:00 -
[110] - Quote
Brutus Crendraven wrote: PVP (method of destroying isk to generate a level of income for CCP)
I feel the need to point out that PvP doesn't destroy isk, it destroys materials. The isk is in the hands of whoever sold the PvPers those ships.
If anything, isk is created through the insurance system. |
|
Chesterfield Fancypantz
Radical Astronauts Plundering Eve WormHole Occupation and Resource Exploitation
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:58:00 -
[111] - Quote
a DAMN PATRIOT wrote:For me one of the great things about wormholes is that they behave in variable but somewhat predictable ways. This rewards the experienced player who can calculate jump mass on the fly, and use the mechanics to their advantage.
Like many players have said, this change would make rage rolling a pain in the ass, and prevent smaller groups from being able to manipulate hole mass to their advantage, and make yoloswag420ing caps into a brawl much less favorable.
This is one change basically everyone seems to agree is a horrible idea. CCP what are you doing, plz stop
I think thats the most important thing to note here.
Its an almost universal hatred for the change, its rarely seen. |
Steven Hackett
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
34
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:59:00 -
[112] - Quote
So this is what CCP is up to when they don't work on POS's, corp roles, stuff from the list of small things or anything else useful..
I wonder what CSM member(s) have advocated this change or if the CSM have even been given a chance for feedback. That would be very nice to know, thx :) |
MurinA 7o9
Omega LLC
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 17:59:00 -
[113] - Quote
hi .can we get more information why this particular change is being done and what are other changes u guys and girls are cooking for future in wormhole life.thanks
rolling static to iceland |
Brutus Crendraven
Stryker Industries
24
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:01:00 -
[114] - Quote
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:Brutus Crendraven wrote: PVP (method of destroying isk to generate a level of income for CCP)
I feel the need to point out that PvP doesn't destroy isk, it destroys materials. The isk is in the hands of whoever sold the PvPers those ships. If anything, isk is created through the insurance system.
It's not the main point of the post, but for simples:
If something is detroyed then someone will replace. They may replace by going and licking a roid for several hours or they might go and grab a plex.
But the essence is isk is removed from the economy and has to be replaced. |
Jen Talbot
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:02:00 -
[115] - Quote
I won't be unsubscribing due to this change, but that's mainly because I have characters in other areas of space than wormholes. I can see how for many people whose entire game centers around living in a wormhole and farming their static for kills or sites, this change could severely hamper their enthusiasm for logging on every morning. I can understand a change that would spawn your ship *just* out of reach of the wormhole, so you'd maybe have to slowboat 5-10km back, but 40km is excessive. If wormholes are meant to be a mysterious and uninhabited frontier, that's just what they're about to become for anyone other than the massive groups who are already well-established in J-space. Jumping into a hostile hole with anything short of a sizable fleet with long-range weapons (nagas, ishtars and tengus, anyone?) backing you up is about to become very, very risky. I came to wormholes to get a break from the powerblocs of nullsec; it's a pity that only powerblocs are going to be able to survive long-term in high-class wormholes now as well. |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:03:00 -
[116] - Quote
The isk is not removed from the economy. It's removed from the wallet of the player who lost the ship, should they choose to replace it. There IS a difference. |
Seras VictoriaX
Relentless Grind
41
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:03:00 -
[117] - Quote
So when can we see this same change applied to Cyno's ?
Titans landing 80km off the cyno.
|
Kupena
Enso Corp
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:13:00 -
[118] - Quote
Oh man, love this idea. From my perspective this is going to be a fresh breath to already great environment.
- more strategic approach to deploying forces through a wh, have to take the spread in consideration - means rolling will be harder - easier to catch someone out, incentive to have fights - less chance of having bigger hulls dropped right on you when fighting on wh's. - could be that the small mass of frigs will drop them right on the hole, less than 2k off - easier to catch and kill - cov-ops T3 might be dropped more than 2k off meaning it's easier to cloak up and warp off or whatever. It was too random previous to that
Adapt or die, hail bob. |
Dasani Waters
Hard Knocks Inc.
20
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:15:00 -
[119] - Quote
This change discourages smaller entities from engaging larger ones.
Under the current mechanics, if there is a larger aggressor fleet on the other side of a defender's wormhole, the defenders can try using heavier ships to counteract their inferior numbers. The fact that the defenders spawn within jump range of their own hole allows them to disengage and collapse the wormhole, and pick off any aggressors who follow and get trapped. This change discourages that tactic because the defenders spawn so far outside of jump range and would not be able to leverage their heavier mass against the aggressors.
Smaller entities still would not be able to use lighter ships in an attempt to outmaneuver their attackers because lighter ships spawn closer to the wormhole, and are thus more susceptible to being scrambled and forced to return home.
The net effect of this change would be that if a group encounters a larger entity than them, their choices to engage would be more limited than they are currently, and would thus be encouraged to simply log off.
What would be more interesting, however, is an inverse relationship between mass and jump distance. In other words, having lighter ships spawn farther from the wormhole and vice versa would allow smaller groups to use lighter ships to outmaneuver their hostiles, or to use heavier ships to mass the connection.
An inverse relationship between mass and spawn distance would also still keep the logistical overhead of creating content (ie rolling wormholes) to a minimum and thus provide more opportunities for groups to interact with each other instead of wrestling with game mechanics. |
BeanBagKing
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
289
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:15:00 -
[120] - Quote
Ok, in the interest of trying to find meaningful feedback, and keeping in mind I haven't read through everything in this thread....
Negatives: It's going to make rage rolling a pain in the arse. The easiest way to collapse high mass wormholes is with high mass ships, which are going to be spawning way out of range of the wormhole. Your choice is to either fit a prop mod on them and burn back to the hole, warp off and warp back, use a lot more lower mass ships, or just not rage roll. I'm not sure which one wormhole entities will end up doing. No matter which one is chosen it's going to slow down rage rolling and make an already boring, time consuming, and tedious job even more boring, time consuming, and tedious. If people end up just saying that it isn't worth it, lets not roll the hole, it's going to create more wormhole stagnation and much less pvp.
Positives: If people still use caps for hole rolling, it could create opportunities for more ganks and pvp. Even if they use smaller mass ships, there's still better odds that one or two will get caught. I'm not sure what distance we're looking at for cruisers and smaller, but it may make it easier to catch cloaky scouts before they can jump back through. As Traiori said, it's already an art form, but not giving them the opportunity to immediately jump back gives the camper better odds.
Basically, I absolutely hate the thought of rolling holes with this mechanic, and I'll be one of the ones who figures it's not worth the time, just let it die naturally. However, I love the thought of someone else trying to roll a hole and catching them.
My suggestions you ask? First, I love new content and additions, but this is one of those things that I can't help but think, "if it ain't broken, don't fix it". I would love to see what CCP's goals are for introducing this. They have to be thinking of spicing up wormhole space in some way, which is a good thing, I'm just not sure this is the way to go about it. Overall I have to agree with others, in it's current form this sounds like a bad idea.
The only thing I can think of (shot in the dark) is that they are trying to mitigate capital usage (blap dreads) in wormholes, and this is their way of doing it. If that's the case then I don't think this is a good idea. Residents will still be able to use caps in their home systems, but anyone trying to bring caps in for a fight are going to have them spread all over grid, as much as 80km apart. It'll reduce people bringing caps out of their own home systems, but not reduce the use in that home system. It'll compound the issue that already exists. Nobody will ever want to jump any force into another entities home.
If this is the change CCP wants to make though, then 40km is way too far away. It potentially puts capitals outside of each others support range. Make it more like stargates, say 10km from the holes. You can still jump into a wormhole and be inside the support range of your fleet, and not spread all to hell and back. However, scouts and the like aren't appearing within jump range of the hole, making them easier to catch. It'll make hole rolling with capitals a bit more time consuming, they'll have to burn 5km back to be within range of the hole, but it'll allow at least some time to catch them.
Really though it's hard to offer up suggestions and ideas to balance things without knowing what CCP is trying to get out of this. Are you trying to nerf blap dread useage in wormholes? Are you trying to give us better chances of catching scouts? Are you just throwing something out there and saying "lets see what players do with this"? Are there other changes coming that will compliment this?
|
|
Bronya Boga
Isogen 5
407
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:18:00 -
[121] - Quote
this would make the life of small corporations, who rely on mass and polarity to win fights, much harder. If it isnt in jump range it will basically make it very hard to take advantage of polarity and mass during small, and even large, fights.
I would ask that you reconsider this feature and throw it away and maybe work on Black holes or something. Host of Down The Pipe-áIngame Channel DTP Podcast www.downthepipe-wh.com GÇïIsogen 5 is recruiting. Check us out
|
Hans Bonderstadt
Codename-47
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:21:00 -
[122] - Quote
no
Pros: lol
Cons: everything
If this is for real, im literally moving to nullsec |
Scarlet Nobleonce
Dominion Enterprise Psychosomatic.
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:21:00 -
[123] - Quote
MurinA 7o9 wrote:hi .can we get more information why this particular change is being done and what are other changes u guys and girls are cooking for future in wormhole life.thanks
rolling static to iceland
be carefull you might end up in greenland or in the middle of the ocean!
I for one am completly against this change. |
Nakid singularity
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:22:00 -
[124] - Quote
How this currently is implemented is not good for wormhole space. I can only see one way it might be workable. Large ships spawn closer to the hole after jumping through then smaller ships. (cap within 5k, bs 7.5, cs 10, fr 15,... ). Then rolling would stil possible. Cap fights would still be possible. Kiting and brawlng could be viable. Downside never ever will you catch covert ops or frigates. Might make lower class wormhole more kite like and higher class wormholes still brawly. |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
114
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:22:00 -
[125] - Quote
Bronya Boga wrote: I would ask that you reconsider this feature and throw it away and maybe work on Black holes or something.
Good idea |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2034
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:23:00 -
[126] - Quote
Omg CCP! !!
Why ruin collapsing wormholes with caps so I can PvE it up in my C6 , 100% safe?
I'm so mad, I'm going to throw forum tantrums about it ending PvP fights, which rarely happen, about it making w-space more empty, then it already is, and throw in some stuff about making it tougher for the little guy, because I'm just making things up right now.
Please CCP, don't bring danger to w-space, I just want to shoot sleepers in complete safety day after day. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
115
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:27:00 -
[127] - Quote
If it's worth saying, say it on your main. |
Dasani Waters
Hard Knocks Inc.
22
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:28:00 -
[128] - Quote
Kupena wrote:Oh man, love this idea. From my perspective this is going to be a fresh breath to already great environment.
- more strategic approach to deploying forces through a wh, have to take the spread in consideration - means rolling will be harder - easier to catch someone out, incentive to have fights This means you need more people online and active to roll holes, so if you don't have enough you go afk or log off.
Kupena wrote: - less chance of having bigger hulls dropped right on you when fighting on wh's.
Those guys who would've dropped a bigger hull on you just won't fight you to begin with. They'll go afk or log off.
Kupena wrote:- could be that the small mass of frigs will drop them right on the hole, less than 2k off - easier to catch and kill - cov-ops T3 might be dropped more than 2k off meaning it's easier to cloak up and warp off or whatever. It was too random previous to that. So people who would've tried to put a cheap scout into your hole in order to scout you for a fight won't because they'll die. Instead they're forced to try to use a covert T3. If they can't do that, then they'll go afk or log off.
Kupena wrote:Adapt or die, hail bob. So if you see a new sig spawn and don't have anyone willing to jump in a covert t3, then your best bet is to just log off instead of ninja rolling or even scouting their hostiles. This doesn't sound like a good way to get more fights. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2034
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:29:00 -
[129] - Quote
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:If it's worth saying, say it on your main.
Oh I see I've ruffled some feathers with the stupidly rich and entitled wormhole bears. Guess I'm 100% on the mark. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Moloney
Mass Effect Enterprises Dark Knights of Eden
67
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:30:00 -
[130] - Quote
This is ridiculous.
Leave the damn thing alone!
How long do you intend it to take to close a WH? 1. Orca jumps through 2. Orca spends 5minutes getting back to the hole )assuming it is not hostile, which means they are not getting back [bump / bubble]) 3. ??? 4. Fix* POS FIRST!!!
* Fix does not mean do anything other than sort out an Active Directory like permission / OU system. |
|
Myxx
765
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:31:00 -
[131] - Quote
CCP, stop ******* the entire game up. Its almost like CCP WANTS people to hate them. The CSM seems to be utterly useless and appears to have not done their job (again). Who on the CSM thought this was REMOTELY okay? |
Lemonades
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
57
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:32:00 -
[132] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:Erasmus Phoenix wrote:If it's worth saying, say it on your main. Oh I see I've ruffled some feathers with the stupidly rich and entitled wormhole bears. Guess I'm 100% on the mark. It's the 'stupidly rich wormhole bears' that will suffer less from this. It's the smaller groups that will feel it the most. |
Zarny Woop
Dominion Enterprise Psychosomatic.
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:33:00 -
[133] - Quote
WH residents honestly don't ask for much. Fix pos mechanics and work on black hole(because it is terrible).
Please listen to your players and don't do it.
This will only popularize the activity of pos spinning. GRAMMAR: It's the difference between knowing your ****, and knowing you're ****... |
Dasani Waters
Hard Knocks Inc.
22
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:36:00 -
[134] - Quote
BeanBagKing wrote:Ok, in the interest of trying to find meaningful feedback, and keeping in mind I haven't read through everything in this thread....
Positives:
Basically, I absolutely hate the thought of rolling holes with this mechanic, and I'll be one of the ones who figures it's not worth the time, just let it die naturally. However, I love the thought of someone else trying to roll a hole and catching them.
This is NOT a postive. More people will go afk or log off while waiting for their static to die naturally instead of actively looking for fights or isk. |
Chesterfield Fancypantz
Radical Astronauts Plundering Eve WormHole Occupation and Resource Exploitation
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:36:00 -
[135] - Quote
Lemonades wrote:Sentamon wrote:Erasmus Phoenix wrote:If it's worth saying, say it on your main. Oh I see I've ruffled some feathers with the stupidly rich and entitled wormhole bears. Guess I'm 100% on the mark. It's the 'stupidly rich wormhole bears' that will suffer less from this. It's the smaller groups that will feel it the most.
Completely agree.
large wormhole corps like hard knocks, lazerhawks, SSC, etc will just keep using capitals, because they know if one gets tackled they have the numbers to support it. its in essence a large bait.
The smaller groups, like mine, this is almost a complete death blow to our way of life. A couple capital losses and we'd be hit pretty hard. |
Chris Winter
Winters Are Coming
525
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:38:00 -
[136] - Quote
The ability to jump back through a hole(within polarity limits) is one thing that makes WH space different from null (where you have to burn back to the gate).
Why are you trying to make wormholes more like null? |
Crispinius
Negative Density No Response
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:39:00 -
[137] - Quote
I guess there will be a Mod or an Implant which we can buy on AURUM Store to have the Old WH Jumpsystems again |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
116
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:39:00 -
[138] - Quote
And every large entity WANTS the smaller groups to be committing and using caps. More fights are good. Caps dead on either side means more fun. |
Kupena
Enso Corp
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:39:00 -
[139] - Quote
Dasani Waters wrote:Kupena wrote:Oh man, love this idea. From my perspective this is going to be a fresh breath to already great environment.
- more strategic approach to deploying forces through a wh, have to take the spread in consideration - means rolling will be harder - easier to catch someone out, incentive to have fights This means you need more people online and active to roll holes, so if you don't have enough you go afk or log off. Kupena wrote: - less chance of having bigger hulls dropped right on you when fighting on wh's.
Those guys who would've dropped a bigger hull on you just won't fight you to begin with. They'll go afk or log off. Kupena wrote:- could be that the small mass of frigs will drop them right on the hole, less than 2k off - easier to catch and kill - cov-ops T3 might be dropped more than 2k off meaning it's easier to cloak up and warp off or whatever. It was too random previous to that. So people who would've tried to put a cheap scout into your hole in order to scout you for a fight won't because they'll die. Instead they're forced to try to use a covert T3. If they can't do that, then they'll go afk or log off. Kupena wrote:Adapt or die, hail bob. So if you see a new sig spawn and don't have anyone willing to jump in a covert t3, then your best bet is to just log off instead of ninja rolling or even scouting their hostiles. This doesn't sound like a good way to get more fights.
Those are some pretty wild assumptions. Sounds like carebears to me, if they would simply log off without a fight with the new mechanics then they'd probably log off without a fight even if nothing changed. Heck, we're small enough and if there's something bigger on the other side we just batphone people in. |
BeanBagKing
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
289
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:42:00 -
[140] - Quote
Chesterfield Fancypantz wrote:
large wormhole corps like hard knocks, lazerhawks, SSC, etc will just keep using capitals, because they know if one gets tackled they have the numbers to support it. its in essence a large bait.
The smaller groups, like mine, this is almost a complete death blow to our way of life. A couple capital losses and we'd be hit pretty hard.
The problem is that they can only bring in so much support to rescue a tackled cap. That being about 2 dreads, a carrier, and subcap support. Even if you do bring in reinforcements, they could easily land outside of support range for that single tackled cap. That's also assuming they have the support online, nobody wants to form up a 40 man fleet and have everyone on standby in the correct ships just to roll and old static and see what is in the new chain. Meanwhile whoevers system you rolled into that has your capital tackled can bring in as many caps as they want, at whatever range they desire, not spread out all over. It'll be a complete death blow to our way of life as well.
I agree with Dasani Waters. I was trying to find positives so maybe I didn't make it clear enough, but yea, people will go afk before they try to roll statics 98% of the time. I'm sure someone -will- still try it, and when they do then it might be possible to catch a capital. that's where I was coming from calling it a positive. That other 98% of the time though I completely agree, people will go afk instead of trying for a fight. |
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
620
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:42:00 -
[141] - Quote
Kynric wrote:Erasmus Phoenix wrote:People roll with a gang larger than that, except they're in the correct ships for the fight they're looking for instead of all being in rolling battleships. Having to wait for half your fleet to go back to their poses and change ships is going to lead to losing fights. Lots of obvious solutions: Use alts for the battleships or have the proper ships in a carrier and just leave the battleships floating in your hole (ghost riding for wormholers), or make a battleship doctrine or send some interdictors in to hold them down while you re-ship. Once again its not the end of your playstyle. Yes because requiring more alts is good for CCPs bottom line account sheet compelling gameplay. The number of alts already needed to be competitive/efficient is pretty excessive. Adding more to that pile of plex/$$ cost simply to be able to find things to do in a timely manner is asinine.
I'm right behind you |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
117
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:46:00 -
[142] - Quote
We already have the same few people with alts doing the boosting/scanning/massing when we rageroll, because other people would have to swap out of a combat ship. This is just going to burn out the people who can multibox even faster. |
Thead Enco
47th Ronin
183
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:49:00 -
[143] - Quote
To whom this may concern at CCP,
Can't be bothered to look into a sov/POS revamp? But you gotta fix what's not broken and probably one of the only areas in the game that is working as intended since release right?
-á"A Lannister always pays his debts."
-áTyrion Lannister |
Ness Phase
Hard Knocks Inc.
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:50:00 -
[144] - Quote
100% not for this change. |
Mr Jesterman
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:50:00 -
[145] - Quote
As stagnation is a problem in Nulsec, So should the people of WH suffer. This is only fair.
Another example of CCP Balance team with no real in game experience living in WH's making changes. |
Deeone
Deadspace Zombie Factory
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:53:00 -
[146] - Quote
Well this is a horrible change. WH space was just starting to get more population too. Now CCP is going to kill it off. Stupid change almost as dumb as when you could not warp to a gate at 0. just please announce when this is going live CCP so i can move out of my C4 and unsub like most of the high sec indys have already. You guys **** up indy completely and then instead of all hands on deck fixing it you are ******* with wh space great use of resources. Keep this **** up and the eve is dying crowd will finally be right. I mean you guys realize with how wh and polarization work you cant just jump back and escape like a gate. hell if anything randomly spawning 80km off the people trying to kill me is going to help me escape. And on top of it all its one more change that helps large groups over small exactly what we dont want in WH space. You already gave null to the goons how bout letting small groups keep something......... |
Geiri Tyr
Aether Ventures Surely You're Joking
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 18:56:00 -
[147] - Quote
Surely they're joking. |
CBBOMBERMAN
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:00:00 -
[148] - Quote
There are no words to say how bad this is. We spend hours rolling in order to get good fights. Now we are going to spend even more hours or people just get borred and not login. .
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
620
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:00:00 -
[149] - Quote
Mr Jesterman wrote:As stagnation is a problem in Nulsec, So should the people of WH suffer. This is only fair.
Another example of CCP Balance team with no real in game experience with living in WH's making changes. Your avatar looks, a little, like a sad Nicholas Cage.
That said, in the interest of sharing the misery joys of stagnation, we'll happily allow this change if applied to kspace jumping mechanics to include all forms which utilize a cynosural field generator (covert or otherwise), jump bridges, titan bridges.
It ought to really shake things up and that's good right guys? Right?
I'm right behind you |
Firefox4312 Yatolila
Nex Exercitus Northern Coalition.
45
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:02:00 -
[150] - Quote
I hope Hellmar isnt telling people to ignore the rage and hate for this change like he did with incarna. Probably already has a "Im sorry I screwed you guys over" speech ready. Seriously, you guys had to fire 20% of all CCP employees last time you basically didnt give a **** about what the community said. You also lost about 10%? or so of all your income from subscriptions as well. Granted, this wont be as bad as incarna, but if you dont give a damn about us now, what about the next change that you completely ignore the public AGAIN and then you have Incarna 2.0 happen?
I would seriously stop being concieted and breaking things that work as intended, and fix something more important like 0.0, pos management, hell walking in station would be nice. Just stop changing things that dont help the gake but rather enrage the player base. WE ALL KNOW MAKING THE EVE COMMUNITY MAD = BAD.
Rant over, watching Lucy in theatre right now. I shall post more when I'm home. Also, Hellmar; Stop. Breaking. This. Game. Please. And. Thank. You. |
|
Elana Apgar
DarkMatter-Industries Upholders
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:05:00 -
[151] - Quote
This is one of the WORST ideas/things you could EVER do to W-Space.
Like everyone else before has mentioned, this will kill PVP. You can't possibly try to pvp with any type of mixed (mixed being battleships, battlecruisers, cruisers, etc.) fleet comp if everyone is going to be spewed out in all sorts of random directions. You would basically be signing your hole fleet up for slaughter.
One of the fleets that my alliance likes to do is travel through our pipe in RR Domis. With this new concept, that would be impossible. Domis have a range of 10km for cap chain and 8.5k for rep range. Spawning 40km off the hole in a random direction would completely kill this concept. You would be removing content instead of adding.
Fighting in wormholes occur on wormholes most of the time, and I understand wanting to try and change it up, but something like this would break wormholes, much like adding local to wormholes.
Please do not implement this change. It is repugnant to the entire wormhole community. It will break wormholes, and remove content from the game.
|
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
496
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:07:00 -
[152] - Quote
W-space jump mechanics ain't broke. Don't fix them.
There ARE things that are broken: free discovery scanner sig intel, free industry intel via teams, and ore belts as anomalies instead of signatures. Fix those.
Does the WH brawling style of fighting confuse your nullsec minds so much that you need to make W-space more like K-space? Nano-kiting is the rule of thumb in K-space. Armour brawling is the rule of thumb in W-space. You don't need every place in the game to have the exact same mechanics as everywhere else. You do know that polarization exists, right? That we can't keep jumping back and forth at any given time?
Are we TOO efficient at hunting, finding your nullsec farming fleets, and ripping them to shreds? Please show us on the doll where a W-space group touched your ratting or C5 farming fleet.
Are you going to make the same kind of changes affect Cynos and K-space gates, or are only the W-space groups in your crosshairs?
|
Antimatter0097
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:07:00 -
[153] - Quote
Hans Bonderstadt wrote:no
Pros: lol
Cons: everything
If this is for real, im literally moving to nullsec I might consider this a positive if you actually do end up moving :D
|
Hans Bonderstadt
Codename-47
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:10:00 -
[154] - Quote
Antimatter0097 wrote:Hans Bonderstadt wrote:no
Pros: lol
Cons: everything
If this is for real, im literally moving to nullsec I might consider this a positive if you actually do end up moving :D
Well you are one rudey pooty pitootie Not quite sure what I did to you :)
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
620
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:14:00 -
[155] - Quote
Firefox4312 Yatolila wrote:Rant over, watching Lucy in theatre right now. I'm so sorry. It's terrible.
I'm right behind you |
Galmas
United System's Commonwealth
162
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:15:00 -
[156] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and...
...
Lo Fozzie,
don't take hate but somehow i got the feeling that i do not like any part of that extract of your post.
Just leave w-space alone, for me personally it is by far the best part of Eve, so looking at the changes you guys brought to the game lately (beside the changes to scanning, these are really good) i doubt it will get any better.
Best Regards Gal
|
Dentric Crendraven
DarkMatter-Industries Upholders
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:15:00 -
[157] - Quote
Hans Bonderstadt wrote:Antimatter0097 wrote:Hans Bonderstadt wrote:no
Pros: lol
Cons: everything
If this is for real, im literally moving to nullsec I might consider this a positive if you actually do end up moving :D Well you are one rudey pooty pitootie Not quite sure what I did to you :)
Could Possibly have something to do with the Swastika POS or the general **** talking in local.
But that's none of my business |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
58
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:20:00 -
[158] - Quote
Kynric wrote: Oh the horror of needing a dozen pilots to rage roll (do people honestly rage roll with a gang smaller than that?)
Some of the best times I have had was with just 4-6 pilots. One scout so that doesn-¦t leave much wiggleroom.
If I was with team tinfoldhat I-¦d say nullbears have lost too many caps/supers on wormholes because they were too scared to follow the wounded caps in. If the cap is not in jumprange anymore they can do riskfree titandrivebys or just throw everything at it until TiDi hits. Free capkills for the blob.
I find it cute how people think this will force people to move away from armor-T3s. You know that over 50% of those ships will have longrange scrams and webs and spawn in a tiny ball around the hole. If you bring f.e. kitey BS they will still appear in range and you will loose alot of them fast since they will also outdps you. Or they will really **** you over and bring a lot of damps, tank you easily and just roll you in because you don-¦t have a HIC on the hole. This stuff works in k-space because a) regional gates f.e. spawn your entire fleet scattered inside a huge radius and b) there are flippin gates you can take to get out and around. Here it is loose your holecontrol and you loose your way home.
This change will also make camping retardedly easy, you see what jumps, you do the math and then have a ceptor orbit the hole at the spawnrange. Or in case of covertops just smartbomb his ass, you know he is within 2000m of the hole.
Fozzies response also feels like "we have already decided on how to change everything. We might adjust some numbers." |
Blodhgarm Dethahal
Transcendent Sedition Protean Concept
180
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:21:00 -
[159] - Quote
While I respect the effort to make WHs more unpredictable and thus dangerous, you need to be careful of the degree of danger you present.
40km jump range possible? no one will risk that at all with heavier ships and fleets, oh sure you will have the few that will risk it, but its a minority, and you can't balance a game around that. Its like saying capitals coming into a cyno will come out somewhere within a 40km radius, do you think you will jump your capital then?
Now 15km range, same as stargates, I wouldn't mind that, but I still feel that it just takes away the distinct WH like feel of the space I've come to love.
I cautiously await your next proposals. -Bl+¦d
http://bloodytravels.blogspot.com/ -á-- My travels through space. |
Chrysalis Pollard
Griffin Capsuleers Ad-Astra
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:22:00 -
[160] - Quote
Wanted to chime in on this thread. Being a smaller corp, this will significantly affect our ability to close holes as we will not want to risk our Orcas and maybe not even our battleships to close a hostile hole or get a new LS static for better PvE or PvP opportunities. Will it cause us to leave WH space? Probably not, but if we have dangerous or deadly connections or a really crappy static, we will probably just stay possed up and flip to our HS mission running or mining alts instead of trying to stay and play in the wormhole space.
Also, its very concerning to me why CCP seems to keep needing to relearn the lesson of open and honest communication when it comes to the player base and CSM regarding changes to game mechanics. |
|
Dentric Crendraven
DarkMatter-Industries Upholders
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:25:00 -
[161] - Quote
Also, this is just a terrible move. Regardless of whether this is final coding or not just don't mess with the jump mechanics of wormholes. They are fine how they are.
Honestly if this is the kind of stuff you are going to do with wormholes without consulting the community of which it will affect the most.. just don't mess with wspace.
Talk to Corbexx, talk to the wspace community. Find out what we want changed if anything. Don't go messing with things we didn't ask for. Right now wspace is the best space mechanics wise and any changes need to be taken with care.
It doesn't make any sense. WHers like their space, Null seccers do not. Fix the broken space before you start messing with other space. |
DirtyJob
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:26:00 -
[162] - Quote
If you really really must change mechanics. What about spawning distance on other end should be connected with speed of ship before jump? Then as some ppl suggested you can still use "sniper" doctrines and have some options when jumping on other site.
I am very very sceptical about any change that would push capitals away from hole. It would reduce even more it usage in WH. If someone want to roll hole(cos another end is less then favorable) leave him be with current mechanics. If he would not be able to quickly roll he will probably just afk at POS or play another game till he will be absolutly sure he can roll current static or it will collapse on it's own. |
Bob Artis
Into the Ether RAZOR Alliance
66
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:31:00 -
[163] - Quote
That sounds really backwards. Why not have the heavier ships spawn closer to the wormhole and have the lighter ships flung further away?
Capitals and Orcas will still spawn within 5km like everything else now and frigates will be the ships that end up 50km away and spread out. |
Vivi Udan
Multiplex Gaming The Bastion
41
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:36:00 -
[164] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:...We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. ... In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you...
I don't live in wormholes so I could just be out of the loop, but WHY did CCP feel the NEED to make changes to this aspect of wormholes?
I know people who live/lived in wormholes and they all seemed to really like how the current system works. The Mittani of House GoonWaffe,-áFirst of His name, King of the Goons and VFK,-áMaster of griefing,-áLord of the CFC, Warden of the West,-áand Protector of Deklein. |
Korben Kurvora
Hard Knocks Inc.
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:37:00 -
[165] - Quote
Dentric Crendraven wrote:Hans Bonderstadt wrote:Antimatter0097 wrote:Hans Bonderstadt wrote:If this is for real, im literally moving to nullsec I might consider this a positive if you actually do end up moving :D Well you are one rudey pooty pitootie Not quite sure what I did to you :) Could Possibly have something to do with the Swastika POS or the general **** talking in local. But that's none of my business And who said wormholers don't hold grudges?
This is an absolutely terrible change. Keep up the good work, CCP. |
Arec Bardwin
1490
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:43:00 -
[166] - Quote
A prime example of :CCP: development philosophy |
Doc Hollidai
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
54
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:43:00 -
[167] - Quote
1. Rolling holes with capitals will be a thing of the past as you now have 5 minutes of your capital exposed which people won't do. So if you're not using capitals, then you won't be putting nearly as much mass on a hole as quick... so cloaky carrier **** won't work anymore. 2. Dreads will decloak at their optimal. Blap dreads are goign to be a thing again. Best way to counter t3 blob when you have multiple dreads, spread the dreads out so they can always track. GG CCP 3. MWD BS will become primary mode of rolling holes. 10 sets for a 3B hole. BS can have prop mod to run away, MJD to jump away unless you have scram, scorpions?, less isk at risk, and more i didn't think of 4. Control a fight on a hole by changing the mass quickly? Not going to happen when you have to slowboat 30km 5. Capital/Freighter jumps through hole, your ****** bubble missed it as it spawned outside range... it gets webbed away and lives... GG
And that's just the stuff that came to mind in the first 5 mins. |
Jess Tanner
Bangworks Systems Inc.
111
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:49:00 -
[168] - Quote
To echo what some people are saying, the inverse of the mass vs distance suggestion does make more sense if your going to mess with the mechanic at all, larger ships should pop out closer to the wormhole, thus forcing the smaller ships to actually pilot their way around after they get spit out if they want to survive. That being said however, I do remember a certain dev coming on a wormhole townhall not that long ago and saying something to the point of w-space was the most balanced aspect of the game, which would seem to suggest that any change in a fundamental mechanic need not be tinkered with while a huge chunk of the game still has gaping holes that need fixing/iteration.... Go with Bob, keep Him always in your heart. He is your Sword, Shield, and the Knife in your back. |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
5387
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:49:00 -
[169] - Quote
Whatever mechanic you have to cause this effect; apply it to cynos too please. The Paradox |
Tevath
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:51:00 -
[170] - Quote
I just love this new feature! Why? It's simple.
Until now you could relay on your big fleets to win wh fights, when you alone are useless. Now even if your friends come to your rescue, they wont be in jump range to run in case something goes wrong, making them vulnerable. Ins and outs wont be made easily, and your caps wont roll whs just cause it's fun and you need another exit. Vulnerability is the key and i just love how you all are so scared about this.
Null secers are right. This already happens with gates, so.. what's the point of so much fuss? None.. just tears. |
|
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
120
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:55:00 -
[171] - Quote
Polarization doesn't happen with gates, and aggression timers don't affect wormholes. Apples and oranges. |
Hans Bonderstadt
Codename-47
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:56:00 -
[172] - Quote
Really the smaller sized corps get screwed over with this Hole rolling will become ridiculous, with us just moving into a C5-C5 rolling will be literally near impossible if anyone big is in the chain, larger windows in which caps are vulnerable, them spawning out at 40km gives the attackers the advantage of choosing their engagement range, (provided they are off grid or at a ping to start with) forcing defenders to burn up to ~50-60km to defend a capital, which will probably end up dead anyway, which will result in less hole rollings, and meaning larger corps at a Huge advantage, which will probably monopolize wormholes into fewer larger corps than more smaller corps (which IMO is terrible, so many large groups out there reduces small gang pvp, and really hurts the smaller guys.) I feel as though more hit and run/guerrilla warfare mechanics need to be developed so that smaller groups can still do something about the larger groups in an engagement, and larger groups need a reason to not be so... Large... |
Ingersoll Jones
Long Wharf Exploration Inc You Are Being Monitored
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 19:59:00 -
[173] - Quote
I'm gonna have to err on the side of "not the best idea" as well.
Generally, I have little to say when CCP decides to change one mechanic or another in the game; I find it far more productive to find ways to adapt to changes other than whine about them. However, in this case, I think I may need some cheese.
My corp, which is much smaller, tends to farm wormholes in a transient style - move in for just a few days or even hours at a time, farm what we can, and leave. But in doing that, we travel together, with a couple combat ships and various mining and indy ships all at once. I hate to think that jumping though a womhole could possibly place me upwards of 40 to 80 kilometers away from my indy guys (supposing that RNG places us at say 20k off on opposite sides of the hole). I feel that this mechanic somewhat cheapens the wolf-pack tactic that helps to keep us safe, and it would certainly have a significant impact on our ability to do what we do.
I do hope that CCP does find a way to achieve whatever goal it is they have for implementing this change without so harshly penalizing loyal wormholers like myself and the others who have posted here. I didn't choose the wormhole life. The wormhole life chose me. |
Bei Rong
Hard Knocks Inc.
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:08:00 -
[174] - Quote
Tevath wrote:I just love this new feature! Why? It's simple.
Until now you could relay on your big fleets to win wh fights, when you alone are useless. Now even if your friends come to your rescue, they wont be in jump range to run in case something goes wrong, making them vulnerable. Ins and outs wont be made easily, and your caps wont roll whs just cause it's fun and you need another exit. Vulnerability is the key and i just love how you all are so scared about this.
Null secers are right. This already happens with gates, so.. what's the point of so much fuss? None.. just tears.
It will give the hold defenders more of a reason to just dump dreads at range, and know that your own caps will be at much greater risk then before. Furthermore, it would force any aggressive force to stand down, since support caps would not be nearly as effective, and we would have to relay on pure bodies at blap range. No fc will call for a fleet to jump into that mess with so much down time, as logis get close enough to set up chains, being webbed and blaped without the life giving reps, and our precious triage carriers being a possible 80mk off, they would just be dead.
And as for null secers their caps don't jump gates, so they avoid their caps blobs being out of rep/ effective dps range, which is the issue rather then sub caps. |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
436
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:10:00 -
[175] - Quote
This change in its current SISI implementation is ridiculous. Not only this makes rolling wh even more tedious but also makes this extremely dangerous.
Now, increasing "slightly" random distance to lets say 10ish km could be considered but firstly we need to have a good reason for it. So the question is: WHY?
One answer can be that its too easy to roll wh during pvp to cut away from enemy or cut his way of escaping. While in principle this can be good for the game at the same time in 99% of situations (where there is no pvp) this will only increase time needed to get back trough the wh. At the same time this will help scanners to always be in cloaking range from wh.
But is all of the above good? I'm not sure. I would like a random situation where this would occur. A random element to the game that from time to time can spark a nice fight. But making a rule of it? I don't think so.
Again this change like many proposed before is benefiting mostly large entities that are capable of capital killings. Where smaller entities will be in fear whenever taking capital from SMA. Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff? |
Hans Bonderstadt
Codename-47
22
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:10:00 -
[176] - Quote
Tevath wrote:I just love this new feature! Why? It's simple.
Until now you could relay on your big fleets to win wh fights, when you alone are useless. Now even if your friends come to your rescue, they wont be in jump range to run in case something goes wrong, making them vulnerable. Ins and outs wont be made easily, and your caps wont roll whs just cause it's fun and you need another exit. Vulnerability is the key and i just love how you all are so scared about this.
Null secers are right. This already happens with gates, so.. what's the point of so much fuss? None.. just tears.
Yes but the vulnerability applies to everyone including the group that would benefit most from this So in the case of this mechanic, I cant seem to find a way to actually take advantage of this vulnerability Because of the huge range possibility that people could spawn at, this allows no range control, and people with larger forces will be more likely to land a scram on you due to spawning close enough There is no real way to use this mechanic for anything but baiting or ganking Also guardians still land within rep range of everyone, so gg |
Dread Nanana
Action Super Dupper Test Corp
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:10:00 -
[177] - Quote
Shilalasar wrote: If I was with team tinfoldhat I-¦d say nullbears have lost too many caps/supers on wormholes because they were too scared to follow the wounded caps in. If the cap is not in jumprange anymore they can do riskfree titandrivebys or just throw everything at it until TiDi hits. Free capkills for the blob.
That's quite delusional regarding nullsec. If anything, the WH people should easily get kills in 0.0 if the are looking a for fight.
Anyway, Instead of jumping in and out with your dread in a risk-free maneuver, you'll need a scout to have a warp out and warp back in? Takes an entire minute. Unless the reason is not to find a fight, like oh-everyone-so-claims, but to avoid one.
|
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
682
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:12:00 -
[178] - Quote
Not so worried about the risk aspect but slow boating a capital ~40km every time you wanted to collapse a hole would be more than a bit of a drag :S
Wouldn't mind seeing some mechanic whereby smaller/lighter ships in a class got spat out further than heavier ones though, does kind of mean covert ops, etc. would be all but uncatchable unless it was done on some kind of bell shaped curve but as an example shield t3 would get spat out at say 20km whereas an armor one at 10km. |
Nelly Uanos
Quebec's Underdog League Quebec United Legions
22
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:23:00 -
[179] - Quote
Fix broken thing, this isn't one!
Bad:
Rolling will be unpleasant as hell, be it for aggressive party that want to find fight or for defensive party that want to close their home.
Sniping dread spreading around hole............
Catching Cov Ops and Blockade Runner will be gone...
Even more Ishtar fleet spreading around... NO THANK
Good:
None... |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
178
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:24:00 -
[180] - Quote
From an overall game design perspective, yes it's a significant change that feedback in this thread would indicate is majority negative.
That being said...
What if it had been like this on day one of Apocrypha, and we'd never had 0-risk hole rolling? Would we be up in arms asking for CCP to make it so everyone spawned within 7.5km of the wormhole? I doubt it.
Maybe wormhole space needs to have its meta smacked around a bit. We don't know what other changes are in flight, so maybe there are other things going on that combine with a change like this (which he said weren't using final values) that makes the overall idea okay to us.
|
|
Aryth
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1567
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:24:00 -
[181] - Quote
Introducing a mechanic to allow rolling using some sort of Siphon might be amusing. Leader of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal. Vile Rat: You're the greatest sociopath that has ever played eve. |
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2035
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:24:00 -
[182] - Quote
This feature effectively deals with 2 major w-space problems.
1) Carebears using caps to make their ISK faucet completely safe. 2) Roaming gangs of T3 ships looking for easy targets to gank.
The end result will be more meaningful PvP over systems and resources, not the current carebear and gank fest.
It's a brilliant solution CCP, make it happen. (and for cynos too please!) ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Stalkon Dsandor
Quantum Explosion E X P L O S I O N
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:29:00 -
[183] - Quote
I am very interested in the midst of the madness of someone came up with the idea. If you want to remove the wormhole of the game so easily remove. |
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
650
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:31:00 -
[184] - Quote
The reaction to this change strikes me as the same sort of "who moved my cheese!" reaction industry got: largely people who don't like change protesting that their carefully optimized gameplay has been altered and they'll have to come up with new ways to do things.
That's understandable, but the group of people who like mindlessly following optimized routines are a very vocal minority and the game is just flatly better when things are shaken up a little. This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. |
BadAssMcKill
ElitistOps
817
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:34:00 -
[185] - Quote
Man remember when CCP listened to the playerbase before making wacky changes
What happened to that . |
Hans Bonderstadt
Codename-47
22
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:34:00 -
[186] - Quote
Gospadin wrote:From an overall game design perspective, yes it's a significant change that feedback in this thread would indicate is majority negative.
That being said...
What if it had been like this on day one of Apocrypha, and we'd never had 0-risk hole rolling? Would we be up in arms asking for CCP to make it so everyone spawned within 7.5km of the wormhole? I doubt it.
Maybe wormhole space needs to have its meta smacked around a bit. We don't know what other changes are in flight, so maybe there are other things going on that combine with a change like this (which he said weren't using final values) that makes the overall idea okay to us.
This ^ Meta does need a change, maybe if the spawn ranges were more tighter, just enough so wormholes stay a brawling environment just as they always had, but increase the amount of time or ways in which a larger ship becomes vulnerable. Maybe a timer besides polarity for higher mass ships, nothing too significant, 15 seconds to leave a dread or carrier on a hostile side maybe (Just a spontaneous idea, no h8 m8) |
James Amril-Kesh
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
10898
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:35:00 -
[187] - Quote
I don't even live in wormholes and this seems dumb. No, this isn't it at all. Make it more... psssshhhh. |
Dread Nanana
Action Super Dupper Test Corp
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:35:00 -
[188] - Quote
Doc Hollidai wrote:1. Rolling holes with capitals will be a thing of the past as you now have 5 minutes of your capital exposed which people won't do. So if you're not using capitals, then you won't be putting nearly as much mass on a hole as quick... so cloaky carrier **** won't work anymore. 2. Dreads will decloak at their optimal. Blap dreads are goign to be a thing again. Best way to counter t3 blob when you have multiple dreads, spread the dreads out so they can always track. GG CCP 3. MWD BS will become primary mode of rolling holes. 10 sets for a 3B hole. BS can have prop mod to run away, MJD to jump away unless you have scram, scorpions?, less isk at risk, and more i didn't think of 4. Control a fight on a hole by changing the mass quickly? Not going to happen when you have to slowboat 30km 5. Capital/Freighter jumps through hole, your ****** bubble missed it as it spawned outside range... it gets webbed away and lives... GG 6. Less content, more frustration.
And that's just the stuff that came to mind in the first 5 mins.
Edit: This whole things stinks of "We don't know what is going into next mini-release, lets just change some **** and call it awesome new content generator"
So,
1. you want to avoid a fight. 2. dreads have a terrible time locking subcaps - subcaps can just jump through the WH if they are camping, or burn for the dread or warp out? Or are they avoiding a fight again? 3. no comment, again seems to be avoiding a fight 4. no comment, seems like again a risk-free way of baiting and then ganking 5. freighters have less mass than carriers. If carriers appear at 40km, use a large T2 bubble and freighter is in your bubble.
https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Mobile_Large_Warp_Disruptor_II
7. less risk-free hole rolling, maybe.
Hint: no need to slow boat 40+km back to the hole. Just warp off to a safe and back to your hole. Takes less than a minute and some risk.
Anyway, all the posts I see here is how dangerous activity this will be. So don't mix it with "finding fights" in same sentence. |
Nelly Uanos
Quebec's Underdog League Quebec United Legions
22
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:36:00 -
[189] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:This feature effectively deals with 2 major w-space problems.
1) Carebears using caps to make their ISK faucet completely safe.
2) Roaming gangs of T3 ships looking for easy targets to gank.
The end result will be more meaningful PvP over systems and resources, not the current carebear and gank fest.
It's a brilliant solution CCP, make it happen. (and for cynos too please!)
1) Not a problem at all... You just need to put a bubble on their side of the hole... so if they want to re-take home control at least they need to fight it out.
2) Easy... what?
- Leaving a cloaked on incoming hole warn you already... - Discovery scanner do the same for new wormhole spawning... |
Lynx Sawpaw
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:37:00 -
[190] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone. ...we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time.... ...We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then... ... In the meantime I advise you all to not panic.... ...Nobody is out to get you....
TLDR; None of our discussion is being paid any attention to at the moment. CCP only listens when they want to listen. Guess it's time to shoot the statues outside Jita and Amarr again. CCP doesn't listen, but CCP does watch. Source: monoclegate.
Also Fozzie, it's a bad idea as a dev to tell the player base that "nobody is out to get you." It does nothing to allay the fears and anxieties of a change that, to be frank, will shake the very foundation of player groups living in w-space.
By pushing out changes that drastically alter the perceived quality of life in w space a negative way with no explanations or dev blog to explain your design, CCP has yet again proven their masochistic tendencies towards self immolation. Please stop abusing the trust the players have in you and at least include us in an honest discussion over what you see wrong with this aspect of the game and where your overall design goals regarding WH are headed. You told us about where k space wants to go with player made stargates, so why not show the same kind of love to those of us who live in j space? |
|
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
66
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:37:00 -
[191] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:This feature effectively deals with 2 major w-space problems.
1) Carebears using caps to make their ISK faucet completely safe. 2) Roaming gangs of T3 ships looking for easy targets to gank.
The end result will be more meaningful PvP over systems and resources, not the current carebear and gank fest.
Uhm yeah ... no :) How do you figure? |
Wander Prian
Arctic Light Inc. Arctic Light
34
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:38:00 -
[192] - Quote
The way it is in SiSi now is not a good idea. I'll reserve my final verdict until I've read the devblog |
Firefox4312 Yatolila
Nex Exercitus Northern Coalition.
47
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:52:00 -
[193] - Quote
Nelly Uanos wrote:Fix broken thing, this isn't one! Bad: Rolling will be unpleasant as hell, be it for aggressive party that want to find fight or for defensive party that want to close their home. Sniping dread spreading around hole............ Catching Cov Ops and Blockade Runner will be gone... Even more Ishtar fleet spreading around... NO THANK Good: None...
The good is that if they get away with this and pissing the playerbase off, they'll do it again. Saves CCP money since they get to fire 20% of their staff... Again. |
Kazanir
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
501
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:55:00 -
[194] - Quote
Maverick Capasso wrote:-1 Interesting concept, but it seems like it will just discourage PvP in WH space. We cant YOLO caps into null now b/c when they cyno in five titans to drive be DD we can't hop back to saftey. If we wanted to fight the blob we would live in nullsec. Zzzzzzz
Well, supercapital-class ships are gay as hell. But won't this change mean that the phrase "you only live once" will describe your capitals rather more accurately? |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
5391
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 20:59:00 -
[195] - Quote
Aryth wrote:Introducing a mechanic to allow rolling using some sort of Siphon might be amusing. But siphons love your towers. NOM NOM NOM NOM!!!
Honestly we need a new siphon to harvest all these tower owner tears. The Paradox |
Dread Nanana
Action Super Dupper Test Corp
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:00:00 -
[196] - Quote
Lynx Sawpaw wrote: TLDR; None of our discussion is being paid any attention to at the moment. CCP only listens when they want to listen. Guess it's time to shoot the statues outside Jita and Amarr again. CCP doesn't listen, but CCP does watch. Source: monoclegate.
So are you really trying compare some small change to WH mechanics that tries to avoid risk-free hole rolling with a pay-to-win-eve ? Say it ain't so! |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
5391
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:01:00 -
[197] - Quote
Kazanir wrote:Maverick Capasso wrote:-1 Interesting concept, but it seems like it will just discourage PvP in WH space. We cant YOLO caps into null now b/c when they cyno in five titans to drive be DD we can't hop back to saftey. If we wanted to fight the blob we would live in nullsec. Zzzzzzz Well, supercapital-class ships are gay as hell. But won't this change mean that the phrase "you only live once" will describe your capitals rather more accurately?
You are correct. They indeed are very merry and in a lively mood. The Paradox |
Cap James Tkirk
Gung-HO Guns Insurance Fraud.
138
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:07:00 -
[198] - Quote
Bad change is bad and changing things just cuz is really stupid if this goes into effect as its been stated cynos should have the same penalty as they create a similar effect to what a wh represents also local should cost trillions of is to maintain in null since we are throwing out shite ideas and all make no thing safe for anyone ever. |
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
60
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:07:00 -
[199] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:This feature effectively deals with 2 major w-space problems.
1) Carebears using caps to make their ISK faucet completely safe. 2) Roaming gangs of T3 ships looking for easy targets to gank.
The end result will be more meaningful PvP over systems and resources, not the current carebear and gank fest.
It's a brilliant solution CCP, make it happen. (and for cynos too please!)
First, this does nothing to solve roaming either of those issues. If anything it makes it harder to gank PVE caps. Mainly due to the fact that it will increase your PVP rolling time by a significant amount. Let s do some simple addition:
If nothing goes wrong you have 65m/s avg on dreads, (the most used gank capital class in WH space)
- So lets say you avg between 20-40k kickout from a WH when you try to rage roll for PVP.
- Thats an extra 5-10 minutes of having your dread slow boating back to the hole. An entire siege cycle or more.
And, thats 5-10 mins of not being able to get support to your dread if the inhabitants decide to jump that dread or if another chain happens to open up in that 5-10 mins. Your dread gets tackled, your fleet can either get half a fleet to die trying to save it or let the dread die....
Ok, so no more dreads rolling holes, that means less PVP by far. PVE'ers can sleep safe knowing that no fleet will roll into them because no one is rage rolling their static. GG Blood Union, Skyfighters, Hardknocks, oh and every other PVP entity in WH space.
So then it turns into null again, don't take out those caps that you want to PVP in because CCP just ****** up any chance of getting a good fight between two parties.
Also, how does this affect T3 combat in any way? The will be even more prevalent because there will be no more point to rolling the hole. Instead lets just take 40 people in T3's and go roaming....oh wait, since no one has rolled their holes that means upperclass WH PVP is only done when two holes happen to connect and not when people are actually ready for a fight....damn CCP looks like you ****** that up too.....
I love climbing into holes! I train New Bro's in WormHoles! Check out my PodCast:-áPraise Bob! Also checkout these other PodCasts: http://evepodcasts.com/ |
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
685
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:08:00 -
[200] - Quote
I love this change so much. Changes everything. Finally. New life to wormhole space. Everybody will need to learn new tactics, awesome.
Do it. I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I-- THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/asayanami Twitter: https://twitter.com/Asayanami
|
|
kai il
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:08:00 -
[201] - Quote
I only see this hurting wormhole space rather then helping it, Nobody in our corp currently thinks this a good idea and from what I can see nobody else in this thread thinks its a good idea.
Orcas jumping and landing 11k is terrible enough on its own but now you are adding capitals landing 30-40k in the hopes of increasing pvp and all I can see this doing is increasing quick ganks.
After removing npc kill data wormholes began a decline and I am glad that CCP is trying to fix this but this is more putting the nail in the coffin then anything and will just cause people to go to null or lowsec making it even harder to get pvp in wormhole space. |
Scarlet Thellere
Natasha Aleksejewa Republik
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:10:00 -
[202] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:This feature effectively deals with 2 major w-space problems.
1) Carebears using caps to make their ISK faucet completely safe. 2) Roaming gangs of T3 ships looking for easy targets to gank.
The end result will be more meaningful PvP over systems and resources, not the current carebear and gank fest.
It's a brilliant solution CCP, make it happen. (and for cynos too please!)
1) Maybe. They will just POS up when new sig auto-magically shows up and just log out. And crit close WH with BS.
2) Make more tedious maybe. (longer time per roll) But they would have even bigger advantage on hole control. (longer time required to close hole)
I just don't see how it would improve anything. What problems it solves and what we even define as problem. Some problems are features for others. |
Lynx Sawpaw
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:11:00 -
[203] - Quote
Dread Nanana wrote: So are you really trying compare some small change to WH mechanics that tries to avoid risk-free hole rolling with a pay-to-win-eve ? Say it ain't so!
There are parallels in the way CCP handles player response. Corporate culture is slow to change. I'm not saying this is a fiasco like monocle gate and if you read my post it would be rather apparent.
That being said, who are you? Do you have anything to do with WH? Rolling a hole is not without risk. There is always a chance that the cloaky carrier trap is waiting for you. Source: Just did this the other day, thanks to a carrier trap. |
Souiginto
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:12:00 -
[204] - Quote
our entire corp approves of kai's post
EDIT: the thing Lynx is talking about: >Click< |
kai il
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:15:00 -
[205] - Quote
. please remove |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
491
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:33:00 -
[206] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote: This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices.
please explain whats good about it and the more interesting choices. please also apply them to. c1 wh's, c2 to c4 wh's and then c5 to c6 wh's also please take in to account farmers and pvpers. Small groups thatlivein the lower class wh's and bigger groups in the higher class wh's.
Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better |
Lynx Sawpaw
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:37:00 -
[207] - Quote
Souiginto wrote:EDIT: the thing Lynx is talking about: >Click< *brofist soui* thx m8. confirming im bad at the internet. |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
121
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:45:00 -
[208] - Quote
Dread Nanana wrote: That's quite delusional regarding nullsec. If anything, the WH people should easily get kills in 0.0 if the are looking a for fight.
Anyway, Instead of jumping in and out with your dread in a risk-free maneuver, you'll need a scout to have a warp out and warp back in? Takes an entire minute. Unless the reason is not to find a fight, like oh-everyone-so-claims, but to avoid one.
You never sat in a capital did you? Warp out and in uner a minute, lol not even with implants could you do that! You clearly are a troll.
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
121
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:48:00 -
[209] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:This feature effectively deals with 2 major w-space problems.
1) Carebears using caps to make their ISK faucet completely safe. 2) Roaming gangs of T3 ships looking for easy targets to gank.
The end result will be more meaningful PvP over systems and resources, not the current carebear and gank fest.
It's a brilliant solution CCP, make it happen. (and for cynos too please!) OO an other troll. 1) won't be fixed at all with this and you know it 2)roaming gangs and t3 fleets will be the only thing left sinces capitals are out!
Home defense will be so much easier if this bad change would go through. You will be safe if you have 10 or more capitals in your system. |
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
61
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:49:00 -
[210] - Quote
corbexx wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote: This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. please explain whats good about it and the more interesting choices. please also apply them to. c1 wh's, c2 to c4 wh's and then c5 to c6 wh's also please take in to account farmers and pvpers. Small groups that live in the lower class wh's and bigger groups in the higher class wh's.
This does not affect Lower class W space in anyway beyond orca's. I would say this effectively removes orcas as a viable hole closer or as a legitimate transport. Yay for making orca's in W space suicide. This means lower class corps cannot thrive with limited logistics. Meaning corps can no longer progress through W space like they have. Lower to upper. I love climbing into holes! I train New Bro's in WormHoles! Check out my PodCast:-áPraise Bob! Also checkout these other PodCasts: http://evepodcasts.com/ |
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
121
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:50:00 -
[211] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:The reaction to this change strikes me as the same sort of "who moved my cheese!" reaction industry got: largely people who don't like change protesting that their carefully optimized gameplay has been altered and they'll have to come up with new ways to do things.
That's understandable, but the group of people who like mindlessly following optimized routines are a very vocal minority and the game is just flatly better when things are shaken up a little. This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. No points made why this change would be bether but dozens of reasons why it would be bad . Should be tried on cyno's first to get a bether view of the effects. Maybe it would shake up the blue donut. |
Edward Harris
Lazerhawks
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:55:00 -
[212] - Quote
This is a great idea if it is your plan to get half of the WH population to stop playing and the other half to finally move to nullsec. If that is the case, you might as well also add some cool random ship explosions when a fleet jumps through a wormhole - you know, cause w-space is dangerous and so on. |
Jack Marshal
The Malleus Maleficarum Random-Violence
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:57:00 -
[213] - Quote
Wow Talk about Garbage If your in a small group, Not PL or Goons you cant own space CCP you ensured that with the current Sov. dynamics So we move in to a WH so we can call something home that we dont have to pay rent for. Some were we can defend and not have to worry about Titains and Damned Suppers being dropped on us when we try and have a fight. Wh space is the last resort for smaller groups / corps and CCP is going to take that away with this jump range garbage. Heres an IDEA look at the SOV Map activity on the weeked, ITS EMPTY Most of your SOV is EMPTY, its ******** when we drop out of a hole, at 01:00 Eve time , and NO ONE HAS JUMPED GATES in some of the nullsec Systems, you may want to think to yourself GÇ£Gee somethings broke, why is all this sov emptyGÇ¥.
Here is My question. Dear CCP were can we move to next and call home, were we can do something besides please F1 in the blob fleets you love so much to advertise. CCP since your Stripping the only defense we have (Worm hole control) from huge wormhole groups, what is your plan next? push all the smaller groups out to get bigger blob fleets for you to advertise on you tube?
This Is not "content" this is garbage. Try this [pause for effect] Add something NEW to wormhole space. Given were not a huge number of people and what we think doesn't way heavy with you guys, but come on give us a break.
|
Rroff
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
684
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 21:59:00 -
[214] - Quote
^^ Its a bit like some of the recent changes to nullsec - it causes some extra work for bigger entities but doesn't have the desired effect of inhibiting their ability to project power as they are big enough to deal with the burden, while smaller entities struggle even more to be effective with the extra burden to deal with. |
Sum Olgy
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
62
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:03:00 -
[215] - Quote
I can't see any positive ideas here. And many many negatives.
It all works for large WH entities with a lot of people online - it adds a new dynamic to getting content. However, small WH entities suffer as there's no way they'll roll or put large ships through. It's just no a risk worth taking.
So I'm a large NO!
Look more at this idea please, CCP, it's not terribly well thought through for the vast majority of WH dwellers. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1645
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:06:00 -
[216] - Quote
So instead of adding new features/content to wormhole space, CCP are going to make a change that will have a negative effect on wormhole space as a whole?
This type of decision is what really makes me frustrated with the developers. I think this proposed change will discourage the "rolling " of wormholes because the must vulnerable ships (capitals and battleships) will be taking the biggest risk. In the end, only the biggest groups can safely use chain rolling tactics, while smaller groups have to make the decision to either risk big, or log off.
IMO a better change would be to reduce the wormhole jump range to 2 km but set the spawn distance (when exiting a wormhole) to around 6 km.
The only positive is that fighting on a HS will be riskier. +1 |
DoToo Foo
Weaponised FuGu
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:07:00 -
[217] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: ... Nobody is out to get you...
This is wormhole space. Everyone is out to get you
|
Winthorp
2453
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:19:00 -
[218] - Quote
Honestly i dont know what you people expect, there has been countless years worth of threads were we have whined about how predictible WH's are and how easy it is for your content of the moment to roll you away at their choosing perfectly safely unless you have a bubble up before they click warp.
Now CCP actually try to do something and you all carry on like it is going to ruin WH's. I think 40km for a capitol is a bit high but i welcome changes to the current stale meta of WH life. Maybe if they change enough in WH's more people will be willing to bother again with WH PVP but as it stands it is lack luster boresville. |
Viscis Breeze
No Vacancies
37
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:21:00 -
[219] - Quote
Quote: This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations
Can you please just fix POSs, alliance bookmarks and all the other little things wrong with wormhole space instead of just try to change database numbers and package it as a wormhole space overhaul.
Once again CCP strikes with an un-thought-out, arbitrary change which will do more harm than good. Recruitment: http://bit.ly/1r4G5Pv Website: http://www.no-vacancies.net/ Channel: No Vacancies
|
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:22:00 -
[220] - Quote
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1M79iBz5tiqowrEbOANt1GPzTsh8Ib_c6PMid8TMxtXg/edit#gid=0
Even if numbers change, if they get smaller to the point where we are happy. That means nothing happened....CCP wastes time yet again on useless crap. I love climbing into holes! I train New Bro's in WormHoles! Check out my PodCast:-áPraise Bob! Also checkout these other PodCasts: http://evepodcasts.com/ |
|
Dealth Striker
Striker Ltd
38
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:22:00 -
[221] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Yes, and that Nobody works for CCP!
Striker Out!! |
Edward Harris
Lazerhawks
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:25:00 -
[222] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Honestly i dont know what you people expect, there has been countless years worth of threads were we have whined about how predictible WH's are and how easy it is for your content of the moment to roll you away at their choosing perfectly safely unless you have a bubble up before they click warp.
Now CCP actually try to do something and you all carry on like it is going to ruin WH's.
A bad solution for a problem doesnt mean it's a good idea.
|
QT McWhiskers
Hard Knocks Inc.
415
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:35:00 -
[223] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
You have awoken me from my slumber. With this change, you have single handedly killed c5 and c6 wormhole corps. We require the ability to effectively roll the static connection quickly and easily. You have just DESTROYED that ability. Spawning outside of jump range is a very VERY bad idea for several reasons. But all I have to do is provide one.
On December 16, 2013 a wormhole alliance by the name of Disavowed decided to get some payback and invaded our bros in lead farmers. Hard knocks took up the call and over the course of 3 hours we rolled 32 static wormhole until we found the correct hole. Leading to one of the largest fights wormhole space has EVER seen.
This would not have been possible if we were not able to roll our static connection, literally, every 5 minutes. This kind of change destroys all kinds of quick response in wormhole space. |
Abney Stewart
4U Services Inc. Upholders
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:38:00 -
[224] - Quote
Horrible Horrible Horrible idea.
This will only reward turtling. Being the aggressor will automatically put you at a large disadvantage.
NEW META - ALL T3 fleets with MWD.... |
Ion Udan
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
80
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:42:00 -
[225] - Quote
Hi CCP Fozzie,
Thank you for responding to this thread, I'd like to contribute some constructive feedback on the matter which helps in moulding how this change is deployed.
The first part that stands out is how this change was found. Please confirm if this is the standard way CCP deploy changes, ie: for all changes you just put them on SiSi and then work on them from there, even if players find them before you announce?
The second part that stands out is how this change will be perceived to impact "content" in W space, and by content i mean PvP. W space is so dynamic sometimes its possible in your current W space chain there will be no activity so you're required to roll your static to try and find someone. Whether this is another W space entity or a K space connection.
Now rolling high mass WH's means the use of capitals, capitals spawning 40 km's from the WH will certainly take some time to get back to the hole and jump through. Now doing this once off, adding maybe 5 to 10 minutes to rolling 1 hole isnt bad. When you multiple this by the amount of times people roll their static this is a large amount of time! The time spent rolling your static will add up and people dont have unlimited time to play EvE. EvE is reknown for having a high age level player base, with this comes more people working, more people with families and these are priorities for their time. If they know they're going to have to devote 20 to 30 minutes JUST for rolling holes its a negative to W space.
On the topic of how entities of differing sizes engage each other this change will have a perceived negative effect on the smaller group. To ensure the safety of your capitals, if you choose to use them for rolling, you will need to have a backup fleet on standby something not all W space entities can do. If you want to use smaller ships then its going to take a long time to roll, waiting out polarity. Or they just choose to leave it and log off. All this changes play time and how your player base interacts with them game.
I hope you find the above information useful. This is just my personal opinion but similar views appear to be within this thread.
Ion Udan o7 RudinV:-á"2dreadnoughts with agro Vs 5 rly mad guys;)" |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
499
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:48:00 -
[226] - Quote
Lynx Sawpaw wrote:You told us about where k space wants to go with player made stargates, so why not show the same kind of love to those of us who live in j space? Where do you think those gates are going? What part of space is devoid of gates and could "benefit" from them the most? Right.
Dear CCP, notice from this thread that, by and large, we DON'T want you making large changes to W-space. We barely want you making small changes; you got W-space "right" when you first rolled it out, and have left it alone for the most part without breaking it. What we want most of all is that you consider the changes in the rest of the game that you make and what effects they might have on W-space, altering them BEFORE you break something else in W-space. Again.
As far as changes we WOULD like to see in W-space, Corbexx has opened a discussion thread just for that. Most of them were intended to be small changes, but naturally when people get talking together, the ideas start flowing. That thread is discussed and vetted by the community, as is the list of things Corbexx would send you.
From day one, we've thrown your plans for W-space in the toilet and did our own thing. For a company that prides itself on player-driven content, you should be proud of that and encourage that. You shouldn't try to keep screwing us over like you do. Are the tears worth the lost subs? If the idea is to drive people back to Nullsec, realize that many people in W-space have already been to Nullsec, didn't like it, and wouldn't go back. They will leave the game instead.
Someone else posted a brilliantly insightful comment: Nullsec groups are unhappy with their space. Wormholers are very happy with their space. Work on fixing what makes your customers unhappy, not breaking what makes them happy.
Disclaimer: This change as is wouldn't affect me or my corp quite so much. We would just stop using Orcas to roll, and would instead only use battleships or 100MN cruisers. In fact, with the new cargo capacities of the specialty indy ships and DSTs, there isn't much use for an Orca in W-space anymore if this change goes through, except maybe for baiting.
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
536
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:51:00 -
[227] - Quote
This is the new iteration of the Hated Cloaked K162 Gankhole idea that was stickied for months, then unstickied this weekend (8/2/2014).
Everybody HATED that idea.
Everybody HATES this idea.
If you want to create more content for wormholes, why don't you do what the ENTIRE FKING community has asked for.
Revert back the Discovery Scanner (no more instant show wormholes) Revert back mining sites to anomalies. Change Black Holes to something Viable. Deal with C4 space and figure out if a dual static is viable for it.
Hell pick one thing from the W Space Little Things Thread. There are viable concepts that are agreed by the entire wormhole community there. The community, Your Customers, And the CSM that was voted by US in YOUR Election.
Why don't you start Listening To Them.
Yaay!!!! |
Hatshepsut IV
Cascading Failure Un.Bound
176
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:53:00 -
[228] - Quote
Tevath wrote:
Null secers are right. This already happens with gates, so.. what's the point of so much fuss? None.. just tears.
I'll break it down so even a bullhead can understand.
Wormholes are not gates. W-space is not Nullsec nor do we want it to be more like Nullsec. The mechanics surround kspace gate fights are a big draw reason a lot of us live in w-space, so we don't have to deal win that crap.
Tldr.
Different from kspace is good, GTFO with your it works for us in null crap. It's not wanted and not constructive.
You too can start failing today! Reddit-áad | Cascading Failure Public Channel | Aspiring Failure
|
Winthorp
2453
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 22:54:00 -
[229] - Quote
Edward Harris wrote:Winthorp wrote:Honestly i dont know what you people expect, there has been countless years worth of threads were we have whined about how predictible WH's are and how easy it is for your content of the moment to roll you away at their choosing perfectly safely unless you have a bubble up before they click warp.
Now CCP actually try to do something and you all carry on like it is going to ruin WH's. A bad solution for a problem doesnt mean it's a good idea.
I agree its the wrong solution but it is a step in the right direction.
You only have the people at fanfest WH round table to blame as all the recent changes to WH space have developed from that meeting. CCP confirmed this. |
Setsune Rin
Collapsed Out Overload Everything
210
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:03:00 -
[230] - Quote
helllll no
i'd like to actually use my capitals, this means they will just never leave the hole anymore
capitals spawning 7km off MAYBE, so that you can't immediatly close it but it's still not a suicide mission/pain in the ass to roll holes
and spawn subcaps 10-20 off so that faster ships have a chance
this change as it stands is just pants on head ******** |
|
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
650
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:07:00 -
[231] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote:The reaction to this change strikes me as the same sort of "who moved my cheese!" reaction industry got: largely people who don't like change protesting that their carefully optimized gameplay has been altered and they'll have to come up with new ways to do things.
That's understandable, but the group of people who like mindlessly following optimized routines are a very vocal minority and the game is just flatly better when things are shaken up a little. This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. No points made why this change would be bether but dozens of reasons why it would be bad . Should be tried on cyno's first to get a bether view of the effects. Maybe it would shake up the blue donut. we in nullsec are always willing to try new game mechanics to shake things up - we are, after all, the adaptable bunch - so i'd be happy to have this implemented with cynos at the same time it is implemented in wormholes |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1647
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:08:00 -
[232] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Quick clarification, when I say we don't have any specific plans to implement a change I'm not lying. Nothing on this scale would be in the cards for the summer expansion, we're not going to start changing things on this scale without giving them the discussion and feedback time they deserve
We'll hold you to that here to mate. +1 |
Alundil
Isogen 5
621
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:12:00 -
[233] - Quote
corbexx wrote:ok so some stuff is up on reddit. http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2ci5ue/dear_ccp_stop_fucking_with_wormholes_please/I'll be totally honest I'm not sure what I can and can't say about stuff (i'm checking now on skype). What would really help is for people to discuss it and put feed back in a calm and meaning full way. Raging and calling people names won't help me at all. what i mean here is say why you like or dislike it, what effects you think it will have will it be good or bad, give reasons. stuff like "this is terrible RAWRRAWRRAWRRAWR" won't help and will just get in the way. I see several issues. it makes a boring job rolling holes more boring. This favours bigger groups over smaller groups. C2 to C4 orcas could be a issue. It probably wont affect farmers at all cos if they connect to a big group they will just not bother to roll and log
What it does is make rolling a hole for (insert reason) more tedious and time consuming. Wspace is time consuming as is. We deal with it since we did, after all, choose to live in this space with its different issues. However, that doesn't mean that we want to see arbitrary designs implemented that will reduce the QoL in wspace by requiring further time invested in basic logistics (read: rolling for egress/ingress, rolling for PvP, rolling after PvP, rolling because a fight won't happen, rolling for PvE, etc.). This increases the amount of time that this basic and required task will take by a healthy margin.
The option to "make pings with an inty". If this change goes through, the smart people remaining in wspace who need to roll a hole will likely do this. However, this requires yet another pilot (or more) in order to make it work. One for the ping (new), at least one for the scout (existing), at least one for webs for caps (new) because you don't want them slowboating into warp. From a rolling perspective, it will increase the number of pilots required by at least 2 but more than likely 2+ which places further demand on smaller corps. The guys who run in 30-40+ gangs won't really notice the addl one or two bodies because they'll have them. It has a larger negative impact on the smaller groups as they won't have enough pilots online all the time to realistically roll the hole without considering the ship a loss upfront.
Collapsing holes, or crit'ing holes during PvP is a valid tactical decision though when the numbers of pilots involved is heavily tilted one way or another.
And as for jumping caps into a fight on a bubbled hole. Good luck seeing those with anything approaching regularity. Same goes for jumping caps into someone's home hole for PvP. In addition to the (likely) home cap # advantage, CCP has just given the defenders all the advantage that matters as well in this regard....range (from reps/capxfer/extract). Suicide triage/dread is the only time an FC in their right mind would commit these resources at that point.
I'm right behind you |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3560
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:14:00 -
[234] - Quote
Oh good, another complete useless change to WHs by CCPs that does NOTHING but **** people off. Ships in WHs need to spawn within jump range. It is a key difference between WHs and gates and is offset by the polarity timer. Without it in make daily jobs like rolling WHs god awfully tedious.
Please, just STOP making changes to WHs. Just stop. Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Thead Enco
47th Ronin
184
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:14:00 -
[235] - Quote
Fozzie,
Has it occurred to you that you will also be effectively killing the mercenary play style in which alliances accept contracts from smaller groups that live in w-space and their ability to roll statics to get to their clients home system in order to complete their contract.
-á"A Lannister always pays his debts."
-áTyrion Lannister |
kidkoma
Brave Privateers
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:14:00 -
[236] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Don't you have sov to fix? Pos code perhapse? Why are you fixing a part of the game that is actuly working nicely? |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
752
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:16:00 -
[237] - Quote
Sounds like a good change, all around. Removing the safety mechanism of being able to immediately jump back through a wormhole increases the risk of traveling and allows for meaningful control of who comes in and out of a wormhole. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
Sith1s Spectre
Hard Knocks Inc.
1124
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:18:00 -
[238] - Quote
I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes AU tz best tz
|
Stacey Starwolf
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:29:00 -
[239] - Quote
I think it is a horrible idea for several reasons mentioned, but I might have found the thought behind it:
Nestor The Nestor (as designed currently) has incredibly low mass - around half the mass of a normal Battleship. This should make it very popular in wormholes.
Wait ... no ... even if they would make the change it would still be a bad ship. Sorry guys, I give up. |
Shevai Asan
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
66
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:31:00 -
[240] - Quote
Well, CCP never wanted any of us to live in WH space anyway; this is their way of saying "Get out or deal with it."
Don't worry everyone, I'm sure our opinions will be swiftly looked over and ignored as usual. CCP, working as intended...er...expected. |
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1647
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:32:00 -
[241] - Quote
Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes
yeah why wouldn't the people from big corps like it? Easier to catch hostile collapsing capitals and they have the numbers to roll in battleships. Win! +1 |
Sith1s Spectre
Hard Knocks Inc.
1125
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:41:00 -
[242] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes yeah why wouldn't the people from big corps like it? Easier to catch hostile collapsing capitals and they have the numbers to roll in battleships. Win!
For dreads, it's stupidly OP. Jump through the hole, instantly in optimal @ 40km away.
Let the blapfest begin! AU tz best tz
|
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
267
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:46:00 -
[243] - Quote
Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes
I would rather have them rolling holes than possing up and logging off.
This change wont promote pvp, people will just stop rolling whs even more, and itll make it harder to successfully gank people. The Wormhole Kid |
Senn Denroth
Lazerhawks
204
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:51:00 -
[244] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Wow this makes it hard for me because I have to move all my ships out to kspace and unsub my accounts.
AOE 2 has been on special for $5, that's right guys, FIVE DOLLARS!! Get on that! Best fun I've ever had in a long time.
P.S. I know you have to try and make content to keep your job Fozzie, but the self-destructive nature in which the game has been changed lately will be costing you all your jobs. Sorry to say but yea, every large wormhole space entity can see it now that we're in the final days of EVE. |
Hayley Enaka
Hard Knocks Inc.
38
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:58:00 -
[245] - Quote
I think it's not an awful idea just too extreme in its current implementation. I feel like CCP is simply trying to make ships more vulnerable around wormholes rather than always having the freedom of jumping to the other side. Putting caps 40km away however is complete suicide when dropping them outside jump range at say 5 - 10km serves the same purpose without making it completely unrealistic to use them. |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
858
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 23:58:00 -
[246] - Quote
Fozzie, There has been quite an outpouring of negative feelings regarding this change.
It appears to offer no positive features and a host of negative side effects, which are more like major destructive features than side effects.
Whatever the range you decide on will only make it more or less of a unwanted idea. Never a wanted one.
It seems that this will actually have entirely the opposite effect to the one you wish to see.
It is very hard to see where this Idea could have come from, as only a very very few could benefit from such a change, and only until there were no victims left for them to cull.
Being able to rage roll holes MORE easily will add to content, not implementing changes designed to make it as difficult and unpleasant as possible.
Here is something Many would actually like, A little suggestion that you can consider or ignore as you choose.
The NESTOR lacks desirability in wormholes, you seem committed to it never having a covert ops cloak, So as an alternative, Give it variable mass. switchable between Low mass like a double bubbled HIC, and the mass of an orca or capital.
EVERY wormhole corp would IMMEDIATELY buy a minimum of 2 or 3, as rolling multiple holes is neither pleasant or fun, we just looked long and hard and found a painful and awkward way to do it.
Please Do not make bad features even worse.... please give us the tools for US to make our game better. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Dark Armata
Bookmark Both Sides Exit Strategy..
105
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:04:00 -
[247] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Going to be 100% honest here.
The part in italics scares the absolute living **** out of me.
Experience has shown that once developer time and effort (read:money) has been spent on something it is the exception rather than the rule that it won't make it into the game.
Proposed changes that have already made it to the test server, but don't worry we will want your feedback next week.
If this change is any indication to the collection of proposed changes, well all I can say is GG if your goal is making wormholes the new null. Where only the biggest groups can prosper.
Glad I haven't brought my tickets to Eve Down Under yet.
Signature block has been modified. W-Space WAS Best Space |
Alundil
Isogen 5
623
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:09:00 -
[248] - Quote
Sith1s Spectre wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes yeah why wouldn't the people from big corps like it? Easier to catch hostile collapsing capitals and they have the numbers to roll in battleships. Win! For dreads, it's stupidly OP. Jump through the hole, instantly in optimal @ 40km away. Let the blapfest begin!
Except you won't be able to track what you're shooting at because your subcap web support is 30km on the opposite side of the hole and your targets are spiraling in on you with incoming neuts and DPS. Oh, and you're capxfer supporrt? They're 80km from you. They might as well be on the opposite side of New Eden for all the good they'll do you when the neuts cap you out and you die.
So much for the afterglow (and the optimal).
And a question Sith, all those times we rolled a hole (SF and RLLO)....we must have been risk averse too huh? Because it's not about risk aversion at this point but a crap mechanic being added "for the lolz" that will simply cause fewer holes to be rolled overall resulting in fewer targets found.
I'm right behind you |
Kalel Nimrott
1115
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:20:00 -
[249] - Quote
ExookiZ wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes I would rather have them rolling holes than possing up and logging off. This change wont promote pvp, people will just stop rolling whs even more, and itll make it harder to successfully gank people.
This. Brasil, decime qu+¬ se siente / tener en casa a tu pap+í / Te juro, que aunque pasen los a+¦os / nunca nos vamos a olvidar / Que el Diego te gambete+¦ / que Cani te vacun+¦ / que est+ís llorando desde Italia hasta hoy |
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:23:00 -
[250] - Quote
ExookiZ wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes I would rather have them rolling holes than possing up and logging off. This change wont promote pvp, people will just stop rolling whs even more, and itll make it harder to successfully gank people.
Well no what they do now is they warp a dread and Orca and roll it in your face while you sit their twiddling your thumbs unable to do **** all about it unless you got a bubble up in which case they always see the bubble and log off anyway. |
|
Kalel Nimrott
1115
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:25:00 -
[251] - Quote
Agree, Winthorp, the way it is now is not perfect, but at least it doesn't **** up the pvpeers when they want to find content. This change will do it. So its a matter of which one is the lesser evil. Brasil, decime qu+¬ se siente / tener en casa a tu pap+í / Te juro, que aunque pasen los a+¦os / nunca nos vamos a olvidar / Que el Diego te gambete+¦ / que Cani te vacun+¦ / que est+ís llorando desde Italia hasta hoy |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
341
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:30:00 -
[252] - Quote
The idea isn't terrible for solo players though. Maybe do the reverse? Capitals spawn near the hole and frigates spawn up to 40km out? This gives the traveling noob much more leeway to escape.
Maybe CCP want wormholes to gain more activity by eroding the big players and making solo/small gang activity more viable and not simply gank bait.
Wormholes were not meant for permanent habitation, you've said it yourselves. Maybe now the "bug" of permanent wormhole corps will be patched. Or maybe it won't. Who cares? You wanted change and now you've got it and maybe there needs to be a hurricane or two to the established order of things before rebuilding in a better way can happen. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:32:00 -
[253] - Quote
I think we can all agree the current WH Meta is stale and boring, the only way the large entities ever fight now is if you completely scout each other 3 times over leading to 40min form up times to perfectly counter each others growing jabber ping or you catch each other with their pants down.
Their needs to be more unpredictability in Wh's to force groups out of their comfort zones and catch them with their pants down.
Personally i think the number for a dread could be better serving this goal at 15-20 and not 40 but it will do. This whole lets just roll the chain attitude when ever people see someone in chain they are not prepared to fight needs to have some level of danger added to it so your assets are actually at risk when rolling a hole to achieve a new safe chain.
As for the rage rolling (My favorite pastime) yeah it would take a hit to the time it takes to rage roll but it means you will have to warp the dread and Orca away and back to the hole to complete the roll. but if you are rage rolling properly you should have your support fleet at the ready anyway right? (Not playing CS waiting for the scouts to find rage rolling action) right?
Hell this even makes it great for people that are warping **** through chains, no more safety on HS holes, no more insta webbing Orcas through chains (you will have to burn your webber closer to the Orca).
All in all i think this adds some more danger to Wh space and the people that are crying about how this will limit WH PVP are out right ******* delusional. |
Kalel Nimrott
1116
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:34:00 -
[254] - Quote
Sari Jasra wrote:Where were you when wormholes was kill?
In a C3 with a hisec static..., pathetic... Brasil, decime qu+¬ se siente / tener en casa a tu pap+í / Te juro, que aunque pasen los a+¦os / nunca nos vamos a olvidar / Que el Diego te gambete+¦ / que Cani te vacun+¦ / que est+ís llorando desde Italia hasta hoy |
Nelly Uanos
Quebec's Underdog League Quebec United Legions
23
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:36:00 -
[255] - Quote
Alundil wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes yeah why wouldn't the people from big corps like it? Easier to catch hostile collapsing capitals and they have the numbers to roll in battleships. Win! For dreads, it's stupidly OP. Jump through the hole, instantly in optimal @ 40km away. Let the blapfest begin! Except you won't be able to track what you're shooting at because your subcap web support is 30km on the opposite side of the hole and your targets are spiraling in on you with incoming neuts and DPS. Oh, and you're capxfer supporrt? They're 80km from you. They might as well be on the opposite side of New Eden for all the good they'll do you when the neuts cap you out and you die. So much for the afterglow (and the optimal). And a question Sith, all those times we rolled a hole (SF and RLLO)....we must have been risk averse too huh? Because it's not about risk aversion at this point but a crap mechanic being added "for the lolz" that will simply cause fewer holes to be rolled overall resulting in fewer targets found.
2 Dread jumping at the same time, they could end being like 70km from each other... What do you do now?
Also the current idea is by MASS, your webbing subcap support is going to be nearer to the wormhole than the dread...
|
Aelias Zero
Jaded.
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:46:00 -
[256] - Quote
Kynric wrote:Aelias Zero wrote:Makes it easier to camp a wormhole and nothing more. Also makes it so the smaller corps/fleets have less control in picking their fights.
-1 to the idea, all this is going to do is frustrate lots of people and get them to leave an already-empty wormhole space. You might have more control and better opportunities as a small gang as you can more easily get outside of scram range and if you fall back through you have new disengagement options which you do not have now.
That's a fair point. My line of thinking is that a smaller fleet is forced to spread out more, whereas a larger fleet has a better overall density allowing them to converge on the smaller fleet.
Another issue I'm seeing is the risk-averse being less likely to use caps for fleet fights and not-so-experienced corps losing a cap to a 40k WH kickout and calling it quits.
Basically, it lowers my pool of potential targets.
That said, there are some good and valid points both for and neutral over the potential change, so it's not like my opinion is completely thought out, just what I think about a few aspects. "Is probably the best person alive." -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á -Ron Paul |
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:46:00 -
[257] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:
Winthrop, the new meta is stable and boring, but the solution is not to kill organized pvp in wspace out of existence. And wormholes arent unpredictable. They are hard to figure it out and control which is different.
I have read all the above reasons in this thread on how this will kill WH PVP bla bla bla, its all bullshit reasons that can be overcome with a little more effort. People just want to be able to rage roll with little effort, find **** to gank send jabber ping and win or they want to find a Wh entity and they do either of two things they roll the Wh in their face with no recourse (NO DANGER) or they jump said fleet through and see how they go with a little skirmish and jump home to preserve the rest of the fleet if it isn't going so well for them.. that's pretty gay mechanics.
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2036
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:50:00 -
[258] - Quote
Instead of just ranting, has anyone come up with a good way to prevent bears from collapsing holes before their visit to the money tree?
W-Space was supposed to be a wild and dangerous place, not a place you live in to get your PvE on.
For people saying this will run PvP, the only question I have is, what PvP? ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Kirasten
No Vacancies
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:51:00 -
[259] - Quote
Viscis Breeze wrote:Quote: This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations Can you please just fix POSs, alliance bookmarks and all the other little things wrong with wormhole space instead of just try to change database numbers and package it as a wormhole space overhaul. Once again CCP strikes with an un-thought-out, arbitrary change which will do more harm than good.
Or in lieu of that, just LEAVE US ALONE.
I would rather they not change anything in w-space than their continued idea to "fix" things. |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
98
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:51:00 -
[260] - Quote
I'll go through this thread fully later. But for now first thoughts.
You're currently spit out between 0 and 10km in a bell curve. Will CCP be grabbing the outside end of the bell curve and adjusting that or will CCP be making "bands" by moving both ends based on ship class. As a Battleship slinger, this makes me sad. It's already hard to find times to use them. Really need numbers here. Fozzie can you drop the current thoughts on numbers down like now please. Earlier you do it the less people freak out. Can see an upside if CovOPs are always spawning inside the WH itself. No more auto cloaky run away for you. I guess this ends any kind of non Logi RR gangs. RIP Domi. Hello Nestor?
If you're doing this, maybe add common directionality to the spawn locations so fleets stick together? As in if you're on the true north side of the WH when you jump you pop out on the south side, give or take a bit of an angle?
Doing the opposite of your current thoughts could be an interesting idea. The heavier the closer to the WH. Catching Covops is already hard so throw them out there while allowing the heavy stuff to have the safety of the WH.
Since you're tweaking anyway, make the polarisation timer based off something on the ship too. Sensor Strength would be my preference. Higher = lower timer. |
|
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 00:54:00 -
[261] - Quote
corbexx wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote: This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. please explain whats good about it and the more interesting choices. please also apply them to. c1 wh's, c2 to c4 wh's and then c5 to c6 wh's also please take in to account farmers and pvpers. Small groups that live in the lower class wh's and bigger groups in the higher class wh's.
I will.
So currently most groups in C2,3,4 roll with stabbed and jam fit Scorpions with verry little danger at all and if they don't roll holes like this then they are doing it wrong as it currently stands.
This will also help smaller groups that like to PVP, no longer will they catch someone with their pants down only for that person to sit cloaked at the WH with two sets of cloak timers giving them extra time to wait until backup arrives from their C5/6, instead they will be 15km's off the hole dying to that C2 guy with him and his mate having a go at PVP.
The only guy i feel gets screwed on this mechanic is the guy living in a C1 (Lets face it they are mostly reaction farms anyway) or the guy with a C1 static. |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
342
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:02:00 -
[262] - Quote
I live in a c1 black hole and I don't see this negatively affecting me in any way really. Infact I think it's great. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=348015 T3 OHing subsystem review and rebalance https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=290346 LP faction weapon store costs rebalancing
|
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3562
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:04:00 -
[263] - Quote
whoever's check on sisi, how far are BSs, T3s and covops spawning from holes respectively? (no, im not going to go on sis to check myself) Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Indrid Hot
Forever Winter Absolute Zero.
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:07:00 -
[264] - Quote
Stance: Against I speak for my alliance roughly 150 toons strong. Please no, this would make rage rolling to find a hs or closing wh's to run in home sites needlessly difficult, as someone mentioned it would make us less likely to even put a cap through a hole for pvp. I know ccp likes to see ships destroyed to keep eve's industry gears turning, but in all honesty this will put the brakes on it. Half of my team honestly thought this was a joke, and one dude said something about needing to bludgeon someone. As it stands with new updates there are usually things that happen to wh's even when patchnotes make no mention of wh's being affected. Lets recap: 1. Use of enemy encounter surveilance system in wh's. (Broke wh's as you could set that up on a hole, and it would immediately announce in local whenever someone entered) 2. Wh's not dissapearing after expiring. (when trying to jump through an expired wh you were caught in a temporal rift and your ships image dissappeared. Only fix was to relog) 3. The wub-wub's. (Initiating warp to a hole would cause it to make an activation sound. Even if warp was canceled. This was actually hilarious as one toon could intimidate a few people camping a hole by repeatedly doing this, making them think a huge fleet was incomming) So my point is, with many new big releases there are many glitches changes we need to deal with, lets not do this one. If anything I would say, lets open up for debate maybe sov in wh space... or fixing pos code? Please fix pos code before anything. I have been shot by my own pos before.. I've setup a TCU above my pos with a bunch of cans around it and a bubble as a bug-zapper. In the entire time I was out there setting it up, the pos didnt even try to lock me. I warped off and came back to see if it would pull me out of warp like I wanted.. and the pos shot me real quick. |
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:08:00 -
[265] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:(no, im not going to go on sis to check myself)
This change was meant for lazy people like you jack.... I kid i kid.
|
Dark Armata
Bookmark Both Sides Exit Strategy..
108
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:10:00 -
[266] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:ExookiZ wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes I would rather have them rolling holes than possing up and logging off. This change wont promote pvp, people will just stop rolling whs even more, and itll make it harder to successfully gank people. Well no what they do now is they warp a dread and Orca and roll it in your face while you sit their twiddling your thumbs unable to do **** all about it unless you got a bubble up in which case they always see the bubble and log off anyway.
Plenty you can do.
Cross jump leaving tackle on your side. Safe log own dread on wormhole log on when they enter warp and cross jump with that. Mass games.
The point about rage rolling isn't that it will be more dangerous because as you say you should have your full fleet with you. But will make it take longer and more tedious.
W-Space WAS Best Space |
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:10:00 -
[267] - Quote
Indrid Hot wrote:Stance: Against I speak for my alliance roughly 150 toons strong. Please no, this would make rage rolling to find a hs or closing wh's to run in home sites needlessly difficult, as someone mentioned it would make us less likely to even put a cap through a hole for pvp. I know ccp likes to see ships destroyed to keep eve's industry gears turning, but in all honesty this will put the brakes on it. Half of my team honestly thought this was a joke, and one dude said something about needing to bludgeon someone. As it stands with new updates there are usually things that happen to wh's even when patchnotes make no mention of wh's being affected. Lets recap:
So as it stands your 150 strong group currently like to stick your cap through whatever wh you are pvping through just to jump it back when it gets too risky for you?
So your 150man group can't protect your dread while you are rage rolling for the HS?
Why are you in WH space again? |
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:12:00 -
[268] - Quote
Dark Armata wrote:Winthorp wrote:ExookiZ wrote:Sith1s Spectre wrote:I actually like the change.
No more risk adverse people easily rolling holes I would rather have them rolling holes than possing up and logging off. This change wont promote pvp, people will just stop rolling whs even more, and itll make it harder to successfully gank people. Well no what they do now is they warp a dread and Orca and roll it in your face while you sit their twiddling your thumbs unable to do **** all about it unless you got a bubble up in which case they always see the bubble and log off anyway. Plenty you can do. Cross jump leaving tackle on your side. Safe log own dread on wormhole log on when they enter warp and cross jump with that. Mass games. The point about rage rolling isn't that it will be more dangerous because as you say you should have your full fleet with you. But will make it take longer and more tedious.
So what if it takes you more time to do it, i don't really think thats a concern. Should you really be able to do it that fast that you are able to roll into a dangerous entities home WH and roll away with not a thing they can do to you?
|
The Cue
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:20:00 -
[269] - Quote
CCP,
I love the fact that you're finally taking a bit of a look at wormholes, we wormholers have felt a little left behind as you've changed a lot, but haven't really visited wormholes. However, I want to point out I think that this change is going in a slightly wrong direction. May I suggest a mirror of what you plan? So, capitals that jump spawn right on top, while subcaps spawn farther and farther away.
The advantage to this is two fold. First, it makes logistics to live in a WH still quite possible, and not horribly painful.
Secondly, and more importantly, it will actually cause a change in the metagame, which is something that I feel WHs need badly. With your currently suggested changes, armor tanked brawling ships will continue to be the only real desirable fleet type. Since subcaps will still come out in web range, there will be nothing to really motivate a meta change allowing other fleet comps. If the lighter subcaps were to appear on the other side of a hole at significant enough range, kiting comps would become viable.
This has the side effect of making battleships potentially viable, as they appear closer, compared to their T3 counterparts.
If your objective is to make rolling a WH much harder, then it would be much better to do so using a different mechanic |
Kraesk
4U Services Inc. Upholders
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:22:00 -
[270] - Quote
No. Just... No. If you want to make some changes to WH's, fine, but ASK US what we want, don't make an arbitrary and seemingly not-thought-out decision which breaks a fundamental way we all interact with our world. |
|
BeanBagKing
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
289
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:22:00 -
[271] - Quote
Winthorp, if you really want to comment on mechanics you are framiliar with, that fine. I don't know if you live in a lower class wormhole or not, but if you have options on that fine.
However, the comments your making on the higher end game play and the assumptions you make about the mechanics and how players there operate make it clear that you either have no idea what you are talking about, or are a troll. Please stop. |
Durzel
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
239
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:22:00 -
[272] - Quote
I don't think this is a terrible idea in principal, but it needs a light touch.
Right now it's trivial for one guy with alts to collapse out holes for PVE, or to roll for a highsec chain. It's actually easier the higher class you go, which seems antithetical, C5 and up it's just 2 Orcas and any capital. It's actually harder for the minnows to do it (have fun collapsing 3b non capital holes)
So, in principal having to have a defensive fleet ready to protect a capital is logical, but the environment as it stands now often makes having to rage-roll to find fights a necessity. Making this process more cumbersome would be more annoying than it already is.
Also if this change goes through I'd implore you to consider excluding K-space to W-space holes from it, for the simple reason that people venture into WHs now from empire space because the risk is manageable. When you jump in you're in jump distance on the other side, making highsec camps all but pointless, and providing the wary with risk free reassurance.
It sounds like a minor distinction but right now if a bear jumps into low or null in a PVE ship and is unlucky enough to land on a camp their distance from the gate will probably mean they're screwed. The fact this doesn't happen in W-space is hugely significant and imo one of the best decisions CCP made with wormholes. "I can peek inside in total safety" vs "pot luck if you land in a camp and are screwed" is worlds apart risk profile wise. |
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:29:00 -
[273] - Quote
BeanBagKing wrote:Winthorp, if you really want to comment on mechanics you are framiliar with, that fine. I don't know if you live in a lower class wormhole or not, but if you have options relevant to the game play you understand, please leave them.
However, the comments your making on the higher end game play and the assumptions you make about the mechanics and how players there operate make it clear that you either have no idea what you are talking about, or are a troll. Please stop.
To be clear i have lived in a- - C2 HS/C1 - C3/HS - C2 C3/HS - C5/C5 - C5/C2 - C5/C5 - C5/C5 - C4/C4
Now tell me how many different classes of WH you have lived in sir to base your ill informed judgement, because i have done it all living in small groups and in the blobs in C5 life so the mechanics of WH space i understand perfectly.
My response to this thread are not trolling at all, these are my legitimate views that this change is a move in the right direction for WH space. |
SPAMINATOR3000
4U Services Inc. Upholders
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:38:00 -
[274] - Quote
Messing with current WH mechanics would be equivalent to messing with Gate travel. It is far too established of a game mechanic and as current is not broken in any way (people that think otherwise need to adjust their tactics)
IF
You wanted to do something fresh and exciting with WH's specifically I would suggest the following.
More Roaming WH's
Bear with me on this.
Imagine if you will something like a 4 bil mass WH that punched randomly from a C1 to a NS / LS (or any other class WH)
right now some C1ers are peeing a little.
But imagine, just for a little while. Those C1ers had an easy way to bring in Capitals (as opposed to building them) Now the C1ers have some Capital ships that arent "stupid precious" now they would be more willing to use them during another roaming WH lets say to a C2 but this WH is also large enough to allow capitals, suddenly we have C1 and C2 groups fighting with their Capitals, groups that normally wont bring capitals out except for invasion defenses.
You cant rage roll this WH's since their roaming so its not like your going to bring in 50 capitals to evict a C1,2,3,4 but you may bring a triage carrier with a support fleet to fight the locals, then leave closing it behind you. And if the locals aren't boring they would bring a fight since they would have Capitals too.
I live in a C2 If an enemy Capital showed up in my front lawn you would most certainly get my attention and a response.
|
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3562
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:40:00 -
[275] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:My response to this thread are not trolling at all, these are my legitimate views that this change is a move in the right direction for WH space. what 'right direction' is that? one where people don't roll holes? one where people cannot roll holes quickly in order to cycle for content?
this change reduces the likelyhood of PVP, it does NOT increase it.
you really think people will continue rage rolling if they need to do it in a subcap fleet? you really think people will blindly try close incoming hostile holes with caps or BSs if they spawn outside of jump range?
ive killled more than a few people closing holes in all sorts of ships that were stabbed out the ass or 'safe' cos they insta roll. it isnt hard to catch these ships, making them spawn out of range will guarantee you wont catch them as they'll never leave the POS.
I don't know what station you've been spinning in lately but your 'opinion' here is WAY off the mark. Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Durzel
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
239
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:42:00 -
[276] - Quote
Someone made a point (sorry forgot name) that currently rage rolling as an activity right now is one or two guys with the same couple of ship types doing the same thing over and over on total safety and confidence of well known mass mechanics while the rest of the corp is either asleep or playing World of Tanks or something until (if) something happens....
That doesn't seem odd to anyone in so-called dangerous space? |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15555
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:44:00 -
[277] - Quote
corbexx wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote: This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. please explain whats good about it and the more interesting choices. please also apply them to. c1 wh's, c2 to c4 wh's and then c5 to c6 wh's also please take in to account farmers and pvpers. Small groups that live in the lower class wh's and bigger groups in the higher class wh's. this is in line with what ships do when they activate gates and need to "burn to the gate" to get back. it's unprecedented when carriers and dreads can't use gates, but it's the same tactical situation as if they could. in comparison, jumping through a wormhole and being within reactivation range is a little too easy and thoughtless. it would seem the motivation behind this is making a wormhole jump more purposeful, as in this change is fine for people whose intention it is to use a wormhole one-way rather than jumping straight back. for them, the further away from the hole they spawn, the better.
that said... the absolute value of this change whether good or bad is very outside of the ordinary, and I think CCP should be commended for thinking of such a bold move. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Winthorp
2454
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:45:00 -
[278] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Winthorp wrote:My response to this thread are not trolling at all, these are my legitimate views that this change is a move in the right direction for WH space. what 'right direction' is that? one where people don't roll holes? one where people cannot roll holes quickly in order to cycle for content? this change reduces the likelyhood of PVP, it does NOT increase it. you really think people will continue rage rolling if they need to do it in a subcap fleet? you really think people will blindly try close incoming hostile holes with caps or BSs if they spawn outside of jump range? ive killled more than a few people closing holes in all sorts of ships that were stabbed out the ass or 'safe' cos they insta roll. it isnt hard to catch these ships, making them spawn out of range will guarantee you wont catch them as they'll never leave the POS. I don't know what station you've been spinning in lately but your 'opinion' here is WAY off the mark.
You really think you should have the right to safely roll away a hostile incoming Wh with perfect safety with your dread and Orca?
you really think people should be able to rage roll as it stands now with only a few people active while the rest sit on TS sperging about the other games they are activily playing while those few people SAFELY rage roll? Is that how it should be? LOL
You really think it should be ok that when skirmish's happen they are allowed to safely jump the subcap fleet then the dread home when the risk becomes to great for the fight they just entered into?
I really do think this would increase PVP and FORCED PVP not the near perfect safety it is done with current mechanics. |
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:46:00 -
[279] - Quote
Durzel wrote:Someone made a point (sorry forgot name) that currently rage rolling as an activity right now is one or two guys with the same couple of ship types doing the same thing over and over on total safety and confidence of well known mass mechanics while the rest of the corp is either asleep or playing World of Tanks or something until (if) something happens....
That doesn't seem odd to anyone in so-called dangerous space?
I made this point and continue to do so because that is the REALITY as it stands now. |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
502
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:50:00 -
[280] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:So currently most groups in C2,3,4 roll with stabbed and jam fit Scorpions with verry little danger at all and if they don't roll holes like this then they are doing it wrong as it currently stands. If you want to run away, sure. Stab your ships. Course that doesn't help with bubbles and infini-points. Otherwise, combat-fit your ships and surprise those who jump you. A couple of battleships fit correctly can absolutely destroy a small T3 gank fleet.
But if you really want to roll fast, particularly a 2 bil hole, use Orcas. I won't tell you how to do it, since we're obviously doing it wrong anyway. I will however disagree and say that there isn't a single "correct" way to do it. Although if you're rolling a hole and have no idea what's on the other side then I can agree that you'll be making a harsh payment one day.
What this change DOES mean is that Orcas won't be used anymore, and maybe not battleships for the smaller, risk-averse corps. Your Dread, Orca, Battleship holy trio in C5/C6 space also won't be used anymore unless you have a substantial fleet to back you up.
People will still collapse their system before they farm home sites. This change only modifies how long it takes to do that. The instant sigs on discovery scanner means they'll still know instantly when someone opens up into them, and since you jump a CovOps or cloaky T3 in first, and not the dreads or other combat ships, there's still no risk for the attacker who is coming to scout you. Meanwhile, you warp off grid as soon as you can after the sig spawns. Nothing changes.
The casual groups who aren't rage-rolling their statics won't suffer that much. My corp fits this description. We roll when we want a change, or if a new shift is coming on and we're low on numbers with an active group deeper in the chain. Sometimes we'll rage-roll our hisec to find something that isn't in Solitude (obviously incorrectly, as I have now learned).
The groups this will affect are the C5/C6 rage rolling corps. On one hand, it will possibly force groups like BU and QEX to scout beyond their static for activity, but why should CCP care that they do that unless CCP alts have been the victims of rage-rolling fleets. I may think it's amusing when these groups complain they can't find anything from just rage-rolling, but they have the absolute right to play this game the way they want (and to complain as much as they want). It's called a sandbox for a reason.
The changes hitting W-space have been a systematic effort to protect farming fleets, up to and including this change. That's all it is. I'm more convinced than ever that CCP doesn't consider W-space as a legitimate environment for groups to dwell and hunt, but only as "exploration" content that is a few notches harder than the sites you find in k-space. Why not finish it all, removing moons and removing wormholes originating in W-space.
One day these changes will be too much for an entire segment of your game's community, and W-space will just be nullsec farmers. And you guys will still probably have no clue what that W-space thing is.
|
|
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:53:00 -
[281] - Quote
Meytal wrote:[quote=Winthorp]NPC ALT RAMBLINGS
I really would love to debate with you further but i have always held the policy of not replying to NPC alts, even a well known NPC alt like yours. |
Sith1s Spectre
Hard Knocks Inc.
1127
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:54:00 -
[282] - Quote
Meytal wrote:
One day these changes will be too much for an entire segment of your game's community, and W-space will just be nullsec farmers. And you guys will still probably have no clue what that W-space thing is.
It's pretty much already that now bar about 10 groups (in the higher end holes) AU tz best tz
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15556
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:58:00 -
[283] - Quote
Hatshepsut IV wrote: I'll break it down so even a bullhead can understand.
Wormholes are not gates. W-space is not Nullsec nor do we want it to be more like Nullsec. The mechanics surrounding kspace gate fights are a big draw/reason a lot of us live in w-space, so we don't have to deal with that crap.
Tldr.
Different from kspace is good, GTFO with your it works for us in null crap. It's not wanted and not constructive.
aside from the language and the loss of temper which is a giveaway of someone not thinking rationally, this is an argument based purely on the status quo. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
503
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 01:59:00 -
[284] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:corbexx wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote: This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. please explain whats good about it and the more interesting choices. please also apply them to. c1 wh's, c2 to c4 wh's and then c5 to c6 wh's also please take in to account farmers and pvpers. Small groups that live in the lower class wh's and bigger groups in the higher class wh's. this is in line with what ships do when they activate gates and need to "burn to the gate" to get back. it's unprecedented when carriers and dreads can't use gates, but it's the same tactical situation as if they could. in comparison, jumping through a wormhole and being within reactivation range is a little too easy and thoughtless. it would seem the motivation behind this is making a wormhole jump more purposeful, as in this change is fine for people whose intention it is to use a wormhole one-way rather than jumping straight back. for them, the further away from the hole they spawn, the better. that said... the absolute value of this change whether good or bad is very outside of the ordinary, and I think CCP should be commended for thinking of such a bold move. So, are they going to add polarization to K-space gates? Or remove it from wormholes?
Already mentioned ad nauseum is the fact that W-space and wormholes != K-space and gates. They are different mechanics with different play styles and are used in different ways. Because something works in one area doesn't mean it'll work just fine everywhere else. That's something CCP has been screwing up on quite a bit lately as well.
Differing play styles are good. Making everything the same is not good.
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15556
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:02:00 -
[285] - Quote
unprecedented does not mean similarities are bad. those similarities also do not indicate intent. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:07:00 -
[286] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Winthorp wrote:My response to this thread are not trolling at all, these are my legitimate views that this change is a move in the right direction for WH space. what 'right direction' is that? one where people don't roll holes? one where people cannot roll holes quickly in order to cycle for content? this change reduces the likelyhood of PVP, it does NOT increase it. you really think people will continue rage rolling if they need to do it in a subcap fleet? you really think people will blindly try close incoming hostile holes with caps or BSs if they spawn outside of jump range? ive killled more than a few people closing holes in all sorts of ships that were stabbed out the ass or 'safe' cos they insta roll. it isnt hard to catch these ships, making them spawn out of range will guarantee you wont catch them as they'll never leave the POS. I don't know what station you've been spinning in lately but your 'opinion' here is WAY off the mark. You really think you should have the right to safely roll away a hostile incoming Wh with perfect safety with your dread and Orca? you really think people should be able to rage roll as it stands now with only a few people active while the rest sit on TS sperging about the other games they are activily playing while those few people SAFELY rage roll? Is that how it should be? LOL You really think it should be ok that when skirmish's happen they are allowed to safely jump the subcap fleet then the dread home when the risk becomes to great for the fight they just entered into? I really do think this would increase PVP and FORCED PVP not the near perfect safety it is done with current mechanics these activities are nowhere NEAR as safe as you make them out to be. like I said, I've killed ships in all of those situations on MANY occasions, and I know I'm not the only one.
in any case, what's your alternative? if this change goes in the alternative is people will stop actively looking for content. I dont see how that help anyone, anywhere in any way.
Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Bleedingthrough
Raptor Navy
59
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:09:00 -
[287] - Quote
Durzel wrote:Someone made a point (sorry forgot name) that currently rage rolling as an activity right now is one or two guys with the same couple of ship types doing the same thing over and over on total safety and confidence of well known mass mechanics while the rest of the corp is either asleep or playing World of Tanks or something until (if) something happens....
That doesn't seem odd to anyone in so-called dangerous space?
Anyone else finds it amusing that the exact opposite of what has been suggested by CCP (here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=331782&find=unread) would make crushing way more dangerous: instant activation of the K162 side of WHs before warp to them has been initiated.
If this mechanic will apply to BS in a similar manner we (living in a C2 with null/C5 static) would most likely be facing the following a lot more:
People sitting in POS for 24h because it would be suicide to roll? Pain in the ass to crush to another group that wants to play? Resulting in making it a lot harder to get podded players back in our WH or to reship in jita.
I fail to see anything coming from this that would benefit w-space.
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
540
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:13:00 -
[288] - Quote
Lets see. There is broken stuff in wormhole space. What to do.
How about fix sig changes after downtime.
That only affects.. all of Australia, Asia, Russia, and half of Europe.
Why not try to please HALF THE PLANET?!?
If you don't know what to fix about wormhole space, Start There.
Once you have fixed that... Then go here WSpace Little Things
Once you have gone through and addressed all of those elements supported by the community and its representative. Then.. you can debate whether your wormhole change would be a good option.
You have a list, created by the community. You may not like that list, but this is not about what you like, it is about what needs to be done and NOT what you think.
Flip your corporate pyramid putting you on top and us on bottom upside down. We are the most important part of the game. We are your community. How about addressing some of the things your community says is wrong with your game.
Yaay!!!! |
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:13:00 -
[289] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Winthorp wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Winthorp wrote:My response to this thread are not trolling at all, these are my legitimate views that this change is a move in the right direction for WH space. what 'right direction' is that? one where people don't roll holes? one where people cannot roll holes quickly in order to cycle for content? this change reduces the likelyhood of PVP, it does NOT increase it. you really think people will continue rage rolling if they need to do it in a subcap fleet? you really think people will blindly try close incoming hostile holes with caps or BSs if they spawn outside of jump range? ive killled more than a few people closing holes in all sorts of ships that were stabbed out the ass or 'safe' cos they insta roll. it isnt hard to catch these ships, making them spawn out of range will guarantee you wont catch them as they'll never leave the POS. I don't know what station you've been spinning in lately but your 'opinion' here is WAY off the mark. You really think you should have the right to safely roll away a hostile incoming Wh with perfect safety with your dread and Orca? you really think people should be able to rage roll as it stands now with only a few people active while the rest sit on TS sperging about the other games they are activily playing while those few people SAFELY rage roll? Is that how it should be? LOL You really think it should be ok that when skirmish's happen they are allowed to safely jump the subcap fleet then the dread home when the risk becomes to great for the fight they just entered into? I really do think this would increase PVP and FORCED PVP not the near perfect safety it is done with current mechanics these activities are nowhere NEAR as safe as you make them out to be. like I said, I've killed ships in all of those situations on MANY occasions, and I know I'm not the only one. in any case, what's your alternative? if this change goes in the alternative is people will stop actively looking for content. I dont see how that help anyone, anywhere in any way.
Sure i should be corrected as they are not 100% safe but be honest here Jack they are 95% safe because i too have killed people in those situations but i too like you have watched idly by as the other 95% just got away to jew safely another day.
I don't think this will be as bad as you all make out, what it will mean is when rage rolling people will have to stop being lazy as hell about it, and when people jump into a fight they are committing themselves, not just until they feel like the losses will become to bad if they don't jump home.
Hell it will even change the current meta up that web boats will become more prevalent now and choices will have to be made will it be more lokis,Jams or Nuets, start thinking of the possibilities and not the negatives. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15556
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:16:00 -
[290] - Quote
that it's based on mass should say enough about the change to make some assumptions. it's too easy to send mass through and back again. a player who is not willing to admit this should probably step away from the thread and come back when they're ready to consider the ways it will change their gameplay. that's the prudent thing to do right now.
you can still roll if you want to. this situation favors teamwork, e.g. ten battleships over 1 cap. mass counting is more accurate that way anyway.
this really isn't something to be upset about. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
|
Deeone
Deadspace Zombie Factory
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:17:00 -
[291] - Quote
So I went to work and had a full day to think about this........its still ****. Sorry CCP this will kill pretty much every corp in wh space that has less then 10 people on constantly. As for all the Im going to move to null people that's exactly what they want personally id rather unsub then play in the broken ass sov system. There are 100s of other things that need fixed before we just shake up WH space for no reason. All I can think of when I see a stupid idea like this is how great loot spew for hacking was........ |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:20:00 -
[292] - Quote
if the spawn distance compared to mass is linear, and a battleship is 10-15% of a cap, the spawn distance is under 5 km. not much of a change for groups who roll with numbers. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Deeone
Deadspace Zombie Factory
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:24:00 -
[293] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:corbexx wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote: This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. please explain whats good about it and the more interesting choices. please also apply them to. c1 wh's, c2 to c4 wh's and then c5 to c6 wh's also please take in to account farmers and pvpers. Small groups that live in the lower class wh's and bigger groups in the higher class wh's. I will. So currently most groups in C2,3,4 roll with stabbed and jam fit Scorpions with verry little danger at all and if they don't roll holes like this then they are doing it wrong as it currently stands. This will also help smaller groups that like to PVP, no longer will they catch someone with their pants down only for that person to sit cloaked at the WH with two sets of cloak timers giving them extra time to wait until backup arrives from their C5/6, instead they will be 15km's off the hole dying to that C2 guy with him and his mate having a go at PVP. The only guy i feel gets screwed on this mechanic is the guy living in a C1 (Lets face it they are mostly reaction farms anyway) or the guy with a C1 static.
There will be no one in c1-c4 cuz they cant efficiently roll to pvp or farm........as for c5-c6 id guess the goons or brave will move in and blob everyone to death since you wont be able to roll your hole without a group..........as a side note ive been in wh space for years now and ive only seen scorps rolling a hole once........orcas or heavy bs are far more common in the lower classes....maybe your corp was so risk adverse that it only rolled with jamming stabbed bs (id wager you are dead b4 you can lock to jam since you know there is no drawback to stabs.) tbh if im rolling a hole its because its empty and there is no pvp or pve to be had. I might be in the minority but I can say I have never rolled a wh to avoid pvp.
EDIT: who the hell uses stabs where hictors are so common......... |
Bleedingthrough
Raptor Navy
59
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:28:00 -
[294] - Quote
Deeone wrote:So I went to work and had a full day to think about this........its still ****. Sorry CCP this will kill pretty much every corp in wh space that has less then 10 people on constantly. As for all the Im going to move to null people that's exactly what they want personally id rather unsub then play in the broken ass sov system. There are 100s of other things that need fixed before we just shake up WH space for no reason. All I can think of when I see a stupid idea like this is how great loot spew for hacking was........
From my experience crushing in two waves (that would be 5 people) is good/safe enough most of the time for C5s. |
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:29:00 -
[295] - Quote
Deeone wrote: There will be no one in c1-c4 cuz they cant efficiently roll to pvp or farm........as for c5-c6 id guess the goons or brave will move in and blob everyone to death since you wont be able to roll your hole without a group.....
Bahahahahahaha i have nothing constructive to add to that post at all, that is just absurd wow. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:31:00 -
[296] - Quote
10 scorps between 150 and 250 gigagrams and a hictor or two. this is the death of the standby roll team of the carrier and orca, which is flawed as it is.
an elegant solution, imo. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
64
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:51:00 -
[297] - Quote
Have been reading for 15 pages now...I still see no valid or concise reason this is in any way a good idea. Provide numbers, like I have or make a valid point please. Some one explain why this isn't complete ****. I love climbing into holes! I train New Bro's in WormHoles! Check out my PodCast:-áPraise Bob! Also checkout these other PodCasts: http://evepodcasts.com/ |
Bjurn Akely
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 02:58:00 -
[298] - Quote
The way I personally see it:
- Catching stuff going through a hole to the tacklers side will be easier. Depending on the tacklers choice of ship of course. No more 'the HiSec is always safe to bring an Orca through, cause you can always get straight out if it goes south'.
- Rolling holes will be quite a chore and a lot more dangerous.
- Slipping away in a cloaky ship when going through a hole will be very easy.
- (Depending on the final exit distance, cloaky bubblers on the hole might be a less seen thing.
- Getting things like POS fuel/industry goods/PI materials in and out will be a lot more risky. Expect larger corps to benefit as they will be the ones able to run an Escort gang to keep the Industrials safe.
- Also: I predict the Arazu getting popular. A will long webbers.
- Cloaky transports will become even more popular.
All these assumptions and opinions as based upon the range varying to up to 30-40 km. As Devs said this will probably be less... But still. If entrance range is kept at 5 km the travel could be significant.
Personally I think the changes will mean the following:
- Sites and sigs: Safer to run. Less rolling of holes means less hunters.
- Industry: Getting materials in and out a lot more risky. Holes with HiSec statics will get stuff out just as easy as now, but getting stuff in will be different. Less Orcas and more cloaky transports. Holoe to hole travel with Orca and large Industrials will be riskier. There will be a lot more cloaking devices seen on such ships in order to perhaps get away.
- Keeping fleet integrity when jumping through a hole will be tricky. Short range remote repping fleets will suffer and Logi fleets not really affected (logi wise).
- (Mobile) bubbling of holes will be a more common sight as it will be a need to delay ships warping off. remember that the spawn distance from the hole means that the span is double that. If your tackler is 15 km from the hole and the spawn is opposite the range is 55 km.
So what will the effect be? More kills or less? Less I think. My reasoning here is that groups continuously rolling their will (if they still choose to do it) will have to spend more time doing it. Burning back to the hole will take longer and warping off and back might be quicker.
Rolling for smaller corps will be even harder. Larger corps can chuck more people at it and will suffer less.
Corps/Alliances specializing in industry/mining/PI will suffer a lot. The risk for them is substantially greater, especially getting stuff in from HiSec.
Now... Note that I've not said if these things are good or bad. I'm having a hard time making up my mind. It all hinges terribly much on what the spawn distances become in the end. If they are substantial the risk of not being able to jump back with a large ship can very well be balanced out by the spawn distance being so large that a warp or microjump is often a possibility.
Personally I'll go with my old way. Wait and see. And if I don't like what I see go from there. That said I'm quite a bit worried about CCP's methodology when implementing changes. They seem to me hap hazard and often based on a whim rather than experience. Seem, perhaps I am wrong. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:01:00 -
[299] - Quote
Angrod Losshelin wrote:Have been reading for 15 pages now...I still see no valid or concise reason this is in any way a good idea. Provide numbers, like I have or make a valid point please. Some one explain why this isn't complete ****. it keeps me from locking myself away from harm with 1 buzzard, 1 carrier, and 1 orca... which for me was 1/4 of my gang. which is what I've done with complete success through 6 months of farming (our corp lost some site teams, but those were not my characters and it never happened on my watch).
so your cap will land far from a hole. if you mean to continue traveling down a chain, it's good for you.
at some point you have to admit a change makes sense.
it's a popular opinion that some EVE game design is bad, and it might be so, but when a change is good you gotta give CCP credit where it's due. iterations are made for reasons and chances are those changes are an improvement. if you don't stop to consider the possibility, it means you're bandwagoning on the CCP smear train. and that kind of attitude only leads to missing out on a good thing.
saying that you see no valid reason means you're in denial. you see it, you just don't like it. as for concise reasons, current gameplay regarding wormhole mass seems clear enough from CCP, who has an interest in maintaining some secrecy. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Servant's Lord
Pandora Sphere Disavowed.
61
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:09:00 -
[300] - Quote
Crosspoast from another forum:
Quote:As far as my (incredibly educated and somewhat relevent due to my eve situation) opinion goes - this is a GOOD change, but only if they slightly tweak what they have now.
I am all for making it harder to bear in wspace, and I am all for making committing capitals a srsbsns thing (you have no idea how much I ******* hate shitlers who intentionally crit holes or **** with their caps, or park their fleet on a WH with a cap ready to disengage and collapse hole the second they start losing).
What I am NOT for is punishing individuals for being ballsy and trying to commit caps to a WH.
The range is good in my opinion - near the edge of triage rep range from the hole @ 0.
One really important thing this mixes up in the meta is the typical jump into perfectly setup blapdreads optimal.
With your caps landing in a random direction 40k off, you can potentially land on the opposite side from setup dreads with your caps. This greatly helps triage in the meta, since you cannot currently use triage against competent Wspace alliances at present if they're in their home holes(and tbh u need proper shield nidhoggur or shield archon if you want to use it at all - armor triage archons eat **** and die so fast vs even a single dread + subcaps).
A side effect of this is further enforcing the fact that revelations are a bad joke, armor moros are utter ****, naglfars are stronk, and phoenix are magic that ain't noone understand or gotta explain. Close range dreads need to be properly fit to project damage at a minimum to 40k if u want to hit opposing caps @ jumpin if you're pre-setting up @0 on the hole. Anywhere else and you could end up further away.
What this DOESN'T help is the exact thing. Your capitals can land spread out 80k apart. This forces you to make a choice between one or the other, and removes the ability of friendly triage to potentially rep each other or dreads. This punishes individuals jumping into others' holes with anything more than a single cap, which is quite honestly stupid.
Fortunately, this is easily fixed - make the direction random only once. This way, hostiles cannot know where to setup to land you perfectly in optimal, yet, you still land at range.
Simply have your caps land in a 10k deviation, 40k off the hole. This way you can still deploy multiple caps and be confident in not having them be suicidally wasted jumping into hostiles for a fight.
Problem solved - carebear rolling is removed against active/proactive opponents, and while rage-rolling is slowed, it is not significantly impacted by these changes - in an empty WH its rather easy to get back on the hole in jump range within 30 seconds to a minute or so, tops.
I am very ok with these changes and, if CCP takes the slight tweak I outlined above, looking forward to them hitting TQ for some awesome fights. :) |
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:11:00 -
[301] - Quote
about the dread optimal: assuming the hostile gang is on the hole means they control the decision to collapse the hole and trap that dread. seems fair. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
98
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:16:00 -
[302] - Quote
More I think on it the more I'm not too worried about this.
You can still roll your (at least lower WH) static just fine. Just means we'll be seeing either 200km bm's away from the wh to bounce to or MJD's becoming more popular. A few more seconds far side won't hurt anyone and you gain the advantage of (potentially, random and all...) being further away from any tacklers chasing you.
Cloaky Dictors take a hit, not necessarily a bad thing.
It's going to mean less point blank fights on wormholes, though an increase in long pointers webbers and intys. Not necessarily a bad thing.
Big boost to Logi and local Reppers. RR Domi's DIAF finally. Local repper guys aren't dealing with the ENTIRE gang all at once. They get a chance to settle in or kite off.
You know what'd be cool, make Black Hole's the anti Cataclysmic Variables. Massive nerf bat to RR range in them. That could be real cool with this, especially for us unique snowflake pilots.
I still want to see numbers though. |
Servant's Lord
Pandora Sphere Disavowed.
61
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:18:00 -
[303] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:about the dread optimal: assuming the hostile gang is on the hole means they control the decision to collapse the hole and trap that dread. seems fair.
They collapse the hole and trap the dread, then they're trapped their own caps on the other side, otherwise it's likely you'll simply collapse the hole upon jumping your caps in. |
Iyokus Patrouette
No Vacancies
174
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:19:00 -
[304] - Quote
All this still assumes a large corp with numbers enough to throw at an 'oh ****' moment. smaller corps just seem to get pushed out further with increased burden. all this talk of risk averse carebears rolling the minute they see hostiles doesn't seem quite right in my mind.
A small pvp corp with an average of 5-10 pilots active at a given time is probably just as likely to roll away a chain connecting the large corps that they just can't fight due to pure numbers, so they roll and look for something more manageable.
If you change where a cap and larger ships land on the other side, a corp might do a quick risk assessment and decide rolling is far to risky and just log off and go play space engineers or something else. At least currently those small corps will show those rolling ships even if it is briefly.
---- Advocate for the initiation of purple coloured wormholes---- |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:23:00 -
[305] - Quote
Servant's Lord wrote:Rain6637 wrote:about the dread optimal: assuming the hostile gang is on the hole means they control the decision to collapse the hole and trap that dread. seems fair. They collapse the hole and trap the dread, then they're trapped their own caps on the other side, otherwise it's likely you'll simply collapse the hole upon jumping your caps in. you trap the cap with subcaps. XP
all other anti blap gameplay still applies. keep moving, jam the webbers, etc.
blap dread jump also adds a wormhole pvp strategy that didn't exist before. this option is being painted as bad, when it's just an option, and options are... good. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
pyropwnsu
Lazerhawks
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:31:00 -
[306] - Quote
If this is an intended feature, it is a huge mistake. Finding content in wormhole space is already very difficult, and sometimes ends up being nothing but ganks. This would increase the ganks-to-realpvp ratio by alot. We don't want to gank rolling capitals, we want to fight.
I understand the want for people to "give it the good old college try" in pvp rather than insta-rolling when they see hostiles, but this would just turn into mass x-logs instead. W-space is already too quiet as it is.
This is not the way. |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
98
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:53:00 -
[307] - Quote
pyropwnsu wrote:If this is an intended feature, it is a huge mistake. Finding content in wormhole space is already very difficult, and sometimes ends up being nothing but ganks. This would increase the ganks-to-realpvp ratio by alot. We don't want to gank rolling capitals, we want to fight.
I understand the want for people to "give it the good old college try" in pvp rather than insta-rolling when they see hostiles, but this would just turn into mass x-logs instead. W-space is already too quiet as it is.
This is not the way.
You're going to have to explain how this will cause less fights as I'm not seeing it. I can see it increasing the viability of fleet comps for sure. It'll mean there's more chance to catch stragglers alone.
The only way the ratio would change is if you get more ganks, nothing wrong with that. Who knows, maybe those ganks will escalate into a fight. |
Hatshepsut IV
Cascading Failure Un.Bound
180
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 03:59:00 -
[308] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote: aside from the language and the loss of temper which is a giveaway of someone not thinking rationally, this is an argument based purely on the status quo.
The language is perfectly apt to the situation. Yes the logic of my point is based in the status quo because it works perfectly and it's near unanimous from the dwellers in bobs space that of all the things whs could use this isn't one. I care very strongly about w-space I call it home and will passionately expose my views and/opinions as such.
The status quo of ice cream is that it is cold, the status quo of a toilet is that you flush it and it flushes the excrement away. Neither or these needs changing/fixing.
Simply becaus something is a status quo doesn't make that a bad thing.
You too can start failing today! Reddit-áad | Cascading Failure Public Channel | Aspiring Failure
|
Keith Planck
Lazerhawks
817
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 04:18:00 -
[309] - Quote
eh n++[ 2014.06.02 04:47:22 ] Sith1s Spectre > despite our difference in opinions Keith, you've been a very important person in Sky/Rolled Out n++[ 2014.06.02 04:49:05 ] Sith1s Spectre > but yeah, you're one of the few people who i am quite happy to admit i was wrong about on my initial expectations |
Blodhgarm Dethahal
Transcendent Sedition Protean Concept
180
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 04:33:00 -
[310] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote:The reaction to this change strikes me as the same sort of "who moved my cheese!" reaction industry got: largely people who don't like change protesting that their carefully optimized gameplay has been altered and they'll have to come up with new ways to do things.
That's understandable, but the group of people who like mindlessly following optimized routines are a very vocal minority and the game is just flatly better when things are shaken up a little. This seems like a good change that will cause a lot more interesting choices. No points made why this change would be bether but dozens of reasons why it would be bad . Should be tried on cyno's first to get a bether view of the effects. Maybe it would shake up the blue donut. we in nullsec are always willing to try new game mechanics to shake things up - we are, after all, the adaptable bunch - so i'd be happy to have this implemented with cynos at the same time it is implemented in wormholes
Riiiiiiiight... I'm sure all your wonderful jump freighter pilots will love this change to death then...
inb4 Super Range Tackle Proteus on every station to snatch all your JFs.. or any capital tbh.. -Bl+¦d
http://bloodytravels.blogspot.com/ -á-- My travels through space. |
|
Syndiaan
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 04:48:00 -
[311] - Quote
Unsubscribing all my accounts once this update is implemented. |
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 04:50:00 -
[312] - Quote
Syndiaan wrote:Unsubscribing all my accounts once this update is implemented.
Can i have your stuff. |
Syndiaan
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 04:54:00 -
[313] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Syndiaan wrote:Unsubscribing all my accounts once this update is implemented. Can i have your stuff.
sure |
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:00:00 -
[314] - Quote
Syndiaan wrote:Winthorp wrote:Syndiaan wrote:Unsubscribing all my accounts once this update is implemented. Can i have your stuff. sure
Legally binding document confirmed.
Now for the rest of you risk adverse carebears to roll over like this guy... |
Kusum Fawn
State Protectorate Caldari State
511
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:02:00 -
[315] - Quote
Long list of things that need to get fixed first because they are not even working as intended (and thats before you get into the is the intention good for anyone), and you decide to screw with more things that are arguably the least broken thing in the entire game.
gg CCP.
Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
xpaulx
Codename-47
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:04:00 -
[316] - Quote
Antimatter0097 wrote:Hans Bonderstadt wrote:no
Pros: lol
Cons: everything
If this is for real, im literally moving to nullsec I might consider this a positive if you actually do end up moving :D
my feels |
Lugia3
Intentionally Dense Easily Excited
1064
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:05:00 -
[317] - Quote
Terrible idea, ccp. It will only promote blobbing in wormhole space and will kill small corps. Small corps will just have to log out until the hole closes. "CCP Dolan is full of ****." - CCP Bettik
Remove Sov! |
LarcatOfZion
ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:06:00 -
[318] - Quote
Looks like i got out of wormholes at the right time |
Syndiaan
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:08:00 -
[319] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Syndiaan wrote:Winthorp wrote:Syndiaan wrote:Unsubscribing all my accounts once this update is implemented. Can i have your stuff. sure Legally binding document confirmed. Now for the rest of you risk adverse carebears to roll over like this guy...
Yeah because there is no risk being in a wormhole lol..... |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
123
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:16:00 -
[320] - Quote
Winthorp wrote: This will also help smaller groups that like to PVP, no longer will they catch someone with their pants down only for that person to sit cloaked at the WH with two sets of cloak timers giving them extra time to wait until backup arrives from their C5/6, instead they will be 15km's off the hole dying to that C2 guy with him and his mate having a go at PVP.
How will this help small gang pvp while it it easier to escape some? You will need to have more people just to cover the space the dude that jumped in could be! It would be easier to escape so less pvp. |
|
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:20:00 -
[321] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Winthorp wrote: This will also help smaller groups that like to PVP, no longer will they catch someone with their pants down only for that person to sit cloaked at the WH with two sets of cloak timers giving them extra time to wait until backup arrives from their C5/6, instead they will be 15km's off the hole dying to that C2 guy with him and his mate having a go at PVP.
How will this help small gang pvp while it it easier to escape some? You will need to have more people just to cover the space the dude that jumped in could be! It would be easier to escape so less pvp.
I always find it hard to get a lock on a really slow to warp BS 15km off a WH...
Do you guys even believe some of the crap you write? |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3567
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:26:00 -
[322] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Now for the rest of you risk adverse carebears to roll over like this guy... there's a difference between adding risk and adding mindless tedium. this change adds tedium, not risk. Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
1320
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:26:00 -
[323] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:I always find it hard to get a lock on a really slow to warp BS 15km off a WH... Do you guys even believe some of the crap you write?
I think that's the problem. The more I think about this change the less I think I care. Especially if it is also applied to cyno mechanics. |
pyropwnsu
Lazerhawks
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:28:00 -
[324] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:
You're going to have to explain how this will cause less fights as I'm not seeing it. I can see it increasing the viability of fleet comps for sure. It'll mean there's more chance to catch stragglers alone.
The only way the ratio would change is if you get more ganks, nothing wrong with that. Who knows, maybe those ganks will escalate into a fight.
The entertainment value of the increase in ganks does not outweigh the increase in rolling time, in my opinion. More X-logs = Less people to shoot at = wormhole space is more quiet than it already is.
The cons very very heavily outweigh the pros. |
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:31:00 -
[325] - Quote
pyropwnsu wrote:BayneNothos wrote:
You're going to have to explain how this will cause less fights as I'm not seeing it. I can see it increasing the viability of fleet comps for sure. It'll mean there's more chance to catch stragglers alone.
The only way the ratio would change is if you get more ganks, nothing wrong with that. Who knows, maybe those ganks will escalate into a fight.
The entertainment value of the increase in ganks does not outweigh the increase in rolling time, in my opinion. More X-logs = Less people to shoot at = wormhole space is more quiet than it already is. The cons very very heavily outweigh the pros.
So by extra time you mean the few minutes it would take to warp away and back the dread and Orca to your C5/5. So much inconvenience that i am unsure how you get up in the morning... |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
5394
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:32:00 -
[326] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Now for the rest of you risk adverse carebears to roll over like this guy...
ad-+verse - preventing success or development; harmful; unfavorable.
a-+verse - having a strong dislike of or opposition to something.
I think you need to start dropping the letter D? The Paradox |
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:32:00 -
[327] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Winthorp wrote:Now for the rest of you risk adverse carebears to roll over like this guy... there's a difference between adding risk and adding mindless tedium. this change adds tedium, not risk.
Cmon jack, yes it adds tedium but are you really going to say it adds no risk WTF?
|
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:33:00 -
[328] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Winthorp wrote:Now for the rest of you risk adverse carebears to roll over like this guy... ad-+verse - preventing success or development; harmful; unfavorable. a-+verse - having a strong dislike of or opposition to something. I think you need to start dropping the letter D?
#rekt
You got me.
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
123
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:39:00 -
[329] - Quote
Not being able to roll the hole will get small corp out of w-space. Because if there is nothing in the chain you bether log of. I have scanned chains as long as 6 hole from the "home" hole with nothing in it. Not being able to roll will just leave you with one option : log off. I remember the days in a corp where we coudn't roll the hole, it died because people didn't show up because there was never any content. Wich made less people log in wich mean even less people to be able to roll the hole... . Large corp will need to wait untill there are engough people online to be able to roll the hole safely. Even more waiting will mean more people playing world of tanks like you said whinthorp. It will make w-space even more slower then it already is. Now people who wants fast kills left us for low sec. Farmers left us for incursions. We need more reasons for people to go to w-space not less.
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
123
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:40:00 -
[330] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:[quote=unimatrix0030] I always find it hard to get a lock on a really slow to warp BS 15km off a WH... Do you guys even believe some of the crap you write? And battleships will be the only thing you have left to catch. |
|
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:42:00 -
[331] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Winthorp wrote:[quote=unimatrix0030] I always find it hard to get a lock on a really slow to warp BS 15km off a WH... Do you guys even believe some of the crap you write? And battleships will be the only thing you have left to catch.
Why would you not catch the other normal stuff that you catch now?
Do try to make some sense. |
Winthorp
2456
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:43:00 -
[332] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Not being able to roll the hole will get small corp out of w-space. Because if there is nothing in the chain you bether log of. I have scanned chains as long as 6 hole from the "home" hole with nothing in it. Not being able to roll will just leave you with one option : log off. I remember the days in a corp where we coudn't roll the hole, it died because people didn't show up because there was never any content. Wich made less people log in wich mean even less people to be able to roll the hole... . Large corp will need to wait untill there are engough people online to be able to roll the hole safely. Even more waiting will mean more people playing world of tanks like you said whinthorp. It will make w-space even more slower then it already is. Now people who wants fast kills left us for low sec. Farmers left us for incursions. We need more reasons for people to go to w-space not less.
/sigh.
Can i have your stuff also? |
Saisin
State War Academy Caldari State
102
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:47:00 -
[333] - Quote
I like the idea of having the mass of ships affect the distance of popping out on the other side of a WH.
Scouting the other side is not going to be affected, so this is good.
I do like that ranges will not be as obvious to anyone once this change is implemented, forcing some quick decisions making on all parts.
I also do like that it will make logistics operations more difficult in WH, as WH space should remain a difficult place to call home. I have no specific experience with capitals, but anything that makes use of capitals more difficult in WH is also a positive in my mind.
+1 from me.
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope http://turamarths-evelife.blogspot.com/2014/05/ok-now-im-betting-man.html |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
98
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:49:00 -
[334] - Quote
pyropwnsu wrote:BayneNothos wrote:
You're going to have to explain how this will cause less fights as I'm not seeing it. I can see it increasing the viability of fleet comps for sure. It'll mean there's more chance to catch stragglers alone.
The only way the ratio would change is if you get more ganks, nothing wrong with that. Who knows, maybe those ganks will escalate into a fight.
The entertainment value of the increase in ganks does not outweigh the increase in rolling time, in my opinion. More X-logs = Less people to shoot at = wormhole space is more quiet than it already is. The cons very very heavily outweigh the pros.
You're adding literally two short warp jumps for each BS jump. +150km from WH and back to the WH. That's a bit over a minute. Not that it matters as you'll still have the polarisation timer to deal with. |
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
64
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 05:58:00 -
[335] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:pyropwnsu wrote:BayneNothos wrote:
You're going to have to explain how this will cause less fights as I'm not seeing it. I can see it increasing the viability of fleet comps for sure. It'll mean there's more chance to catch stragglers alone.
The only way the ratio would change is if you get more ganks, nothing wrong with that. Who knows, maybe those ganks will escalate into a fight.
The entertainment value of the increase in ganks does not outweigh the increase in rolling time, in my opinion. More X-logs = Less people to shoot at = wormhole space is more quiet than it already is. The cons very very heavily outweigh the pros. You're adding literally two short warp jumps for each BS jump. +150km from WH and back to the WH. That's a bit over a minute. Not that it matters as you'll still have the polarisation timer to deal with.
That turns into a 2-3 min warp in a dread plus a 30 second align
so still with the 6 mins added on. That equates to a 600% increase in WH rolling time....serously 600% wtf? I love climbing into holes! I train New Bro's in WormHoles! Check out my PodCast:-áPraise Bob! Also checkout these other PodCasts: http://evepodcasts.com/ |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
98
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 06:06:00 -
[336] - Quote
Angrod Losshelin wrote:BayneNothos wrote:
You're adding literally two short warp jumps for each BS jump. +150km from WH and back to the WH. That's a bit over a minute. Not that it matters as you'll still have the polarisation timer to deal with.
That turns into a 2-3 min warp in a dread plus a 30 second align so still with the 6 mins added on. That equates to a 600% increase in WH rolling time....serously 600% wtf?
LOLWUT. If it's taking you 2-3 minutes to warp 150km, you're failing somewhere.
Lets put it this way. Time on far side of WH. You have to warp to your side no matter what. All that matters is time on the far side. Currently: 1-2 seconds. Under this system: ~1 minute.
That's hardly the epic disaster of game ending proportions you think it is. |
Seraph Essael
Devils Diciples League of Infamy
768
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 06:06:00 -
[337] - Quote
This is a ridiculous mechanic that should not even have made it onto the test server.
Adding more time to an already tedious job of rolling (yes some of us dont have 10 pilots in Battleships to throw at a hole plus a 15 man PvP fleet on stand by especially on weekdays) will not allow for more fights, people just wont bother connecting their chains and will just log off or go to nullsec for fights.
Combat rolling is a viable tactic to maintain hole control if the enemy fleet out numbers you. This tactic will no longer be an option meaning some pilots just wont bother fighting outnumbered anymore.
This is a bad idea, one that will only slow things down in WHs.
Why am I not looking forward to this up coming Dev blog? Quoted from Doc Fury: "Concerned citizens: Doc seldom plays EVE on the weekends during spring and summer, so you will always be on your own for a couple days a week. Doc spends that time collecting kittens for the on-going sacrifices, engaging in reckless outdoor activities, and speaking in the 3rd person." |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 06:08:00 -
[338] - Quote
yeah there's that option, of getting a warp-out for your rollers.
Hatshepsut IV wrote:The language is perfectly apt to the situation. Yes the logic of my point is based in the status quo because it works perfectly and it's near unanimous from the dwellers in bobs space that of all the things whs could use this isn't one. I care very strongly about w-space I call it home and will passionately expose my views and/opinions as such.
The status quo of ice cream is that it is cold, the status quo of a toilet is that you flush it and it flushes the excrement away. Neither or these needs changing/fixing.
Simply becaus something is a status quo doesn't make that a bad thing.
let's agree to disagree.
I'm upgrading my opinion of this change from elegant to brilliant. I was too busy pwning cap holes with two characters to consider a change of such surgical precision.
Paikis wrote:Winthorp wrote:I always find it hard to get a lock on a really slow to warp BS 15km off a WH... Do you guys even believe some of the crap you write? I think that's the problem. The more I think about this change the less I think I care. Especially if it is also applied to cyno mechanics. not the most valid comparison. cynos are primarily a capital gameplay mechanic. the use of capitals in wormholes is predominantly as a workaround to wormhole lifespan. applied to cyno mechanics, the cyno dies after 2 capitals jump through. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 06:11:00 -
[339] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Winthorp wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:I always find it hard to get a lock on a really slow to warp BS 15km off a WH... Do you guys even believe some of the crap you write? And battleships will be the only thing you have left to catch. I've considered throwing an empty carrier through a hole to trap a dread... several times. those caps were never something you could catch anyway.
Winthorp wrote:#rekt You got me. yeah stop mongering the D bro President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
1320
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 06:12:00 -
[340] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:the cyno dies after 2 capitals jump through.
It'd be 3 jumps, but I'd be OK with this change also. |
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 06:16:00 -
[341] - Quote
we can dream. thankfully, 3 cap jumps still crash a wormhole. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
495
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 06:42:00 -
[342] - Quote
Sentamon wrote:This feature effectively deals with 2 major w-space problems.
1) Carebears using caps to make their ISK faucet completely safe. 2) Roaming gangs of T3 ships looking for easy targets to gank.
The end result will be more meaningful PvP over systems and resources, not the current carebear and gank fest.
It's a brilliant solution CCP, make it happen. (and for cynos too please!)
The problem is it won't.
Because 1) Carebears will do what they do now if a big group is connected, scout it then go **** collapsing and just log for the day. 2) Big groups could easily close with battle ships if they wanted meaning it won't affect us much but will screw the smaller guys. Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better |
Angelique Duchemin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
829
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:01:00 -
[343] - Quote
Couldn't you just use Nidhoggurs with inertia stabs and then have them warp to a cloaky scout and then warp back to the wormhole and jump?
You should be able to get an align time of about 10 seconds. The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity. |
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Sanguis Ignis Prosperitum
64
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:03:00 -
[344] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Angrod Losshelin wrote:BayneNothos wrote:
You're adding literally two short warp jumps for each BS jump. +150km from WH and back to the WH. That's a bit over a minute. Not that it matters as you'll still have the polarisation timer to deal with.
That turns into a 2-3 min warp in a dread plus a 30 second align so still with the 6 mins added on. That equates to a 600% increase in WH rolling time....serously 600% wtf? LOLWUT. If it's taking you 2-3 minutes to warp 150km, you're failing somewhere. Lets put it this way. Time on far side of WH. You have to warp to your side no matter what. All that matters is time on the far side. Currently: 1-2 seconds. Under this system: ~1 minute. That's hardly the epic disaster of game ending proportions you think it is.
Ok, if you are referring to 150km warp you are still looking at 30 second aligns both ways plus the warp time and the omg dead caps when you get people landing on the ship you just used to warp to 150km off.
So, from 1 second to 60 + seconds. Still a huge increase especially in cap terms. If people are watching then no rolling. Your 150km 1-2 min solution is alot better than the 10 min burn back. Still sucks though. Percentage wise its more than doubling the time it takes to roll holes. I love climbing into holes! I train New Bro's in WormHoles! Check out my PodCast:-áPraise Bob! Also checkout these other PodCasts: http://evepodcasts.com/ |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:03:00 -
[345] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:Couldn't you just use Nidhoggurs with inertia stabs and then have them warp to a cloaky scout and then warp back to the wormhole and jump?
You should be able to get an align time of about 10 seconds. yes President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Enthropic
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
92
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:05:00 -
[346] - Quote
this will lead to less PvE and PvP activity in WHs, there are countless posts in this thread explaining why.
CCP you never cease to surprise me. Undo this please asap and either leave WHs mechanics as they are because they are one of the few aspects of the game that you did NOT f... up with your changes and 'rebalancing'
if you want to give WHers some love then create something new and exciting for us, something that is fun to do while you wait for your corpmates to log in. New sites to run for example. Or dedicated pvp systems, where groups can connect to and brawl and have fun, there are thousands of ideas.
simply changing working mechanics because you have no insipration to add something really new to the game is not creating fun for anyone.
PLEASE RECONSIDER THIS xxxxed up idea you implemented on Sisi |
Syndiaan
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:13:00 -
[347] - Quote
So when you jump a WH you get shot out in random directions and distance based on mass.... Here is wormhole PvP between corps if this is implemented.
20 vs 20 looking for a fight sitting on the other side of each other.
Team A: You jump over first!
Team B: No you jump over first!
Team A: No you jump over first!
Team B: No you!
Team A: No you!!!
Team B: NO YOU!!!!
Team A: YOU!!!!!!
everyone leaves.... |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:13:00 -
[348] - Quote
corbexx wrote:The problem is it won't.
Because 1) Carebears will do what they do now if a big group is connected, scout it then go **** collapsing and just log for the day. 2) Big groups could easily close with battle ships if they wanted meaning it won't affect us much but will screw the smaller guys. Sir, I sense your objection is defused, and what remains is a residual for the children that you know won't stick. If you don't express your change of heart in clear & simple english, a lot of players will continue seeing this as something to get upset about. o7 President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Angelica Everstar
33
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:16:00 -
[349] - Quote
This is an idea that was raised at FanFest WH roundtable for the lat couple of years, and was given a lot of support. But the idea was also a little different. Distances of spawning on the other side was much shorter (5-10km), and WH activations would be reduced to 2.5km. Any typos, spelling errors and bad grammer found, are free and yours to keep Current bond : PFA05 500b / Total 825b |
Keith Planck
Lazerhawks
822
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:17:00 -
[350] - Quote
I suggest a bell-curve based on mass.
Very small ships (scouts) and very large ships (capitals) would spawn close. Medium sized ships would spawn farther away (guardians have a 70km range so I'd say max distance would be 35kms)
Scouts no harder to kill: Check Capitals still somewhat safe to use on wormholes: Check Hole rolling speed not influenced: Check Heavy armor fleets don't have to worry about being too spread out: Check Kite doctrines will have the option to jump into enemy fleets: Check Hard as **** to code: Pending n++[ 2014.06.02 04:47:22 ] Sith1s Spectre > despite our difference in opinions Keith, you've been a very important person in Sky/Rolled Out n++[ 2014.06.02 04:49:05 ] Sith1s Spectre > but yeah, you're one of the few people who i am quite happy to admit i was wrong about on my initial expectations |
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:21:00 -
[351] - Quote
// o7 to the programmers who interface between ideas and code to turn these things into space-reality. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Winthorp
2462
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:37:00 -
[352] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:Couldn't you just use Nidhoggurs with inertia stabs and then have them warp to a cloaky scout and then warp back to the wormhole and jump?
You should be able to get an align time of about 10 seconds.
There is no issue of align time as you would have a scout on the other side while rage rolling anyway, just fit a web really. |
Borsek
A.A.A
215
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:37:00 -
[353] - Quote
This idea is almost as great as the sov in wormholes idea.
It's a good thing my subs are running out. |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
99
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:39:00 -
[354] - Quote
Syndiaan wrote:So when you jump a WH you get shot out in random directions and distance based on mass.... Here is wormhole PvP between corps if this is implemented.
20 vs 20 looking for a fight sitting on the other side of each other.
Team A: You jump over first!
Team B: No you jump over first!
Team A: No you jump over first!
Team B: No you!
Team A: No you!!!
Team B: NO YOU!!!!
Team A: YOU!!!!!!
everyone leaves....
Sounds beneficial against the standard T3+Logi Blob. Logi has to now sit next to the WH and can't burn out lest they get caught by the people jumping in. This means Logi sits next to everything else you plan to pew. Much more useful. Your own Logi now sits a fair distance out from the enemy so it's not getting auto tackled straight away anymore.
I think some people need to do less stressing out and more thinking on how to exploit this for their own benefit. It's really not going to shut down W Space. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:40:00 -
[355] - Quote
Borsek wrote:This idea is almost as great as the sov in wormholes idea.
It's a good thing my subs are running out. I think Winthorp is collecting people's stuff. in fact, yeah... he has dibs. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Syndiaan
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:42:00 -
[356] - Quote
Maybe I am not understanding this correctly but the idea I'm getting is CCP is trying to prevent people from opening up a wormhole, seeing something they do not like for whatever reason and able to instantly roll it. I can understand that. This idea CCP has is just a horrible way of addressing it.
Personally I like the way wormholes work, maybe others do not but thats my opinion. However this change obviously is not liked and most certainly is not wanted judging from fellow WH friends and on the WH forums.
If CCP is so desperate to stop rage rolling my suggestion would be to put a time limit from when a wormhole is opened and the time a capital ship is able to pass through it, similar to polarity. This would seriously delay the time frame it takes to roll a new wormhole spawned without completely destroying the mechanics that we wormhole guys enjoy.
|
Syndiaan
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:47:00 -
[357] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Syndiaan wrote:So when you jump a WH you get shot out in random directions and distance based on mass.... Here is wormhole PvP between corps if this is implemented.
20 vs 20 looking for a fight sitting on the other side of each other.
Team A: You jump over first!
Team B: No you jump over first!
Team A: No you jump over first!
Team B: No you!
Team A: No you!!!
Team B: NO YOU!!!!
Team A: YOU!!!!!!
everyone leaves.... Sounds beneficial against the standard T3+Logi Blob. Logi has to now sit next to the WH and can't burn out lest they get caught by the people jumping in. This means Logi sits next to everything else you plan to pew. Much more useful. Your own Logi now sits a fair distance out from the enemy so it's not getting auto tackled straight away anymore. I think some people need to do less stressing out and more thinking on how to exploit this for their own benefit. It's really not going to shut down W Space.
I do not disagree that the whole T3 and logi needs work, but CCP is already rebalancing T3 ships, which is long overdue IMO. I think they should finish doing that before also screwing around with other game mechanics.
|
Winthorp
2462
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:54:00 -
[358] - Quote
Syndiaan wrote:So when you jump a WH you get shot out in random directions and distance based on mass.... Here is wormhole PvP between corps if this is implemented.
20 vs 20 looking for a fight sitting on the other side of each other.
Team A: You jump over first!
Team B: No you jump over first!
Team A: No you jump over first!
Team B: No you!
Team A: No you!!!
Team B: NO YOU!!!!
Team A: YOU!!!!!!
everyone leaves....
So as it stands now we have
Team A Finds Team B
Team B Gets alerted to Team A being there (The instant sig overlay usually alerts them)
Team B scouts Team A's fleet
Team B sends jabber ping
Team A waits on WH with fleet or half fleet and half reserved
Team B gets a few log ins starts to form up
Team A notices Team B getting a few more numbers and sends another scout through to assess
Team A realises they are starting to get a few more people then they are comfortable with and think a fight might happen.
Team A sends jabber ping to bolster numbers
Team A and B scouts **** around like shitcunts for 15mins liaising with FC's about fleet comps they can see and look for deepsafes
Team B realise Team A's fleet is not sitting in their home WH
Team B decides to send another scout out to scan for their home Wh to make sure there is only Team A current shown fleet.
Team A starts to get pissed off at form up time and has either massive dicks like me start to talk **** in local or the FC will start talking **** in Hiddens love den (Rainbow retards channel)
Team B figure they either better do something soon or fear being outed as pussies.
Option 1 usually happens here:
Team b get the stock standard dread blap at range setup ready
Team A see the changes and realises they can do bugger all about dread blap and call them lots of names and go home to do escalations
Option 2
Team B warps to hole with a great fleet after jabber ping army has assembled (I'm looking at you SSC jabber warriors)
Team A jump in their fleet and see Team B has commited and call in the reserve fleet and a dread and Archon
Team A dont have enough numbers to break Team B in the end and jump subcaps home then jump dread home after taking a few minor losses but saving the rest of the 50B ISK fleet to safely fight another day
Team A then go home to do escalations while **** talking with Team B while Team B run escalations in their home
Both teams pretty chuffed about what has just happened and think all is fine with the universe....
AND THIS IS THE CURRENT STATE OF HIGH END WH's YOU WANT TO KEEP?
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
123
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:55:00 -
[359] - Quote
Logi chains of the guys jumping in would be broken so easy with a few damps. Wich means jumping in would be suicide. |
Var D'ovoli
Radical Astronauts Plundering Eve WormHole Occupation and Resource Exploitation
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:57:00 -
[360] - Quote
I hate the idea. Why not fix what is broken instead of avoiding it??? |
|
Enthropic
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
92
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 07:59:00 -
[361] - Quote
Syndiaan wrote:Maybe I am not understanding this correctly but the idea I'm getting is CCP is trying to prevent people from opening up a wormhole, seeing something they do not like for whatever reason and able to instantly roll it.
people should ask themselves why actually it is a bad idea that people can closing a wh that they dont like.
carebears want to close connections to run sites in peace - win gankers want to roll their static to kill carebears - win
consequenc: carebears can play and run sites, gankers get a chance to shoot
everbody wins
if you limit this, you get less pve content that people enjoy, and consequently less pvp targets
I dont get it |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
99
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:00:00 -
[362] - Quote
Syndiaan wrote:BayneNothos wrote:
Sounds beneficial against the standard T3+Logi Blob. Logi has to now sit next to the WH and can't burn out lest they get caught by the people jumping in. This means Logi sits next to everything else you plan to pew. Much more useful. Your own Logi now sits a fair distance out from the enemy so it's not getting auto tackled straight away anymore.
I think some people need to do less stressing out and more thinking on how to exploit this for their own benefit. It's really not going to shut down W Space.
I do not disagree that the whole T3 and logi needs work, but CCP is already rebalancing T3 ships, which is long overdue IMO. I think they should finish doing that before also screwing around with other game mechanics.
The T3 Blobs comes from all WH fights starting within Scram/Web/Bubble range. No T3 changes will stop that. Use of T3's come about due to them surviving well in that situation. The Proteus especially. If they no longer become dominant in that environment then another ship class will take it's place. Brick HAC's for example.
This gives options.
I'd really like to see it go more crazy, like adding directionality, so if you come in at one angle you come out at the polar opposite angle with a slight variation. Mostly I want it to still feel different from jumping a gate. |
Shogun Hogun
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:02:00 -
[363] - Quote
Keith Planck wrote:I suggest a bell-curve based on mass.
Very small ships (scouts) and very large ships (capitals) would spawn close. Medium sized ships would spawn farther away (guardians have a 70km range so I'd say max distance would be 35kms)
Scouts no harder to kill: Check Capitals still somewhat safe to use on wormholes: Check Hole rolling speed not influenced: Check Heavy armor fleets don't have to worry about being too spread out: Check Kite doctrines will have the option to jump into enemy fleets: Check Hard as **** to code: Pending
i like this alot |
Walextheone
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
83
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:03:00 -
[364] - Quote
Maby just wait for the dev blogs before going ape **** on the forums? We don't know any numbers yet and we don't know the mechanics or if that sisi changes are the only thing they are planning.
Just chill until more facts comes up. |
Syndiaan
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:03:00 -
[365] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Syndiaan wrote:So when you jump a WH you get shot out in random directions and distance based on mass.... Here is wormhole PvP between corps if this is implemented.
20 vs 20 looking for a fight sitting on the other side of each other.
Team A: You jump over first!
Team B: No you jump over first!
Team A: No you jump over first!
Team B: No you!
Team A: No you!!!
Team B: NO YOU!!!!
Team A: YOU!!!!!!
everyone leaves.... So as it stands now we have Team A Finds Team B Team B Gets alerted to Team A being there (The instant sig overlay usually alerts them) Team B scouts Team A's fleet Team B sends jabber ping Team A waits on WH with fleet or half fleet and half reserved Team B gets a few log ins starts to form up Team A notices Team B getting a few more numbers and sends another scout through to assess Team A realises they are starting to get a few more people then they are comfortable with and think a fight might happen. Team A sends jabber ping to bolster numbers Team A and B scouts **** around like shitcunts for 15mins liaising with FC's about fleet comps they can see and look for deepsafes Team B realise Team A's fleet is not sitting in their home WH Team B decides to send another scout out to scan for their home Wh to make sure there is only Team A current shown fleet. Team A starts to get pissed off at form up time and has either massive dicks like me start to talk **** in local or the FC will start talking **** in Hiddens love den (Rainbow retards channel) Team B figure they either better do something soon or fear being outed as pussies.
Option 1 usually happens here: Team b get the stock standard dread blap at range setup ready Team A see the changes and realises they can do bugger all about dread blap and call them lots of names and go home to do escalations Option 2 Team B warps to hole with a great fleet after jabber ping army has assembled (I'm looking at you SSC jabber warriors) Team A jump in their fleet and see Team B has commited and call in the reserve fleet and a dread and Archon Team A dont have enough numbers to break Team B in the end and jump subcaps home then jump dread home after taking a few minor losses but saving the rest of the 50B ISK fleet to safely fight another day Team A then go home to do escalations while **** talking with Team B while Team B run escalations in their home Both teams pretty chuffed about what has just happened and think all is fine with the universe.... An hour later. AND THIS IS THE CURRENT STATE OF HIGH END WH's YOU WANT TO KEEP?
Judging from your characters employment history, pretty sure you should just leave the wormhole forums. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:07:00 -
[366] - Quote
hah. a low blow, but more importantly when someone puts their thoughts into words, it shouldn't take looking at an employment history to tell good from bad. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Winthorp
2464
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:09:00 -
[367] - Quote
Syndiaan wrote: Judging from your characters employment history, pretty sure you should just leave the wormhole forums.
Judging from you staying in the same stale C6 corp for two years thinking you are the elite of WH's while experiencing no other WH gameplay you should stop judging other people.
Wow you guys seem to get really personal and nasty when someone like me doesn't agree with your everything is right mentality. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:21:00 -
[368] - Quote
writing off characters based on employment history and killboards isn't smart, but it is to write off the people who do. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1648
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:22:00 -
[369] - Quote
Have CCP got this the wrong way round? Doesn't it make more sense for smaller ships to spawn further away, due to their ability to burn back into jump range quicker?
Hayley Enaka wrote:I think it's not an awful idea just too extreme in its current implementation. I feel like CCP is simply trying to make ships more vulnerable around wormholes rather than always having the freedom of jumping to the other side. Putting caps 40km away however is complete suicide when dropping them outside jump range at say 5 - 10km serves the same purpose without making it completely unrealistic to use them.
I agree. It's not an awful idea but the balance of mass vs. spawn range has to be planned perfectly or the change will have negative consequences.
I don't think any ship should spawn within jump rang and to me, it makes more sense if smaller ships spawn further out while capitals and BS spawn 2km and 3km out of jump range, respectively. +1 |
The Icefox
Origin. Black Legion.
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:24:00 -
[370] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:We will be looking for player feedback at that time.
Since when do eve players wait to provide their feedback? I'll add my .02 isk. Since I just watched 4 of my industrial friends quit and unsub after the recent industrial changes now I'm listening to my fed up worm hole friends say the same thing. This is game breaking for a number of reasons.
This will in no way create interesting content. There is no sane reason to jump caps into a hostile setup fleet as this change makes it highly unlikely that you would be able to predict positioning, particularly whether or not you land near your support. Or your support lands in the middle of a blob of hostiles and your dps lands in the back. This change will encourage people to simply sit on opposite sides of a hole doing NOTHING.
This also breaks some of the more stable mechanics of worm hole life. Like rolling your hole to find interesting content, or to run away from content that is more than interested in you. Or you know just finding a sane exit.
Additionally you change one of the fundamentally positive aspects of wormhole space, and an aspect that makes wh space unique in comparison to k space. You can jump back out if you don't like what you see.
I would add to this that most of the fighting that I have seen in wormholes occurred on wormholes. No one enjoys pos fights. This encourages pos fights. Or more accurately pos spinning.
All in all this is a terrible idea. I currently have 4 accounts. They were subbed for 1 year each those subs come due in September. Between the recent terrible change to research pos, blue prints, and skills, and with proposed changes as inane as this I feel that my time in eve and my continued financial contribution to this game will likely be coming to an end. Too many of these changes are causing people I've played with for years to leave.
PS. No you can't have my stuff. Q: So many well known dev's left lately, should we be worried? A:-á Worry a lot if Fozzie, Masterplan, Rise, Veritas, Bettik, Ytterbium, Scarpia, Arrow, or even Greyscale leaves. Worry a little if Punkturis, karkur, SoniClover, Affinity, Goliath, or X¦¦h¦¦a¦¦g¦¦e¦¦n¦¦ leaves. |
|
Syndiaan
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:29:00 -
[371] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Syndiaan wrote: Judging from your characters employment history, pretty sure you should just leave the wormhole forums.
Judging from you staying in the same stale C6 corp for two years thinking you are the elite of WH's while experiencing no other WH gameplay you should stop judging other people. Wow you guys seem to get really personal and nasty when someone like me doesn't agree with your everything is right mentality.
I never said I was an elite WH player, I am actually pretty bad at EvE, and do not care, I have fun playing regardless. I am not sure what you mean by a "stale" corp but I enjoy playing with my corp mates and we have a really good time, even when we lose ships. We may not be the best corp in the game but we have fun and enjoy the game and have a ton of laughs.
I was not trying to attack him personally I was just pointing out he is a corp jumper. Maybe he has his reasons maybe not, I personally do not trust corp jumpers unless they express why. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:33:00 -
[372] - Quote
hah. I just had a vision of 12 hictors becoming the new C5 C6 ragerolling meta. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Montgomery Black
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
55
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 08:52:00 -
[373] - Quote
:thumbs down
As others have said, why mess with something that isnt broken ?
My corp lives in a lower class wormhole.
Reason why i think the change is bad
- We frequently roll the hole to find pew or to get a quicker K space route to where a ally has some potential pew / needs assistance etc. These proposed changes will make rolling take longer ....meaning less pew all round.
solution Ive got a bright idea... how about you work on something that the WH community has requested for ages like Personal SMAs.. more ship storage security = easier recruitining. easier recruiting = more people in WHs. More people in WHs = more pew and fun for everybody ! |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:03:00 -
[374] - Quote
because it is broken, but you don't need to worry. if you live in a smaller wormhole and the spawn distance is based on mass, it affects you less. like 10x less. if caps are landing 30-40 km from holes, something like your cruiser at 115,000,000 kg with a 100 MN prop should land 1/10 of that distance which is 3-4 km... that's still within 5km and reactivation range. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Mashie Saldana
BFG Tech
1139
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:04:00 -
[375] - Quote
I still want to see wormholes become unidirectional turning WH space back to the great dangerous unknown it was before it got mapped out and farmed to hell. Mashie Saldana Dominique Vasilkovsky
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1648
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:11:00 -
[376] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:because it is broken...
How so?
People in low class wormholes have tend to use orcas and battleships to roll, not cruisers. They will still face the same issues but to a lesser degree. +1 |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:12:00 -
[377] - Quote
i was just thinking i'd like to see ships spawn from wormholes with some momentum, and in random directions as if they were spit out by a vortex President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Flag Zulu
Bookmark Both Sides Exit Strategy..
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:13:00 -
[378] - Quote
Having just spent the past couple of hours reading through near the whole Forum Thread, I think everyone will agree that there is a lot of disagreement between the members for and against the expected changes. I will not beat about the bush and say that I am against the current changes GÇô with one caveat.
If they are going to ignore their employers (us) and screw around the way we are ejected from a Wormhole (WH), they must make the same change to every other method of star transit in K-space GÇô Star Gates, Titan Bridges, Jump Bridges, Cynos, everything. Personally I have always thought that if a cyno is killed before the incoming fleet arrives, that fleet should lose its re-entry point to K-Space and be subsequently scattered throughout the systems between their departure point and around their intended destination. This is my own opinion - like it or not, I really donGÇÖt care.
To the point, I have for the best part of a year now become increasingly concerned with what is happening to the player base. While I am concerned with the expected changes to the mechanics of the game just like everyone, the mechanics have been done to death in this forum already. My concern is starting up my launcher and seeing the number of accounts logged into my TZ getting smaller with each passing week.
CCP do you keep records of numbers online, Please release them, and be honest.
I can recall when a good week night would see 25k plus accounts logged in. A weekend would see peaks of over 35k online, and I have seen 40k some weekends.
Oh, but people are multi-boxing and PLEX their accounts through the in-game market you argue GÇô SO WHAT! Each account is a PLEX, and PLEX do not just appear in the game through seeding. Someone in Real Life (RL) must spend RL money to buy the PLEX and chose to place the PLEX into the market for other people to buy.
Today, I see between 16k and 19k on during the week, and weekends are lucky to see 30k when the EU TZ is overlapping out TZ around DT. Before EU comes into the game our TZ is often down to between 18k and 22k on a weekend.
What does this mean? - 20,000 accounts is $20 x 20,000 = $400,000 per month, or 12 x $400,000 = $4.8 mill per year. It means that CCPs revenue is down by an estimated 7k to 12k accounts overall in our TZ.
Based on my own TZ observations, and AUST/NZ TZ is by no means the biggest, CCPs income appears to have dropped by $2.5 mil to $3 mil per year over the past 12 months. We, your employers, and I say that because without us GÇÿthe playersGÇÖ buying PLEX, you CCP, are unemployed. You need to be very aware of that fact when you decide to screw with things that are good and ignore what you tell us is broken.
I personally have lapsed one account, my son has lapsed his only account, my brother has lapsed two accounts, a good friend has lapsed four accounts. I know around 20 other players personally that have lapsed one to three accounts each. Half of them no longer play at all. This is the real effect of the badly thought out content changing CCP conduct with little or no consultation.
To those who stand up with their WH alts and voice their opinion GÇô Well done!
Yes, there are players that support the expected change, and that is what makes EVE the game it is, diversity. However, we all notice that some players hide behind Forum Alts with no playing history, and donGÇÖt have the balls to use their main playing character to voice their view. Your choice, but you stand accused being a forum troll with no WH experience or right to voice your opinion in or about our sandpit until you do.
It is safe to say however that by a large majority, the real WH playing fraternity have no fear of their WH game character being identified and do not support the expected changes.
CCP, if you are going to propose a change like this you are going about it the wrong way.
Try talking to the players first - tell us who proposed the idea, and put it up for discussion before you waste development time and money on it.
You created magic with W-Space! However, You started stuffing W-Space with changes to scanning! A WH has no subspace beacon for local communications chat or any other K-Space infrastructure. For that reason alone, No Site of any kind in W-Space should be able to be located without scan probes, and no player owned structures or ships should likewise be able to be located without combat probes or exceptional skill and practice with the D-Scan function.
You (CCP) openly admit that SOV and POS mechanics are broken and need to be fixed. Stop trying to fix what you got right the first time GÇô W-Space, and go fix the SOV and POS mechanics. Instead of losing even more of your employer base, you may just get some of them back.
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1648
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:21:00 -
[379] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:appropriately, and just like everyone else. i mean, the only reason for using an orca to roll is the mass... it's certainly not the combat ability. to balance that shortcut of pushing a lot of mass through at one time, you end up in more danger. isn't that balance?
Not in my opinion. As you stated, an orca is not a combat ship and neither is a dread out of siege. Smaller groups will be taking a huge risk using large mass ships while large groups can do it without a second thought.
I agree that rolling shouldn't be risk free but spawning a capital (orca included) or a battleship any further out of jump range that 5km is too extreme IMO.
Rain6637 wrote:appropriately, and just like everyone else. I don't know what you mean by that. +1 |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:21:00 -
[380] - Quote
let's be honest about the shortcut this affects. carrier + orca spawning further out is as appropriate as they are an easy button. i mean, what is the one situation you jumped a dread through a wormhole with the intention of jumping straight back (which is what this change affects).
sorry about the short reply. I realized I should explain myself and added to it.
I have a feeling that when it gets bad, 'all those players' are gone anyway, and there's nothing to lose... CCP will get serious about selling all those microtransaction clothing items that I want.
you know, hit rock bottom so they can get out from under this oppressive player base. (yes you)
do you know how many times more successful WoW is? President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
|
Winthorp
2465
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:24:00 -
[381] - Quote
Flag Zulu wrote:Yes, there are players that support the expected change, and that is what makes EVE the game it is, diversity. However, we all notice that some players hide behind Forum Alts with no playing history, and donGÇÖt have the balls to use their main playing character to voice their view. Your choice, but you stand accused being a forum troll with no WH experience or right to voice your opinion in or about our sandpit until you do.
Apparently though if you don't agree with the masses and think the change is good people think that instead of debating the reasoning with you they have some right to ask where i get my experience from or what is your corp history... And when my history gets given to them they just shut their keyboard right up.
I have never seen half the people in this thread bitching about how this is so game breaking ever come to Wh forums to come to discuss any WH mechanics or ideas until their perfect little world of insta rolling away issues is threatened.
But i will give them a few more posts maybe they will KB troll me next. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1648
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:30:00 -
[382] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:let's be honest about the shortcut this affects. carrier + orca spawning further out is as appropriate as they are an easy button. i mean, what is the one situation you jumped a dread through a wormhole with the intention of jumping straight back (which is what this change affects).
sorry about the short reply. I realized I should explain myself and added to it.
Yeah as i said, i agree that the ships should spawn outside of jump range but 40km, even 15km for a capital ship that doesn't have a prop mod is ridiculous. +1 |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1648
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:33:00 -
[383] - Quote
Winthorp wrote: I have never seen half the people in this thread bitching about how this is so game breaking ever come to Wh forums to come to discuss any WH mechanics or ideas until their perfect little world of insta rolling away issues is threatened.
People don't complain about things they consider to be working reasonably well...
Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? Please explain your answer. +1 |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15559
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 09:48:00 -
[384] - Quote
absolutely agree, Rek. this is definitely not high on the list of things people would like to see changed, and this reaction is expected. it shouldn't come as a surprise that CCP's list of priorities is different from the players'. I'm not saying I know CCP's intent, but it's pretty clear who benefits from rolling a hole with 2 ships: the player(s) doing it, despite CCP and other players.
it's different from other changes like Fozzie's wormhole signature delay because there's a way to adjust for it. at least you can roll with ships of lower mass.
I'm on a break, after spending some months under the strain of so much ISK hanging out in the wind in a wormhole. but I ask myself constantly if it's time to go back. I know it's what my mates want. this change doesn't influence my decision much. my support fleet comp will be different, and be copy paste RR battleships (most likely), and maybe an empty oh **** hole closing carrier... but that's about it. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Enthropic
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
94
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:01:00 -
[385] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Winthorp wrote: I have never seen half the people in this thread bitching about how this is so game breaking ever come to Wh forums to come to discuss any WH mechanics or ideas until their perfect little world of insta rolling away issues is threatened.
People don't complain about things they consider to be working reasonably well... Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? Please explain your answer.
indeed. I would like to hear your answer as well, Winthorp.
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15559
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:04:00 -
[386] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Rain6637 wrote:let's be honest about the shortcut this affects. carrier + orca spawning further out is as appropriate as they are an easy button. i mean, what is the one situation you jumped a dread through a wormhole with the intention of jumping straight back (which is what this change affects).
sorry about the short reply. I realized I should explain myself and added to it.
Yeah as i said, i agree that the ships should spawn outside of jump range but 40km, even 15km for a capital ship that doesn't have a prop mod is ridiculous. it is proportional, according to one specific attribute, and affecting one direction of travel. as a change, it's as effective as they come, with no collateral damage outside of what Fozzie is attempting to balance. I think this is exactly what we should hope changes look like. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Turelus
Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
981
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:06:00 -
[387] - Quote
Rather than have it based on mass can't we just have all ships that enter appear randomly anywhere from 10-40km away from the WH? That would be fun and add an element of unknown when jumping in or out. Lieutenant Turelus Caldari Independent Navy Reserve The Fourth District
I post on my main... shocking I know! |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15559
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:21:00 -
[388] - Quote
lol. not just that, but also with some momentum. vortex, remember
to continue my last post:
this change adds to the usefulness of T3s and T2, which in large part is their range bonus to modules. it also adds the benefit of dreads placed at optimal when they're committed to a hole with the intent to shoot something.
is this not a better version of system connections for offensive caps than stargates President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Necharo Rackham
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:27:00 -
[389] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Hell pick one thing from the W Space Little Things Thread. There are viable concepts that are agreed by the entire wormhole community there. The community, Your Customers, And the CSM that was voted by US in YOUR Election. Why don't you start Listening To Them.
Because fixing POS mechanics is too difficult.
Something must be done in w-space, this is something, let's do it! |
Mindo Junde
Bunnie Slayers Redrum Fleet
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:34:00 -
[390] - Quote
Necharo Rackham wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:Hell pick one thing from the W Space Little Things Thread. There are viable concepts that are agreed by the entire wormhole community there. The community, Your Customers, And the CSM that was voted by US in YOUR Election. Why don't you start Listening To Them. Because fixing POS mechanics is too difficult. Something must be done in w-space, this is something, let's do it!
Why does sound like the most correct explanation? FFS is this the best idea they could come up with? We really are in trouble if it is. |
|
Luscius Uta
95
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:43:00 -
[391] - Quote
Look, what's here? Oh, it's another "great" idea from CCP "muhahaha I'm going to kill EVE" Fozzie!
Hey look Fozzie, this isn't going to cause more kills or traffic in W-space. People will stop using capitals to collapse wormholes and the only people dying because of this change will be random explorers.
If you want to encourage camping of WH entrances, increasing the jump-in distance a bit is okay, but it shouldn't be more than 12 km (like with gates) and it should not depend on the ship size.
Also I also hope you don't plan to make the 60 seconds aggression timer apply to wormholes (if you're going to do so, it's going to be an obvious sign that you tender to the interest of nullbears, as most of them don't even know that you can jump through a WH with a weapon flag), wormholes are not gates and PvP at wormholes is quite a bit different from PvP at gates (most obvious differences are that you can collapse a wormhole and trap the other party, and that capitals can jump though wormholes but not through gates).
Sadly, knowing Fozzie, he's probably going to ignore most feedback, thinking that all the forum rage is just a sign of the awesomeness of his idea. Eventually one day he's going to decide that having to scan down the wormholes is stupid and that worhmole entrances should show up as system-wide beacons that everyone could warp to (at least in K-space, as there's no need to make things too easy for those spoiled W-space residents). Highsec is for casuals. |
Winthorp
2465
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:46:00 -
[392] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Winthorp wrote: I have never seen half the people in this thread bitching about how this is so game breaking ever come to Wh forums to come to discuss any WH mechanics or ideas until their perfect little world of insta rolling away issues is threatened.
People don't complain about things they consider to be working reasonably well... Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? Please explain your answer.
People don't complain when they think things are stale and boring either, they just leave to do other things in the game or leave the game all together. Look at current login player numbers over a week period, look at the breakup of so many groups and their major consolidation of WH groups into only a few players and tell me you think everyone is happy with the current form of WH's.
Do you really think the way WH's are at the moment are in anyway interesting and fun? (trying not to answer a question with a question but..)
Look the only thing i don't like about this change is it isn't showing any consistency in the goal direction of WH space from CCP and that concerns me that they are not being open with what they want from us.
- They leave instant sig overlay (carebear safe mode) - They come up with a 5min delay for new sigs (no carebears will stay) - Then they forget they ever mentioned the idea (back to carebear mode) - They removed sleeper API data becauseit was too powerfull (carebears get a little safer) - Now this change (clearly a PVP driven idea)
They need to be more consistent with the direction they want to take because they are not balancing it well currently.
Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? [i] Please explain your answer. [/i
I think if they wanted to do something that resulted in more people in WH space they could have chosen something else entirely instead of this, i have never once said this will result in more people in Wh's. The above carebear mode changes have resulted in more people in wh space (You can't deny that)
What i have said is the current way all these players in Wh space interact with each other is stale and SAFE. The people in this thread that are trying to say its not perfectly safe to roll away hostile chains are ******* delusional. There is only very situational times that you can ever kill people rolling away a C5/6 chain on you.
I actually do feel this will lead to more fun had by WH people and more interactions, the larger groups will still roll holes like they always have with it only taking them a few minutes longer and yes the smaller groups may be more hesitant to do so but now instead of them safely picking the perfect chain whenever they want they will be forced to scan a chain they may have just rolled away because they saw a known entity in the chain.
So yes i think it will lead to less people rolling chains but maybe they shouldn't be rolling away non optimal chains and be forced to interact with other players in an MMO. If you want a safe escalation period and roll away or crit your static you should be at risk to make that happen. if you want to get your 30B or so escalation loot or replace that fleet you just lost you should have to risk more then just rolling the C5 or C6 untill you get a C2/3 HS, you should have to go down some more risky chains or be forced to risk a little more to roll that chain to get the one you want.
The way it is is too easy and too safe. Not only is it safe to roll now it is STOPPING interactions with other players by the chains you get to pick and choose at will in perfect safety at no cost.
If by your own arguments it will stop rage rolling in its tracks then won't people by that same argument be more inclined to run sites if they feel safer that less people are rolling?
You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
341
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:52:00 -
[393] - Quote
As you work for a compromise on this I will point out the smaller corp perspective. There are 2 ranges you can pop out of a wh.
1. Inside jump range - this is were you can use mechanics, skill and what not to have a chance to fight above your weight class. The option to close wh allows a lot of interesting game play that is not based on bigger numbers winning.
2. Outside of jump range - this is where jumping through a wh for pvp becomes a more is better and will win 99 times out of 100.
So as you compromise don't try to fool yourself that 20 km is ok. It's in jump range where you can use wh mechanics or not in jump range where numbers win.
This is a small corp killer. It's not a wh killer, but little guys will get snuffed out like a discarded smoke on a sidewalk. Corp death by new jump range feature slaughter or pos spinning to avoid slaughter. You're listening to the wrong folks on this one. Seriously, if you take away the ability to use wh jump mechanics (mass and polarization) what do we have left?? |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
341
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:54:00 -
[394] - Quote
We have numbers win as a new feature. (in case you were at a loss for what is left) |
Kalel Nimrott
1119
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:56:00 -
[395] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Winthorp wrote:My response to this thread are not trolling at all, these are my legitimate views that this change is a move in the right direction for WH space. what 'right direction' is that? one where people don't roll holes? one where people cannot roll holes quickly in order to cycle for content? this change reduces the likelyhood of PVP, it does NOT increase it. you really think people will continue rage rolling if they need to do it in a subcap fleet? you really think people will blindly try close incoming hostile holes with caps or BSs if they spawn outside of jump range? ive killled more than a few people closing holes in all sorts of ships that were stabbed out the ass or 'safe' cos they insta roll. it isnt hard to catch these ships, making them spawn out of range will guarantee you wont catch them as they'll never leave the POS. I don't know what station you've been spinning in lately but your 'opinion' here is WAY off the mark. You really think you should have the right to safely roll away a hostile incoming Wh with perfect safety with your dread and Orca? you really think people should be able to rage roll as it stands now with only a few people active while the rest sit on TS sperging about the other games they are activily playing while those few people SAFELY rage roll? Is that how it should be? LOL You really think it should be ok that when skirmish's happen they are allowed to safely jump the subcap fleet then the dread home when the risk becomes to great for the fight they just entered into? I really do think this would increase PVP and FORCED PVP not the near perfect safety it is done with current mechanics.
I already told you that an uncontrolled variable would only lead to stagnation and the remove of people from wh space. Brasil, decime qu+¬ se siente / tener en casa a tu pap+í / Te juro, que aunque pasen los a+¦os / nunca nos vamos a olvidar / Que el Diego te gambete+¦ / que Cani te vacun+¦ / que est+ís llorando desde Italia hasta hoy |
Moo Moocow
Hard Knocks Inc.
27
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:57:00 -
[396] - Quote
Shogun Hogun wrote:Keith Planck wrote:I suggest a bell-curve based on mass.
Very small ships (scouts) and very large ships (capitals) would spawn close. Medium sized ships would spawn farther away (guardians have a 70km range so I'd say max distance would be 35kms)
Scouts no harder to kill: Check Capitals still somewhat safe to use on wormholes: Check Hole rolling speed not influenced: Check Heavy armor fleets don't have to worry about being too spread out: Check Kite doctrines will have the option to jump into enemy fleets: Check Hard as **** to code: Pending i like this alot
good suggestion but I think that's an acceptance of something that doesn't need changing.
I know its probably an easy change to implement and wouldn't take up much dev time,
but that dev time would be better spent elsewhere. There are threads full of better suggestions.. |
Winthorp
2465
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 10:59:00 -
[397] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:I already told you that an uncontrolled variable would only lead to stagnation and the remove of people from wh space.
I'm sorry that i don't believe your sky is falling bullshit. |
Epigene
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
42
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:04:00 -
[398] - Quote
Assuming that this is really a feature, not a bug, I am confused of the intent. Did anyone complain about the ease of combat rolling holes? Its tedious, annoying and - to the WH noob - rather frustrating already. Having caps drop 40km off the hole appears counter-intuitive.
Someone above suggested the reversal - have caps drop right on the hole and scouts 40km out. I can see how that could actually be a decent method to break sieges, have newbs scout more in relative safety but to be honest, I don't see the need for this at all.
So, without any further information, I also vote "no".
Cynically, maybe some CCP Dev woke up one day and remembered that the game had this odd space called "wormholes". He asked around in the office but nobody knew what they were if people used them. So they decided to change something that nobody wanted in order to gauge if anyone notices.
Yes, CCP, people do live in wormhole space. We just keep our heads down to prevent you from screwing around with mechanics you don't understand.
www.splatus.wordpress.com-á |
wazp1
Twilight Souls Surely You're Joking
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:06:00 -
[399] - Quote
CCP
Since ships mass would be a factor on what distance you get ejected out of a wormhole(mass * anti gravity = ejected distance from wh), would that mean that smaller ships can jump earlier (wh gravity * mass = jump range)?
|
Winthorp
2466
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:09:00 -
[400] - Quote
Moo Moocow wrote: but that dev time would be better spent elsewhere. There are threads full of better suggestions..
^ 100% |
|
Lemonades
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
61
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:43:00 -
[401] - Quote
Angelique Duchemin wrote:Couldn't you just use Nidhoggurs with inertia stabs and then have them warp to a cloaky scout and then warp back to the wormhole and jump?
You should be able to get an align time of about 10 seconds. Why would we want nuthuggers they're pretty useless |
Kalel Nimrott
1119
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:48:00 -
[402] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Kalel Nimrott wrote:I already told you that an uncontrolled variable would only lead to stagnation and the remove of people from wh space. I'm sorry that i don't believe your sky is falling bullshit.
Quoted for later. And the sky isn't falling, just less people to play with. Brasil, decime qu+¬ se siente / tener en casa a tu pap+í / Te juro, que aunque pasen los a+¦os / nunca nos vamos a olvidar / Que el Diego te gambete+¦ / que Cani te vacun+¦ / que est+ís llorando desde Italia hasta hoy |
Asserted Invaluability
Anti Einstein-Rosen Vixens
20
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:48:00 -
[403] - Quote
Fozzie just needs to jump out of the closet and once and for all admit he hates WHers and W-space.
From derisory comments on the AT tournament commentary year after year to the most contentious "ideas".
I don't believe for a second that any of these are ill-thought out ideas, they are very purposefully put together to antagonise and disrupt because Null hates WH's so Fozzie obeys his masters.
What CCP always fails to remember is that Apocrypha was and still is the most popular, content creating update ever made in recent years and without that they probably wouldn't have a spoon to stir sh*t with let alone a desk to do it on.
How about you actually LISTEN to your WH community on what needs FIXING before you go and break it all again. Get rid of the damn discovery scanner, instant sigs etc.
Fozzie you're a waste of space but that doesn't mean you have to make our space a waste.
|
Winthorp
2471
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:50:00 -
[404] - Quote
Kalel Nimrott wrote:Winthorp wrote:Kalel Nimrott wrote:I already told you that an uncontrolled variable would only lead to stagnation and the remove of people from wh space. I'm sorry that i don't believe your sky is falling bullshit. Quoted for later. And the sky isn't falling, just less people to play with.
I wish i could quote people, they have banned me from having a forum signature. |
ISK Lord
Negative Density No Response
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:52:00 -
[405] - Quote
CCP...
I really do worry you have completely lost your way. I love the game you provide us with massively but you really need to start thinking about how to keep the game fresh and fun for your member base - this is surely your aim?
I'm all for changes in W-Space, but only if that change provides more exciting content and leads to a bigger wormhole-dwelling population. This tweak wont do that I'm afraid to say and will be detrimental to wormhole life. That means less bottom line for your business as people wont log on.
This change does not create content, and I think from the comments on this thread you should understand why. If you do not, then CCP decision-makers need to actually try playing wormholes day-in and day-out for a few weeks and see how hard players work to find content for their communities. What we'd like is a simple helping hand. Help us by giving us content.
Instead of ruining rage rolling for larger groups, protecting farmers from the sword, and making it practically impossible for smaller groups to do anything safely with their assets, why not create some new content?
I don't think wormhole vets really care what that is - just give us something!!!
C7 systems with no moons and fat statics? New wormhole types to promote bigger fights? New effects that help different classes of ships? Spice up C4s? T3 Battleships with low mass? New ISK incentives in C1-C4 space?
Use your imagination please! Please stop trying to fix things that work already...
'If it aint broke don't fix it'
Instead just try to think up 'NEW' content please. That's what we all want. SOMETHING NEW.
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15561
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 11:52:00 -
[406] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:As you work for a compromise on this I will point out the smaller corp perspective. There are 2 ranges you can pop out of a wh.
1. Inside jump range - this is were you can use mechanics, skill and what not to have a chance to fight above your weight class. The option to close wh allows a lot of interesting game play that is not based on bigger numbers winning.
2. Outside of jump range - this is where jumping through a wh for pvp becomes a more is better and will win 99 times out of 100.
So as you compromise don't try to fool yourself that 20 km is ok. It's in jump range where you can use wh mechanics or not in jump range where numbers win.
This is a small corp killer. It's not a wh killer, but little guys will get snuffed out like a discarded smoke on a sidewalk. Corp death by new jump range feature slaughter or pos spinning to avoid slaughter. You're listening to the wrong folks on this one. Seriously, if you take away the ability to use wh jump mechanics (mass and polarization) what do we have left?? if small ships aren't affected as much, especially if they land in the same ranges after this change, will you admit small corps with less than ten characters don't really have any business committing to capital holes? President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1652
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:00:00 -
[407] - Quote
Winthorp wrote: People don't complain when they think things are stale and boring either, they just leave to do other things in the game or leave the game all together. Look at current login player numbers over a week period, look at the breakup of so many groups and their major consolidation of WH groups into only a few players and tell me you think everyone is happy with the current form of WH's.
Do you really think the way WH's are at the moment are in anyway interesting and fun? (trying not to answer a question with a question but..)
If by your own arguments it will stop rage rolling in its tracks then won't people by that same argument be more inclined to run sites if they feel safer that less people are rolling? Won't they then leave their chain open for you to find them? Or bubble it up now for "safety"?
You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH.
I'm one of the people that is not happy with the lack of ccp development and the general state of wormhole space, and I'm always on the forums requesting the CCP devote more resources to get wormhole space interesting. I think this change will contribute to falling number because if there is nothing to do in your chain and you don't have the numbers to roll, you can't play the wormhole game.
Yes, perhaps people will feel safer running sites because, theoretically, there will be less hunter rolling but if they have a hostile wormhole in system that they don't want to risk rolling, they may choose to log off instead. If this happens enough, they may leave wormhole space all together.
If was only looking at this from my own selfish perspective, i would consider this a good change for bigger groups. We'll use 15 battleships and roll safer and faster than ever but what concerns me is the effect it will have on the smaller groups and the knock-on effect that will have on general activity in wormhole space.
At the end of the day i'm okay with CCP making little changes here and there but those changes should be accompanied by some fun/new features/gameplay once in a while... and i'm not talking about crap like ghost sites that are as rare as rockinghorse shite.
So yeah, bring on the change on for all i care. If this change and the lack of developer created content kills wormhole space, CCP only have themselves to blame.
+1 |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3570
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:04:00 -
[408] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Winthorp wrote:Now for the rest of you risk adverse carebears to roll over like this guy... there's a difference between adding risk and adding mindless tedium. this change adds tedium, not risk. Cmon jack, yes it adds tedium but are you really going to say it adds no risk WTF? Before you were saying it adds so much risk that people would never roll holes and never pvp.... What story are you going to stick with? ok, sure, but those are the same thing. it adds risk that people wont be willing to take, which results in an overall reduction of risk take. Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
jonnykefka
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
268
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:08:00 -
[409] - Quote
So, briefly, I appreciate the innovative thinking but this particular change could be very, very bad for corps like ours in particular. I'll be honest, we're on the small end for C5/C6 PvP corps, and when we go up against one of the bigger, well-organized groups (Lazerhawks, SSC, KILL, Hard Knocks), we pretty much rely on our ability to cut off the chain of reinforcements if we want to stand a chance. The longer a fight goes on, the more likely it is that we'll be massively outnumbered. This just erases that entire tool, or at least makes it a guaranteed capital loss. Corbexx said very early in the thread that it favors big groups over small and I agree, and I think that we have too many big groups (or groups that are too big) right now as it is. This essentially encourages you to have the biggest blob possible, so that you can all jump through in 50 T3s and end up close enough to the wormhole to fight.
I'm glad CCP is devoting some time and thought to wormhole mechanics but this particular change is going to make it very hard for groups like us to engage a larger corp without getting stomped every single time. Personally I like engaging bigger foes, but not when there's zero chance of taking control of the fight. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15561
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:20:00 -
[410] - Quote
jonnykefka wrote:So, briefly, I appreciate the innovative thinking but this particular change could be very, very bad for corps like ours in particular. I'll be honest, we're on the small end for C5/C6 PvP corps, and when we go up against one of the bigger, well-organized groups (Lazerhawks, SSC, KILL, Hard Knocks), we pretty much rely on our ability to cut off the chain of reinforcements if we want to stand a chance. The longer a fight goes on, the more likely it is that we'll be massively outnumbered. This just erases that entire tool, or at least makes it a guaranteed capital loss. Corbexx said very early in the thread that it favors big groups over small and I agree, and I think that we have too many big groups (or groups that are too big) right now as it is. This essentially encourages you to have the biggest blob possible, so that you can all jump through in 50 T3s and end up close enough to the wormhole to fight.
I'm glad CCP is devoting some time and thought to wormhole mechanics but this particular change is going to make it very hard for groups like us to engage a larger corp without getting stomped every single time. Personally I like engaging bigger foes, but not when there's zero chance of taking control of the fight. mate if there's no bubble on the hole i can warp in a closing team with a quickness. if there is a bubble I can still manage it if i'm already on the hole. ten characters is not such a hard figure to clear... i mean, since when has a cap hole ever been a good idea for small groups? I keep hammering the cap hole angle because that's the one that will have caps jumping through it, which is what this change hits the hardest. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
|
Tiberizzle
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
47
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:24:00 -
[411] - Quote
abloo bloo bloo
i can't pop an interceptor / interdictor out of rage-rolled nullsec connections for absolutely guaranteed zero risk zero skill tackles for my 20 man ishtar gang all day long because now i have to slowboat my archon back to the hole and s-s-someone might g-g-gank me instead
im unsubbing right now life does not go on
ps. consume urine w-space scum guzzlers |
Edgar Strangelove
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:25:00 -
[412] - Quote
CCP, congratulations. This proposed change sent me from zero to awake faster than any caffeine or alarm clock ever has. No, seriously, someone actually woke me up to tell me to read this thread. It's that dire.
It sure seems contrary to a fundamental property of wormholes: the part where you have a polarity timer rather than a combat timer and everyone spawns within jump range. I am having an awfully hard time thinking of the fun this could create and am immediately thinking of headaches. The ability to quickly crash wormholes has influenced how wormhole space has developed from the beginning. The ability to warp our own environment within reason, to be able to use our own terrain to deal with a fleet with superior numbers or to trap a fleet away from its reinforcements, all of these things have been there from the beginning and have dictated an awful lot. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15561
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:30:00 -
[413] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I think this change will contribute to falling number because if there is nothing to do in your chain and you don't have the numbers to roll, you can't play the wormhole game. Yes, perhaps people will feel safer running sites because, theoretically, there will be less hunter rolling but if they have a hostile wormhole in system that they don't want to risk rolling, they may choose to log off instead. If this happens enough, they may leave wormhole space all together. if a wormhole corp's numbers are low, there's going to be more to farm in the wormhole. this imaginary group of players who can't scout themselves while closing holes... are they patient enough to last in EVE anyway? President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Iksobarg
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:31:00 -
[414] - Quote
Cap macrojumpdrive anyone?? |
Sweetsthehooker Zateki
Cloaked Goof Cascade Imminent
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:35:00 -
[415] - Quote
Posting in a terrible update thread |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1652
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:38:00 -
[416] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I think this change will contribute to falling number because if there is nothing to do in your chain and you don't have the numbers to roll, you can't play the wormhole game. Yes, perhaps people will feel safer running sites because, theoretically, there will be less hunter rolling but if they have a hostile wormhole in system that they don't want to risk rolling, they may choose to log off instead. If this happens enough, they may leave wormhole space all together. if a wormhole corp's numbers are low, there's going to be more to farm in the wormhole. this imaginary group of players who can't scout themselves while closing holes... are they patient enough to last in EVE anyway?
I'm not really concerned with farming but some of our members in quiet time zones roll our c5 static in search of low class wormholes to farm. They will not be able to do that after the change so they will probably quit.
I don't believe eve should be designed to only accommodate one playstyle but as you refute the existence of small/inexperienced corps, there's no point me commenting if you are right for eve or not. +1 |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15563
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:41:00 -
[417] - Quote
if there's no PVP then make ISK? President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1652
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:44:00 -
[418] - Quote
I log off if there is no PVP. That's just me though. +1 |
AssassinationsdoneWrong
The Nexus 7's
225
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:47:00 -
[419] - Quote
Tiberizzle wrote:abloo bloo bloo
i can't pop an interceptor / interdictor out of rage-rolled nullsec connections for absolutely guaranteed zero risk zero skill tackles for my 20 man ishtar gang all day long because now i have to slowboat my archon back to the hole and s-s-someone might g-g-gank me instead
im unsubbing right now life does not go on
ps. consume urine w-space scum guzzlers
Spoken like a true Goon (True Goon in this example = average mental age 12, still obsessed with s-*** guzzling etc)
The fact that you're truly all scared of WH's is exactly why they shouldn't be changed. Somewhere you guys can never successfully be in eve is a good place and should be left untouched. Experienced WH pilots one to one will generally outsmart, outfly and outpunch the average Goon pilot by 2:1 simply because we have actually got L5 skills in our queue, fly our own ships without pressing orbit, assign and afking to stroke ourselves to pictures of Mittens. The fact that your archons only come in packs of 50's and you all sit there doing nothing is not our fault.
Elsewhere crying you perhaps should be hmmmm?
The Nexus 7's
What we fall short of in numbers we more than make up for in stupidity |
Neckbeard Nolyfe
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:49:00 -
[420] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:if there's no PVP then make ISK?
Stop posting.
Thanks, you did everyone a favor. |
|
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:49:00 -
[421] - Quote
AssassinationsdoneWrong wrote:Tiberizzle wrote:abloo bloo bloo
i can't pop an interceptor / interdictor out of rage-rolled nullsec connections for absolutely guaranteed zero risk zero skill tackles for my 20 man ishtar gang all day long because now i have to slowboat my archon back to the hole and s-s-someone might g-g-gank me instead
im unsubbing right now life does not go on
ps. consume urine w-space scum guzzlers Spoken like a true Goon (True Goon in this example = average mental age 12, still obsessed with s-*** guzzling etc) The fact that you're truly all scared of WH's is exactly why they shouldn't be changed. Somewhere you guys can never successfully be in eve is a good place and should be left untouched. Experienced WH pilots one to one will generally outsmart, outfly and outpunch the average Goon pilot by 2:1 simply because we have actually got L5 skills in our queue, fly our own ships without pressing orbit, assign and afking to stroke ourselves to pictures of Mittens. The fact that your archons only come in packs of 50's and you all sit there doing nothing is not our fault. Elsewhere crying you perhaps should be hmmmm?
You sir haz win. Funny and 100 % agreeable upon. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15563
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:50:00 -
[422] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I log off if there is no PVP. That's just me though. lol. yeah and we also know groups like yours poach players who are PVP capable, so who's more guilty of stripping that capability from small wormhole groups. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:51:00 -
[423] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
It starts badly.
The major effect of this tweak is to remove small & mid entities from W-Space
Oh, like in nullsec !
And this is considered by almost everyone to be a big issue.
Less people in W-Space, less fight, big entities will control w-space, ....
Do you realize that nullsec is more boring then HS at that time ?
And do you realize that W-Space is the last place for people like who wants to rule a small territory ?
Collapsing is one of the fundamentals for us.
Give us alliance bookmarks, give us better POS system, this forum is full of good ideas, and stop breaking things that works fine.
Unbelievable |
Jez Amatin
Enso Corp
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:52:00 -
[424] - Quote
I'm not terribly impressed with this idea, and my initial response is if it ain't broke don't fix it. I'm not fundamentally opposed to this change (altho, the range is too much at mo...), but at the same time i can see why some of the complaints are being made. I'm more concerned about WH logistics at the mo, if that becomes more tedious than it already is, i think its fair to assume some of the smaller corps will either blob up or leave WH space altogether.
There are a million other things to fix in this game, and having dev(s) screw around with this mechanic comes across as misguided without more background / rationale. Maybe its the effect of looking at the current POS code. Its that bad that you end up finding anything to do other than to fix things that actually need fixing
Also if CCP want people to receive changes in a constructive manner, can i suggest putting up a dev blog before putting it on SISI. At the very least bring it up in forums before hand (as suggested by others). This will help manage the response from the community in a more prepared manner, rather than the current 20 page mixed bag of nerd rage, trolling and occasional balanced comment.
Corbex - good luck with this one, i sense you are going to need it! |
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
66
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:52:00 -
[425] - Quote
AssassinationsdoneWrong wrote:Tiberizzle wrote:abloo bloo bloo
i can't pop an interceptor / interdictor out of rage-rolled nullsec connections for absolutely guaranteed zero risk zero skill tackles for my 20 man ishtar gang all day long because now i have to slowboat my archon back to the hole and s-s-someone might g-g-gank me instead
im unsubbing right now life does not go on
ps. consume urine w-space scum guzzlers Spoken like a true Goon (True Goon in this example = average mental age 12, still obsessed with s-*** guzzling etc) The fact that you're truly all scared of WH's is exactly why they shouldn't be changed. Somewhere you guys can never successfully be in eve is a good place and should be left untouched. Experienced WH pilots one to one will generally outsmart, outfly and outpunch the average Goon pilot by 2:1 simply because we have actually got L5 skills in our queue, fly our own ships without pressing orbit, assign and afking to stroke ourselves to pictures of Mittens. The fact that your archons only come in packs of 50's and you all sit there doing nothing is not our fault. Elsewhere crying you perhaps should be hmmmm?
Hahaha nice one +1 goon tears in wormhole forums
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15563
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 12:53:00 -
[426] - Quote
Neckbeard Nolyfe wrote:Rain6637 wrote:if there's no PVP then make ISK? Stop posting. Thanks, you did everyone a favor. why did you use an NPC character for that? President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1654
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 13:08:00 -
[427] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I log off if there is no PVP. That's just me though. lol. yeah and we also know groups like yours poach players who are PVP capable, so who's more guilty of stripping that capability from small wormhole groups.
Again i can't speak for anyone else but our corp doesn't need to poach people. Players come to us because we can offer free POS fuel, SRP and the safety in numbers that small corps can't. +1 |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 13:13:00 -
[428] - Quote
:-D I won't name names President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
742
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 13:32:00 -
[429] - Quote
do these wormhole people actually think they're good at pvp |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
546
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 13:33:00 -
[430] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote::-D I won't name names
Why aren't you posting as the more attractive Mizhir? Sorry, that hair just isn't doing it for me :<
TrouserDeagle wrote:do these wormhole people actually think they're good at pvp
Does Shadow Cartel actually think they're good at PvP ? If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
547
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 13:40:00 -
[431] - Quote
Did anybody listen to Corbexx?
Stop derailing the thread. Ty Yaay!!!! |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
546
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 13:44:00 -
[432] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:Stop derailing the thread. Ty
Do you realise where you are?
Complaining about the entire issue is pretty pointless because, as was shown with API, regardless of how much WHs want/don't want a feature, CCP will do what they want. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Bleedingthrough
Raptor Navy
59
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 13:53:00 -
[433] - Quote
It seems to me that CCP does not have a coherent vision for w-space. You need to communicate that better and ask for feedback on your design goals. Implementing a mechanic without communicating your vision will fail almost every time and upset the community. That said, I canGÇÖt wait for your dev block.
Rek Seven wrote:Again i can't speak for anyone else but our corp doesn't need to poach people. Players come to us because we can offer free POS fuel, SRP and the safety in numbers that small corps can't.
IMO wormholes are heading the way of null sec because of CCP design choices. The small groups can't do anything to hurt the big guys significantly, other than taking part in corp theft (which will go once corp roles are fixed) and thus, people will consolidate into just a few massive alliances.
This is exactly what I fear. I signed up for small fights and an environment that allows us to outsmart others. If CCPs vision is to turn this into a numbers game more than it already is I would be very disappointed. But again I would not be forced to speculate about your intentions if you communicated your vision.
Corbexx is awesome at representing the entire w-space community. Listen to him! If something is not on his wish list then chances are it is terrible.
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 13:53:00 -
[434] - Quote
I wish I was even... half the man she is President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Hidden Fremen
Lazerhawks
458
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:00:00 -
[435] - Quote
Oh, I'm sure CCP knows what they're doing. They're not altruistic. They want to please their breadwinners. We all know who they're catering to. /tinfoil Snipped signature for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
550
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:02:00 -
[436] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:I wish I was even... half the man she is
Maybe with time, and a resculpt... If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:04:00 -
[437] - Quote
i'm not sure that procedure is available
she's going to kill me. (but not really) President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Dark Armata
Bookmark Both Sides Exit Strategy..
112
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:10:00 -
[438] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:Stop derailing the thread. Ty Do you realise where you are? Complaining about the entire issue is pretty pointless because, as was shown with API, regardless of how much WHs want/don't want a feature, CCP will do what they want.
Come on.
The chance of this thread staying on topic after Jester appears is about the same as this change not making it to the live server.
Would be very happy to be proved wrong on this one. W-Space WAS Best Space |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
553
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:11:00 -
[439] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:i'm not sure that procedure is available
she's going to kill me. (but not really)
I've heard biomassing can help with that procedure, but don't quote me on it. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:12:00 -
[440] - Quote
that is so mean President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
|
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
554
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:12:00 -
[441] - Quote
Dark Armata wrote:Andrew Jester wrote:Phoenix Jones wrote:Stop derailing the thread. Ty Do you realise where you are? Complaining about the entire issue is pretty pointless because, as was shown with API, regardless of how much WHs want/don't want a feature, CCP will do what they want. Come on. The chance of this thread staying on topic after Jester appears is about the same as this change not making it to the live server. Would be very happy to be proved wrong on this one.
Which one do you want to be proved wrong on))?
Also this is nice:
Dark Armata wrote: W-Space WAS Best Space
Rain6637 wrote:that is so mean
Sometimes the truth hurts :< If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
364
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:16:00 -
[442] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
-1. Normally I try to stay pretty positive but this is a turd sand which. Go home CCP you're drunk. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:18:00 -
[443] - Quote
believe it or not i can look at my skillsheet with a straight face President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Longinius Spear
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
281
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:22:00 -
[444] - Quote
CCP:
I'm stunned again by your 'devil may care" programing design style.
Not going to say its a good idea or a bad idea because honestly it wouldn't and hasn't mattered what the players really ask for anyway.
But!
If you apply this change to wormhole exits. Please apply the exact same change to cyno beacons. Fairs fair.
Read more of my ramblings on my blog www.invadingyourhole.blogspot.com |
SpotlessBlade
Van Diemen's Demise Northern Coalition.
55
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:24:00 -
[445] - Quote
Delicious delicious tears
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:26:00 -
[446] - Quote
90 Million SP falcon alt... whatev President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
555
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:29:00 -
[447] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:90 Million SP falcon alt... whatev
Do you even ECM Phoenix you casual?
If you have 90m SP you should be an ECM Wyvern alt If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:34:00 -
[448] - Quote
no i've limited the rains to subcap so I have some hope of a skillsheet that makes sense eventually, by default. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
170
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:35:00 -
[449] - Quote
Messing with the ability to roll wormholes is problematic. It is hard enough to find fights as it is.
If you want to make changes to the way wormholes "fling" out stuff jumping through them, maybe you should take the ship mass into account: the lighter the ship is, the further it gets thrown out when u go through a hole.
This will allow people to still properly rageroll but subcaps have more chance to require some slowboating to jump back.
The class of wh should also affect this so that people in lower class space don't constantly get shafted if they try to roll their wh's in battleships ending up 10k off the hole all the time. |
Bleedingthrough
Raptor Navy
64
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:38:00 -
[450] - Quote
Ya Huei wrote:Messing with the ability to roll wormholes is problematic. It is hard enough to find fights as it is.
If you want to make changes to the way wormholes "fling" out stuff jumping through them, maybe you should take the ship mass into account: the lighter the ship is, the further it gets thrown out when u go through a hole.
This will allow people to still properly rageroll but subcaps have more chance to require some slowboating to jump back.
The class of wh should also affect this so that people in lower class space don't constantly get shafted if they try to roll their wh's in battleships ending up 10k off the hole all the time.
This wont work! I don't want to sacrifice our Bubblecrushers to Bob every time we need to roll. |
|
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
555
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:46:00 -
[451] - Quote
How did people not see this coming? Orcas being spawned on gates and in POSes after killing a hole were obviously the prophets of this change.
You didn't repent and this is what you get. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:51:00 -
[452] - Quote
you don't get to have triple nickel likes. that's kinda cool and it upsets me, so i will give you another. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Moo Moocow
Hard Knocks Inc.
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:52:00 -
[453] - Quote
SpotlessBlade wrote:Delicious delicious tears
How about we slow carriers align time while we are at it and see what happens :P |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:57:00 -
[454] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:you don't get to have triple nickel likes. that's kinda cool and it upsets me, so i will give you another.
When I hit 420 I asked people to stop liking my posts, but then Dusette ruined it :< If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15565
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 14:59:00 -
[455] - Quote
'tswatchu get President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
220
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:11:00 -
[456] - Quote
Jack Marshal wrote:Wow Talk about Garbage If your in a small group, Not PL or Goons you cant own space CCP you ensured that with the current Sov. dynamics So we move in to a WH so we can call something home that we dont have to pay rent for. Some were we can defend and not have to worry about Titains and Damned Suppers being dropped on us when we try and have a fight. Wh space is the last resort for smaller groups / corps and CCP is going to take that away with this jump range garbage. Heres an IDEA look at the SOV Map activity on the weeked, ITS EMPTY Most of your SOV is EMPTY, its ******** when we drop out of a hole, at 01:00 Eve time , and NO ONE HAS JUMPED GATES in some of the nullsec Systems, you may want to think to yourself GÇ£Gee somethings broke, why is all this sov emptyGÇ¥.
Here is My question. Dear CCP were can we move to next and call home, were we can do something besides please F1 in the blob fleets you love so much to advertise. CCP since your Stripping the only defense we have (Worm hole control) from huge wormhole groups, what is your plan next? push all the smaller groups out to get bigger blob fleets for you to advertise on you tube?
This Is not "content" this is garbage. Try this [pause for effect] Add something NEW to wormhole space. Given were not a huge number of people and what we think doesn't way heavy with you guys, but come on give us a break.
So, CCP, what was your thought process on this? CCP 1:Man, we really do need to get around to doing something about Null Sec, POS code,missiles, T3's, capitals and all that super duper secret squirrel stuff Seagull has working on. CCP 2:Yea, you're right, how about we go buttfuck WH'ers for a while? They've been pretty quiet lately, and if we do it right we could screw over small groups at the same time! CCP 1:Hell yea! I love screwing over players that don't subscribe with 10 accounts.
Dicks. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15565
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:12:00 -
[457] - Quote
12 President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Light Shock
Florida Sand Hermits Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:17:00 -
[458] - Quote
Industry changes influenced me to cancel 10 accounts, new WH changes now prevent me from trying out WH's as I had planned to in a few weeks. Well played CCP the remaining 6 accounts I had active, with majority training scanning skills to move in to wh life. 5 of those will not be renewed leaving me with this 1 account deciding if I want to go on with EvE or win eve.
well played ccp, hemorrhage those subs |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:19:00 -
[459] - Quote
Light Shock wrote:Industry changes influenced me to cancel 10 accounts, new WH changes now prevent me from trying out WH's as I had planned to in a few weeks. Well played CCP the remaining 6 accounts I had active, with majority training scanning skills to move in to wh life. 5 of those will not be renewed leaving me with this 1 account deciding if I want to go on with EvE or win eve.
well played ccp, hemorrhage those subs
Changes aren't in yet, you can still try them. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
860
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:23:00 -
[460] - Quote
Corbexx, good luck with this one, large, medium and small corps and their menbers are agast and in shock after hearing about this proposal, the dislike is almost universal amongst those who actually spend any time in wormholes and the delight of nullsec players and forum alts is very clear.
Stopping something once it has appeared on the test server is bad enough, but stopping something once a dev blog is written is like trying to stop an avalanche.
So Good luck, We are behind you and glad you are there for us and representing us.
But you will really really need good luck to stop this disater from occuring.
There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
|
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
170
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:27:00 -
[461] - Quote
Bleedingthrough wrote:Ya Huei wrote:Messing with the ability to roll wormholes is problematic. It is hard enough to find fights as it is.
If you want to make changes to the way wormholes "fling" out stuff jumping through them, maybe you should take the ship mass into account: the lighter the ship is, the further it gets thrown out when u go through a hole.
This will allow people to still properly rageroll but subcaps have more chance to require some slowboating to jump back.
The class of wh should also affect this so that people in lower class space don't constantly get shafted if they try to roll their wh's in battleships ending up 10k off the hole all the time. This wont work! I don't want to sacrifice our Bubblecrushers to Bob every time we need to roll.
You 100mn AB cruiser will be back within 5K in no time besides whats the problem with risking a cruiser in order to reap the reward of a new wh ?
|
Light Shock
Florida Sand Hermits Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:27:00 -
[462] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:Light Shock wrote:Industry changes influenced me to cancel 10 accounts, new WH changes now prevent me from trying out WH's as I had planned to in a few weeks. Well played CCP the remaining 6 accounts I had active, with majority training scanning skills to move in to wh life. 5 of those will not be renewed leaving me with this 1 account deciding if I want to go on with EvE or win eve.
well played ccp, hemorrhage those subs Changes aren't in yet, you can still try them.
I've don EvE long enough to know CCP doesn't give a rats ass about what the player community has to say. I'm not going to waste the time investing towards it when odds are incredibly likely this will go live as is.
They introduced it without any notification for crying out loud. By chance, a wh community member found out about it and ionly because of that chance finding is outrage and discussion taking place. This isn't a rare occurrence.
I'm just over CCP at this point. |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
220
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:37:00 -
[463] - Quote
Light Shock wrote:Andrew Jester wrote:Light Shock wrote:Industry changes influenced me to cancel 10 accounts, new WH changes now prevent me from trying out WH's as I had planned to in a few weeks. Well played CCP the remaining 6 accounts I had active, with majority training scanning skills to move in to wh life. 5 of those will not be renewed leaving me with this 1 account deciding if I want to go on with EvE or win eve.
well played ccp, hemorrhage those subs Changes aren't in yet, you can still try them. I've don EvE long enough to know CCP doesn't give a rats ass about what the player community has to say. I'm not going to waste the time investing towards it when odds are incredibly likely this will go live as is. They introduced it without any notification for crying out loud. By chance, a wh community member found out about it and ionly because of that chance finding is outrage and discussion taking place. This isn't a rare occurrence. I'm just over CCP at this point. I'm not over CCP, I'm over thinking that they won't screw me over just because they get bored. Can someone send a copy of the latest Merriam-Webster to CCP HQ so they can learn that feedback implies that you give a **** what somebody tells you? Because I don't they really know what it means. These changes will likely go live as is with the message of "Shut up and take it: like so many other things (RLML/RHML) |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1659
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:40:00 -
[464] - Quote
Is is true that chitsa jason is behind this proposal? +1 |
Quincy Thibaud
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
27
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:44:00 -
[465] - Quote
Of all of the things that need changes and fixing in wormhole space, this is what CCP came up with? I can't understand why this is even remotely a good idea let alone be a priority for CCP development to screw with. Wormhole space is one of the few places left in Eve where small gangs can still get good fights and now you want to make that less workable.
|
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:47:00 -
[466] - Quote
Ya Huei wrote: You 100mn AB cruiser will be back within 5K in no time besides whats the problem with risking a cruiser in order to reap the reward of a new wh ?
Because it will need 15+ back and forth. For a 2b mass connexion for example.
Collapsing with Orca is already very dangerous, you need lots of precaution and intel to do that. And u can still have your collapsing ship lost on the wrong side of the connexion. It happens sometimes because connexion mass is not a constant, it is +/- 10% and you do not know necessarily how many ships go through to estimate the current connexion mass.
And small/young corps doesnt have necessarily have an heavy dictor pilot.
If CCP have the same whormole knowledge as you we are in a very bad position ... |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:53:00 -
[467] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Light Shock wrote:Andrew Jester wrote:Light Shock wrote:Industry changes influenced me to cancel 10 accounts, new WH changes now prevent me from trying out WH's as I had planned to in a few weeks. Well played CCP the remaining 6 accounts I had active, with majority training scanning skills to move in to wh life. 5 of those will not be renewed leaving me with this 1 account deciding if I want to go on with EvE or win eve.
well played ccp, hemorrhage those subs Changes aren't in yet, you can still try them. I've don EvE long enough to know CCP doesn't give a rats ass about what the player community has to say. I'm not going to waste the time investing towards it when odds are incredibly likely this will go live as is. They introduced it without any notification for crying out loud. By chance, a wh community member found out about it and ionly because of that chance finding is outrage and discussion taking place. This isn't a rare occurrence. I'm just over CCP at this point. I'm not over CCP, I'm over thinking that they won't screw me over just because they get bored. Can someone send a copy of the latest Merriam-Webster to CCP HQ so they can learn that feedback implies that you give a **** what somebody tells you? Because I don't they really know what it means. These changes will likely go live as is with the message of "Shut up and take it: like so many other things (RLML/RHML)
BUT THEY LISTENED TO THE COMMUNITY ABOUT ISHTARS THERE IS HOPE YOU JUST HAVE TO BELIEVE If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
99
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:54:00 -
[468] - Quote
I live in a C4, lets review how this will effect my life.
Rolling the WH under non combat conditions: Adds the whole one minute to the procedure... Jump WH, warp up to bm, warp back, jump back, rinse repeat. Only time ANY extra time is added is on the last jump as I for the rest you're waiting for the polarisation timer anyway.
Rolling while hostiles are around: Guess I'll actually have to use a combat ship to do it now. Damn CCP and them making me fight!. Ultimately it's a safety calculation as previously. If it's safe it's safe, if it's not it's not. Putting in a tiny more effort doesn't change that.
Other people rolling WH's: Makes it a bit easier to catch those not paying attention and means doing more than flying to zero on a WH and hoping things will work out right. People actually paying attention turn into legitimate fights now. Mixed gangs required with inties and long webbers to hold stuff out at range. More gang choice is always good.
Hole control under sieges: Bit more tricky now though with covops (cause they're lighter) spawning nearer the WH, not a huge deal still. Maybe we'll start to see suicide BS's used to bring pods back in? Jump in, eject, warp pod out.
Catching Covops: No change as they spawn close anyway.
Catching other bigger stuff: Means I need to bring along something to tackle (an Inty for example) while the rest of us fly over. Hardly a big deal.
Hauling stuff with hostiles around: Really no different than how it is now. Getting caught 20km off the WH is no different to getting caught at zero and jumping back. More options in defensive modules like neuts to shake off small stuff, ecm bursts, smartbombs become available as you're not blocked by the wh anymore. Means webbing things into warp is a bit more difficult, and by more difficult I mean I need to board a different ship. Tough stuff.
Jumping into Hostiles: Now here's where it gets cool. I have options now. Currently I need to assume I'll be scrammed/webbed/bubbled the second I jump through. No so anymore. Kitting ships are now an option (OMG the Talos is back baby!) Heavy ships that local rep are more of an option. Long scrammers, sniper boats, RSD's. All kinds of cool stuff becomes available when the fight doesn't exist start to end under 10km. Also means people have a much harder time failing out when things go bad. You will have to more often decide to re-escalate the fight or cut your losses where they are.
Seriously people need to chill out for a sec and actually think about things. It's really not changing much at all. The biggest issue with this is that it's changing WH mechanics to one that's a bit too similar to how a stargate works. I'd rather WH's stay dramatically different from K Space as much as possible.
But ultimately give it a week and everyone will have adjusted and we'll be back to normal transmission. |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
179
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 15:54:00 -
[469] - Quote
The Icefox wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:We will be looking for player feedback at that time. Since when do eve players wait to provide their feedback? I'll add my .02 isk. Since I just watched 4 of my industrial friends quit and unsub after the recent industrial changes now I'm listening to my fed up worm hole friends say the same thing. This is game breaking for a number of reasons.
That's too bad. My industrial friends are making a killing right now on their industry work. They didn't sit around whining, they immediately started analyzing the markets and going after the high margin stuff.
|
|
ISD Cyberdyne
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1547
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 16:00:00 -
[470] - Quote
Locked for cleaning. Please standby for a few minutes. Thanks. ISD Cyberdyne Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
|
Mysi
Negative Density No Response
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 16:46:00 -
[471] - Quote
So will this make black holes something you want to roll into? |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
179
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 16:47:00 -
[472] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Winthorp wrote: I have never seen half the people in this thread bitching about how this is so game breaking ever come to Wh forums to come to discuss any WH mechanics or ideas until their perfect little world of insta rolling away issues is threatened.
People don't complain about things they consider to be working reasonably well... Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? Please explain your answer. People don't complain when they think things are stale and boring either, they just leave to do other things in the game or leave the game all together. Look at current login player numbers over a week period, look at the breakup of so many groups and their major consolidation of WH groups into only a few players and tell me you think everyone is happy with the current form of WH's. Do you really think the way WH's are at the moment are in anyway interesting and fun? (trying not to answer a question with a question but..) Look the only thing i don't like about this change is it isn't showing any consistency in the goal direction of WH space from CCP and that concerns me that they are not being open with what they want from us. - They leave instant sig overlay (carebear safe mode) - They come up with a 5min delay for new sigs (no carebears will stay) - Then they forget they ever mentioned the idea (back to carebear mode) - They removed sleeper API data becauseit was too powerfull (carebears get a little safer) - Now this change (clearly a PVP driven idea) They need to be more consistent with the direction they want to take because they are not balancing it well currently. Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? [i] Please explain your answer. [/iI think if they wanted to do something that resulted in more people in WH space they could have chosen something else entirely instead of this, i have never once said this will result in more people in Wh's. The above carebear mode changes have resulted in more people in wh space (You can't deny that) What i have said is the current way all these players in Wh space interact with each other is stale and SAFE. The people in this thread that are trying to say its not perfectly safe to roll away hostile chains are ******* delusional. There is only very situational times that you can ever kill people rolling away a C5/6 chain on you. How many times have you found a group you thought would and could fight you only to hear your scout say "nevermind they are rolling" when they want to do it is all over by then with not a thing you can do and that group then picks and chooses its interactions with whoever they want in what is supposed to be a dangerous area of the game. I actually do feel this will lead to more fun had by WH people and more interactions, the larger groups will still roll holes like they always have with it only taking them a few minutes longer and yes the smaller groups may be more hesitant to do so but now instead of them safely picking the perfect chain whenever they want they will be forced to scan a chain they may have just rolled away because they saw a known entity in the chain. So yes i think it will lead to less people rolling chains but maybe they shouldn't be rolling away non optimal chains and be forced to interact with other players in an MMO. If you want a safe escalation period and roll away or crit your static you should be at risk to make that happen. if you want to get your 30B or so escalation loot to HS or replace that fleet you just lost you should have to risk more then just rolling the C5 or C6 untill you get a C2/3 HS, you should have to go down some more risky chains or be forced to risk a little more to roll that chain to get the one you want. The way it is is too easy and too safe. Not only is it safe to roll now it is STOPPING interactions with other players by the chains you get to pick and choose at will in perfect safety at no cost. If by your own arguments it will stop rage rolling in its tracks then won't people by that same argument be more inclined to run sites if they feel safer that less people are rolling? Won't they then leave their chain open for you to find them? Or bubble it up now for "safety"? You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH. EDIT: Loving the hate mail from your alts by the way guys, i feed off that thanks.
Winthrop for CSM10. (In addition to corbexx)
The more I read, the more I like the idea. Yes, it makes my own life more difficult. It also means more ambush opportunities and puts a premium on good intel.
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
344
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:07:00 -
[473] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:As you work for a compromise on this I will point out the smaller corp perspective. There are 2 ranges you can pop out of a wh.
1. Inside jump range - this is were you can use mechanics, skill and what not to have a chance to fight above your weight class. The option to close wh allows a lot of interesting game play that is not based on bigger numbers winning.
2. Outside of jump range - this is where jumping through a wh for pvp becomes a more is better and will win 99 times out of 100.
So as you compromise don't try to fool yourself that 20 km is ok. It's in jump range where you can use wh mechanics or not in jump range where numbers win.
This is a small corp killer. It's not a wh killer, but little guys will get snuffed out like a discarded smoke on a sidewalk. Corp death by new jump range feature slaughter or pos spinning to avoid slaughter. You're listening to the wrong folks on this one. Seriously, if you take away the ability to use wh jump mechanics (mass and polarization) what do we have left?? if small ships aren't affected as much, especially if they land in the same ranges after this change, will you admit small corps with less than ten characters don't really have any business committing to capital holes?
I could agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.
If you read for comprehension in lieu of... well whatever made you think it's about little guy tears you would see the important parts.
Important part: Dah Dah Dah Da Dum Dum
The range 'feature' Takes the wh mechanics out of jumping through a wh and puts advantage clearly in the hands of he who has more numbers. 10 < 20 <50 < 60, there isn't a lower limit on where it's true. It's about removing wh mechanics from jumping through a wh. Which is just dumb. (DUMB) |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
221
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:18:00 -
[474] - Quote
Gospadin wrote:Winthorp wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Winthorp wrote: I have never seen half the people in this thread bitching about how this is so game breaking ever come to Wh forums to come to discuss any WH mechanics or ideas until their perfect little world of insta rolling away issues is threatened.
People don't complain about things they consider to be working reasonably well... Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? Please explain your answer. People don't complain when they think things are stale and boring either, they just leave to do other things in the game or leave the game all together. Look at current login player numbers over a week period, look at the breakup of so many groups and their major consolidation of WH groups into only a few players and tell me you think everyone is happy with the current form of WH's. Do you really think the way WH's are at the moment are in anyway interesting and fun? (trying not to answer a question with a question but..) Look the only thing i don't like about this change is it isn't showing any consistency in the goal direction of WH space from CCP and that concerns me that they are not being open with what they want from us. - They leave instant sig overlay (carebear safe mode) - They come up with a 5min delay for new sigs (no carebears will stay) - Then they forget they ever mentioned the idea (back to carebear mode) - They removed sleeper API data becauseit was too powerfull (carebears get a little safer) - Now this change (clearly a PVP driven idea) They need to be more consistent with the direction they want to take because they are not balancing it well currently. Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? [i] Please explain your answer. [/iI think if they wanted to do something that resulted in more people in WH space they could have chosen something else entirely instead of this, i have never once said this will result in more people in Wh's. The above carebear mode changes have resulted in more people in wh space (You can't deny that) What i have said is the current way all these players in Wh space interact with each other is stale and SAFE. The people in this thread that are trying to say its not perfectly safe to roll away hostile chains are ******* delusional. There is only very situational times that you can ever kill people rolling away a C5/6 chain on you. How many times have you found a group you thought would and could fight you only to hear your scout say "nevermind they are rolling" when they want to do it is all over by then with not a thing you can do and that group then picks and chooses its interactions with whoever they want in what is supposed to be a dangerous area of the game. I actually do feel this will lead to more fun had by WH people and more interactions, the larger groups will still roll holes like they always have with it only taking them a few minutes longer and yes the smaller groups may be more hesitant to do so but now instead of them safely picking the perfect chain whenever they want they will be forced to scan a chain they may have just rolled away because they saw a known entity in the chain. So yes i think it will lead to less people rolling chains but maybe they shouldn't be rolling away non optimal chains and be forced to interact with other players in an MMO. If you want a safe escalation period and roll away or crit your static you should be at risk to make that happen. if you want to get your 30B or so escalation loot to HS or replace that fleet you just lost you should have to risk more then just rolling the C5 or C6 untill you get a C2/3 HS, you should have to go down some more risky chains or be forced to risk a little more to roll that chain to get the one you want. The way it is is too easy and too safe. Not only is it safe to roll now it is STOPPING interactions with other players by the chains you get to pick and choose at will in perfect safety at no cost. If by your own arguments it will stop rage rolling in its tracks then won't people by that same argument be more inclined to run sites if they feel safer that less people are rolling? Won't they then leave their chain open for you to find them? Or bubble it up now for "safety"? You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH. EDIT: Loving the hate mail from your alts by the way guys, i feed off that thanks. Winthrop for CSM10. (In addition to corbexx) The more I read, the more I like the idea. Yes, it makes my own life more difficult. It also means more ambush opportunities and puts a premium on good intel. Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.
But it is nice to see that corbexx has been in here so much on this issue, always nice to know that at least someone is seeing the feedback once CCP goes back to ignoring feedback.
I am against this change because it is going to give larger groups a big advantage, the ability to role holes quicker will allow them greater system security that no amount of superior FC'ing and piloting will overcome. Good ole fashioned RNG. A large group can quickly role any hole they suspect to be compromised by an enemy scout as soon as they think they are clear, whereas a small group (or even an off-shift group) is left with a home turning into swiss cheese. Winthrop raises some good points about more potential for content, but the mechanic that is creating the opportunities favors large groups over small. |
calaretu
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
129
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:20:00 -
[475] - Quote
As someone pointed out earlier. If this had been the way it worked day 1 then noone would be complaining. Having read almost every page in thread I am inclined to agree with winthrop that the current status quo is not a better solution ~Bringer of happiness
http://collapsedbehind.blogspot.no/ |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
499
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:31:00 -
[476] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote: But it is nice to see that corbexx has been in here so much on this issue, always nice to know that at least someone is seeing the feedback once CCP goes back to ignoring feedback.
I'm watching this thread like a hawk so don't worry there (i'm sure ccp will be as well).
I'm testing c2 pve at the moment on sisi which is attually pretty relaxing. but i'll be online later to chat to anyone who has issues or wants to come chat to me about this.
I might also try and sort out a mini wh town hall this weekend. (depending on how much spare time i have) Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:33:00 -
[477] - Quote
ISD Cyberdyne wrote:Alrighty guys and gals, I've performed some thread cleaning and removed some off-topic posting, trolling, ranting, profanity, and other forum violations. This is an important discussion to many players, and as stated by others, should stay on topic and not be derailed. Please don't troll the discussion or feedback being provided by various players in this thread. I ask that you all keep this on topic, support this thread with respectful and constructive feedback and comments, and don't abuse this opportunity to provide feedback on this subject. The following rules have been broken and were resolved. I'll continue to monitor this thread, but please refrain from violating the forum rules. Thank you! Quote:2. Be respectful toward others at all times.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.
Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.
5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
6. Racism and discrimination are prohibited.
Racism, gender stereotyping and hate speech are not permitted on the EVE Online Forums. Derogatory posting that includes race, religion or sexual preference based personal attacks and trolling can result in immediate suspension of forum posting privileges.
7. Use of profanity is prohibited.
The use of profanity is prohibited on the EVE Online forums. This includes the partial masking of letters using numbers or alternate symbols, and any attempts at bypassing the profanity filter.
22. Post constructively.
Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.
26. Off-topic posting is prohibited.
Off-topic posting is permitted within reason, as sometimes a single comment may color or lighten the tone of discussion. However, excessive posting of off-topic remarks in an attempt to derail a thread may result in the thread being locked, or a forum warning being issued.
7 in one post, new record? If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
|
ISD Cyberdyne
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1549
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:37:00 -
[478] - Quote
Please remember that discussion of forum moderation and trolling the volunteers are not in keeping with the forum rules. Please don't risk losing your posting priviledges to make comments and remarks at the expense of CCP or ISD. I sincerely just want to see this thread stay on topic. Please do the same.
Quote:5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.
The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category.
30. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.
CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, GÇ£outingGÇ¥ of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.
Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts. ISD Cyberdyne Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
557
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:50:00 -
[479] - Quote
ISD Cyberdyne wrote:Please remember that discussion of forum moderation and trolling the volunteers are not in keeping with the forum rules. Please don't risk losing your posting priviledges to make comments and remarks at the expense of CCP or ISD. I sincerely just want to see this thread stay on topic. Please do the same. Quote:5. Trolling is prohibited.
Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.
11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.
The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category.
30. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.
CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, GÇ£outingGÇ¥ of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.
Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.
That's 9 in one thread, definitely a record. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Kynric
Sky Fighters
144
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:51:00 -
[480] - Quote
I disagree with the assertion that the proposed change is an advantage to larger groups.
The current dominate single meta of everyone flying the same doctrine (armor t3s) is what advantages the larger group. As if both sides have more or less the same fleet comp the weight of isk, skill points and most of all fleet size are inescapably the dominant factors on who wins. Hence the larger fleet will almost always win if they are both flying the same doctrine.
Elsewhere in eve there is more of a rock - paper - scissors where each fleet has its prey and is predators. The exceptions to that rule (ishtars and supers) are where the system breaks apart, but in general there is a lot more variation in fleet doctrines and that often matters more than just raw size.
This probably seems a bit off topic so let's bring it back in and ask ourselves why wormholes are different and compress down to so frw doctrines. I believe the answer to that is simply the wormhole mechanics. When you spawn deep in scram/web range it is obvious that brawling will reign. This proposed change could change that as it might be possible to get an assault frig gang or a nano gang or a sniper gang successfully through the hole if the spawns are a bit further out. As such with this change we might have options where a smaller gang could successfully run through a larger gang and that proves my point that this could be really good for the little guy. Or at least the little guys that will fight whatever they can find. There is no helping the ones that insist on avoiding combat.
Obviously we need to see the development blog and associated numbers before knowing for sure as that will make or break the deal. |
|
TKL HUN
Jugis Modo Utopia pwn-O-graphy
154
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:54:00 -
[481] - Quote
Seriously, someone please help CCP Fozzie to find he's medicine....
Instead of ruining w-space in general, try to fix nullsec... |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15565
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:54:00 -
[482] - Quote
i just wanna say i loved my ORE hole crasher gang. I did what I could to suppress my rage but I can't take it anymore. I'm about to see their purpose in this game nerfed yet. again. why are ORE ships being murdered?? that's what this is about, isn't it. killing ORE ships. my Rorq and Orcas...
first it was mobile depots. role stolen then it was mobile tractor units. role stolen compression anchorable. role stolen
the only way this could be worse is if Rorqs only give mining boosts within 20 km of a wormhole.
if you want to remove ORE ships from the game, just do it. don't string players along who only want to fly ORE ships. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Cirillith
Bean-shidh The Nameless Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 17:59:00 -
[483] - Quote
Well - As from my perspective I would like to know what was general reason of this kind of mechanic change from DEVs actually. Why? Because this thread is kinda full of arguments about this change is being good/or bad (I'm even one of those ppl thinking this would be kinda bad change) and full of theories how this affect future life inside w-space. Since we do not know other so called "iterations" planned for W-Space its hard to see the bigger picture. And I started really to afraid them.
The most annoying thing about this - mentioned somewhere above in this thread - is that it seems CCP doesn't care about us, living in W-Space. Usually we get some knowing about changes affecting environment we are living with, when we dig them out on SISI or TQ even, and some DEVtalks, DEVblogs are appearing on eve website when all is settle, and CCP wants some feedback but is doing nothing after receiving it. THE ORDER OF MAKING CHANGES SHOULD BE: 1. some ideas 2. checking them internally 3. going with DEVblog 4. getting feedback 5. adjusting changes 6. even more feedback 7. release
BTW - you should know that during our meeting event here in Warsaw just few days ago (last Wednesday) I asked CCP Gargant who was here (really big fellow :)), if they are planning something for W-SPace. I received answer NO.
Funny isn't it?
Of course I know that WH could be boring some times. Looking for a fight is usually pain in the ass and comes to a conclusion of getting someone on sites or baiting. This takes time, and usually ppl will notice you before you can catch them - close hole or escaping. Even when you send char with too big killboard history your prey wont bait at you. But there are also scenarios when we fought like 4 times on single WH with different setups.
This change is leading to even bigger Mexican stand off situation style - if you would like to seek out some analogy - two WH c6 connected with each other one pulsar second one wolf rayet, both colonized with active pvp entities. The most common way of engagement is shield fleet wait for armor fleet on pulsar side and armor one waiting for shield one on rayet side. Jump mechanic change will lead to same situation since you cant predict where your support capitals will be and they could be like 60 km from each other, also this kind of mechanics favors defending side - in preparing battle - even more that is today.
Other arguments - again right in my opinion - are involved with small entities. If they will saw some active PVP corp scout in their chain they will POS up and log off or if that kind of situation will be experienced very often they will move out of W-space making it even more empty.
Anyway - I know that making W-Space more interesting place would be nice, but still you have so much work to do with thing that are not working well (POSes, rights in Corporations, etc) or you could deliver something new and demanded like ALLIANCE or FLEET BOOKMARKS. Why changing something that works pretty well? I will now repeat question that was pointed at you many times:
Were you actually playing in W-Space? Have you seen how life there look like? Not for a long time - at least for a week or so. And I know that you are allowed to play on some character with other in their corps as long as they do not know you are a DEV. |
Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 18:31:00 -
[484] - Quote
Being a pilot who has always been part of smaller wormhole pvp fleets. There is always 2 ways to handle a very large wormhole entity that you get connected to.
Option 1: Combat roll the hole Option 2: Afk in POS for the day
If this change takes effect there will be only 1 of those options left... |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
346
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 18:33:00 -
[485] - Quote
Kynric wrote:I disagree with the assertion that the proposed change is an advantage to larger groups.
The current dominate single meta of everyone flying the same doctrine (armor t3s) is what advantages the larger group. As if both sides have more or less the same fleet comp the weight of isk, skill points and most of all fleet size are inescapably the dominant factors on who wins. Hence the larger fleet will almost always win if they are both flying the same doctrine.
Elsewhere in eve there is more of a rock - paper - scissors where each fleet has its prey and is predators. The exceptions to that rule (ishtars and supers) are where the system breaks apart, but in general there is a lot more variation in fleet doctrines and that often matters more than just raw size.
This probably seems a bit off topic so let's bring it back in and ask ourselves why wormholes are different and compress down to so frw doctrines. I believe the answer to that is simply the wormhole mechanics. When you spawn deep in scram/web range it is obvious that brawling will reign.
This proposed change could change that as it might be possible to get an assault frig gang or a nano gang or a sniper gang successfully through the hole if the spawns are a bit further out. As such with this change we might have options where a smaller gang could successfully run through a larger gang and that proves my point that this could be really good for the little guy. Or at least the little guys that will fight whatever they can find. There is no helping the ones that insist on avoiding combat. By enabling more metas this is an advantage to numerically smaller gangs as we demonstrated that the single meta is heavily in favor of raw numbers.
Obviously we need to see the development blog and associated numbers before knowing for sure as that will make or break the deal.
I agree with your statement..... BUT.....
There are already thousands (probably tens of thousands) of gates in eve where what you said is true. Then there is this wh space where it isn't true. I don't think we need to make wh like the other thousands of gates in eve. I think we should protect the uniqueness of WH space. If you want gate mechanics - you know where to find gates. If I want WH mechanics - it would be nice to have a place I could use them.
Seriously - all the wh folks that want gate mechanics - google DOTLAN. You will find what you seek there. |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
558
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 18:34:00 -
[486] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:i just wanna say i loved my ORE hole crasher gang. I did what I could but I can't take it anymore. I'm about to see their purpose in this game nerfed yet. again. why are ORE ships being murdered?? that's what this is about, isn't it. killing ORE ships. my Rorq and Orcas...
first it was mobile depots. role stolen then it was mobile tractor units. role stolen compression anchorable. role stolen hole crasher team nerf. role stolen
the only way this could be worse is if Rorqs only give mining boosts within 20 km of a wormhole. if you want to remove ORE ships from the game, just do it. don't string players along who only want to fly ORE ships.
You obviously don't understand the enormous emergent gameplay potential of a Rorqual.
- Shield slowcat: You never get primaried because that ORE skin makes you look absolutely fabulous. Not only do you save your friends, you salvage at the same time, so even if you lose your ship, you'll have paid it off(you have a hauler alt, right?)
- Combat salvager: Have you ever seen a massive fight that's just begging for salvaging? Warp your Rorqual an appropriate distance off and begin tractoring. Nobody has time for MTUs and anyways, you want to show off your awesome skin.
- POS setterupper: Have you ever knocked down a PL dyspro moon that had full silos? Jump your Rorqual right in a scoop all that tasty moongoo. As an added bonus, you can setup a new POS while you're at it
- Mining Booster: I think this is a thing.
- Ore compressor: If you're dumb enough to own a Rorqual, you're dumb enough to mine. Get your ore out of wherever you are by using that thing that makes to Rorqual look super cool and compress your ore today! It's what CCP wants you to do anyways
- Clonebitch: Do you live anywhere but wormholes? You can do this. Do you live in wormholes? getfukt
- Combat mode: Fit a stiff tank and drop on unsuspecting nerds. Who needs fighters when you have Geckos?
All these uses and more can be yours in only ONE ship today. If you're not a stupid poor, you can look fabulous while doing it with the super sexy ORE skin. Contact your local cap seller today and get one of these babys and go make some content!
P.S: WTS Rorqs pls buy them ;-; If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Synthec
Big Johnson's
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 18:36:00 -
[487] - Quote
Great Idea CCP ! /Sarcasm
Stop trying to turn Wormholes into Null Blocks. Most of us came in here to get away from it. There are so many other things you could be trying to FIX . How is this even a good idea?
1. T3 Re-balance 2. Corp Roles 3. And of course POS's <-- Ya we know this will never happen. 4. Bookmarks 5 Separate D-Scan and Probe Windows
As a few
Wormholers have been bringing up these ideas as a majority for a long time and Instead CCP gets drunk on Boone's Farm and comes up with this..
You say you want to drive player interaction give us more random connections to all Space and Classes of WH's You should be making it easier for use to roll so we can see more chains
If this is put in game it better affect Titan Bridges and Cyno's the same way what's fair is fair.
I will go back under my rock now (Troll away)
O7
|
Blood Spine
Infinity Engine Sleeping Dragons
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 18:52:00 -
[488] - Quote
This is absoloute garbage CCP should just leave wormholes alone and work on somthing we actualy need. Fixing POSs for instence. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
349
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 18:54:00 -
[489] - Quote
I would think it only proper for cynos/bridges to spread the ships more as the mass goes up.
1 carrier = 40 km 2 carrier = 50 km 3 carrier = 60 km
Think of how this would unstagnate null sec. It would be so dynamic to litter the whole grid with 100 carriers. As a neat benefit it would probably uncloak everything on grid. This is and outstanding feature and should immediately be implemented across the board.
Would this help the carrier/sentry blob problem go away? (we all know the answer) |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15566
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 18:57:00 -
[490] - Quote
call me helplessly optimistic. as disappointed as I am, I'm already imagining the Rorqual's comeback. It's gotta be something epic after such a hard nerf to what little utility it has left. I'll just have to take my Rorqual gameplay elsewhere in the meantime, I guess. Shame on me for trying to make it work in a wh.
not very reassuring that it shares the fate of my phoenix pilot who I spent so long training to perfect skills. people told me it was a bad idea and I should have listened.
but i mean, I figured the rorq would be safe from nerfs due to its specialized role. wrong again. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
|
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
866
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:05:00 -
[491] - Quote
Have no fear, it can always be used as a single use hole closer with the new mechanics, there will be none left to worry about in a week....... There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
505
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:08:00 -
[492] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Meytal wrote:NPC ALT RAMBLINGS I really would love to debate with you further but i have always held the policy of not replying to NPC alts, even a well known NPC alt like yours.
Winthorp wrote:Apparently though if you don't agree with the masses and think the change is good people think that instead of debating the reasoning with you they have some right to ask where i get my experience from or what is your corp history. Pot. Kettle.
Winthorp wrote:(long description of high-class fleet stand-offs) This is why my corp and I prefer low-class w-space, specifically C2/HS/C4, and is why we have seen many high-class groups leave high-class space. Maybe we're a little more wreckless than other groups -- we certainly don't have a perfect efficiency -- but when we see a fleet we think we can handle, we will go for it, win or lose. If this means jumping into their home, we'll do that. If it means only fighting until they land their capitals on grid, we'll do that too.
If we know we have more numbers and think we can bait them to get them to commit something else that they might not have brought otherwise, we'll do that. If we know we don't have many numbers at all, and can't fight our targets head on, especially in their home system, we'll hop in for a small skirmish and run before we are overwhelmed.
Most of the time people are SO risk averse that they won't follow a small fleet that just polarized itself because obviously there are far, far more on the other side waiting to pounce. They rarely think people have the balls to jump a small fleet into a much larger one without major backup. We've kicked several C5 corps in the nuts and then run away like this. It's pretty good one-sided fun, though understandably frustrating for the other side :)
If mechanics changed such that you jump into a fleet and land everywhere on grid, smaller groups can't engage larger groups on the hole. They, we, only engage when massively outnumbered because we can jump and try to get away while the other side has to wonder if we're just a bait fleet or if we are everything, while we try to shoot whatever we can. If we land everywhere within 40k from the hole, we'll just die. People won't do that for very long. Little by little, with their changes CCP is removing gameplay options from W-space.
Maybe we're doing everything wrong. We don't usually rage-roll, but instead scan our W-space static chain and then jump out our hisec static and start scanning surrounding systems for wormholes. A new hisec means a whole new fresh avenue to explore; why would we need to rage-roll unless we're looking for a specific hisec destination? Our mapper has some beautiful chains sometimes, even if it does take effort. But when we do want to roll, whether to find PvP or to find PvE, increasing the time it takes doesn't accomplish anything and only adds tedium, as already has been mentioned.
I've already said this change won't affect us much, because aside from doing it wrong by using combat-fit ships for rolling instead of stabby jammy Scorpions when we're not rolling a fresh hole with Orcas, we generally use battleships and cruisers. We'll be able to adjust easily. But the guys in C5/C6 will have a harder time adjusting. Smaller corps will have an even harder time in any class of W-space. "Use Cruisers", sure, but +/- 10% is a big variation that Cruisers can't cover. That's more than Battleships in 3 bil holes.
Besides, the biggest justification for this change so far seems to be "Waah, they're not playing the game the way I want because they rage roll, or because they instantly close their holes for (insert reason)! CCP change it!" That is simultaneously the most amusing aspect of this thread, but also the saddest aspect of this thread.
|
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
560
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:12:00 -
[493] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:call me helplessly optimistic. as disappointed as I am, I'm already imagining the Rorqual's comeback. It's gotta be something epic after such a hard nerf to what little utility it has left. I'll just have to take my Rorqual gameplay elsewhere in the meantime, I guess. Shame on me for trying to make it work in a wh.
not very reassuring that it shares the fate of my phoenix pilot who I spent so long training to perfect skills. people told me it was a bad idea and I should have listened.
but i mean, I figured the rorq would be safe from nerfs due to its specialized role. wrong again.
Your Phoenix pilot was obviously destined to fly the magnificent logi or ECM phoenix.
Train up some capital rep skills on your Rorq pilot and you're back in the game! If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
181
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:13:00 -
[494] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.
I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that.
He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair. |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
221
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:20:00 -
[495] - Quote
Gospadin wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me. I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that. He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair. It was at bottom of the post you quoted, I paraphrased a bit but I'll even go grab the quote so you don't have to think outside the box. Don't strain you'rself, I'll Edit with the quote |
Snakes-On-A-Plane
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:27:00 -
[496] - Quote
Wormhole mechanics are the absolute heart of the gameplay in J-space, and their 'iteration' approach is to just drive a sword through it and see who screams.
If this was null, they would pluck a stray hair from somewhere near the gameplay, study it under a microscope for 10 months. create spreadsheets and analyze them with a committee for 10 more months, and then finally: do nothing.
|
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
563
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:27:00 -
[497] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Gospadin wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me. I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that. He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair. It was at bottom of the post you quoted, I paraphrased a bit but I'll even go grab the quote so you don't have to think outside the box. Don't strain you'rself, I'll Edit with the quote
Since you're a think outside the box type yourself, do you have any ideas for what a Rorqual could be used for?
Pls respond)) If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Blodhgarm Dethahal
Transcendent Sedition Protean Concept
181
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:28:00 -
[498] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Not being able to roll the hole will get small corp out of w-space. Because if there is nothing in the chain you bether log of. I have scanned chains as long as 6 hole from the "home" hole with nothing in it. Not being able to roll will just leave you with one option : log off. I remember the days in a corp where we coudn't roll the hole, it died because people didn't show up because there was never any content. Wich made less people log in wich mean even less people to be able to roll the hole... . Large corp will need to wait untill there are engough people online to be able to roll the hole safely. Even more waiting will mean more people playing world of tanks like you said whinthorp. It will make w-space even more slower then it already is. Now people who wants fast kills left us for low sec. Farmers left us for incursions. We need more reasons for people to go to w-space not less.
http://i.imgur.com/hPQktFT.png plz -Bl+¦d
http://bloodytravels.blogspot.com/ -á-- My travels through space. |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
563
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:34:00 -
[499] - Quote
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:unimatrix0030 wrote:Not being able to roll the hole will get small corp out of w-space. Because if there is nothing in the chain you bether log of. I have scanned chains as long as 6 hole from the "home" hole with nothing in it. Not being able to roll will just leave you with one option : log off. I remember the days in a corp where we coudn't roll the hole, it died because people didn't show up because there was never any content. Wich made less people log in wich mean even less people to be able to roll the hole... . Large corp will need to wait untill there are engough people online to be able to roll the hole safely. Even more waiting will mean more people playing world of tanks like you said whinthorp. It will make w-space even more slower then it already is. Now people who wants fast kills left us for low sec. Farmers left us for incursions. We need more reasons for people to go to w-space not less.
http://i.imgur.com/hPQktFT.png plz
Casual If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Aiyshimin
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:34:00 -
[500] - Quote
Perfectly predictable rolling has always been ********.
Numbers need tweaking and testing, and this should most probably be connected with other changes like for example total number of wormhole systems, number of statics and random wormhole spawns.
In other words, I support changes that increase risk and interaction between wormhole inhabitants, whether this change as presented achieves those goals is currently debatable- but the general direction is certainly right.
|
|
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
221
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:37:00 -
[501] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Gospadin wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me. I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that. He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair. It was at bottom of the post you quoted, I paraphrased a bit but I'll even go grab the quote so you don't have to think outside the box. Don't strain you'rself, I'll Edit with the quote Since you're a think outside the box type yourself, do you have any ideas for what a Rorqual could be used for? Pls respond)) Wait, this is a thread about the Rorqual? Wow, I was under the impression that this was a thread discussing a change to the range at which you will spawn after transiting a wormhole. I'm so sorry for the mistake. What's that? This is what that thread is for and all this talk about the Rorqual is off-topic and belongs somewhere else?
Here's another out of the box idea for you, take the Rorqual discussion to yet another Rorqual thread and slobber on Winthrop's e-knob there.
Have a nice day,
|
Sentamon
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2042
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:39:00 -
[502] - Quote
Along with cynos, also please add this feature to station undocking, and end 11 years of terrible station games. ~ Professional Forum Alt -á~ |
Light Shock
Florida Sand Hermits Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:51:00 -
[503] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:I would think it only proper for cynos/bridges to spread the ships more as the mass goes up.
1 carrier = 40 km 2 carrier = 50 km 3 carrier = 60 km
Think of how this would unstagnate null sec. It would be so dynamic to litter the whole grid with 100 carriers. As a neat benefit it would probably uncloak everything on grid. This is and outstanding feature and should immediately be implemented across the board.
Would this help the carrier/sentry blob problem go away? (we all know the answer)
One of the better suggestions I've ever heard. |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories Vertical.
675
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:52:00 -
[504] - Quote
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
The reason why fighting in a wolf-rayet is always an awesome idea. 15j from home? Take the crowfleet.
"I honestly thought I was in lowsec"
|
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
563
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 19:54:00 -
[505] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Andrew Jester wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Gospadin wrote: I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that.
He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair.
It was at bottom of the post you quoted, I paraphrased a bit but I'll even go grab the quote so you don't have to think outside the box. Don't strain you'rself, I'll Edit with the quote Since you're a think outside the box type yourself, do you have any ideas for what a Rorqual could be used for? Pls respond)) Wait, this is a thread about the Rorqual? Wow, I was under the impression that this was a thread discussing a change to the range at which you will spawn after transiting a wormhole. I'm so sorry for the mistake. What's that? This is what that thread is for and all this talk about the Rorqual is off-topic and belongs somewhere else? Here's another out of the box idea for you, take the Rorqual discussion to yet another Rorqual thread and slobber on Winthrop's e-knob there. Have a nice day, Edit: I edited my previous post so you don't have to go looking for the quote or my opinion, just to stay on topic.
There's no reason to be so hostile friend! I was simply asking for your input. Since your intellect is so vastly superior to mine, you should've realised far before I did that this thread will cause nothing to change, it's simply a place for people to vent. You were the one who linked corbexx's quote, so you should absolutely be aware that this change will be going through. Every change/iteration suggested in this thread is to get rid of it. Obviously that isn't going to happen as CCP has decided that this is the best thing for WHs.
The Rorqual talk is obviously not off-topic, as if it was, an ISD would've come along long ago and removed all posts talking about Rorquals. If all posts here were on topic, this thread would be half its current size.
Also please don't be daft this is the WH section I don't know why you'd ever think a post would stay on topic. It's okay I forgive you for your mistake and forgive your transgressions. Stay mad friend))
Serendipity Lost wrote:I would think it only proper for cynos/bridges to spread the ships more as the mass goes up.
1 carrier = 40 km 2 carrier = 50 km 3 carrier = 60 km
Think of how this would unstagnate null sec. It would be so dynamic to litter the whole grid with 100 carriers. As a neat benefit it would probably uncloak everything on grid. This is and outstanding feature and should immediately be implemented across the board.
Would this help the carrier/sentry blob problem go away? (we all know the answer)
What kind of casual doesn't cyno caps to a ping and then warp them in? If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
500
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:05:00 -
[506] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.
If you want to call me out that's fine, but two can play that game so. Please point out where I said this? If you can't I'll expect an apology
Also please dont try and paraphrase me cos that sort of **** pisses me off.
I've posted what I think on this, I'm not to happy about it like most people, will I be discussing it with CCP, yes.
Which is why I also asked for people to be constructive and post what they think on this as that can also potentially help me.
Now if you mean this.
Winthorp wrote: You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH.
This isn't me.
Should I expect the apology here or in the mail? Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15566
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:08:00 -
[507] - Quote
I use a rorqual as a capital hole roller. i'm particular affected by a mess nerf to hole rollers. it's added insult to injury when a rorqual costs so much more than a carrer President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
221
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:12:00 -
[508] - Quote
corbexx wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me. If you want to call me out that's fine, but two can play that game so. Please point out where I said this? If you can't I'll expect an apology Also please dont try and paraphrase me cos that sort of **** pisses me off. I've posted what I think on this, I'm not to happy about it like most people, will I be discussing it with CCP, yes. Which is why I also asked for people to be constructive and post what they think on this as that can also potentially help me. Now if you mean this. Winthorp wrote: You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH.
This isn't me. Should I expect the apology here or in the mail? I'm starting to suspect that there was a mistake in my original post, what I meant was indeed that post you linked. If you scroll up you can see I was discussing it with Andrew Jester. I am going back to check my original post now to fix it
|
Nash MacAllister
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
146
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:17:00 -
[509] - Quote
As I try and tackle the threadnaught here, I will simply have to wait for further iterations from CCP but I am leaning towards this being negative to w-space overall. However, my real issue: Of all the areas of the game to spend resources on, CCP, you choose this??? Are you kidding me? If you want to tackle w-space then work on content not mechanics. And for the love of God fix POS mechanics/security first! Yes, if you have to ask yourself the question, just assume we are watching you... |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:23:00 -
[510] - Quote
Nash MacAllister wrote:As I try and tackle the threadnaught here, I will simply have to wait for further iterations from CCP but I am leaning towards this being negative to w-space overall. However, my real issue: Of all the areas of the game to spend resources on, CCP, you choose this??? Are you kidding me? If you want to tackle w-space then work on content not mechanics. And for the love of God fix POS mechanics/security first!
I assume their thinking is that through changing mechanics, they're creating content. It's a **** way to create content, but it's the only reason I can think of for why they'd change this instead of something else If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
624
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:26:00 -
[511] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:corbexx wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me. If you want to call me out that's fine, but two can play that game so. Please point out where I said this? If you can't I'll expect an apology Also please dont try and paraphrase me cos that sort of **** pisses me off. I've posted what I think on this, I'm not to happy about it like most people, will I be discussing it with CCP, yes. Which is why I also asked for people to be constructive and post what they think on this as that can also potentially help me. Now if you mean this. Winthorp wrote: You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH.
This isn't me. Should I expect the apology here or in the mail? I'm starting to suspect that there was a mistake in my original post, what I meant was indeed that post you linked. If you scroll up you can see I was discussing it with Andrew Jester. I am going back to check my original post now to fix it Edit: I see where the misunderstandings where happening, I was referencing the "Winthrop for CSM" line, not trying to pin anything on corbexx.
Hmm where is it
I'm right behind you |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
564
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:28:00 -
[512] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:I'm starting to suspect that there was a mistake in my original post
That's putting it lightly. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
221
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:29:00 -
[513] - Quote
*I did have a quote block here but there were too many quotes and I'm too lazy to trim it.* Andrew Jester I didn't realize that my original post was so ambiguous about what I meant, from my perspective you were ignoring the quote you approved of when you were actually referring to searching posts by corbexx for something he never said.
As for Rorquals, I had the idea that they should be able to act as on-grid super mining boosters, a single module is created that is scripted to accept T1/T2/faction mindlinks and allow the Rorqual pilot to boost individual pilots with added effect. Added role bonus of being the only ship to fit the module, the Orca can still do off-grid boosting but if you warp in the Rorq you get X number of super boosts per Rorq, as well as not needing hauling runs because the Rorq can simply store the insta-compressed ore. I don't know about the specifics of it, but ideally the use of the module wouldn't impact the Rorq's fitting any more than the standard mindlinks, this would facilitate the fitting of survival mods. This would get Rorq's into belts were everyone and the grandma will want to kill it, and it also allows the miners the option to have combat ships in the hangar and put up a fight instead of running, thereby creating even more content. Further more, even if it doesn't make the Rorq more popular than it was, it will make useful again which will give industrials a reason to build it and compete for the teams. Miners and industrials win, gankers win, PvPers win.
|
X4me1eoH
Revenge of the Liquidators The Marmite Collective
150
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 20:57:00 -
[514] - Quote
Sorry, very bad speak english, but it's very very stupid idea |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
127
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 21:24:00 -
[515] - Quote
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote: So what? i draw the line at 6 holes deep who are empty before i stop , get someone else to roll the hole or do something else or try to roll the hole myself. We have lots of scanners who go way beyond that. But let me ask you , where did you find pvp in that chain? And would the change discussed here improve that? |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1664
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 21:48:00 -
[516] - Quote
I'm starting to come round on the idea. With some refinements it could mix things up in a good way. Sure it will negatively effect rolling and small groups but the gameplay of ambushing and fighting on wormholes may improve.
I still want new content though! A wormhole generator or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way... +1 |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1664
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 21:53:00 -
[517] - Quote
unimatrix0030 wrote:Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote: So what? i draw the line at 6 holes deep who are empty before i stop , get someone else to roll the hole or do something else or try to roll the hole myself. We have lots of scanners who go way beyond that. But let me ask you , where did you find pvp in that chain? And would the change discussed here improve that?
If larger chains like that become the norm, it kind of sucks that we can no longer monitor api data, as nobody will assign scouts to monitor all those systems. +1 |
Cirillith
Bean-shidh The Nameless Alliance
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 22:04:00 -
[518] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: A wormhole generator...
Well - please forgive me a bit of criticism - so wormhole under POS? just outside grid of it? - I do not think it would be the best idea.
Rek Seven wrote: or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way...
This would only help to rageroll.... No help with pvp part - you know capitals and support shattered across grid around hole |
Icarus Able
Revenant Tactical Ineluctable.
429
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 22:06:00 -
[519] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I'm starting to come round on the idea. With some refinements it could mix things up in a good way. Sure it will negatively effect rolling and small groups but the gameplay of ambushing and fighting on wormholes may improve.
I still want new content though! A wormhole generator or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way... Yeh coming from a char from a 200 char corp.... FOr anything smaller if for example you roll into us. As you have before we wont even be able to attempt to get away. Our only response is to welp a 15 man fleet into a 50 man fleet or pos up and log. At least with the current mechanics we can attempt to roll before you fleet arrives and that has a higher chance of spawning a fight than us just logging off.
CCP...Please give one example of a positive change for this. |
Ev0l Hireling
Balls to the Walls No Response
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 22:17:00 -
[520] - Quote
I don't think it'll be helpful to people trying to roll holes in anything but large numbers who could rush to a larger ship's aid. I can understand that CCP want to add extra risk to wormhole ISK making, but this isn't the way to do it.
Perhaps adding better a use for black holes would balance things out: more people would inhabit them, and as more hostile entities would reside within WH space it'd make everything more dangerous...
Even with a shorter spawn distance I personally think this will deter peopel from fights and even make them leave wormhole space. Some, I'd sadly even go so far as to say, would even leave EvE. |
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1665
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 22:21:00 -
[521] - Quote
Cirillith wrote:Rek Seven wrote: A wormhole generator...
Well - please forgive me a bit of criticism - so wormhole under POS? just outside grid of it? - I do not think it would be the best idea. Rek Seven wrote: or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way...
This would only help to rageroll.... No help with pvp part - you know capitals and support shattered across grid around hole UPDATE: Forgot to mention surprise feeling of that conventional rolling crew which will encounter someone with that ship ^^
For the generator it could be a deployable that is anchored at the sun or near a planet, just like a poco.
For collapsing without mass, maybe there could be a BS only mod that slowly reduces mass (e.g. 5 minutes per stage) and the mod could prevent the ship moving or jumping while it is active.
Just a thought... I know some people won't like the idea and would just prefer CCP don't make the proposed change but I don't think that's going to happen. +1 |
Undermine Dahl
Revenant Tactical Ineluctable.
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 22:30:00 -
[522] - Quote
This addition would have made my corp's weekend horrible:
A reason this would have been bad is my corp has just invaded a c5 with a c3 static to get more pvp, isk and so on. When we had the op planned we had our scout report that Ixtab had a hole open and was scouting our target. There was a stratios and a scanning frig in the target hole so we waited until it looked good. we logged on the seeded caps and crashed the hole as our support t3s landed to hopefully keep our caps safe. we ended up trapping the strat and killing it. If we where not able to quickly crash a hole by roundtripping the stage 2 hole with 3 t3s and a carrier then we would have had to wait for either ixtab to warp stuff to the hole and close it (which would also take longer because of either a bunch of battleships or caps having to burn or bounce) or we would have to wait until it crashed in 24 hours. This does not sound like any fun as we where already going to be bashing the inactive peoples pos so we could use it for pvp.
If someone sees a way around this please explain how this could have been done better if the new sisi mass-distance thing was added |
Samuel Wess
Stain Police Happy Cartel
56
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 23:03:00 -
[523] - Quote
I rarely went into whs but this sounds awful. Why dont make the same thing with the cyno jump and the gates than to be consistent (ironic). A better timer is required instead of this. Walk into the club like "What up? I got a big cockpit!" |
Hatshepsut IV
Cascading Failure Un.Bound
186
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 23:10:00 -
[524] - Quote
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
Pshhhhh please +1
http://m.imgur.com/kkQCvmQ You too can start failing today! Reddit-áad | Cascading Failure Public Channel | Aspiring Failure
|
Rei Moon
Murderous Inc
7
|
Posted - 2014.08.04 23:13:00 -
[525] - Quote
Oh well.
Right when i was moving into wspace...
I've found the forums awesome!
You guys are the best!
And now, to lowsec... |
Winthorp
2473
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 00:16:00 -
[526] - Quote
Meytal wrote:Winthorp wrote:Meytal wrote:NPC ALT RAMBLINGS I really would love to debate with you further but i have always held the policy of not replying to NPC alts, even a well known NPC alt like yours. Winthorp wrote:Apparently though if you don't agree with the masses and think the change is good people think that instead of debating the reasoning with you they have some right to ask where i get my experience from or what is your corp history. Pot. Kettle. Winthorp wrote:(long description of high-class fleet stand-offs) MORE NPC ALT RAMBLINGS
You see the difference my character i take my stance on has an ingame WH history, ingame future and ingame risk. When you are prepared to put your assets and future employment at risk everytime you sperge on the forums like i do then i will respond to you further. |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
99
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 00:17:00 -
[527] - Quote
Nazori Naskingar wrote:Being a pilot who has always been part of smaller wormhole pvp fleets. There is always 2 ways to handle a very large wormhole entity that you get connected to.
Option 1: Combat roll the hole Option 2: Afk in POS for the day
If this change takes effect there will be only 1 of those options left...
Sigh, still wrong
Current: Option 1: Combat roll the hole with minimal risk if they scan the new WH out fast. Option 2: Afk in POS for the day
New: Option 1: Combat roll the hole with a bit more risk and a bit more time for them to scan the WH down. Option 2: Afk in POS for the day
Nothing changes in your options. If the gang was there at the WH you wouldn't be doing the combat roll anyway, that doesn't change. All that changes is there's now a minute long window in which they can scan you down. Congrats you now have to risk something to continue your bearing. |
Winthorp
2473
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 00:20:00 -
[528] - Quote
Gospadin wrote:Winthorp wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Winthorp wrote: I have never seen half the people in this thread bitching about how this is so game breaking ever come to Wh forums to come to discuss any WH mechanics or ideas until their perfect little world of insta rolling away issues is threatened.
People don't complain about things they consider to be working reasonably well... Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? Please explain your answer. People don't complain when they think things are stale and boring either, they just leave to do other things in the game or leave the game all together. Look at current login player numbers over a week period, look at the breakup of so many groups and their major consolidation of WH groups into only a few players and tell me you think everyone is happy with the current form of WH's. Do you really think the way WH's are at the moment are in anyway interesting and fun? (trying not to answer a question with a question but..) Look the only thing i don't like about this change is it isn't showing any consistency in the goal direction of WH space from CCP and that concerns me that they are not being open with what they want from us. - They leave instant sig overlay (carebear safe mode) - They come up with a 5min delay for new sigs (no carebears will stay) - Then they forget they ever mentioned the idea (back to carebear mode) - They removed sleeper API data becauseit was too powerfull (carebears get a little safer) - Now this change (clearly a PVP driven idea) They need to be more consistent with the direction they want to take because they are not balancing it well currently. Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? [i] Please explain your answer. [/iI think if they wanted to do something that resulted in more people in WH space they could have chosen something else entirely instead of this, i have never once said this will result in more people in Wh's. The above carebear mode changes have resulted in more people in wh space (You can't deny that) What i have said is the current way all these players in Wh space interact with each other is stale and SAFE. The people in this thread that are trying to say its not perfectly safe to roll away hostile chains are ******* delusional. There is only very situational times that you can ever kill people rolling away a C5/6 chain on you. How many times have you found a group you thought would and could fight you only to hear your scout say "nevermind they are rolling" when they want to do it is all over by then with not a thing you can do and that group then picks and chooses its interactions with whoever they want in what is supposed to be a dangerous area of the game. I actually do feel this will lead to more fun had by WH people and more interactions, the larger groups will still roll holes like they always have with it only taking them a few minutes longer and yes the smaller groups may be more hesitant to do so but now instead of them safely picking the perfect chain whenever they want they will be forced to scan a chain they may have just rolled away because they saw a known entity in the chain. So yes i think it will lead to less people rolling chains but maybe they shouldn't be rolling away non optimal chains and be forced to interact with other players in an MMO. If you want a safe escalation period and roll away or crit your static you should be at risk to make that happen. if you want to get your 30B or so escalation loot to HS or replace that fleet you just lost you should have to risk more then just rolling the C5 or C6 untill you get a C2/3 HS, you should have to go down some more risky chains or be forced to risk a little more to roll that chain to get the one you want. The way it is is too easy and too safe. Not only is it safe to roll now it is STOPPING interactions with other players by the chains you get to pick and choose at will in perfect safety at no cost. If by your own arguments it will stop rage rolling in its tracks then won't people by that same argument be more inclined to run sites if they feel safer that less people are rolling? Won't they then leave their chain open for you to find them? Or bubble it up now for "safety"? You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH. EDIT: Loving the hate mail from your alts by the way guys, i feed off that thanks. Winthrop for CSM10. (In addition to corbexx) The more I read, the more I like the idea. Yes, it makes my own life more difficult. It also means more ambush opportunities and puts a premium on good intel.
<3 Thank you for taking the time to read it without anger at being scared for change is all i ask.
Screw ever running for CSM, i would have to tell so many sooks and loosers to fuckoff and that doesn't go down to well.
I pity Corbexx at a time like this TBH and i think he is doing a great job and has been one of the most publicly hard working WH CSM's we have had. |
chris elliot
Yoyodyne corporation Shadow Cartel
380
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 00:37:00 -
[529] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: Nobody is out to get you.
You obviously are.
CCP Fozzie wrote: Hope you all have a great weekend.
I was until I read this peice of trash. Who in CCP that actually plays in wormhole space thought this was a good idea? Like really? You say you guys play the game...... And then you release ideas like this. Do you only play Dota like half your bored player base? Because the other half is likely to join them if this is a sign of things to come.
I mean, I know chitsa posted it at one point. But even at that point you all should have know he was so bad any idea he posts is like asking a 2year old how to do your taxes. I mean really, get a grip guys. |
Undermine Dahl
Revenant Tactical Ineluctable.
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 00:40:00 -
[530] - Quote
corbexx wrote:ok so some stuff is up on reddit. http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2ci5ue/dear_ccp_stop_fucking_with_wormholes_please/I'll be totally honest I'm not sure what I can and can't say about stuff (i'm checking now on skype). What would really help is for people to discuss it and put feed back in a calm and meaning full way. Raging and calling people names won't help me at all. what i mean here is say why you like or dislike it, what effects you think it will have will it be good or bad, give reasons. stuff like "this is terrible RAWRRAWRRAWRRAWR" won't help and will just get in the way. I see several issues. it makes a boring job rolling holes more boring. This favours bigger groups over smaller groups. C2 to C4 orcas could be a issue. It probably wont affect farmers at all cos if they connect to a big group they will just not bother to roll and log. Chitsa Jason wrote:Hey Corby,
I would like to pint out a few ideas. Some of those have been pointed out previously but I think it is important to mentions them. So here is my list of small things.
18. Make it so that the higher of the ship mass the further it spawns from the wormhole by jumping through. Would increase the ability to catch rolling ships, would make rage rolling slower.
This didn't make it on to my little things sheet btw.
you may have read this corbexx but Here it is. it would cause problems in invasions and as my group has about 10-20 active people online and fighting Ixtab on an invasion is a big no no as we only have a few caps seeded and it would be too much of a loss to lose any t3s at that point
A reason this would have been bad is my corp has just invaded a c5 with a c3 static to get more pvp, isk and so on. When we had the op planned we had our scout report that Ixtab had a hole open and was scouting our target. There was a stratios and a scanning frig in the target hole so we waited until it looked good. we logged on the seeded caps and crashed the hole as our support t3s landed to hopefully keep our caps safe. we ended up trapping the strat and killing it. If we where not able to quickly crash a hole by roundtripping the stage 2 hole with 3 t3s and a carrier then we would have had to wait for either ixtab to warp stuff to the hole and close it (which would also take longer because of either a bunch of battleships or caps having to burn or bounce) or we would have to wait until it crashed in 24 hours. This does not sound like any fun as we where already going to be bashing the inactive peoples pos so we could use it for pvp.
|
|
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
508
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 00:51:00 -
[531] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:You see the difference my character i take my stance on has an ingame WH history, ingame future and ingame risk. When you are prepared to put your assets and future employment at risk everytime you sperge on the forums like i do then i will respond to you further. Ahh, I understand. Rather sage advice, I suppose, if I ever want to sperge on the forums.
Cheers!
|
Icarus Able
Revenant Tactical Ineluctable.
429
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 00:51:00 -
[532] - Quote
Undermine Dahl wrote:Stuff
What my seemingly english challenged corpmate (hes dutch) is trying to say is that in a situation with a larger corp this just means we cant roll quickly to get away and find/make content elsewhere.Forcing us to either stay cloaked or logging. Not creating any content for anyone....
The distance would have to be changed to 7-8km max to make it even worth it to risk the capital. |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
100
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 00:59:00 -
[533] - Quote
Undermine Dahl wrote:
you may have read this corbexx but Here it is. it would cause problems in invasions and as my group has about 10-20 active people online and fighting Ixtab on an invasion is a big no no as we only have a few caps seeded and it would be too much of a loss to lose any t3s at that point
A reason this would have been bad is my corp has just invaded a c5 with a c3 static to get more pvp, isk and so on. When we had the op planned we had our scout report that Ixtab had a hole open and was scouting our target. There was a stratios and a scanning frig in the target hole so we waited until it looked good. we logged on the seeded caps and crashed the hole as our support t3s landed to hopefully keep our caps safe. we ended up trapping the strat and killing it. If we where not able to quickly crash a hole by roundtripping the stage 2 hole with 3 t3s and a carrier then we would have had to wait for either ixtab to warp stuff to the hole and close it (which would also take longer because of either a bunch of battleships or caps having to burn or bounce) or we would have to wait until it crashed in 24 hours. This does not sound like any fun as we where already going to be bashing the inactive peoples pos so we could use it for pvp.
So your complaint is that you have to risk something for a short time?
Here's what would have happened. You would have jumped the WH, webbed and bounced to a spot 200km away, then webbed and bounced back and closed the WH. That's it. Unless the Ixtab fleet was on the WH itself, in which case you never would have jumped anyway, nothing changes. |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
1532
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 01:31:00 -
[534] - Quote
CCP PR: "Look, guys, we have a reputation for dropping changes on the community without warning. Like, who was the clown who renamed the powergrid impplants last patch without mentioning it in the patch notes?
CCP Somedude:*mutters*
CCP Public Relations: "Yeah. Thanks, buddy. And swapping Fuel Blocks to a component, when they are a consumable? nicely telescoped. My point is, you shaven apes, you need to telescope changes ahead of deploying them. Not jjust jam them up on Singularity and wait for a 26 page threadnaught to **** up the forums."
CCP Wormholedude: "Oh crap."
CCP Public Relations: *headdesk*
- - - -
Removing API kill logs seems to have thrown a bucket of cold water on wormholes. Given CCP seems to be all about making the game safer for farmers, and then bans $20K per month in RMT accounts and bots bbecause farming is now a subsidised industry, and seems happy to maintain the economy-breaking grip of the moon goo cartels (wonder how much of that is RMT'd?) and the tacitly named RMT-esque farming empires (BOT, ffs). Then fine, allowing nullsec turdlords to run alt accounts farming C6's for extra tens of billions a month hardly seems excessive, and you certainly gave a fillip to that crowd.
But changing this aspect of the game? I'm not sure this is doing anything except further entrenching the ISK farmers in high-class wormholes. Lets be honest, you can probably get away with ragerolling in low-class space, it's pretty hard to decloak an orca at 40km, it just becomes a supreme PITA. Or you use battleships with MJDs or something, whatever, and collapse HICtors will be perfect now.
But carriers ragerolling, even with 200km pounces and rapier webs up and down, it's just nuts and people won't get involved in this crap. This will make ragerolling much slower, but not a lot more dangerous.
What it will do, which was the objective I think, is turn wormholes into ishtars online for reals, because nothing says use boring drone assign concepts like spawning in a 30km radius bubble around something and get underway with your MWD instantly, forcing everyone to truck around after the ishtards.
Bravo CCP for turning w-space into ishtards Online. The circle is now complete. J's before K's. Sudden Buggery is recruiting w-nerds and w-noobs. Mail your resume in today! http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Mal Nina
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
50
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 02:38:00 -
[535] - Quote
What we did ask for to improve WH dynamics as a community was a rollback of the autoloading of sigs. What we wanted was to have to scan for sigs in order to see them. Yet this one request is blatantly ignored and instead some other silly mechanic is put together in an so called effort to improve PVP.
Why not see what will happen when you give us what we all are asking for instead? Rollback some of the bad changes, work on the requests and see if WH space becomes what you seem to be looking for. All these changes have failed to improve WH dynamics. All they have done is make sure that to survive you just need to become a bigger fish.
You want gank content? then put Ore sites back as a sig and I would put a barge out there... as it is now I do not even bother. As for running sites, then make it so sigs don't show up if you do not have probes out looking for them. Amazing how many site runners we used to catch before you did away with that one. This change, like the non-probable sig delay, does nothing to help find fights or create them.
We have as a community attempted to give you good suggestions in the past and are consistently ignored. Perhaps if your company was customer focused they would realize that there are some good suggestions out there that need to be worked on. Give us more content, more things to do with the content we have in WH space and you just might find more people willing to enter WH space which would improve the opportunities for PVP. |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
100
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 03:05:00 -
[536] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you. .
Bolding by me. Deep breaths, relax. Wait for the blog. |
O'nira
United System's Commonwealth
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 03:31:00 -
[537] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Nazori Naskingar wrote:Being a pilot who has always been part of smaller wormhole pvp fleets. There is always 2 ways to handle a very large wormhole entity that you get connected to.
Option 1: Combat roll the hole Option 2: Afk in POS for the day
If this change takes effect there will be only 1 of those options left... Sigh, still wrong Current: Option 1: Combat roll the hole with minimal risk if they scan the new WH out fast. Option 2: Afk in POS for the day New: Option 1: Combat roll the hole with a bit more risk and a bit more time for them to scan the WH down. Option 2: Afk in POS for the day Nothing changes in your options. If the gang was there at the WH you wouldn't be doing the combat roll anyway, that doesn't change. All that changes is there's now a minute long window in which they can scan you down. Congrats you now have to risk something to continue your bearing.
they don't need a gang to stop you combat rolling after change, they need 1 cloaky interceptor with 2 scrams on it and boosts in system, your day is now ruined by a single ship that costs 50m.
how do you not see that?
the time to scan the wh down is the same btw.
how the hell are you in a 50man corp and don't absolutely hate this idea the moment you see it |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
567
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 03:42:00 -
[538] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you. . Bolding by me. Deep breaths, relax. Wait for the blog.
people are actually going to have aneurysms when the whole thing comes out. Better sign up for life alert boys If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Kusum Fawn
State Protectorate Caldari State
512
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 03:43:00 -
[539] - Quote
Its because BayneNothos imagines he will be the inty that catches some 10 person corp rolling. He's ignoring the issue of whether or not there will be any sub 50 person fleets rolling holes after this proposed change. Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
100
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 03:56:00 -
[540] - Quote
O'nira wrote:
they don't need a gang to stop you combat rolling after change, they need 1 cloaky interceptor with 2 scrams on it and boosts in system, your day is now ruined by a single ship that costs 50m.
how do you not see that?
the time to scan the wh down is the same btw.
how the hell are you in a 50man corp and don't absolutely hate this idea the moment you see it
Cloaky interceptor huh... (I do understand what you mean, just teasing) LOLing aside....
You do know you can fight back against interceptors right? Drones, smart bombs (OMG we can use them now!) neuts, RSD's, other people in your corp. Hell you can use the crash as bait if you really want. (OMG MOAR CONTENT) This all just becomes part of you deciding to combat roll or not. Just like it is now.
And on the combat probing, there's only a 30s (align time) window where you're in the right position to be caught out far. Too early or too late and they'll get a 100% at an in between spot. Probes take time to move, even if it's not moving at all, takes time to scan, takes time to warp to the spot, to lock, human failure, all kinds of stuff. It's not a guaranteed catch by any means.
I did hate it initially, then I actually thought on it a bit and saw the benefits. Is crashing slightly more risky, yes but really who cares. Since when is anything out here meant to be risk free. In return we're gaining heaps. More opportunity to catch things. More ship types used. Mixed gangs. There's a lot here to like. |
|
VirusMD
Anoikis Vergence Critically Unstable
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 04:15:00 -
[541] - Quote
I defiantly feel like this will majorly hurt smaller w-space corps, further pushing members into already established existing entities, long term this probably means a lot of stagnation to w-space, over crowding in those same previously established corps, and the rapid decline of new blood to w-space in general. This will push new curious players into a follower role as opposed to a content creating role. Smaller corps will have serious issues with this change, and will most likely lead there there destruction. There are many PVP oriented corps in all classes of w-space, who rely on rage rolling for content creation, and income. W-space has been undergoing huge changes in terms of residents, corporations and alliances, in the last year and change already, with the fall and disillusion of many larger entities. I cannot see how this could possibly be a benefit to anyone. Just a serious detriment to up and coming corps or anyone wanting to establish a new presence in w-space, witch is already very hard.
This seems to just be another fine example of CCP wishy washy, lack of direction in regards to w-space. This is clearly a huge advantage to defenders, obviously reducing the use of capitals, increasing there losses drastically, and reducing the amount of PVE that a lot of corps can perform to replace the previously mentioned inevitable increase in cap losses. If you absolutely must change spawn ranges for w-space it should be MUCH more conservative, for the thousand reasons already pointed out that i wont bother to quote. Normally i try to put something constructive in with my bitching but i honestly cant think of anything that could make this viable without totally changing the face of PVP and PVE in w-space. Not to mention the obvious and serious advantages this gives low/null sec'rs over wh'rs. Basically this will would destroy PVP, PVE, and SRP programs....
You want to change stuff in w-space FIX POS's and CORP ROLES! **** the rest, get your act together and fix the things that people have been complaining about for literally YEARS. CCP PLEASE pull your head out of your asses, and listen to your players if you want to keep them.
IMO w-space is the least broken space in all of eve, is your goal to make it as broken and dysfunctional as everywhere else? |
O'nira
United System's Commonwealth
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 04:28:00 -
[542] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:O'nira wrote:
they don't need a gang to stop you combat rolling after change, they need 1 cloaky interceptor with 2 scrams on it and boosts in system, your day is now ruined by a single ship that costs 50m.
how do you not see that?
the time to scan the wh down is the same btw.
how the hell are you in a 50man corp and don't absolutely hate this idea the moment you see it
Cloaky interceptor huh... (I do understand what you mean, just teasing) LOLing aside.... You do know you can fight back against interceptors right? Drones, smart bombs (OMG we can use them now!) neuts, RSD's, other people in your corp. Hell you can use the crash as bait if you really want. (OMG MOAR CONTENT) This all just becomes part of you deciding to combat roll or not. Just like it is now. And on the combat probing, there's only a 30s (align time) window where you're in the right position to be caught out far. Too early or too late and they'll get a 100% at an in between spot. Probes take time to move, even if it's not moving at all, takes time to scan, takes time to warp to the spot, to lock, human failure, all kinds of stuff. It's not a guaranteed catch by any means. I did hate it initially, then I actually thought on it a bit and saw the benefits. Is crashing slightly more risky, yes but really who cares. Since when is anything out here meant to be risk free. In return we're gaining heaps. More opportunity to catch things. More ship types used. Mixed gangs. There's a lot here to like.
you are not doing a xv1 with single ceptor, you are trying to kill it in less time than it takes their bubbler to warp on your cap. Smartbomb dont do ****, neuts can be countered with nos/cap booster,Drones are a complete joke to a good fit ceptor, you are gonna be stuck having a falcon there every time you try anything half risky.
you can not bait a bigger corp than you, that's not what baiting is. unless you close the hole on them after you bait them or something to stop reinforcements... oh wait
no one cares about combat probing, caps will be tackled by stuff already on grid 80% of the time if this change went through as is and the only things that are gonna get caught by probes are lazy people
its either making crashing lots more risky and adding lots more content or a bit more risky for a bit more content , how the hell are you figuring that its going in reverse directions unless you basically never close holes this logic doesn't really work.
and even though you may get content from this occasionally as a smaller corp, every single time you roll into a big corp and they are not sleeping you are gonna be ****** for the night or you will have to bobwhelp to them to get them to let you close or them to close the hole.
more ship types= more lokis and minmatar recons and more isthars(yay fun) |
TheButcherPete
Incompertus INC Fatal Ascension
471
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 04:33:00 -
[543] - Quote
BadAssMcKill wrote:Man remember when CCP listened to the playerbase before making wacky changes
What happened to that
THE KING OF EVE RADIO
If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs? |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
134
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 04:49:00 -
[544] - Quote
As both a former wh resident and a future hopeful, this is crazy.
I helped roll a static after finding out Blood Union was on the other side, and it was nerve-wracking enough to have the cap that far out, having seen what happens to capitals that get bumped off stations in null and low.
But increasing the range for the higher mass? That's not a good change.
Make nullsec cynos act in the same way if you wanna see content! |
Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 04:50:00 -
[545] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Nazori Naskingar wrote:Being a pilot who has always been part of smaller wormhole pvp fleets. There is always 2 ways to handle a very large wormhole entity that you get connected to.
Option 1: Combat roll the hole Option 2: Afk in POS for the day
If this change takes effect there will be only 1 of those options left... Sigh, still wrong Current: Option 1: Combat roll the hole with minimal risk if they scan the new WH out fast. Option 2: Afk in POS for the day New: Option 1: Combat roll the hole with a bit more risk and a bit more time for them to scan the WH down. Option 2: Afk in POS for the day Nothing changes in your options. If the gang was there at the WH you wouldn't be doing the combat roll anyway, that doesn't change. All that changes is there's now a minute long window in which they can scan you down. Congrats you now have to risk something to continue your bearing.
I'm sorry if my post was unclear I guess I was leaving a lot to the imagination. Often we will connect OR be connected to by a large wormhole corp capable of fielding 30+ with caps. This is not something we can fight beyond trying to snake a scanner kill or someone too far from their hole to receive help. We are a much smaller corp. At that point we prep up for a quick close so we can continue our day. If we were to pop out in their system 40km off the hole with our Orcas we would never attempt to close on a force that large it is suicide. So the only option is to let it close naturally. We are quite capable pilots, but numbers are numbers. This change could effectively kill our corps activity 100% some days. |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
504
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 05:28:00 -
[546] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Undermine Dahl wrote:
you may have read this corbexx but Here it is. it would cause problems in invasions and as my group has about 10-20 active people online and fighting Ixtab on an invasion is a big no no as we only have a few caps seeded and it would be too much of a loss to lose any t3s at that point
A reason this would have been bad is my corp has just invaded a c5 with a c3 static to get more pvp, isk and so on. When we had the op planned we had our scout report that Ixtab had a hole open and was scouting our target. There was a stratios and a scanning frig in the target hole so we waited until it looked good. we logged on the seeded caps and crashed the hole as our support t3s landed to hopefully keep our caps safe. we ended up trapping the strat and killing it. If we where not able to quickly crash a hole by roundtripping the stage 2 hole with 3 t3s and a carrier then we would have had to wait for either ixtab to warp stuff to the hole and close it (which would also take longer because of either a bunch of battleships or caps having to burn or bounce) or we would have to wait until it crashed in 24 hours. This does not sound like any fun as we where already going to be bashing the inactive peoples pos so we could use it for pvp.
So your complaint is that you have to risk something for a short time? Here's what would have happened. You would have jumped the WH, webbed and bounced to a spot 200km away, then webbed and bounced back and closed the WH. That's it. Unless the Ixtab fleet was on the WH itself, in which case you never would have jumped anyway, nothing changes.
The slight issue here is that all that takes time. not alot but still time. The otherpeople had that wh. you jump through you still have to have some one burn 150plus km.doing 3km a sec is still a min (yeah ok you can do that before the cap goes through). You then have to align and get webbed which doesnt take long but at this point your agressed so if anything goes wrong logging off is now a real issue. then realign which in a cap takes a little while (not long but this isnt a interceptor we're talking about) all they have to do is land a hic or dic and bubble up before you start your warp back. and yeah you coudl fight your way through but some times you don't have numbers and need to quickly colapse in some ones face. Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better |
John Starski
Imperial Navy Lobsters U N K N O W N
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 05:29:00 -
[547] - Quote
Dear CCP. What you're doing is called procrastination. Stop making up useless stuff and go work on poses and other important things players begging you to change for years. *facepalm* |
Budrick3
Serene Vendetta Brawls Deep
33
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 05:35:00 -
[548] - Quote
This is literally the dumbest nerf idea CCP has put forward in quite sometime, and illustrates the disconnect they have with their own game.
I am at a lost for some witty remark because I am still picking up my jaw from the ground that such an idea would even be considered or thought of.
Whoever thought of this .....
Must have to think to breathe. |
Keith Planck
Lazerhawks
827
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 05:36:00 -
[549] - Quote
I don't think I've ever seen any gaming community as hostile and aggressive to the Devs as the eve community. It really just makes me sad reading some of these posts. n++[ 2014.06.02 04:47:22 ] Sith1s Spectre > despite our difference in opinions Keith, you've been a very important person in Sky/Rolled Out n++[ 2014.06.02 04:49:05 ] Sith1s Spectre > but yeah, you're one of the few people who i am quite happy to admit i was wrong about on my initial expectations |
Budrick3
Serene Vendetta Brawls Deep
33
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 05:43:00 -
[550] - Quote
Keith Planck wrote:I don't think I've ever seen any gaming community as hostile and aggressive to the Devs as the eve community. It really just makes me sad reading some of these posts.
I dont think a dev community could come up with such junk ideas considering so many other things need to be fixed in the game.
How long have pos's been screwed up? Where are alliance bookmarks? WTH have they done with the manufacturing in POS's requiring corp wallet? Where is the patch that was promised fixing the corp wallet issue? Supposedly it was going to be out in the next patch, and we are on hot fix #2 or 3 now?
Quit adding mechanics that are dumb.
Either add new crap in the game to keep us interested, or fix some crap that is long over due. Dont add crap to **** everyone off.
Give us a break, or EVE really will be dying. |
|
the Infenro
Edge of Existence
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 05:46:00 -
[551] - Quote
While I do not often chime in on the forums, I feel that this as currently presented is going to kill many smaller wormhole corp(s) like mine. Since the only ones who could "safely" close a wormhole are the biggest players out there, since they can bring a force that will overwhelm a small groups abilities to handle forcing them to pos up and wait out the timer.
however if a corp like this wish's to prevent a wormhole from closing it can be done with the mechanics currently work, they would need to bubble and keep a combat force on your side of the wormhole preventing you from warping within jump range of said wormholes.
If you are on the small end of the spectrum, you are risking a lot of ISK and often do not have anywhere near the same ability to make as many of the c5/6 wormhole groups. This being said I could see some minor changes to how wormholes work. If you are set on increasing the default distance, to over 5km off the wormhole so a range of like 6-7km out would provide an more exposed time to get a fight for a group who is paying attention.
However, an easier way to make life more interesting is to randomize the mass on the wormholes. Therefore, instead of being within 10% of (_) Billion mass as it is currently is. I would recommend changing this percentage to 20-40% higher/lower. This would make rapid closing or wormholes a bit more risky since you would have to pay more attention to mass & status of wormholes. Also might add opportunities to bring in more or less capitals than expected for high-class wormholes, making life more interesting for PvP due to a more randomized nature of wormholes.
Nazori Naskingar wrote:BayneNothos wrote:Nazori Naskingar wrote:Being a pilot who has always been part of smaller wormhole pvp fleets. There is always 2 ways to handle a very large wormhole entity that you get connected to.
Option 1: Combat roll the hole Option 2: Afk in POS for the day
If this change takes effect there will be only 1 of those options left... Sigh, still wrong Current: Option 1: Combat roll the hole with minimal risk if they scan the new WH out fast. Option 2: Afk in POS for the day New: Option 1: Combat roll the hole with a bit more risk and a bit more time for them to scan the WH down. Option 2: Afk in POS for the day Nothing changes in your options. If the gang was there at the WH you wouldn't be doing the combat roll anyway, that doesn't change. All that changes is there's now a minute long window in which they can scan you down. Congrats you now have to risk something to continue your bearing. I'm sorry if my post was unclear I guess I was leaving a lot to the imagination. Often we will connect OR be connected to by a large wormhole corp capable of fielding 30+ with caps. This is not something we can fight beyond trying to snake a scanner kill or someone too far from their hole to receive help. We are a much smaller corp. At that point we prep up for a quick close so we can continue our day. If we were to pop out in their system 40km off the hole with our Orcas we would never attempt to close on a force that large it is suicide. So the only option is to let it close naturally. We are quite capable pilots, but numbers are numbers. This change could effectively kill our corps activity 100% some days.
|
Winthorp
2475
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 05:52:00 -
[552] - Quote
Keith Planck wrote:I don't think I've ever seen any gaming community as hostile and aggressive to the Devs as the eve community. It really just makes me sad reading some of these posts.
I am really happy with the goal of the changes so far, i will wait for the devblog to see the actual numbers of the change as i think what i have read is a little far off what it should be.
But people should really calm down and wait for that devblog and try and work with the numbers they will be given their and improve upon what it will be. |
|
ISD Cyberdyne
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1550
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 06:18:00 -
[553] - Quote
Thank you guys for helping keep the thread on track after the bit of a derail earlier. I just ask that you guys continue to express your thoughts and opinions in a constructive and respectful manner. Please don't rant, troll, or make personal attacks at each other, the development team, or... well, anyone.
Remember that you have a CSM that have the ability to communicate your thoughts directly to CCP, and Corbexx is maintaining a firm line of communication with you guys through this thread. It is important to keep this thread on track, and in keeping with the rules so we all have that open line of communication.
Please continue to be respectful.
Mind your tone and prevent the comment or reply from becoming a rant.
Don't attack each other or the developers.
Don't troll.
This is just a friendly reminder. There is definitely some good discussion and interesting progress in this thread. Sincerely hope it continues to stay on the rails. Thank you very much, everyone! ISD Cyberdyne Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
171
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 07:03:00 -
[554] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:Ya Huei wrote: You 100mn AB cruiser will be back within 5K in no time besides whats the problem with risking a cruiser in order to reap the reward of a new wh ?
Because it will need 15+ back and forth. For a 2b mass connexion for example. Collapsing with Orca is already very dangerous, you need lots of precaution and intel to do that. And u can still have your collapsing ship lost on the wrong side of the connexion. It happens sometimes because connexion mass is not a constant, it is +/- 10% and you do not know necessarily how many ships go through to estimate the current connexion mass. And small/young corps doesnt have necessarily have an heavy dictor pilot. If CCP have the same whormole knowledge as you we are in a very bad position ...
Don't blame me because you suck balls at math.
I've been rolling holes from c3 to c5 for years. |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 07:07:00 -
[555] - Quote
Small note - nobody wants to fix roles cause then there wont be the great stories of how you robbed everybody!
Its great IDEA CCP! Really love it! So much ill probably go play World of Tanks and buy premium there instead of throwing cash at you. Which I suspect is behind this, a plot by Wargaming to draw ppl to WoT again.
Change is stupid. Give us more content instead of this utter stupidity. Or do you really see only 0.0 and rest is just a joke to you? Small corps in WHs will be gone now, spinning ships in POS (I DARE YOU TO ADD A SPIN COUNTER TO THAT). Seems legit.
PCU is dropping already and you decide to kill the game more!
GOOD JOB!
If I had the acc number, id send you some ISK for the effort with message : never do it again.
regards have a nice day. |
Enthropic
Infinite Point Nulli Secunda
96
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 07:21:00 -
[556] - Quote
Dear CCP
I have voiced my own opinion on this change several times now in this thread, so have many others. I did not have the time to read through all the posts here, but it seems to be out of the question that the vast majority of players are very much against this change.
I realize this is your game CCP, and you can do what you think is best, but can such a heated discussion not simply be resolved based on a player vote?
If you announce such a vote and create a simple forum poll, would that not tell you what your players really want? Based on the outcome, you can then say you did (or hopefully did not..) change the WH spawn distance variable based on player feedback.
You cant make everyone happy, but you could at least try to make most of us happy. |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 08:04:00 -
[557] - Quote
corbexx wrote:
The slight issue here is that all that takes time. not alot but still time. The otherpeople had that wh. you jump through you still have to have some one burn 150plus km.doing 3km a sec is still a min (yeah ok you can do that before the cap goes through). You then have to align and get webbed which doesnt take long but at this point your agressed so if anything goes wrong logging off is now a real issue. then realign which in a cap takes a little while (not long but this isnt a interceptor we're talking about) all they have to do is land a hic or dic and bubble up before you start your warp back. and yeah you coudl fight your way through but some times you don't have numbers and need to quickly colapse in some ones face.
If you need to snap shut a WH so fast that a Dictor/HIC is going to land inside that time, shouldn't there be risk involved in that? Right now it's fleet jumps out, fleet jumps back and unless someone gets a freak bump or the WH gods throw you outside jump range you're fully safe. |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
10
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 08:07:00 -
[558] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:corbexx wrote:
The slight issue here is that all that takes time. not alot but still time. The otherpeople had that wh. you jump through you still have to have some one burn 150plus km.doing 3km a sec is still a min (yeah ok you can do that before the cap goes through). You then have to align and get webbed which doesnt take long but at this point your agressed so if anything goes wrong logging off is now a real issue. then realign which in a cap takes a little while (not long but this isnt a interceptor we're talking about) all they have to do is land a hic or dic and bubble up before you start your warp back. and yeah you coudl fight your way through but some times you don't have numbers and need to quickly colapse in some ones face.
If you need to snap shut a WH so fast that a Dictor/HIC is going to land inside that time, shouldn't there be risk involved in that? Right now it's fleet jumps out, fleet jumps back and unless someone gets a freak bump or the WH gods throw you outside jump range you're fully safe.
Whilst your snappy comments are appreciated, your input is hardly good. Do you even live in WH? Do you expect everybody to risk capitals everytime cause the risk seems good to you. WEll fair play boy.
I dont see what is wrong with players ability to control the holes this way.
If you meet PVP entity, not even the inyourfacecollapse helps you. Saw it couple times. They just go balls in since, who cares. Now just make ships appear 100k off and let us all spin on POS.
+1 for POS ship spin counter. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1667
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 08:11:00 -
[559] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I still want new content though! A wormhole generator or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way...
Since i didn't get shouted at, i'm going to assume you guys love the idea... Your welcome
+1 |
Cirillith
Bean-shidh The Nameless Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 08:46:00 -
[560] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I still want new content though! A wormhole generator or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way... Since i didn't get shouted at, i'm going to assume you guys love the idea... Your welcome Since I'm the only one commenting those ^^ Please forgive me my inactivity during the night :)
Anyway - Wormhole generator in a way of anchored module somewhere seems not a bad idea - maybe it should work in way that it would give you second or third random static... I think it could be made in a way of POS/POCO way - with RF timer and such. Additionally I would add condition: cannot anchor on grid of POS - like you said near sun would be good spot (we can use lore explanation here - huge amount of energy needed - from sun ^^)
On ship - let me be a little skeptical here - it would become perfect farming security ship - with that conditions you proposed... Place that on static and you are perfectly safe from anything jumping through there. I think your second idea is not quite we want to.
On the other hand it could be module for battleship which will give it mass of a half of carrier or dreadnought... but still that only helps to close hole.
It wont resolve any other issue - right now if you want brawl under the hole you throw big fleet on conventional logistics or if you got fewer number of ppl you throw carrier and bunch of T3s. After implementing that "strange" jump mechanic second option will be hard to do - since carrier will be dropped somewhere but for sure far from its support - it wont hit triage, since it cannot be dumped or so, but will have impact on other aspects of that kind of brawl, including applying dps or controlling range of fight (on defender side few webbing and long range scramblers and we have attackers totally controlled without chance of applying DPS), it will have great impact on tactics and doctrines used in fights in WH - will reward kiting setups, etc.
Understand me well - since I think new mechanic is BAD idea, I think ppl will adapt if it will be released, but that adaptation could be something that will ruin our quite well working environment.
Dear CCP - we can adapt and we will if you hit us with those changes. Main issue here is that if you really care about our opinion you should maybe ask CSM WH Representative or us, as ppl using WH-space on daily basis what we think about that kind of change. I'm certain we can came to some conclusions or even throw few nice ideas at you (not everyone can come to Fanfest you know). Because right now your image looks like this: you are just a bunch of ppl who does not playing game you designed and few ppl came to your ranks from null-sec power-block environment, and you all simply do not care for W-Space environment since we are few in numbers on a map of New Eden - after all ppl lives mainly in k-space... Why I'm writing this? Because I could bet with you that if you would be considering some cyno, bridge, station, gate mechanic change it would be consulted with CSM and with community before changes hit SISI. And form my point of view - if you will mess up W-Space (It is my home for like 4 years now - and I was in Hi-sec and null earlier - there is no other place for me) - it will be clear sign for me that I should reconsider my interest in your game, and maybe go play some other during my wait for Star Citizen (this is not some blackmail or something just an neutral info BTW) and I think many ppl will do same thing. |
|
the Infenro
Edge of Existence
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 08:47:00 -
[561] - Quote
While I stand behind my earlier comments that a range of like 30km would kill most smaller groups due to lower numbers, I defiantly could agree with having people dropped up to 10km off the wh. Moreover, decrees the side that you can use the WH to 2.5km. Giving people a higher risk while still making it to a useable system, I have lived in wormholes for the last 4 years and have had plenty of experience in both higher and lower class wormholes (normally flying logistics so didn't get on many kills :( ) However the current Meta in wormholes dose have counters and I've seen them & used, as it currently stands its relatively easy to kill scouts, most people scouting in wormholes are don't pay attention and can be grabbed with a quick lock. Moreover, the issue of the common guardian/ t3c's armor fleets sitting on a K162 WH can be countered with some smart use of ships / fittings / fleet command.
PS their is no perfect fleet setup in eve, there is always a counter... |
Kresh Vladir
Back Passage Explorer's
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:05:00 -
[562] - Quote
Extremely bad idea CCP please don't do it. Give us more Content please...... |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
867
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:26:00 -
[563] - Quote
There does seem to be an attitude amongst some, that making life more difficuilt, more risky, more dangerous and more unpleasant, somehow is a valid goal, as it encourages "content".
WRONG.
It encourages people to not want to play. Fewer people in space= less "content"
One learns to either control or work with your environment to minimise risk and maximise benefits. When one arbitarily decides to "shake things up" for no good reason other than thinking it will "add content" you achieve the following.
Fewer players signed in Fewer players in space to act as content. Less interest and opportunity for hunters. The opposite of what you hoped to achieve. A very annoyed player base. Lack of corporate credibility.
But those who advised you are happy, high fiveing, ang gloating at your gullibility for falling for such obvious trolls.
Now, are you going to continue to listen to those who make you look foolish and uncaring or people like corbexx who actually want to help improve things and someone who DOES represent the wormhole community?
Hopefuly you will realise that not everyone has CCP's best interest at heart. Some just want to see the world burn even if their game goes with it............... There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
calaretu
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
130
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:32:00 -
[564] - Quote
the Infenro wrote: However, an easier way to make life more interesting is to randomize the mass on the wormholes. Therefore, instead of being within 10% of (_) Billion mass as it is currently is. I would recommend changing this percentage to 20-40% higher/lower. This would make rapid closing or wormholes a bit more risky since you would have to pay more attention to mass & status of wormholes. Also might add opportunities to bring in more or less capitals than expected for high-class wormholes, making life more interesting for PvP due to a more randomized nature of wormholes.
Yes, tweeking these numbers would be a far better solution ~Bringer of happiness
http://collapsedbehind.blogspot.no/ |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:36:00 -
[565] - Quote
Ya Huei wrote:Papa Django wrote:Ya Huei wrote: You 100mn AB cruiser will be back within 5K in no time besides whats the problem with risking a cruiser in order to reap the reward of a new wh ?
Because it will need 15+ back and forth. For a 2b mass connexion for example. Don't blame me because you suck balls at math. I've been rolling holes from c3 to c5 for years.
A cruiser is around 10m mass. A 100MN MWD (not an AB) fitted on a cruiser and active add 50m mass.
So a back and forth is 120m
2b / 120m = 16.6
What is the issue with my math.
Add to this 4 mins polarisation + travel back to the hole.
For 4 pilot it is a 30/45 mins jobs. And, (if you really are an old wh player) you know you have often to roll 3 or 4 wh to find what you want.
This is insane, the only result is to ruin game experience for wh resident.
Less player in wh = less pvp.
You can **** yourself all day on new strategies to use on hole with this tweak, if nobody want to engage you will get less pvp.
Nobody have already given a good reason to do that tweak. |
Spurty
V0LTA Triumvirate.
1373
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:38:00 -
[566] - Quote
Personally, I'd like to see people come out the other side of a wormhole at incredible speeds and have to slow down and turn around.
Jumping through and appearing at 0m/s is more painful to accept than having moved away from the hole you just got sucked through.
Also, how is any of this surprising? CCP Built wormhole space for you to go explore and if you're brave, make isk.
It was not designed with the purpose of supporting life for long periods of time. Ragerolling is a way to 'force the mechanic' that spawns new holes. Fairly sure it's possible to consider this 'exploitation of game mechanics' if I really had a bad day and "someone's going to get hurt!".
in favor of seeing people arrive the other side of a hole already moving and lockable tbh. Not sure randomly spawning @ 40km away from the hole but moving 0m/s is very adventurous. Sounds more like a wonderful 'bubble avoidance'. *signature is not allowed on the EVE Online forums* |
Winthorp
2478
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:47:00 -
[567] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Rek Seven wrote:I still want new content though! A wormhole generator or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way... Since i didn't get shouted at, i'm going to assume you guys love the idea... Your welcome
Some solid shell game mechanics you have used to get this through sperge.
+1 Good sir. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:49:00 -
[568] - Quote
Papa Django wrote: Nobody have already given a good reason to do that tweak.
There are reason but i don't know if you would think they are good or not. Basically it's going to benefit cloaky hunters quite a lot and big groups won't be able to use range rolling to get easy cap kills or find invasion systems as effectively.
To move the discussion on, we all need to accept that rolling with capitals will no longer be viable, so with that out the way, what are the remaining problems? +1 |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 09:57:00 -
[569] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:
A cruiser is around 10m mass. A 100MN MWD (not an AB) fitted on a cruiser and active add 50m mass.
So a back and forth is 120m
2b / 120m = 16.6
What is the issue with my math.
Add to this 4 mins polarisation + travel back to the hole.
For 4 pilot it is a 30/45 mins jobs. And, (if you really are an old wh player) you know you have often to roll 3 or 4 wh to find what you want.
This is insane, the only result is to ruin game experience for wh resident.
Less player in wh = less pvp.
You can **** yourself all day on new strategies to use on hole with this tweak, if nobody want to engage you will get less pvp.
Nobody have already given a good reason to do that tweak.
There's no extra time as once you jump back you still have to wait on the polarisation timer. It'll take you just as long as it takes now. |
Asserted Invaluability
Anti Einstein-Rosen Vixens
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:06:00 -
[570] - Quote
Whilst I applaud the views expressed you all seem to have missed something important. The poor Russians (Particularly BU and friends).
If this change goes ahead they may actually have to ......... oh it's so horrible I don't want to say............. Oh here goes ..........
They might actually have to Fight On The WH without friends and with equal numbers opposing and ...............
Urrghh it's so horrible I don't want to think about it anymore. |
|
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
171
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:11:00 -
[571] - Quote
Papa Django wrote: stuff..
If you want to close wormholes by using cruisers exclusively be my guest, I don't see why CCP should cater to that kind of risk averse playstyle though. you have the option to use orca's and battleships.
Also mass addition MWD/AB is exactly identical smartass.
|
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
5
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:21:00 -
[572] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: To move the discussion on, we all need to accept that rolling with capitals will no longer be viable, so with that out the way, what are the remaining problems?
THIS is THE major issue.
Rolling with caps or Orca not possible means a lot of time needed to roll connexions.
Rolling connexion easily (it means in a few mins) for small/mid corps is MANDATORY. It is less an issue for big corp directly, because they have the numbers.
So game experience is lower and for small group it can totally break game experience.
Look this, i usually connect around 21/22pm and for a 2<->4 hours session duration. If i have to waste more then half of that time to find a proper hole for what we need/want to do, there is no interest to play.
I will find another game. The highsec is boring, the lowsec is boring, the nullsec is in stasis. No more easy game mechanics -> i leave.
This is simple, i have not the time to spend on this kind of designer caprice.
A game must be fluid. Rolling cnx makes the wh life fluid and keep all the danger you have in wh. This already a very dangerous game area. The only effect is to push out the small/mid corps.
If the game designer decides that this game is playable only for 100+ members corps, please tell us now. I will leave this probably very soon.
But tell us.
CCP cannot tweak a MAJOR GAME MECHANIC for an ENTIRE AREA OF THE GAME without communication.
Someone was talking about respect, CCP is lacking of respect. We are customers, we pay for this. CCP need to communicate on this NOW. It is not a proper way to do things.
CCP don't respect me, why should i respect it ?
They do the things properly for Crius. Everything was explained well, the reasons, with data & facts, what it was planned, etc ...
WTF is this **** for WH ???? |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:28:00 -
[573] - Quote
Ya Huei wrote:Papa Django wrote: stuff.. If you want to close wormholes by using cruisers exclusively be my guest, I don't see why CCP should cater to that kind of risk averse playstyle though. you have the option to use orca's and battleships.
Take a breath, read the conversation again, and read again what you have written.
I have never said that i want to collapse with cruiser. I said i collapse with Orca. Then YOU suggest me to collapse with cruiser and then i prove to yourself that it will takes all the night for a small corp ... |
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
171
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:34:00 -
[574] - Quote
Ye.. I don't plan to derail this thread any further, you clearly misread or failed to read my initial post. |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
11
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:37:00 -
[575] - Quote
I do sincerely pray for the same mechanic to be applied to cynos and titan bridges.
Then read the flame complaint thread where we from WH fuel it. Oh boy.
Also if closing with cruiser :D might as well log off, ALL day unless you get alot of peeps. |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
868
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:42:00 -
[576] - Quote
Ok there seems to be a logic failiure occuring here with some of the thinking.
Some seem to want wormholes to be more dangerous, because........? Some seem to believe they are fields of gold for "farmers" and they should be punished somehow and forced to be either victims or fight. And some believe if this was somehow done that there would be unlimited PVP and all would be well with wormhole space...........
Complete insanity.
If you drive farmers out, and making things unpleasant will do this, then there is No one to shoot. Some great fights happen with people others might label as farmers, true farmers left long ago or get evicted. If one Makes things impossible for those who are willing to fight as well as PvE and you have a desert.
Just because CCP did not envision people living in wormholes is not an excuse to ruin them.
If anything, one should enable simpler hole rolling, but in conjunction with a specialised, expensive vessel, not "shaking things up" forcing every vessel into some artificial mechanic, that ruins the game for everyone ( yes everyone, you just haven't realised it yet)
CCP can play with unusual mechanics on this vessel if they see fit, and then players can decide if they are willing to accept the downsides.
Take the Nestor for example, or even the rocqual and allow it to be fit with modules that square the mass, and others that make the mass the square root when engaged. Let the distance from hole on jumpthrough depend on mass so it can choose distance at the cost of reducing the hole. Let it also have a beacon that can be engaged on this ship so that fleet vehicles when jumping the hole come out within 1Km of it's beacon. If the ship is destroyed, then another ships beacon (backup or an enemies) could be the land point. Make it so that fitting any of these modules prevent the fitting of any type of cloak on this ship. Finally, give the ship an immunity to the catch effect of drag/stop bubbles. Still unable to warp within it, just the catch effect, and it's beacon overpowers the catch effect locally for ships in fleet. This allows crashing out of a wormhole, ( with a little thought, there are tactics to counter this so it is not an "I Win escape")
Then you have a Spacial displacement domination vessel.
This would allow hole crashing, hole defence, forcing through holecamps under heavy fire, and hole control for a fleet, without ruining all other gameplay for other ships.
Yes great risks will be involved in it's use, but the risks are consistent with it's abilities, and manageable with clever play and tactics. BY BOTH SIDES.
The idea is that there are now new tactics for hole control, tactics to crash through a defended hole, and new tactics to prevent that. And all without just making things even more of a pain for everyone with twisted artificial mechanics.
In short you give the players a tool to make things more interesting. And rewarding intelligent tactics.
This is not perfect, or finalised, but the core of an idea that can be fleshed out, that achieves many of the wishes to improve the opportunity for players to meet in a dynamic manner, without destroying the core wormhole mechanics for every ship. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:44:00 -
[577] - Quote
I understand what you mean by ccp showing a lack of consideration for the wormhole community. Usually a change posted and discussed on the features and ideas forum but they didn't see fit to do it this time.
Could you explain why rolling is "mandatory" for your corp? What class of wormhole do you live in? How many active people do you have in your peak time zone? +1 |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:51:00 -
[578] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote: If you drive farmers out, and making things unpleasant will do this, then there is No one to shoot. Some great fights happen with people others might label as farmers, true farmers left long ago or get evicted. If one Makes things impossible for those who are willing to fight as well as PvE and you have a desert.
How does this change make it impossible for farmers to run sites?
Instead of them criting the hole or rolling it and using the exploit of not warping to the new wormhole so it doesn't spawn, can't they just anchor a bubble and or put a scout on the WH? +1 |
Faren Shalni
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:56:00 -
[579] - Quote
So CCP want to screw around with the only working and dynamic space in the game (btw t3 meta is due to a lack of viable options to use as alternatives)
This change only helps cloaky hunters and Large corps as they are, the only ones who can take advantage of this and even then, it will be for a limited time only until the lack of content, from not rolling your chain, drives people out of WH's.
If CCP think this will change WH meta then quite frankly it wont. we already use subcap doctrines so we just will use them more often. as to rolling we will just move on to another method and keep on rolling or just not bother.
This is a big nerf to content, and sure in the short term it will provide more content but in the long run it will reduce it significantly as people just stop using capitals to roll and just leave their chains alone and play another game (which 90% of WHers already do) |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
870
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:57:00 -
[580] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote: If you drive farmers out, and making things unpleasant will do this, then there is No one to shoot. Some great fights happen with people others might label as farmers, true farmers left long ago or get evicted. If one Makes things impossible for those who are willing to fight as well as PvE and you have a desert.
How does this change make it impossible for farmers to run sites? Wouldn't less farming increase the value of sleeper salvage and solve the income issue with low class wormholes? Instead of them criting the hole or rolling it and using the exploit of not warping to the new wormhole so it doesn't spawn, can't they just anchor a bubble or put a scout on the WH?
When one describes a core wormhole mechanic as an exploit, then nothing said will influence your thinking. Pity.
But I will try, this is not referring to making running sites impossible, it is about making functional wormhole life impossible. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
|
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 10:59:00 -
[581] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote: If you drive farmers out, and making things unpleasant will do this, then there is No one to shoot. Some great fights happen with people others might label as farmers, true farmers left long ago or get evicted. If one Makes things impossible for those who are willing to fight as well as PvE and you have a desert.
How does this change make it impossible for farmers to run sites? Wouldn't less farming increase the value of sleeper salvage and solve the income issue with low class wormholes? Instead of them criting the hole or rolling it and using the exploit of not warping to the new wormhole so it doesn't spawn, can't they just anchor a bubble or put a scout on the WH?
no offense, but if you think that stops anybody you must be farming empty c1s.
Also no, less farming wouldnt really increase anything. Itd be there still somehow. Why not fix the dont fly no spawn exploit from CCP first (so less abuse) and let people crit the hole and farm in peace.
Whats wrong with that? If its that bad I am all agaisnt cyno jammers and bubbles on gate in null. Same reason.
And what about incoming WHs? If you manage to anchor bubble before good pvp entity scouts it, it is really a crap crap bunch of noobs with probes. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:04:00 -
[582] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Rek Seven wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote: If you drive farmers out, and making things unpleasant will do this, then there is No one to shoot. Some great fights happen with people others might label as farmers, true farmers left long ago or get evicted. If one Makes things impossible for those who are willing to fight as well as PvE and you have a desert.
How does this change make it impossible for farmers to run sites? Wouldn't less farming increase the value of sleeper salvage and solve the income issue with low class wormholes? Instead of them criting the hole or rolling it and using the exploit of not warping to the new wormhole so it doesn't spawn, can't they just anchor a bubble or put a scout on the WH? When one describes a core wormhole mechanic as an exploit, then nothing said will influence your thinking. Pity. But I will try, this is not referring to making running sites impossible, it is about making functional wormhole life impossible.
Exploit definition: make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource)
Seems like an apt description to me. I can only assume that your unwillingness answer my questions means you have no valid arguments. +1 |
the Infenro
Edge of Existence
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:12:00 -
[583] - Quote
calaretu wrote:the Infenro wrote: However, an easier way to make life more interesting is to randomize the mass on the wormholes. Therefore, instead of being within 10% of (_) Billion mass as it is currently is. I would recommend changing this percentage to 20-40% higher/lower. This would make rapid closing or wormholes a bit more risky since you would have to pay more attention to mass & status of wormholes. Also might add opportunities to bring in more or less capitals than expected for high-class wormholes, making life more interesting for PvP due to a more randomized nature of wormholes.
Yes, tweeking these numbers would be a far better solution
thx for agreeing with me, and personal i would favor a far larger variance in the size of wormholes, for example if you have a 50% variance on a 3b mass hole (average size for a c5 / c6 static). the mass could be anywhere from 1.5B to 4.5 this would mean that you might be-able to only take 1 capital into a fight, and be able to retrieve it, then again it might mean that you can 2 into a fight their and back, or 4 into a one way fight. while 50% is an extreme example i do feel that making the mass have a larger variance would diffidently change up the game. also it would make closing holes with the cap + orca + bs combo risky since if the hole had any mass used it might close one way on the capital. this would promote people using Intel & paying attention to whats going on and how the wormholes are acting, rather than just making life harder on an already working mechanic.
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:13:00 -
[584] - Quote
Pavel Sohaj wrote:... let people crit the hole and farm in peace.
Whats wrong with that?
There's nothing wrong with it but wormholes are supposed to be the most dangerous place to operate, so farming shouldn't be easy or peaceful IMO.
If you want to crit your hole, then you risk your ship getting caught off the hole and if you don't want to take the risk, you bubble your hole in an attempt to slow hostiles down a bit. +1 |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
871
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:16:00 -
[585] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:Rek Seven wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote: If you drive farmers out, and making things unpleasant will do this, then there is No one to shoot. Some great fights happen with people others might label as farmers, true farmers left long ago or get evicted. If one Makes things impossible for those who are willing to fight as well as PvE and you have a desert.
How does this change make it impossible for farmers to run sites? Wouldn't less farming increase the value of sleeper salvage and solve the income issue with low class wormholes? Instead of them criting the hole or rolling it and using the exploit of not warping to the new wormhole so it doesn't spawn, can't they just anchor a bubble or put a scout on the WH? When one describes a core wormhole mechanic as an exploit, then nothing said will influence your thinking. Pity. But I will try, this is not referring to making running sites impossible, it is about making functional wormhole life impossible. Exploit definition: make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource). or Make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhandSeems like an apt description to me. How does this prevent people from functioning? I agree that it changes the way or what people will do in wormhole space but i disagree that people will not be able to function.
Sorry, disagree with you completely, by your definition all of wormhole space is an exploit. is that what you are trying to say?
Making life as unpleasant as possible, introducing a deliberate new mechanics to do so, (over and above the "accidental " ones that occur ) and disregarding the occupants of wormhole space, are not good decisions either from a respect viewpoint, a practical viewpoint, or a commercial one.
I do not have or choose a role as an educator here. If you are unaware of the current functionality of wormhole life, they can be a very enjoyable lifestyle, I encourage you to try it for a few months, and then you will understand it is a complex fragile ecosystem, where changing the core physics has massive effects.
Try changing the freezing point of water by 2 degrees in the real world and see life expire. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Cirillith
Bean-shidh The Nameless Alliance
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:23:00 -
[586] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Ok there seems to be a logic failiure occuring here with some of the thinking.
Some seem to want wormholes to be more dangerous, because........? Some seem to believe they are fields of gold for "farmers" and they should be punished somehow and forced to be either victims or fight. And some believe if this was somehow done that there would be unlimited PVP and all would be well with wormhole space...........
Complete insanity.
If you drive farmers out, and making things unpleasant will do this, then there is No one to shoot. Some great fights happen with people others might label as farmers, true farmers left long ago or get evicted. If one Makes things impossible for those who are willing to fight as well as PvE and you have a desert.
Just because CCP did not envision people living in wormholes is not an excuse to ruin them.
......
I was going to write something similar here.
C'mon EvE is a sand box. CCP invented W-Space and it should be some exploration environment for group activities. Fine, but your customers used "sandbox" approach and beginning to live there. It wasn't intended by designers, but in pure spirit of SANDBOX became reality
And I fully agree here if anyone who already lives there will be forced to move out to k-space or out of the game - we all gonna loose something, and it will have some impact on whole EvE. How big that impact will be - I don't know. could be small, marginal even but on the other hand it could be big.
About changes - like I wrote few posts before - WE as the WH COMMUNITY will adapt. Whatever changes CCP will throw at us will trigger some new tactics or doctrines. those also will change and improve. Some ppl will go away, some will come to place deserted by leaving ones, but... Main issue here is HOW YOU ARE PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTING CHANGES CCP NOT CHANGES THEMSELVES. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:24:00 -
[587] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Rek Seven wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote:Rek Seven wrote:epicurus ataraxia wrote: If you drive farmers out, and making things unpleasant will do this, then there is No one to shoot. Some great fights happen with people others might label as farmers, true farmers left long ago or get evicted. If one Makes things impossible for those who are willing to fight as well as PvE and you have a desert.
How does this change make it impossible for farmers to run sites? Wouldn't less farming increase the value of sleeper salvage and solve the income issue with low class wormholes? Instead of them criting the hole or rolling it and using the exploit of not warping to the new wormhole so it doesn't spawn, can't they just anchor a bubble or put a scout on the WH? When one describes a core wormhole mechanic as an exploit, then nothing said will influence your thinking. Pity. But I will try, this is not referring to making running sites impossible, it is about making functional wormhole life impossible. Exploit definition: make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource). or Make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhandSeems like an apt description to me. How does this prevent people from functioning? I agree that it changes the way or what people will do in wormhole space but i disagree that people will not be able to function. Sorry, disagree with you completely, by your definition all of wormhole space is an exploit if you see that as underhand . is that what you are trying to say? Making life as unpleasant as possible, introducing a deliberate new mechanics to do so, (over and above the "accidental " ones that occur ) and disregarding the occupants of wormhole space, are not good decisions either from a respect viewpoint, a practical viewpoint, or a commercial one. I do not have or choose a role as an educator here. If you are unaware of the current functionality of wormhole life, they can be a very enjoyable lifestyle, I encourage you to try it for a few months, and then you will understand it is a complex fragile ecosystem, where changing the core physics has massive effects. Try changing the freezing point of water by 2 degrees in the real world and see life expire.
Dude, right under my name, take a look at the alliance i'm with.... I'm not the one from a scrub alliance so you couldn't even begin to educate me on wormhole space.
Disagree with me all you want and continue to share your personal feelings with everyone but until you answer the questions i originally asked you, i'll take it as you not having any valid arguments.
For your convenience:
How does this change make it impossible for farmers to run sites? Wouldn't less farming increase the value of sleeper salvage and solve the income issue with low class wormholes? Instead of them criting the hole or rolling it and using the exploit of not warping to the new wormhole so it doesn't spawn, can't they just anchor a bubble or put a scout on the WH?
+1 |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:25:00 -
[588] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: Could you explain why rolling is "mandatory" for your corp?
Seriously ?
Ok, maybe CCP will read this, at least i am sure WH CSM is reading this.
Collapsing wh allow me to :
- Close our system if we want to farm or mine ore. - Close a connexion we don't want if we can. If there is too many hostiles on that hole you cannot close it. - Reroll the static to get a different content. Looking for, pve, pvp, HS or NS exit. - Reroll the static because it is end of life and we don't know how many time is remaining.
Rek Seven wrote: What class of wormhole do you live in?
Something between C1 and C6.
Rek Seven wrote: How many active people do you have in your peak time zone?
A small number because i am in a small corp. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:29:00 -
[589] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:Rek Seven wrote: Could you explain why rolling is "mandatory" for your corp?
Seriously ? Ok, maybe CCP will read this, at least i am sure WH CSM is reading this. Collapsing wh allow me to : - Close our system if we want to farm or mine ore. - Close a connexion we don't want if we can. If there is too many hostiles on that hole you cannot close it. - Reroll the static to get a different content. Looking for, pve, pvp, HS or NS exit. - Reroll the static because it is end of life and we don't know how many time is remaining. Rek Seven wrote: What class of wormhole do you live in?
Something between C1 and C6. Rek Seven wrote: How many active people do you have in your peak time zone?
A small number because i am in a small corp.
Well you will be happy to know that you can still do all this but it will be riskier and more time consuming. Glad i could help
I know it sucks for smaller groups, which is why i think CCP should add a new way to close a hole... but that's a topic for another thread. +1 |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:37:00 -
[590] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: Exploit definition: make full use of and derive benefit from (a resource). or Make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand
Seems like an apt description to me.
Seems not to me. It is just the whormoles core mechanics.
If CCP consider it as an exploit, they should fix it.
Rek Seven wrote: How does this prevent people from functioning? I agree that it changes the way or what people will do in wormhole space but i disagree that people will not be able to function.
Yes, you can still move without legs. You can This is not an argument.
The main issue is : Something is broken in this game, the safer place in all EVE is the renters zone in nullsec. Even highsec is more dangerous. W-Space is by far the more dangerous area.
So what is the purpose of this ? Why getting wh more dangerous and not fixing that f...... nullsec ?
It is pure non-sense. |
|
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
874
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:41:00 -
[591] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:
Dude, right under my name, take a look at the alliance i'm with.... I'm not the one from a scrub alliance so you couldn't even begin to educate me on wormhole space.
Disagree with me all you want and continue to share your personal feelings with everyone but until you answer the questions i originally asked you, i'll take it as you not having any valid arguments.
For your convenience:
How does this change make it impossible for farmers to run sites? Wouldn't less farming increase the value of sleeper salvage and solve the income issue with low class wormholes? Instead of them criting the hole or rolling it and using the exploit of not warping to the new wormhole so it doesn't spawn, can't they just anchor a bubble or put a scout on the WH?
Reply. 1. I have never said it would make it impossible for farmers to run sites, that is your comment. The issue is far more wide reaching than this. 2. No it would not. There needs to be demand as well to support higher prices. 3. Wormhole mechanics are not an exploit. 4. What have those suggestions got to do with anything? Are you totally focused on farming to the exclusion of all other wormhole activities?
Nothing happens in isolation, a change of this magnitude ripples right through wormhole space, the issue is that people focus on one tiny part of the effects, for you it is farmers and putting hole control in place, so in your eyes nothing is of importance. You may be in a wormhole corp, and that is good, i am pleased you have the experience, but no one has the experience of every aspect, it is complex, and others clearly have experience in depth of other areas, and large, small and medium sized corps, PVE PVP and just destroy everything corps are all horrified by this change. Putting a can and bubble on a hole is beyond irrelevant in this issue. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:42:00 -
[592] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Well you will be happy to know that you can still do all this but it will be riskier and more time consuming. Glad i could help
I don't want to risk more, it is riskier enough already. I don't want to spend more time on these logistics things.
I don't see why you want to ruin my game experience with no reasons (you have not given any reason to support that change).
What do you think you can gain from all this ?
Rek Seven wrote: I know it sucks for smaller groups, which is why i think CCP should add a new way to close a hole... but that's a topic for another thread.
No it is the main issue here. A vision. |
Glasgow Dunlop
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
148
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:47:00 -
[593] - Quote
Is fozzie making that horrible change for the sake of making a change, as it just seems strange, if you were jumping a hole why not come out the other side the same speed you went in from the same distance? twitter: @glasgowdunlop-á TDSIN Recruitment Director : Join 'TDSIN pub' Glasgow Meet Organiser
|
AtomYcX
Hard Knocks Inc.
78
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:54:00 -
[594] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:I know it sucks for smaller groups, which is why i think CCP should add a new way to close a hole... but that's a topic for another thread.
BOMBING WORMHOLES! YOUR TIME HAS COME! |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 11:59:00 -
[595] - Quote
It seems clear to me that CCP has two goals with this change:
1. Make it more difficult to rage roll 2. Make it riskier to roll in general
If you're against this, they will want to know why. Saying don't change it because it's always been this way will not persuade them to cancel their plans.
I'm only trying to help here guys! +1 |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
8
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:04:00 -
[596] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:It seems clear to me that CCP has two goals with this change:
1. Make it more difficult to rage roll 2. Make it riskier to roll in general
If you're against this, they will want to know why. Saying don't change it because it's always been this way will not persuade them to cancel their plans.
This is not the way this should work.
They should tell us first why they want to make these changes. Then discuss.
We have told you and CCP why we don't want this "thing" to come on tranquility. Because it remove the ability to roll cnx whitout adding anything.
Ability to roll is ability to find new content when you are stuck because static is empty. If we can't, we just have to stay in POS and log off from the game. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15567
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:05:00 -
[597] - Quote
RIP hole rolling orca President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
357
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:07:00 -
[598] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:corbexx wrote:
The slight issue here is that all that takes time. not alot but still time. The otherpeople had that wh. you jump through you still have to have some one burn 150plus km.doing 3km a sec is still a min (yeah ok you can do that before the cap goes through). You then have to align and get webbed which doesnt take long but at this point your agressed so if anything goes wrong logging off is now a real issue. then realign which in a cap takes a little while (not long but this isnt a interceptor we're talking about) all they have to do is land a hic or dic and bubble up before you start your warp back. and yeah you coudl fight your way through but some times you don't have numbers and need to quickly colapse in some ones face.
If you need to snap shut a WH so fast that a Dictor/HIC is going to land inside that time, shouldn't there be risk involved in that? Right now it's fleet jumps out, fleet jumps back and unless someone gets a freak bump or the WH gods throw you outside jump range you're fully safe.
I think a lot of you folks are focussed on the little picture. How this change will make this or that more or less fun. I'm asking you to look at the bigger picture. What does wh space have that has made it what it is? WH mechanics.
The big 3 are: 1. no local 2. mass limits 3. polarization timers
These 3 things are what made/makes wh space what it is. Decloaking out of jump range takes away 1 of the 3 pillars of wh PVP - the ability to control wh mass. This change will take away that control. Some will argue it just adds risk to wh control.
Let's be honest - you catch a cap out of jump range - it's not gonna make it back. We're not a bunch of marmites camping th 4-4 undock. We know how to web. We know how to bump. Saying it adds risk is just crap. This change makes capital size loot pinatas. Larger corps are all for it. Smaller corps are all against it. It's pretty clear to all parties what this change is about. This is a clear choice by CCP to push the blob into wh space or stand up for the little guys.
This is about ganking guys rolling wh - it's not about pvp. This is cheap stuff pvp. Counter - get a 30 man t3 fleet to protect your rolling assets. If you don't have one, make one. |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
874
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:07:00 -
[599] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:It seems clear to me that CCP has two goals with this change: 1. Make it more difficult to rage roll 2. Make it riskier to roll in general If you're against this, they will want to know why. Saying don't change it because it's always been this way will not persuade them to cancel their plans. I'm only trying to help here guys!
Actually, I believe they have other goals with this. I have suggested an alternative method of achieving their goals if I am right, using an equipment(ship) based methodology rather than changing wormhole physics for everyone. It is just a page or so back and you replied to part of it.
It addresses issues that may be causing a play style bottleneck, without disrupting other mechanics.
CCP are fully aware of the reasons why large corps, medium corps, small corps, PvE Corps PvP corps are all in disagreement with the proposed change. Unless they are totally disinterested, and that would not be in their own best interest. I do not believe they are like that. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:11:00 -
[600] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote: These 3 things are what made/makes wh space what it is. Decloaking out of jump range takes away 1 of the 3 pillars of wh PVP - the ability to control wh mass. This change will take away that control. Some will argue it just adds risk to wh control.
But was the ability for players to manipulate mass mechanics ever a design decision or was it a way to limit fleet/ship sizes to encourage small gangs? +1 |
|
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
874
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:14:00 -
[601] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:BayneNothos wrote:corbexx wrote:
The slight issue here is that all that takes time. not alot but still time. The otherpeople had that wh. you jump through you still have to have some one burn 150plus km.doing 3km a sec is still a min (yeah ok you can do that before the cap goes through). You then have to align and get webbed which doesnt take long but at this point your agressed so if anything goes wrong logging off is now a real issue. then realign which in a cap takes a little while (not long but this isnt a interceptor we're talking about) all they have to do is land a hic or dic and bubble up before you start your warp back. and yeah you coudl fight your way through but some times you don't have numbers and need to quickly colapse in some ones face.
If you need to snap shut a WH so fast that a Dictor/HIC is going to land inside that time, shouldn't there be risk involved in that? Right now it's fleet jumps out, fleet jumps back and unless someone gets a freak bump or the WH gods throw you outside jump range you're fully safe. I think a lot of you folks are focussed on the little picture. How this change will make this or that more or less fun. I'm asking you to look at the bigger picture. What does wh space have that has made it what it is? WH mechanics. The big 3 are: 1. no local 2. mass limits 3. polarization timers These 3 things are what made/makes wh space what it is. Decloaking out of jump range takes away 1 of the 3 pillars of wh PVP - the ability to control wh mass. This change will take away that control. Some will argue it just adds risk to wh control. Let's be honest - you catch a cap out of jump range - it's not gonna make it back. We're not a bunch of marmites camping th 4-4 undock. We know how to web. We know how to bump. Saying it adds risk is just crap. This change makes capital size loot pinatas. Larger corps are all for it. Smaller corps are all against it. It's pretty clear to all parties what this change is about. This is a clear choice by CCP to push the blob into wh space or stand up for the little guys. This is about ganking guys rolling wh - it's not about pvp. This is cheap stuff pvp. Counter - get a 30 man t3 fleet to protect your rolling assets. If you don't have one, make one.
Lots of sense here, but, all sizes of wormhole corp are disliking this , large, medium and small PvP and PvE too.
However I could not say that non wormhole corps would be averse to reaping the benefits of the bloodbath, as they have no interest in the long term sustainability of wormhole life. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
874
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:17:00 -
[602] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: These 3 things are what made/makes wh space what it is. Decloaking out of jump range takes away 1 of the 3 pillars of wh PVP - the ability to control wh mass. This change will take away that control. Some will argue it just adds risk to wh control.
But was the ability for players to manipulate mass mechanics ever a design decision or was it a way to limit fleet/ship sizes to encourage small gangs? CCP never had a long term design decision for wormholes. That is no reason to make them unpleasant to live in after the fact. By all means let them put sand in the sandbox, that is right and proper, replacing the sand with ground glass is not acceptable. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:18:00 -
[603] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Pavel Sohaj wrote:... let people crit the hole and farm in peace.
Whats wrong with that? There's nothing wrong with it but wormholes are supposed to be the most dangerous place to operate, so farming shouldn't be easy or peaceful IMO. If you want to crit your hole, then you risk your ship getting caught off the hole and if you don't want to take the risk, you bubble your hole in an attempt to slow hostiles down a bit.
And if I want to jsut reroll? Risk or face sitting at POS all day long. Cool. Surely brings enough content for everybody. |
AssassinationsdoneWrong
The Nexus 7's
232
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:19:00 -
[604] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: But was the ability for players to manipulate mass mechanics ever a design decision or was it a way to limit fleet/ship sizes to encourage small gangs?
Who cares what the original motives were? Do you think they even know? They have forgotten why or how they wrote the code for poses and you expect them to know why they put mass limits on?
Rek I agree with most of your posts most of the time but we can agree to disagree on this one. There is absolutely NO benefit from this change, to WH's, to content, to anything W-space oriented.
And let's not forget probably the most important single factor in such a huge change ....... CCP's proven ability to mess up every major change with disastrous results.
I also think your comments to the effect of "Yes it will be tougher on smaller corps so what?" just points to power bloc mentality. The Nexus 7's
What we fall short of in numbers we more than make up for in stupidity |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:34:00 -
[605] - Quote
You all make some very valid points... I'll be interested to see if CCP respond to these concerns and refine their plans.
Ps. i love the ground glass comment and can't disagree that wormhole need more content over mechanic change. +1 |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
357
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:36:00 -
[606] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: These 3 things are what made/makes wh space what it is. Decloaking out of jump range takes away 1 of the 3 pillars of wh PVP - the ability to control wh mass. This change will take away that control. Some will argue it just adds risk to wh control.
But was the ability for players to manipulate mass mechanics ever a design decision or was it a way to limit fleet/ship sizes to encourage small gangs?
Who cares. It's a pillar. I'll play Rek Seven (cuz it's easy)
Explain to me how this change (the 40km thing) will make anything better. Please use only facts and stear clear of speculation and extrapolated BS.
If you can't answer me concisely then you have proven it's a bad change. |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
877
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:38:00 -
[607] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:You all make some very valid points... I'll be interested to see if CCP respond to these concerns and refine their plans. Ps. i love the ground glass comment and can't disagree that wormhole need more content over mechanic change.
Thanks Rek, we all truly want the same thing here, a vibrant space alive and thriving. With no playstyle dominating all others. We just need to steer CCP towards that goal, which is good for them too. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
382
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:40:00 -
[608] - Quote
So here my 2 Cents to this Topic. First sorry for my english.
So in the frist time i get negative Feelings for this idea but after some time i see the possibilities. Please don't make the mistake to think only in the C5 / C6 World. I think people in the lower WH will have more chance to get kills.
Rember the HS Wormholes, if you don't like what you see, you jump back to HS. So with these change you will have the chance to shoot down the Pilot from HS. Dual Web on the Ship and he will never get back into jump range in time.
Same at other WHs. You don't have to wait that the pilot jump back. Web him. So I think the Change will most effect Cap Pilots, and not so much people who use BS to close.
If CCP change the income lvl from WH to a lvl where more people go to WH space, it will be more interesting for PVP. So don't think so negative, think about the possibilities ......
Greatings from Austria .
Kira Hhallas - Austrian EvE Community - ingame =+ûsterreich= -
Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
880
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:52:00 -
[609] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:So here my 2 Cents to this Topic. First sorry for my english.
So in the frist time i get negative Feelings for this idea but after some time i see the possibilities. Please don't make the mistake to think only in the C5 / C6 World. I think people in the lower WH will have more chance to get kills.
Rember the HS Wormholes, if you don't like what you see, you jump back to HS. So with these change you will have the chance to shoot down the Pilot from HS. Dual Web on the Ship and he will never get back into jump range in time.
Same at other WHs. You don't have to wait that the pilot jump back. Web him. So I think the Change will most effect Cap Pilots, and not so much people who use BS to close.
If CCP change the income lvl from WH to a lvl where more people go to WH space, it will be more interesting for PVP. So don't think so negative, think about the possibilities ......
Greatings from Austria .
Thanks for your comments, your English is much better than my German. The danger in trying to encourage more kills is that it often has the opposite effect and drives potential targets away. Encouraging movement brings more potential targets, funnelling them into a killzone, gives short term gains and then a great drop off in movements. No one could say that Gatecamps encourage people into Lowsec? They are part of what keeps it comparatively empty in spite of most routes in being open.
So in short if you wish to encourage PVP (and even ganking too as that has a role), one increases traffic, one does not put in mechanics to reduce it. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:53:00 -
[610] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote: Explain to me how this change (the 40km thing) will make anything better. Please use only facts and stear clear of speculation and extrapolated BS.
Facts: CCP Fozzie wrote: The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
Anything else and i would just be speculating or giving you my personal opinion. +1 |
|
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
359
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:55:00 -
[611] - Quote
Kira Hhallas wrote:So here my 2 Cents to this Topic. First sorry for my english.
So in the frist time i get negative Feelings for this idea but after some time i see the possibilities. Please don't make the mistake to think only in the C5 / C6 World. I think people in the lower WH will have more chance to get kills.
Rember the HS Wormholes, if you don't like what you see, you jump back to HS. So with these change you will have the chance to shoot down the Pilot from HS. Dual Web on the Ship and he will never get back into jump range in time.
Same at other WHs. You don't have to wait that the pilot jump back. Web him. So I think the Change will most effect Cap Pilots, and not so much people who use BS to close.
If CCP change the income lvl from WH to a lvl where more people go to WH space, it will be more interesting for PVP. So don't think so negative, think about the possibilities ......
Greatings from Austria .
You have just described ganking. You did not describe pvp. The paradox. You get your gank.... how many more times is that guy gonna jump into a wh? This change will provide cheap short term thrills.
Don't get me wrong - having a way to womp up on the HS wh heros would delight me to no end, but realistically - WH space has to bump up against empire somewhere. Where it does (HS WH) the compromise is that a guy can jump out when he needs/wants to.
Seek to add fun and engaging content while maintaining balance grasshopper. With out proper balance stuff falls over. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
359
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 12:58:00 -
[612] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: Explain to me how this change (the 40km thing) will make anything better. Please use only facts and stear clear of speculation and extrapolated BS.
Facts: CCP Fozzie wrote: The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
Anything else and i would just be speculating or giving you my personal opinion... But one thing i'm looking forward to is being able to kill people on a HS wormhole before they can get in jump range.
So it's a bad change because you have nothing (NOTHING) good to factually say about it. All your prior posts have suddenly become empty and without meaning.
(yeah I have a shocked an amazed gasp on my fice right now) |
Cirillith
Bean-shidh The Nameless Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:00:00 -
[613] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: Explain to me how this change (the 40km thing) will make anything better. Please use only facts and stear clear of speculation and extrapolated BS.
Facts: CCP Fozzie wrote: The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
Anything else and i would just be speculating or giving you my personal opinion.
Yea... Through last like 30 pages we kinda enraged, shared our speculations or some just said NO to that change.
I think we should - I do not believe I'm saying this - just wait for response from DEVs... I know that information we have now are kinda small and many of us are very concerned about them, but hey - we should stop panicking and wait for some details, analyze them and then if big picture will be dumb/unwelcome/ruining WH, only then we should enrage.
Meanwhile maybe we should concentrate on giving some ideas how to improve WH? For sure we should stop writing again and again how these changes will be bad. I think almost all sized entities from WH and even some from HS or null wrote here their opinion. Let's hope now CCP Fozzie or someone else will respond quickly. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1669
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:04:00 -
[614] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: Explain to me how this change (the 40km thing) will make anything better. Please use only facts and stear clear of speculation and extrapolated BS.
Facts: CCP Fozzie wrote: The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
Anything else and i would just be speculating or giving you my personal opinion... But one thing i'm looking forward to is being able to kill people on a HS wormhole before they can get in jump range. So it's a bad change because you have nothing (NOTHING) good to factually say about it. All your prior posts have suddenly become empty and without meaning. (yeah I have a shocked an amazed gasp on my fice right now)
Your argument was based on 40km. I just proved why the basis for your argument was wrong.
What more do you want from me? +1 |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:07:00 -
[615] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:
I think a lot of you folks are focussed on the little picture. How this change will make this or that more or less fun. I'm asking you to look at the bigger picture. What does wh space have that has made it what it is? WH mechanics.
The big 3 are: 1. no local 2. mass limits 3. polarization timers
These 3 things are what made/makes wh space what it is. Decloaking out of jump range takes away 1 of the 3 pillars of wh PVP - the ability to control wh mass. This change will take away that control. Some will argue it just adds risk to wh control.
Let's be honest - you catch a cap out of jump range - it's not gonna make it back. We're not a bunch of marmites camping th 4-4 undock. We know how to web. We know how to bump. Saying it adds risk is just crap. This change makes capital size loot pinatas. Larger corps are all for it. Smaller corps are all against it. It's pretty clear to all parties what this change is about. This is a clear choice by CCP to push the blob into wh space or stand up for the little guys.
This is about ganking guys rolling wh - it's not about pvp. This is cheap stuff pvp. Counter - get a 30 man t3 fleet to protect your rolling assets. If you don't have one, make one.
It doesn't take your second pillar away in any way shape or form, it slightly delays it. It's got nothing to do with the blob or any such rubbish. A cap 1m out or 100km out of a WH is a loot pinata, this change doesn't change that in any way shape or form. It's just clearer now.
Right now you have one direction on ship choice, one. You go point blank scram web or you die. Period. EVERY FIGHT through a WH start in Scram/Web range. EVERY ONE. NO EXCEPTIONS.
This change allows gaps to form, allow kitting ships to exist. This allows other ship classes like recons and interceptors to be more useful by catching targets further away. We may even start to see shield ships again.
Here's the thing, when you have room to move, you can fight bigger groups. Go check out CCP Rise's pre CCP Youtube Channel, plenty of vids on there with him doing exactly that. When you start caught and pummelled the only options you have are jump back or die. This'll give you a new one, manoeuvre.
Random side note, it'd be really cool if you came out the polar opposite side of the WH you came in and kept up your speed. Figuring out the vector to the WH when you click jump shouldn't be that hard and neither is reversing it. Ships that undock already start at speed so that code is already there. |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
883
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:08:00 -
[616] - Quote
Cirillith wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote: Explain to me how this change (the 40km thing) will make anything better. Please use only facts and stear clear of speculation and extrapolated BS.
Facts: CCP Fozzie wrote: The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
Anything else and i would just be speculating or giving you my personal opinion. Yea... Through last like 30 pages we kinda enraged, shared our speculations or some just said NO to that change. I think we should - I do not believe I'm saying this - just wait for response from DEVs... I know that information we have now are kinda small and many of us are very concerned about them, but hey - we should stop panicking and wait for some details, analyze them and then if big picture will be dumb/unwelcome/ruining WH, only then we should enrage. Meanwhile maybe we should concentrate on giving some ideas how to improve WH? For sure we should stop writing again and again how these changes will be bad. I think almost all sized entities from WH and even some from HS or null wrote here their opinion. Let's hope now CCP Fozzie or someone else will respond quickly.
It is important that when something like this appears on Sisi and is discovered to give our response clearly and immidiately. The reality is that it is hard to reverse something once it is on Sisi and well nigh impossible once it has reached the stage of a Dev blog as a great deal of developer time has been spent by then, and no one will want to waste that.
If CCP have listened to bad advice, then NOW is the time to unscramble that before it is too late, and hopefully CCP will be more careful who they listen to next time.......... There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Freddie Merrcury
Daktaklakpak.
119
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:10:00 -
[617] - Quote
Someone tell the dev's to put down the Brennavin and use their brain's for a change.
And remove the goddamn Odyssey scanner already. Thats the actual problem, not WH jump distance. I been kicked out of better homes than this. |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:14:00 -
[618] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote: It doesn't take your second pillar away in any way shape or form, it slightly delays it. It's got nothing to do with the blob or any such rubbish. A cap 1m out or 100km out of a WH is a loot pinata, this change doesn't change that in any way shape or form. It's just clearer now.
Right now you have one direction on ship choice, one. You go point blank scram web or you die. Period. EVERY FIGHT through a WH start in Scram/Web range. EVERY ONE. NO EXCEPTIONS.
This change allows gaps to form, allow kitting ships to exist. This allows other ship classes like recons and interceptors to be more useful by catching targets further away. We may even start to see shield ships again.
Here's the thing, when you have room to move, you can fight bigger groups. Go check out CCP Rise's pre CCP Youtube Channel, plenty of vids on there with him doing exactly that. When you start caught and pummelled the only options you have are jump back or die. This'll give you a new one, manoeuvre.
Random side note, it'd be really cool if you came out the polar opposite side of the WH you came in and kept up your speed. Figuring out the vector to the WH when you click jump shouldn't be that hard and neither is reversing it. Ships that undock already start at speed so that code is already there.
I wonder what hole you literally live in. I had my ship jump to a WH only to have snipers on the other side. Not everybody goes Geronimo straight up, despite your claim IN CAPS LOCK, which in my book totally proves that it is true.
Rest is just a joke. How do kiting ships spread over huge distance help against blobing armor T3 gank, is beyond me.
Speed thing, agree on that. |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
884
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:21:00 -
[619] - Quote
Come on now, lets not be naive, one will know the exact distance a capital (say a moros) will come out of a hole with this change, you have not created interest or excitement, you have created a string of killzones. X range for capitals xx range for cruisers yy range for battleships.
Why not just allow one to fit whirling blades to the wormhole and be done with it........ There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
359
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:23:00 -
[620] - Quote
Well, as I've stated. 40km is equivalent to any distance outside of jump range (of course someone can say 300km isn't the same as 40km and that would be true, but I think my point is clear). So a compromise of 20km or 10km isn't a compromise.
I don't want anything out of you. I just saw how you were enjoying the post manipulation game, so I thought I would play too. It's not as fun as I thought it would be. You keep at it.... I'm going to go get some lunch. |
|
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:31:00 -
[621] - Quote
Pavel Sohaj wrote:
I wonder what hole you literally live in. I had my ship jump to a WH only to have snipers on the other side. Not everybody goes Geronimo straight up, despite your claim IN CAPS LOCK, which in my book totally proves that it is true.
Rest is just a joke. How do kiting ships spread over huge distance help against blobing armor T3 gank, is beyond me.
Speed thing, agree on that.
C4, as stated earlier. I'm being deliberately hyperbolic because poking the bear is keeping me amused while I download the Singularity update (Curious why it's 950mb...). OF course not everyone goes point blank straight up but it is generally preferable as it's the best way to catch something. That's what happens when everything will decloak within scram range.
It helps as the kiters aren't tackled straight away and killed, they can keep away from the short range T3's and plink away at them. You can warp elsewhere and pick off the quick warpers as they land before the logi gets there and resets their chains up. You can constantly crash back to the WH and try to isolate slower ships into bad positions via polarisation.
Ultimately the fights that stick out in my mind aren't the ones that start with me jumping into some or someone jumping into me. They start via a warp in and things moving all around the place because of it. The close range brawls feel too often like who can count to 100 first. |
Cirillith
Bean-shidh The Nameless Alliance
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:39:00 -
[622] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:[
It is important that when something like this appears on Sisi and is discovered to give our response clearly and immidiately. The reality is that it is hard to reverse something once it is on Sisi and well nigh impossible once it has reached the stage of a Dev blog as a great deal of developer time has been spent by then, and no one will want to waste that.
If CCP have listened to bad advice, then NOW is the time to unscramble that before it is too late, and hopefully CCP will be more careful who they listen to next time..........
YES YOU ARE RIGHT, but i think 30 pages long threadnought including our CSM Representative looking at it and posting in it IS sufficient signal for CCP and any more pages wont do a thing, because we can produce like 1000 pages more, all based on small pack of data, that was told by DEV it will be changing, and if CCP wont discover it now i wont discover it even when it will be 20000 pages.
Of course you can disagree with me :) |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
508
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 13:46:00 -
[623] - Quote
Changes like the cost scaling for industry in K-space is a good way to shake up things and add meaningful choice (it still makes no sense for W-space). It gives people the opportunity to make a hard decision: do I try to manufacture closer to Jita and eat higher costs, or do I try to reduce my manufacturing costs by moving away from Jita. Some people will try to be closer to Jita and use teams to reduce costs, while others will move away.
Changes like spawn distance after jumping through a wormhole doesn't shake up things and doesn't add meaningful choice. The big groups will still roll like they generally have in the past, though maybe with fewer capitals. The small groups will likely not roll at all if the situation looks like it could be hostile, whereas previously they might. During the process if you apply pressure to them, they might make a mistake and you could catch them.
The choice will often be: am I big enough to handle being jumped? Roll. No? Don't roll. Do I need this Orca in W-space now except as part of a siege kit? Nope.
There is also the removal of guerilla tactics surrounding smaller groups jumping into larger groups. This gameplay option will no longer be possible at a wormhole where it is so effective. Less choice.
Dear CCP: W-space has become more than just a layer of exploration content adjacent to K-space that people can farm if they're willing to take the risks. You should accept that and embrace it, supporting it, allowing it to become something different and wonderful, instead of rejecting such emergent behaviour from your player base and trying to force it into something else.
BayneNothos wrote:Right now you have one direction on ship choice, one. You go point blank scram web or you die. Period. EVERY FIGHT through a WH start in Scram/Web range. EVERY ONE. NO EXCEPTIONS.
This change allows gaps to form, allow kitting ships to exist. This allows other ship classes like recons and interceptors to be more useful by catching targets further away. We may even start to see shield ships again. This doesn't allow for more options, it changes the dominant gameplay. You can't bring a brawling fleet to a kiting fleet fight situation: you will die while they fly circles around you. So when this change goes in, expect to see fewer brawling fleets, not because of options, but because it's a forced change. It will be an adaptation.
This does, however, align with the upcoming T3 rebalance; they're considered far too tanky by Nullsec people, but we need them that way because our fights are generally brawling style. So if the fighting style in W-space changes to fewer brawls, T3 Cruisers don't need to be quite as tanky.
It just also means W-space becomes more like everywhere else, instead of having a unique environment with unique mechanics. Nullsec types (and by extension, CCP) will be a little more able to understand this Wormhole space thing, since mechanics match what they're used to.
For anyone tired of the W-space brawling style, roam Low or Null. There are groups that do it and love it. Don't advocate changing W-space to be the same as everywhere else.
|
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:03:00 -
[624] - Quote
Pavel Sohaj wrote: I wonder what hole you literally live in. I had my ship jump to a WH only to have snipers on the other side. Not everybody goes Geronimo straight up, despite your claim IN CAPS LOCK, which in my book totally proves that it is true.
Rest is just a joke. How do kiting ships spread over huge distance help against blobing armor T3 gank, is beyond me.
Speed thing, agree on that.
Oh snap I thought your name seemed familiar. Remember this fight?
https://zkillboard.com/br/1392/
We'll ignore your Alt posting :P
That fight was fun. I knew it was a trap, the Navy Aug kinda made that obvious but I took a swing anyway as I could move around initially. 3/4 of the people on that KM wouldn't be there if whatever it was that caught me had just killed me then and there instead of you guys #falcon'd me to all get on the mail. Even still it was a blast to have. If that was on a WH you woulda caught me before I got any distance and it'd have been over in seconds. Instead I almost took down your Legion. Thats what I'd like more of and this feels like it'd accomplish that.
To Meytal: Yes it is too similar to stargates and I'd much prefer something super unique. I'd just like that uniquety to allow more than one type of fleet comp. |
Kristalll
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
313
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:06:00 -
[625] - Quote
I like the change.
It will likely lead to actual fighting on highsec holes because daytrippers and haulers can't just disengage immediately.
And it will cause caps to actually be committed instead of having an easy escape button.
And I'm sure we can all agree, if the change was the other way around, there would be just as much complaining about CCP making wormholes too easy for farmers and bears. GÇ£Die tryingGÇ¥ is the proudest human thing. |
Siulents Raven
Wormbro Ocularis Inferno
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:12:00 -
[626] - Quote
Keith Planck wrote:I don't think I've ever seen any gaming community as hostile and aggressive to the Devs as the eve community. It really just makes me sad reading some of these posts.
You should check out Anarchy Online's forums, as far as I am concerned this thread is both civil and on point compared to the ragecries that devs over at AO gets.
For the point at hand however, I recently migrated from Anarchy Online to live out my spaceship hardon fantasy. EVE has compared to AO a active PvP scene, and a far better PvP community. I came here interested in small gang PvP, after RvB was kind enough to learn some basics I decided to go looking for shiny ships going BOOOM! Low/High-Sec seam like a blob nightmare, I'll borrow/paraphrase an analogy I read on reddit iirc: "In high-Sec you are drake pilot 125" I don't want that, I am looking for a close knit gang where you can evade and engage as you see fit. W-Space was the obvious choice, it also seamed quite exotic so I decided to make it my home. Thankfully Wormbro let me join, and they are pro guys (just to warm to play right now lads) I thought my future in EVE was secured.
Then I read this thread on reddit where CCP outlines the changes, not knowing how everything in EVE work yet I read most of this thread, and it seam to me this will only benefit blob sized spaceship ***** collectives, and trample lesser errect Corps. I do not understand CCP why you feel the need to conform space to a single equation. Doing so is what killed PvP in Anarchy Online, and now you seam hell bent on doing the same. Go home you are drunk CCP.
Yeah this is not written by a veteran, or a person with years of experience. It is written by a new subscriber to EVE, who wants to make his home here.
In the wisdom of Wu-Tang Clan: "You gotta diversify your bonds!" Embrace the different aspects of EVE space, there is room enough for everyone, and everyone is different. Respect that.
Raven |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
888
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:16:00 -
[627] - Quote
Kristalll wrote:I like the change.
It will likely lead to actual fighting on highsec holes because daytrippers and haulers can't just disengage immediately.
And it will cause caps to actually be committed instead of having an easy escape button.
And I'm sure we can all agree, if the change was the other way around, there would be just as much complaining about CCP making wormholes too easy for farmers and bears.
Actually not, if you kill /gank daytrippers on mass on the HS hole you have succeeded in turning wormholes into losec for HS players.
Changing core physics of the wormhole environment is not trivial. It affects all players in ways that even at this early stage are wildly unpredictable. The initial representation is highly disruptive no matter what the final numbers are and which are picked.
I believe I understand what they are looking for, and I believe that changing the core physics is a poor way of achieving it, as it will not actually achieve what they are hoping for.
I can imagine how it was presented to them and I dearly hope that the proposer did not actually foresee the true results, because if he did CCP have just been awoxed. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
571
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:16:00 -
[628] - Quote
Siulents Raven wrote:Keith Planck wrote:I don't think I've ever seen any gaming community as hostile and aggressive to the Devs as the eve community. It really just makes me sad reading some of these posts. You should check out Anarchy Online's forums, as far as I am concerned this thread is both civil and on point compared to the ragecries that devs over at AO gets. For the point at hand however, I recently migrated from Anarchy Online to live out my spaceship hardon fantasy. EVE has compared to AO a active PvP scene, and a far better PvP community. I came here interested in small gang PvP, after RvB was kind enough to learn some basics I decided to go looking for shiny ships going BOOOM! Low/High-Sec seam like a blob nightmare, I'll borrow/paraphrase an analogy I read on reddit iirc: "In high-Sec you are drake pilot 125" I don't want that, I am looking for a close knit gang where you can evade and engage as you see fit. W-Space was the obvious choice, it also seamed quite exotic so I decided to make it my home. Thankfully Wormbro let me join, and they are pro guys (just to warm to play right now lads) I thought my future in EVE was secured. Then I read this thread on reddit where CCP outlines the changes, not knowing how everything in EVE work yet I read most of this thread, and it seam to me this will only benefit blob sized spaceship ***** collectives, and trample lesser errect Corps. I do not understand CCP why you feel the need to conform space to a single equation. Doing so is what killed PvP in Anarchy Online, and now you seam hell bent on doing the same. Go home you are drunk CCP. Yeah this is not written by a veteran, or a person with years of experience. It is written by a new subscriber to EVE, who wants to make his home here. In the wisdom of Wu-Tang Clan: "You gotta diversify your bonds!" Embrace the different aspects of EVE space, there is room enough for everyone, and everyone is different. Respect that. Raven
Wormbro pro lel
If this change goes through, I'm sure people will adapt. It'll be annoying as ****, but it won't be the end for WHs.
If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Alundil
Isogen 5
625
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:17:00 -
[629] - Quote
Kristalll wrote:It will likely lead to actual fighting on highsec holes because daytrippers and haulers can't just disengage immediately.
These all took place on a hs hole in jump range https://zkillboard.com/br/1394/
It happens already.
I'm right behind you |
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3371
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:19:00 -
[630] - Quote
Given the track record of CCP. It would be shocking if CCP did not actually implement this in some form, regardless of the very logical reasons that have been given why this is a stupid idea. The fact that they actually coded it and implemented it on Sisi before ANY discussion with the players demonstrates their commitment to the idea.
Yes, they will of course tweak the numbers down. But if CCP had any guts they would simultaneously implement something in k-space. What is good for one set of space is good for others. And since distance seems to be mass dependent, I would just love to see what the null sec cartels would say if supercarriers should start spawning , oh I dunno, 75 km away, in a random direction, of the cyno, and Titans 125 km. |
|
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
572
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:24:00 -
[631] - Quote
To be fair, something like this is already in place in k-space with gates, which is what WHs essentially are. Changing it by mass it ********, but spawning not immediately within jump range isn't the end of the world.
Yes WHs are meant to be different than k-space, and you're all special unique flowers, but you may get more beneficial results by accepting that this will go into the game and start trying to lobby for either a flat spawn distance (~5-12km) or to greatly decrease the amount that mass affects spawn distance. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Nash MacAllister
Anomalous Existence Low-Class
152
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:25:00 -
[632] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Facts: CCP Fozzie wrote: The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
Anything else and i would just be speculating or giving you my personal opinion... But one thing i'm looking forward to is being able to kill people on a HS wormhole before they can get in jump range.
I believe, based on what I have read/sen, that this will be a boon for folks like ourselves with a HS static or fighting on HS wormholes in general. I for one look forward to folks jumping in and winding up 20km (or whatever) off the HS. Now their "HS games" may have very real consequences, as it should be.
My first concern is on the wh to wh connectors (all classes). Depending on the final code, anything larger than a BS becomes very risky and unfortunately it hits the smaller wh groups far harder that the larger and more well-established ones due to their inability to provide real security in the form of combat ship support while the Orca motors back to jump. While risk should be present, the way this looks like it will be implemented will, IMHO, drive the smaller groups away from w-space as they will not be able to roll for connections as easily. This limits their availability of sites to run, provide for home wh defense (rolling off aggressors), find routes to be used for basic wh logistical purposes (loot, fuel, etc.), or obtain new chains to explore.
Where I find the most potentially critical issue is in the C5/C6 connectors and the transit of cap ships. While it is fairly rare to see people fight on their static as it is, I believe the risk of having your caps end up somewhere far outside the refit range or even rep range (TBD) of your support could seriously and further limit the occurrence of such fights.
If I had to whittle this down into a main statement this is what I would say: CCP, I would suggest that the majority of us roll to look for "content", not run from it. By making it far more risky to roll wh in almost all situations, and heavily favoring large and well-equipped corporations over the smaller and less-experienced ones, you virtually guarantee a significant reduction in attempts to ever gain a foothold in w-space by new entities because it simply isn't worth the risk or effort. I believe this proposed change in any form near where it currently sits pushes the player base in the opposite direction than should be, and will have a detrimental effect on w-space as a whole. Yes, if you have to ask yourself the question, just assume we are watching you... |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
363
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:25:00 -
[633] - Quote
OK, so it's topped 30 pages. Now would be a great time for some fuzzy err.... Fozzie logic. |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
572
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:26:00 -
[634] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:OK, so it's topped 30 pages. Now would be a great time for some fuzzy err.... Fozzie logic.
Pretty sure it's 30 pages even after an ISD clean up If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
888
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:29:00 -
[635] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Given the track record of CCP. It would be shocking if CCP did not actually implement this in some form, regardless of the very logical reasons that have been given why this is a stupid idea. The fact that they actually coded it and implemented it on Sisi before ANY discussion with the players demonstrates their commitment to the idea.
Yes, they will of course tweak the numbers down. But if CCP had any guts they would simultaneously implement something in k-space. What is good for one set of space is good for others. And since distance seems to be mass dependent, I would just love to see what the null sec cartels would say if supercarriers should start spawning , oh I dunno, 75 km away, in a random direction, of the cyno, and Titans 125 km.
I truly hope you are wrong, messing with core physics does not end well, whether you change the freezing point of water from +2 degrees or + 3 will only change the scale of the disaster, whether you get runaway warming or an ice ball. Neither are a good outcome.
The one thing I can guarantee is this will benefit NO wormhole corp large or small, PvP or PvE. Others may benefit who do not call wormholes their own, but only for a short killing and destruction spree, but they have no interest in the sustainability of wormholes anyway.
There is a saying never attribute to malice where ignorance is a possibility.
I believe the situation has now been explained clearly by wormhole corps of all types.
So ignorance is no longer a possibility. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
222
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:34:00 -
[636] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:OK, so it's topped 30 pages. Now would be a great time for some fuzzy err.... Fozzie logic. Pretty sure it's 30 pages even after an ISD clean up A 9 violation clean up
It would be nice if Fozziebear would pop in, but I'm not expecting it until he's ready to tell us that they appreciate our feedback but they're going live with original code and they think it will be an exciting new feature for Eve, everybody loves features.
Seriously CCP, this is the kind of **** that pisses off your player base so damn much, you've got a large group of players and a CSM trying to debate this with you and you're just ignoring them because you've already coded it. If you're going to ask for feedback, and actually use it, then you should be asking before you're already committed to going live with it regardless of what your players say/want. If you don't give a **** about the feedback, that's my personal belief, then don't ask for it and just lock the thread instead of insulting your players. |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
573
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:51:00 -
[637] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Andrew Jester wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:OK, so it's topped 30 pages. Now would be a great time for some fuzzy err.... Fozzie logic. Pretty sure it's 30 pages even after an ISD clean up A 9 violation clean up It would be nice if Fozziebear would pop in, but I'm not expecting it until he's ready to tell us that they appreciate our feedback but they're going live with original code and they think it will be an exciting new feature for Eve, everybody loves features. Seriously CCP, this is the kind of **** that pisses off your player base so damn much, you've got a large group of players and a CSM trying to debate this with you and you're just ignoring them because you've already coded it. If you're going to ask for feedback, and actually use it, then you should be asking before you're already committed to going live with it regardless of what your players say/want. If you don't give a **** about the feedback, that's my personal belief, then don't ask for it and just lock the thread instead of insulting your players.
I think I dinged 7 out of 9 of those violations. Forgot to insult ISDs and CCP .-. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
509
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:52:00 -
[638] - Quote
Siulents Raven wrote:Keith Planck wrote:I don't think I've ever seen any gaming community as hostile and aggressive to the Devs as the eve community. It really just makes me sad reading some of these posts. You should check out Anarchy Online's forums, as far as I am concerned this thread is both civil and on point compared to the ragecries that devs over at AO gets. For the point at hand however, I recently migrated from Anarchy Online to live out my spaceship hardon fantasy. EVE has compared to AO a active PvP scene, and a far better PvP community. I came here interested in small gang PvP, after RvB was kind enough to learn some basics I decided to go looking for shiny ships going BOOOM! Low/High-Sec seam like a blob nightmare, I'll borrow/paraphrase an analogy I read on reddit iirc: "In high-Sec you are drake pilot 125" I don't want that, I am looking for a close knit gang where you can evade and engage as you see fit. W-Space was the obvious choice, it also seamed quite exotic so I decided to make it my home. Thankfully Wormbro let me join, and they are pro guys (just to warm to play right now lads) I thought my future in EVE was secured. Then I read this thread on reddit where CCP outlines the changes, not knowing how everything in EVE work yet I read most of this thread, and it seam to me this will only benefit blob sized spaceship ***** collectives, and trample lesser errect Corps. I do not understand CCP why you feel the need to conform space to a single equation. Doing so is what killed PvP in Anarchy Online, and now you seam hell bent on doing the same. Go home you are drunk CCP. Yeah this is not written by a veteran, or a person with years of experience. It is written by a new subscriber to EVE, who wants to make his home here. In the wisdom of Wu-Tang Clan: "You gotta diversify your bonds!" Embrace the different aspects of EVE space, there is room enough for everyone, and everyone is different. Respect that. Raven
Wormbro are a cool bunch.
Dust forums are pretty bad as well way more hostile than over here. Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
574
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:56:00 -
[639] - Quote
At this point areas of LS has a chance to be less blobby than WHs tbh...
WH forums don't get hostile, just butthurt If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 14:59:00 -
[640] - Quote
corbexx wrote: Dust forums are pretty bad as well way more hostile than over here.
To be fair on the Dust Bunnies, I'm sure if next Fanfest EvE Keynote CCP announced EvE2 and left with a peace out like they did in the Dust one last year, we'd be acting the same. |
|
Rain6637
Team Evil
15568
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 15:00:00 -
[641] - Quote
still trying to decide if this is a compromise over that wh life extender thing the goonies have wanted for some time. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
223
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 15:01:00 -
[642] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Andrew Jester wrote:Serendipity Lost wrote:OK, so it's topped 30 pages. Now would be a great time for some fuzzy err.... Fozzie logic. Pretty sure it's 30 pages even after an ISD clean up A 9 violation clean up It would be nice if Fozziebear would pop in, but I'm not expecting it until he's ready to tell us that they appreciate our feedback but they're going live with original code and they think it will be an exciting new feature for Eve, everybody loves features. Seriously CCP, this is the kind of **** that pisses off your player base so damn much, you've got a large group of players and a CSM trying to debate this with you and you're just ignoring them because you've already coded it. If you're going to ask for feedback, and actually use it, then you should be asking before you're already committed to going live with it regardless of what your players say/want. If you don't give a **** about the feedback, that's my personal belief, then don't ask for it and just lock the thread instead of insulting your players. I think I dinged 7 out of 9 of those violations. Forgot to insult ISDs and CCP .-. Oh I know I hit a few of the marks as well and I did insult CCP, not the ISD though he's just doing his job, these kinds of BS Dev posts tend to bring it out in us.
CCP, you can ask for feedback or you can commit to a change and tell us about it after the fact but you can't do both. Now, in the words of my grandmother, straighten up and fly right. Damnit. |
Necharo Rackham
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 15:15:00 -
[643] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote: Right now you have one direction on ship choice, one. You go point blank scram web or you die. Period. EVERY FIGHT through a WH start in Scram/Web range. EVERY ONE. NO EXCEPTIONS.
This change allows gaps to form, allow kitting ships to exist. This allows other ship classes like recons and interceptors to be more useful by catching targets further away. We may even start to see shield ships again.
It still won't. 40km is the maximum range, kitey ships (which will mean cruisers in the current meta) will end up on the far side well within the range of boosted scrams and webs (and bubbles), at which point they'll just melt.
It would be similar to the situation where a kitey gang jumps through a nullsec gate into bubbled armour fleet. They only have to have a small percentage of your numbers in logi ships before you are unable to engage them anyway because your DPS is all spread out and they can rep more than your effective DPS.
Besides, how would you extract even assuming you could burn out? |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
513
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 15:15:00 -
[644] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Yes it is too similar to stargates and I'd much prefer something super unique. I'd just like that uniquety to allow more than one type of fleet comp. Currently, we have these major, defining attributes:
- free local intel vs no local - travel via static stargates vs variable wormholes
Lowsec and Nullsec offer local and stargates, while w-space offers no local and wormholes. Lowsec and Nullsec also have K-K wormholes, with increased frequency recently, so the only thing they don't have are systems without local.
K-space is great. It offers its own playstyle for anyone who wants it. W-space is great also. It offers its own playstyle for anyone who wants that.
The two are different from one another, and should remain so. If it started differently, maybe we would indeed complain for it to change to what we have. But precedent is set, and over the years, people have adjusted to this way of life. It's not a simple bugfix or quality of life improvement. It's on the order of changing how cynos and bridging work. It's the very core of our gameplay.
Instead of changing either of those two to be like the other, we need to have a type of space that has stargates but without local. This is in addition to W-space ... a third "universe" in the database. It doesn't mean build stargates in current, existing W-space.
Take all of your planned iterations for changing wormhole mechanics, constructable stargates, dockable structures, and whatever else you have planned for W-space that doesn't align with the general community desires, and use them to build a new type of space that doesn't have local.
|
Bleedingthrough
Raptor Navy
66
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 15:46:00 -
[645] - Quote
Meytal wrote:BayneNothos wrote:Yes it is too similar to stargates and I'd much prefer something super unique. I'd just like that uniquety to allow more than one type of fleet comp. Currently, we have these major, defining attributes: - free local intel vs no local - travel via static stargates vs variable wormholes Lowsec and Nullsec offer local and stargates, while w-space offers no local and wormholes. Lowsec and Nullsec also have K-K wormholes, with increased frequency recently, so the only thing they don't have are systems without local. K-space is great. It offers its own playstyle for anyone who wants it. W-space is great also. It offers its own playstyle for anyone who wants that. The two are different from one another, and should remain so. If it started differently, maybe we would indeed complain for it to change to what we have. But precedent is set, and over the years, people have adjusted to this way of life. It's not a simple bugfix or quality of life improvement. It's on the order of changing how cynos and bridging work. It's the very core of our gameplay. Instead of changing either of those two to be like the other, we need to have a type of space that has stargates but without local. This is in addition to W-space ... a third "universe" in the database. It doesn't mean build stargates in current, existing W-space. Take all of your planned iterations for changing wormhole mechanics, constructable stargates, dockable structures, and whatever else you have planned for W-space that doesn't align with the general community desires, and use them to build a new type of space that doesn't have local.
Jove space could be just that if the Jovians would die out. Only accessible via WHs and no local. That would be so awesome. :-) |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 16:15:00 -
[646] - Quote
Just for the lulz, 8 jumps with a mega and a pod on Singularity. Dunno if this is old or new jump range numbers.
8 Plate Mega + MWD High: 9.4km Low: 8.0km Average: 8.8km
Pod High: 6.2km Low: 3.6km Average: 5.1km
Really just stopping you from auto jumping back at that distance. Anyone bored enough to go jump a carrier through some WH's a few times and do the same? |
|
ISD Cyberdyne
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1551
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 16:59:00 -
[647] - Quote
Cleaned up a few posts commenting on forum moderation. Please remember that this thread is about the "Distance that you're being ejected out of a wormhole depends on mass." Please keep it on topic.
Some posters seem rusty on the forum rules. Please take a few minutes to re-familiarize yourselves with the rules. Thanks!
Quote:11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.
The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category. ISD Cyberdyne Lieutenant Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
227
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 17:46:00 -
[648] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:ISD Cyberdyne wrote:Cleaned up a few posts commenting on forum moderation. Please remember that this thread is about the "Distance that you're being ejected out of a wormhole depends on mass." Please keep it on topic. Some posters seem rusty on the forum rules. Please take a few minutes to re-familiarize yourselves with the rules. Thanks! Quote:11. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.
The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a petition under the Community & Forums Category. How the hell is this still 31 pages if you cleaned it up? I hope my Rorqual posts didn't get deleted those had some great ideas :< Because, despite the cleaning, we have still been discussing this for 31 pages. How many pages since Fozzie deigned to come in here and tell us that he is ignoring our feedback?
On the subject of Rorq's; what did you think of my super-booster idea? |
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
1909
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 17:55:00 -
[649] - Quote
Mizhir wrote:Would be hilarious if the same things happened to everything that jumps to a cyno. Nullsec would burn when their precious supers suddenly lands over 50km away from the cyno.
power project this lol. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:
Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1673
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 18:11:00 -
[650] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Just for the lulz, 8 jumps with a mega and a pod on Singularity. Dunno if this is old or new jump range numbers.
8 Plate Mega + MWD High: 9.4km Low: 8.0km Average: 8.8km
Pod High: 6.2km Low: 3.6km Average: 5.1km
Really just stopping you from auto jumping back at that distance. Anyone bored enough to go jump a carrier through some WH's a few times and do the same?
So we can kind of assume that capitals will spawn 10km away? ... which would take you around one and a half minutes to get into jump range. +1 |
|
Rei Moon
Murderous Inc
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 18:15:00 -
[651] - Quote
Hmm shouldn't this have been proposed before even being coded for SiSi. I don't feel like I'm getting much respect for my currently six paid accounts. Not that it matters in a million accounts game |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
227
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 18:24:00 -
[652] - Quote
Rei Moon wrote:Hmm shouldn't this have been proposed before even being coded for SiSi. I don't feel like I'm getting much respect for my currently six paid accounts. Not that it matters in a million accounts game You must be new here..... |
Siulents Raven
Wormbro Ocularis Inferno
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 18:41:00 -
[653] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:Siulents Raven wrote:Keith Planck wrote:I don't think I've ever seen any gaming community as hostile and aggressive to the Devs as the eve community. It really just makes me sad reading some of these posts. You should check out Anarchy Online's forums, as far as I am concerned this thread is both civil and on point compared to the ragecries that devs over at AO gets. For the point at hand however, I recently migrated from Anarchy Online to live out my spaceship hardon fantasy. EVE has compared to AO a active PvP scene, and a far better PvP community. I came here interested in small gang PvP, after RvB was kind enough to learn some basics I decided to go looking for shiny ships going BOOOM! Low/High-Sec seam like a blob nightmare, I'll borrow/paraphrase an analogy I read on reddit iirc: "In high-Sec you are drake pilot 125" I don't want that, I am looking for a close knit gang where you can evade and engage as you see fit. W-Space was the obvious choice, it also seamed quite exotic so I decided to make it my home. Thankfully Wormbro let me join, and they are pro guys (just to warm to play right now lads) I thought my future in EVE was secured. Then I read this thread on reddit where CCP outlines the changes, not knowing how everything in EVE work yet I read most of this thread, and it seam to me this will only benefit blob sized spaceship ***** collectives, and trample lesser errect Corps. I do not understand CCP why you feel the need to conform space to a single equation. Doing so is what killed PvP in Anarchy Online, and now you seam hell bent on doing the same. Go home you are drunk CCP. Yeah this is not written by a veteran, or a person with years of experience. It is written by a new subscriber to EVE, who wants to make his home here. In the wisdom of Wu-Tang Clan: "You gotta diversify your bonds!" Embrace the different aspects of EVE space, there is room enough for everyone, and everyone is different. Respect that. Raven Wormbro pro lel If this change goes through, I'm sure people will adapt. It'll be annoying as ****, but it won't be the end for WHs.
I like to think that if it ain't broke, don't fix it. I have always found that developers doing changes just because they can have a higher risk of alienating a player base. Of course to certain degree developers should ignore the players, because players have a nifty way of proposing something bat-crazy. In this case it seems to be devs doing that. |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
891
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 18:49:00 -
[654] - Quote
Bat - crazy.
That is the most concise description of the suggested change yet.
Now, being as Fozzy is not bat - crazy, who suggested this change? And who suggested it would be good for wormhole space?
Dear god, please do not let it be Mr make it more pssssssh! ? There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Theon Severasse
SniggWaffe WAFFLES.
73
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 18:54:00 -
[655] - Quote
Went to bed and this was at 5 pages, come back now and it's up to 30.
Might get a second CCP reply when it gets to 60 ;)
On point though, I don't know much about WHs, but this seems like a really stupid idea. |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
69
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 18:57:00 -
[656] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Is removing ore sites from ship system scan and returning them to being probed sites in those changes? |
Light Shock
Florida Sand Hermits Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 19:01:00 -
[657] - Quote
Revenant thread goes 30+ pages. Gets 1 CCP reply.
Working as intended. |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
228
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 19:04:00 -
[658] - Quote
Light Shock wrote:Revenant thread goes 30+ pages. Gets 1 CCP reply.
Working as intended. Still a better page numbe vs Dev response ratio than the Rapid Missile thread.... |
Light Shock
Florida Sand Hermits Brothers of Tangra
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 19:12:00 -
[659] - Quote
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Light Shock wrote:Revenant thread goes 30+ pages. Gets 1 CCP reply.
Working as intended. Still a better page numbe vs Dev response ratio than the Rapid Missile thread....
Only reason it got a reply in the first place was because WH community testers found it on SiSI before they had a chance to stealth launch it to live.
So really you can rule the first reply as a no-count. |
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
228
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 19:22:00 -
[660] - Quote
Light Shock wrote:scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:Light Shock wrote:Revenant thread goes 30+ pages. Gets 1 CCP reply.
Working as intended. Still a better page numbe vs Dev response ratio than the Rapid Missile thread.... Only reason it got a reply in the first place was because WH community testers found it on SiSI before they had a chance to stealth launch it to live. So really you can rule the first reply as a no-count. So what you're saying is that WH'ers caught Fozzie with his hand in the WH "cookie jar" and now he's doing damage control? That's crazy talk! Remember, Fozzie told us that know one is out to get us, and if we can't trust CCP to take player feedback into account when they launch new features then who can we trust? I almost managed to type that with a straight face, almost. You would think that they would have learned by now that we get pretty irritable when they try to ninja **** in like this. If i tried to ninja a free account I would be banned but when they change the entire foundation of how a wormhole works we're just supposed to lube up and wait? Fozziebear, the majority of responses in this thread have expressed numerous and valid concerns that you have done nothing to alleviate. Yes, I understand that quieting player concerns is hard to do when you're busy ninja-coding a new feature but maybe, just maybe, your life would be a little easier if you had brought this up before hand. What do you think? Is that a reasonable request?
Also, you might have noticed that Cyberdyne has been pretty busy and I think that most of the outrage that was cleaned up was due to the fact that you deceived your player base intentionally. We had to stumble upon this ourselves or else we wouldn't have known anything about it until you had already coded it and had it ready to go live. Can you understand just how slimy that seems from our end? Maybe next time you can get a larger number of polite responses if you stop trying to slip stuff past your players and actually involve the people who are subscribing to your game.
Have a nice day,
|
|
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
69
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 19:24:00 -
[661] - Quote
Didnt they also want to delay sig detection on new wh to favor the other side? |
Rei Moon
Murderous Inc
9
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 19:37:00 -
[662] - Quote
definition of other side? Also? More Dusettes? |
Altirius Saldiaro
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
69
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 19:40:00 -
[663] - Quote
Rei Moon wrote:definition of other side? Also? More Dusettes?
Look it up. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=331782&find=unread |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
59
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 20:10:00 -
[664] - Quote
Yeah, you guys really think there will be a devresponse? Fozzie already stated there will be a devblog and they are not going to risk getting **** on for one part of the "revamp".
BayneNothos wrote:Just for the lulz, 8 jumps with a mega and a pod on Singularity. Dunno if this is old or new jump range numbers.
8 Plate Mega + MWD High: 9.4km Low: 8.0km Average: 8.8km
Pod High: 6.2km Low: 3.6km Average: 5.1km
Really just stopping you from auto jumping back at that distance. Anyone bored enough to go jump a carrier through some WH's a few times and do the same?
Under the premise the numbers for caps haven-¦t changed: Mass: Pod 32000 kg ->5km Mega around 100M -> 9km Archon 1100M ->35 km
Have fun getting the numerics on this curve. So even in a pod chances are good you-¦ll get popped before you can jump back. So if I-¦m hauling ships in I have to use a frig with propmod every time to be sure. This is ********. Last time I moved I already had to jump 30+ frigs-cruisers out one by one since orca would have murdered the hole too fast. Ofc I could just have clonejumped into an empty pod and be revieved in my POS. Oh no wait, that was nullsec.... With these changes you can now easily camp holes, without having to follow the target and get polarized youself. Newsflash CCP, some of us in wormholespace like our holemechanics and don-¦t like gates. There are even really crazy people like me who like fighting on highsecs. Way harder to get killmails but if I-¦d like easy I-¦d only play on my FW toon. Trying to survive through polarization, crossjumping, forced polarization, etc all those nice tactics neglected by duming down. With these changes it all turns into gatecrashing and praying against 90% webs. The only benefit anyone can see coming from this change is the higher risk at closing a c5/6. Farmers do that once a farmrun, maybe twice, so it really doesnt phase them much. PvP entities will hate their lives when rolling for content and if they roll into each other and see they can-¦t fight because bad numbers on one side they will just agree to let one side roll freely or log off. I-¦ll stop thinking about this chance because I might go bald over it. I really hope this devblog is almost ready, but I am not expecting anything but good intentions and horrible implementation.
Also I just reread the first line of Fozzie-¦s post about sigdelay: Team Five O has been working on a few concepts for improvements to wormhole mechanics and we wanted to run one idea by you all to start some discussion in the community. 2014.03.23 So this "idea" about spawndistance probably has been on the table for 5+ months, esp if it really came from Chitsa/WH roundtable. I won-¦t even bother to look for the last devresponse there but I bet it is 4+ months old. I-¦ll just stop here otherwise ISD might happen. |
Chitsa Jason
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
1272
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 20:14:00 -
[665] - Quote
So I read it most though the thread. In the end I do agree with a change but I do not agree with current implementation. What I think is that CCP and CSM should get more varied feedback in the form of talking to wspace community. It would be great to get game designers and some major wspace movers on same comms and just to see what happens.
My personal opinion is that this change is neither good or bad. It is more of a shakeup of wspace.
TLDR: Wspace talk to the devs, try to channel your opinions through the sources you got avialible. Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me |
Cirillith
Bean-shidh The Nameless Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 20:17:00 -
[666] - Quote
Shilalasar wrote: Also I just reread the first line of Fozzie-¦s post about sigdelay: Team Five O has been working on a few concepts for improvements to wormhole mechanics and we wanted to run one idea by you all to start some discussion in the community. 2014.03.23 So this "idea" about spawndistance probably has been on the table for 5+ months, esp if it really came from Chitsa/WH roundtable. I won-¦t even bother to look for the last devresponse there but I bet it is 4+ months old. I-¦ll just stop here otherwise ISD might happen.
Why stop? I wont - if you are right then we are already screwd, because none will probably even look at our opinion and it will be like with spread after opening data or relic can - it was implemented and removed year later... I hope you are wrong.
On the other hand CCP Gargant - PR guy - didn't know about this (hes on vacations) or didn't want to share it with us during our meeting and drinking here in Warsaw...
I'm kinda more and more concern about silence form CCP out this all... |
Von Keigai
44
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 20:22:00 -
[667] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Just for the lulz, 8 jumps with a mega and a pod on Singularity. Dunno if this is old or new jump range numbers.
8 Plate Mega + MWD High: 9.4km Low: 8.0km Average: 8.8km
Pod High: 6.2km Low: 3.6km Average: 5.1km
This concerns me. It appears that every ship will always appear outside of the wormhole's decloak distance. This will make my form of hunting considerably less viable.
I hunt in wormholes. Usually I am alone, in a stealth bomber. I hunt for any kind of weak ship not in a POS, but among the most usual things I hunt (though not kill) are cloaky scouts. If a cloaky scout can always cloak safely against me, my chance of killing him is zero unless he makes a mistake or I happen to be right on top of him. Currently, there is always the incentive to go for it, on the small but real chance than he is within the wormhole's decloak distance. If he is, then I have the time to lock and can possibly kill. What usually happens is I uncloak, and I go for the lock but fail when he cloaks. This is good because I get a big thrill, and he gets a thrill. We both end up with racing hearts and feeling alive. People who feel alive keep playing.
Another thing I dislike about this, is its effect on me, the hunter. It makes me safer, since currently I too can be killed if I happen to appear too close to a wormhole and someone is there hunting me. Every jump I make into a new system is a bit dangerous. Don't take that way.
vonkeigai.blogspot.com |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
514
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 20:32:00 -
[668] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:So I read it most though the thread. In the end I do agree with a change but I do not agree with current implementation. What I think is that CCP and CSM should get more varied feedback in the form of talking to wspace community. It would be great to get game designers and some major wspace movers on same comms and just to see what happens.
My personal opinion is that this change is neither good or bad. It is more of a shakeup of wspace.
TLDR: Wspace talk to the devs, try to channel your opinions through the sources you got avialible. What other things did you suggest to CCP while you were CSM? |
Kusum Fawn
State Protectorate Caldari State
512
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 21:12:00 -
[669] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:So I read it most though the thread. In the end I do agree with a change but I do not agree with current implementation. What I think is that CCP and CSM should get more varied feedback in the form of talking to wspace community. It would be great to get game designers and some major wspace movers on same comms and just to see what happens.
My personal opinion is that this change is neither good or bad. It is more of a shakeup of wspace.
TLDR: Wspace talk to the devs, try to channel your opinions through the sources you got avialible.
Any way you could get a tally of individual posters for and against this change as it is currently on sisi / proposed? The only reason CCP never does this is because their changes recently have all been really bad. Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
Aelyras Altol
Stryker Industries
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 21:12:00 -
[670] - Quote
Van Kuzco wrote:Why not just invert the changes? Small things exit a WH further away and big things exit closer.
This way kiting/shield cruiser fleets can actually be a viable meta. It would result in a much larger variety of fleet compositions rather than just brawling armor fleets.
Beat you to it sorry =( |
|
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
891
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 21:14:00 -
[671] - Quote
Aelyras Altol wrote:This has no doubt been said elsewhere in the thread, but why don't they reverse the implementation of this, make it so the larger your ships mass, less it drifts from the hole. With this rolling will go on unchanged, while allowing possible change away from the armor brawling fleets into other setups due to landing outside scram/web range of most ships.
The problem is when you change core physics, you have significant secondary effects that need to be understood and designed around, and that is a major undertaking.
Randomly shaking things up results in a messy pile of disorganised items.
Things don't naturally order themselves, they need thought and planning.
They do not seem to have reached that point. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
Van Kuzco
Stryker Industries
75
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 21:15:00 -
[672] - Quote
Aelyras Altol wrote:Van Kuzco wrote:Why not just invert the changes? Small things exit a WH further away and big things exit closer.
This way kiting/shield cruiser fleets can actually be a viable meta. It would result in a much larger variety of fleet compositions rather than just brawling armor fleets. Beat you to it sorry =(
You were typing this up as I was talking about it in mumble werent you! |
umnikar
Fishbone Industries
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 21:57:00 -
[673] - Quote
It's taking away the control of wormholes(defense and offense) in some way, isnt it? Is that really a bad idea? If it will keep chains open it will create content for sure. It's just not that easy anymore to select your wanted content(weaker corp ) - is that the point? |
Samsara Nolte
Sternenschauer AG W.A.S. Alliance - Weapons Armor or Shield
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 22:35:00 -
[674] - Quote
Dear CCP Devolopers who are in charge of this propositon,
in response to that and on behalf of our Alliance, we deemed it necessary to write something regarding your, in this thread stated, intentions.
As you may know the majority of the wormhole residing corps and alliances are pretty small compared to the null and low sec ones. This is, depending in what wormhole you reside in, not solely a choice by the corps but a restriction of the hole itself. There-¦s a certain limit of isk to be made inside your Home system depending on the class of it. Then contrary to popular belief living in w-space not only earns you isk but also costs you. You have to pay for the fuel your pos is constantly consuming, and in contrast to low and nullsec residents our poses aren-¦ t paying for themselves through moon-mining GÇô a passive income. In fact in my opinion, w-space doesn-¦ t have any form of passive income GÇô let me elaborate this PI: we have no local the act of getting our produced stuff from poco-¦s in itself is a great deal of risk contrary to parts of space where you have local GÇô you never know if next to the poco you are warping sits a cloaky interdictor waiting for you to land on grid to be ready to bubble an kill your ship and your Pod (the last thing especially is for w-space residents a cruel thing to happen ... more to this later) Any form of Production be it reaction or other things can-¦t be considered passive because there is a huge deal of effort necessary to get your base materials inside your wh. And considering what kind of hole you live in, you might have to expose your ship your cargo and your capsule to the risk of having to jump through a number of inhabited wormholes GÇô which is exorbitant more dangerous than being able to cyno your things from station to station.
This pretty much forces us WH-Resindents to actually play eve and this more than once a month or week, which is, in most cases, the intervall null sec ones have to empty their silos for their pos to be paid.
We WH- residents accepted a great deal of inconveniences for us to live here. Dangerous and complex logistics the lack of the ability to Clone jump to wherever we want GÇô the most stressing of them not being able to jump inside our Wormhole we live in. What means in most cases losing your pod requires your buddys to search you a way back inside and for you to travel ,in most cases, some pretty big distances 20 or a a lot more jumps ... which spells for most activities at this evening that you are out GÇô whats entirely different in other parts of space ... (lost your capsule GÇô no biggie my med station is 1-2 jumps out GÇô hell it might even be in the same system i lost it before) Here a capsule loss means the end of the Line for at least an hour, given the time most of us have at hand after work this is a rather great source of annoyance. What in iteslf is more than just a minor inconvenience GÇô it migt spell the loss of all our assets. Let me illustrate this a bit further - Wormholes the connections to our home can be closed by collapsing them and they also die of old age. So if we, small as we are, were to take a fight where we are wiped out and all of our capsules are killed, we might, given the momentarily connections to our wh, loss the ability to get back in again GÇô (sure, we like every other wh-corp worth their isk, have failsaves like neut scouts etc ... but there is a possibility, a not exactly low one, depending on the redundancy you have, that this might also fail ) This would result in nothing less than the loss of all our, in our poses stored, assets. Since rediscovering your wh has a relatively slim chance of success. And the moment our Pos-¦es used up their last fuel blocks there will be some guys for which the discovery of our towers will make them their day most likely week. And all it might take for us to lose all our assets will be, to take an unfavourable engagment against a bigger entity. What also is something exclusive to w-space no where else results the loss of one engagment in the possible loss of all your assets GÇô sov outpost aren-¦t destroyable you can be just denyied acces to your assets nothing more ... and at NPC station it can-¦t even be done that
Something we don-¦t have much problems with at the moment because it would have been hopefully our decision to engage other entites GÇô so to speak our fault that we lost everything.-
to be continued |
Samsara Nolte
Sternenschauer AG W.A.S. Alliance - Weapons Armor or Shield
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 22:35:00 -
[675] - Quote
But if you decide to implement this proposition in the game that-¦s gonna change ... Now every time we want to roll our static it not only takes a significantly longer time to do just that GÇô and as it has been pointed out on countless ocassions throughout this thread rolling your static is what creates our content ! What means it is a necessity not something we have fun doing but have to similiar to scanning ... - now it puts us at an increased risk of getting either trapped by a well planned closing of at this point already damaged wh from the local residents or they just kill you during the time your big ship slowboats back to the wh. Bigger entitites will be a able to mitigate this risk by first jumping their fleet on the other side bubble up the hole and then bring the big ships ... but smaller entities such as my alliance won-¦t be able to do that. When we roll or are rolled into by bigger entitites and there a lot which are exactly that bigger than we are - we won-¦t be able to close our connections to them except we are willing to sacrifice some orcas and a capital ship ... other methods of closing a wh let-¦s face it are just to time consuming. I dont wanna close a 3B wh with100Mn cruisers GÇô and since mass is the factor which decides how far you are off the wh ... this pretty much doesn-¦t change much ... i for one would rather sit in a capital througout a fight than in a, for use of an 100mn propulsion mod pimped, cruiser which hasn-¦t enough powergrid to carry more than one or two weapons ... So the standard conversation taking place after a big Fisch "a noteworthy wh-corp" rolls into us is gonna be. Player1 "So, which one wants to sacrifice his capital ship and his pod so that the rest of us can play ... not even ensuring the hole is closed after this... becaus it-¦s gonna be held at place on the otherside preventing it from coming back thus averting the closing of said wh ... which leaves us pretty much at the same point we started ..." Player2 "Nah, we had "insert random noteworthy wh-corp" yesterday an the day before that "insert another random noteworthy wh-corp" which means so far i haven-¦t made any isk this week how do you expect me to replace this "sure as hell gonna happen loss of my ship and capsule" let alone pay my pos fuel ... i say lets play World of Tanks (WoT) perhaps we have more luck tomorrow" I don-¦t know how often this scenario has to repeat itself for most of the smaller wh-entities before their pain threshold is excceeded and they decide to vacate their wormhole or perhaps even leave eve. I mean we w-space residents are used to endure inconveniences and are very very patient. But what i can say for certain is, that when this goes live my Alliance either has to join a powerblock of w-space or has to leave w-space alltogether because when this is implemented, we wont be able to play "our game" any longer or have the income to mitigate the losses this is gonna force on us. And most of the guys we could fight against without being outnumbered 4to1 are gonna share our fate. And to be honest i-¦cant tell how many of the older eve player inside my alliance are gonna quit eve after this GÇô they for the most part, in contrast to myself, have been everywhere and done everything in eve and decided for themselves w-space or nothing ... they won-¦t return to null or low that much i can assure you ...
Since it-¦s most of the time quite fun to play with them i urge you to reconsider this change, than i really don-¦t wanna start playing WoT to continue play something with them and i apologize for sounding like someone who has to explain the w-space part of the game to you ... but you previous propositon for w-space https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=331782 and now this one leads me to believe you don-¦t really know what you are talking about, and quite a number of other w-space residents, shown clearly by the number of posts this thread has that pretty muc state the same, obviously share my opinion regarding this. And if you consider our numbers (of actual wh-residents) this has huge proportions ... And i-¦ dont necessarily expect you to have a clue about every part of eve let alone w-space, but if you don-¦t have please listen to those who have GÇô first of all in this case listen to our CSM we w-space residents went through a great deal of trouble to get elected ... and listen to us ... there are to be found many many great ideas in the froums given to you by the community which are able to spice things up in w-space without breaking it for most of us. We are, for the most part, small entities and want to stay that way, thats the beauty of living in w-space you don-¦t need to have 4000 people and countless titans to be succesfull in here ... please don-¦t take that away from us. And correct me if im wrong GÇô but isn-¦t exactly that GÇô the necessity to be big and constantly get bigger GÇô the reason why null is so boring and stagnat filled with substitute conflicts rather than real ones... instead of adding things to w-space that favour the big you should add things that favour the small, the more non aligned groups you have, the more conflict it will create ... we want to keep our patchwork rug !
With regards |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1673
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 22:40:00 -
[676] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:So I read it most though the thread. In the end I do agree with a change but I do not agree with current implementation. What I think is that CCP and CSM should get more varied feedback in the form of talking to wspace community. It would be great to get game designers and some major wspace movers on same comms and just to see what happens.
My personal opinion is that this change is neither good or bad. It is more of a shakeup of wspace.
TLDR: Wspace talk to the devs, try to channel your opinions through the sources you got avialible.
I hear that you were the main proponent for this idea. In your opinion what do you consider an acceptable range limit (eg within x of wormhole) for a carrier after a wormhole jump?
To be clear, i'm not asking what you discussed with CCP, i'm asking for your personal opinion as a regular player. +1 |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1673
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 23:12:00 -
[677] - Quote
....
Wait a minute... If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal.
Seriously, these two things combined will be some jita riots, call for the firing of a developer, threaten the cancel my account level of bullshit! +1 |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
366
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 23:44:00 -
[678] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:To be fair, something like this is already in place in k-space with gates, which is what WHs essentially are. Changing it by mass it ********, but spawning not immediately within jump range isn't the end of the world.
Yes WHs are meant to be different than k-space, and you're all special unique flowers, but you may get more beneficial results by accepting that this will go into the game and start trying to lobby for either a flat spawn distance (~5-12km) or to greatly decrease the amount that mass affects spawn distance.
You're prescribing we take a defeatist attitude, give in, give up, and hope for the best?? That's not exactly in the spirit of the wh crowd. |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
34
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 23:48:00 -
[679] - Quote
Quote:If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal.
Agreed. Polarisation timers is what lets us kill null blobs and fight around losec holes. It lets us catch people jumping into hisec quickly to propagate their mapper tools. It lets us catch capitals and orcas that are rolling.
Who the heck thought up these changes and why are they breaking one of the few areas in the game that doesn't have completely broken core mechanics? |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
891
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 23:49:00 -
[680] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:.... Wait a minute... If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Seriously, these two things combined will be some jita riots, call for the firing of a developer, threaten the cancel my account level of bullshit!
WHAT! Going to that thread to look in depth.
Now this tinfoil hat business is really beginning to annoy me. There is Precisely one play style that benefits from No polarisation between wormhole space and Nullsec.
AND IT IS NOT WORMHOLE PLAYERS. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
|
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Cult of Mooby
229
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 23:49:00 -
[681] - Quote
Traiori wrote:Quote:If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Agreed. Polarisation timers is what lets us kill null blobs and fight around losec holes. It lets us catch people jumping into hisec quickly to propagate their mapper tools. It lets us catch capitals and orcas that are rolling. Who the heck thought up these changes and why are they breaking one of the few areas in the game that doesn't have completely broken core mechanics? Stargates don't have polarization timers, why should WH's? /end troll |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
366
|
Posted - 2014.08.05 23:52:00 -
[682] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:So I read it most though the thread. In the end I do agree with a change but I do not agree with current implementation. What I think is that CCP and CSM should get more varied feedback in the form of talking to wspace community. It would be great to get game designers and some major wspace movers on same comms and just to see what happens.
My personal opinion is that this change is neither good or bad. It is more of a shakeup of wspace.
TLDR: Wspace talk to the devs, try to channel your opinions through the sources you got avialible.
Chitsa, you know I like you and all, but tbh, since you've been the CSM route you say things like "get game designers and some major wspace movers" and that just makes me think you're missing the big point. I don't think you quite get how some changes get put into this game, or worse maybe you do.
When you pander to the 'major wspace movers' you get bigger groups win. I'll give a few guys from the bigger corps credit for standing up in this thread and not towing their corps line. Self interest of bigger groups doesn't make the game better. We all end up kiting and trying to feel good about it ( I never do ).
The major wspace movers are on here making big noise already. How about I rephrase for you. It would be nice to get game designers and some folks who are more interested in playing the game than maintaining their (put whatever 200+ man corps get out of that here)
This change is dumb (my opinion) and you saying 'game designers and some major wspace movers on the same comms' is even dumber. WTF happened to you??? |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 00:21:00 -
[683] - Quote
Von Keigai wrote: This concerns me. It appears that every ship will always appear outside of the wormhole's decloak distance. This will make my form of hunting considerably less viable.
I hunt in wormholes. Usually I am alone, in a stealth bomber. I hunt for any kind of weak ship not in a POS, but among the most usual things I hunt (though not kill) are cloaky scouts. If a cloaky scout can always cloak safely against me, my chance of killing him is zero unless he makes a mistake or I happen to be right on top of him. Currently, there is always the incentive to go for it, on the small but real chance than he is within the wormhole's decloak distance. If he is, then I have the time to lock and can possibly kill. What usually happens is I uncloak, and I go for the lock but fail when he cloaks. This is good because I get a big thrill, and he gets a thrill. We both end up with racing hearts and feeling alive. People who feel alive keep playing.
Another thing I dislike about this, is its effect on me, the hunter. It makes me safer, since currently I too can be killed if I happen to appear too close to a wormhole and someone is there hunting me. Every jump I make into a new system is a bit dangerous. Don't take that way.
Yah was kinda surprised to have the pod out that far. Was really expecting it to be sitting at like 1km. It's kinda hard though if the goal is to create more time on the side of a WH you don't want to be on. Going further out means you have to travel back, but you can cloak, further in means no cloak but instant back. |
Gwydion Voleur
Anarchic Exploration
15
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 00:25:00 -
[684] - Quote
This is one of the worst changes to wormhole mechanics I can imagine. It severely reduces risk and action in solo/small gang play. |
Styledatol
Tubbies
60
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 00:40:00 -
[685] - Quote
- Mittens hates wspace because it's too hard for the line member of the CFC to do well in. - Mittens asks his CCP friends to ruin the fun for wspace people, because 'we can't let have wspace have fun while sov-null is dying'. - CCP experiments with wspace in fun ways, because clearly none of CCP's devs live in wspace.
With that said: "HA HA! SUCKERS!" Thank bob the only connections I need to roll are 1-2bil mass. |
Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
514
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 00:42:00 -
[686] - Quote
Traiori wrote:Quote:If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Agreed. Polarisation timers is what lets us kill null blobs and fight around losec holes. It lets us catch people jumping into hisec quickly to propagate their mapper tools. It lets us catch capitals and orcas that are rolling. Who the heck thought up these changes and why are they breaking one of the few areas in the game that doesn't have completely broken core mechanics? You answered the question yourself. This is a way we kill Nullsec entities. |
HeXxploiT
Spatium Industries Gatekeepers Universe
40
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 01:38:00 -
[687] - Quote
I think most of you pilots don't realize that this sort of a change would actually encourage a LOT of pilots who don't normally go into wormholes to check them out.
Great Idea to encourage wormhole exploration. Terrible idea for wormhole campers. |
Ryan Kirth
The Arrow Project
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 01:51:00 -
[688] - Quote
Guys stop and think about this. Who virtual controls CCP now. Who are these Devs? If not mistaken they are mostly all nullsec players formerly of corps many of us really didn't care for. This does nothing more then give their croonies an easier way to control their game. This crap all started a year ago. Look at all the nerfs that affect the average player and the buffs that just don't make any sense. Too much of this game is becoming worthless for new / low sp players. Too many nerfs to ships typically found in empire space or WH space while the ships typically found in null get buffed. Just my rant here but it sure looks like a takeover in an effort to discourage your average player. An entirely separate gaming community resides in WH space and nullsec players don't want them there. WH space is too resource rich and easy. The nullsec folk want those resources and until now WH raids have just been too difficult |
Winthorp
2479
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 01:52:00 -
[689] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:.... Wait a minute... If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Seriously, these two things combined will be some jita riots, call for the firing of a developer, threaten the cancel my account level of bullshit!
Look I have to agree, I support the mass/distance change but combined with the removal or polorization I have to wonder what will be next and with CCP's track record I am going to get on the concerned bandwagon
I think we need to see a devblog pretty damn soon.
|
Adarnof
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 02:05:00 -
[690] - Quote
HeXxploiT wrote:I think most of you pilots don't realize that this sort of a change would actually encourage a LOT of pilots who don't normally go into wormholes to check them out.
Great Idea to encourage wormhole exploration. Terrible idea for wormhole campers.
Please, elaborate. |
|
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
3374
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 02:12:00 -
[691] - Quote
Ryan Kirth wrote:Guys stop and think about this. Who virtual controls CCP now. Who are these Devs? If not mistaken they are mostly all nullsec players formerly of corps many of us really didn't care for. This does nothing more then give their croonies an easier way to control their game. This crap all started a year ago. Look at all the nerfs that affect the average player and the buffs that just don't make any sense. Too much of this game is becoming worthless for new / low sp players. Too many nerfs to ships typically found in empire space or WH space while the ships typically found in null get buffed. Just my rant here but it sure looks like a takeover in an effort to discourage your average player. An entirely separate gaming community resides in WH space and nullsec players don't want them there. WH space is too resource rich and easy. The nullsec folk want those resources and until now WH raids have just been too difficult
Wonder how long before the cartels start renting out wormhole systems. |
Malcolm Rennolds
Inquisition FiS Division Surely You're Joking
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 02:24:00 -
[692] - Quote
I'm not sure thus will make nano/frig games more possible. Honestly if (as it sounds likely) a cruiser is coming out 15+/-5km from the wormhole this makes armor gangs even stronger. Massive spread of points and reps will be able to hit everyone. I think a nano gang is too likely to come in relatively closer to the wh (because of lower mass vs an equal ship size) and end up tackled and humped by the armor gang.
I'm assuming that the current sisi is something like 40km cap, 30km battleship, 20km bc, 15 km cruiser. If these numbers get moved down a bit more it just screws nano gangs even more. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
367
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 02:25:00 -
[693] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Rek Seven wrote:.... Wait a minute... If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Seriously, these two things combined will be some jita riots, call for the firing of a developer, threaten the cancel my account level of bullshit! Look I have to agree, I support the mass/distance change but combined with the removal or polorization I have to wonder what will be next and with CCP's track record I am going to get on the concerned bandwagon I think we need to see a devblog pretty damn soon.
You two crack me up. One game breaker is ok (cuz it doesn't hurt us big guys) but oh no no no this polarization thing hurts my game... this must stop.... now. Looks like 5hit just got real - hahahahaha
Sadly I'll even take hypocrits on my side for this one. Welcome aboard. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
367
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 02:27:00 -
[694] - Quote
Malcolm Rennolds wrote:I'm not sure thus will make nano/frig games more possible. Honestly if (as it sounds likely) a cruiser is coming out 15+/-5km from the wormhole this makes armor gangs even stronger. Massive spread of points and reps will be able to hit everyone. I think a nano gang is too likely to come in relatively closer to the wh (because of lower mass vs an equal ship size) and end up tackled and humped by the armor gang.
I'm assuming that the current sisi is something like 40km cap, 30km battleship, 20km bc, 15 km cruiser. If these numbers get moved down a bit more it just screws nano gangs even more.
You're missing the point. Just bring 50 of some doctrine and you'll be fine. |
ODSTSNAKEZZ
Twilight Souls Surely You're Joking
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 02:34:00 -
[695] - Quote
Malcolm Rennolds wrote:I'm not sure thus will make nano/frig games more possible. Honestly if (as it sounds likely) a cruiser is coming out 15+/-5km from the wormhole this makes armor gangs even stronger. Massive spread of points and reps will be able to hit everyone. I think a nano gang is too likely to come in relatively closer to the wh (because of lower mass vs an equal ship size) and end up tackled and humped by the armor gang.
I'm assuming that the current sisi is something like 40km cap, 30km battleship, 20km bc, 15 km cruiser. If these numbers get moved down a bit more it just screws nano gangs even more. Actually current sisi has the high end for caps being 40k then for battleships and below mostly >10k unless RNG screws you or your covered in plates. |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
38
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 03:45:00 -
[696] - Quote
ODSTSNAKEZZ wrote: Actually current sisi has the high end for caps being 40k then for battleships and below mostly >10k unless RNG screws you or your covered in plates.
Corp mate tested this earlier, had capsules landing at ~5K, cruisers at ~10-15K, battleships at ~20, carriers ~30, dreads ~40. If someone could confirm that he didn't manage to confuse cruisers, command ships and battleships that would be great. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15569
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 04:29:00 -
[697] - Quote
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:Ryan Kirth wrote:Guys stop and think about this. Who virtual controls CCP now. Who are these Devs? If not mistaken they are mostly all nullsec players formerly of corps many of us really didn't care for. This does nothing more then give their croonies an easier way to control their game. This crap all started a year ago. Look at all the nerfs that affect the average player and the buffs that just don't make any sense. Too much of this game is becoming worthless for new / low sp players. Too many nerfs to ships typically found in empire space or WH space while the ships typically found in null get buffed. Just my rant here but it sure looks like a takeover in an effort to discourage your average player. An entirely separate gaming community resides in WH space and nullsec players don't want them there. WH space is too resource rich and easy. The nullsec folk want those resources and until now WH raids have just been too difficult Wonder how long before the cartels start renting out wormhole systems. they do already, but they're not the cartels you know about.
I won't explain the specifics because I'd rather keep you in the dark. you twist information that penetrates your thick skull. President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
101
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 05:43:00 -
[698] - Quote
Traiori wrote:ODSTSNAKEZZ wrote: Actually current sisi has the high end for caps being 40k then for battleships and below mostly >10k unless RNG screws you or your covered in plates.
Corp mate tested this earlier, had capsules landing at ~5K, cruisers at ~10-15K, battleships at ~20, carriers ~30, dreads ~40. If someone could confirm that he didn't manage to confuse cruisers, command ships and battleships that would be great.
This isn't what I was getting when I was testing. Full plated MWD mega was averaging around 8.5km. My post is somewhere up above.
Edit: From previous post 8 Plate Mega + MWD High: 9.4km Low: 8.0km Average: 8.8km
Pod High: 6.2km Low: 3.6km Average: 5.1km |
Angelique Duchemin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
830
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 06:03:00 -
[699] - Quote
Lemonades wrote:Angelique Duchemin wrote:Couldn't you just use Nidhoggurs with inertia stabs and then have them warp to a cloaky scout and then warp back to the wormhole and jump?
You should be able to get an align time of about 10 seconds. Why would we want nuthuggers they're pretty useless
I used them as an example because they are the fastest and most agile Carrier. The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity. |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15574
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 06:20:00 -
[700] - Quote
undisturbed it's fine, but a hic or dic and the carrier belongs to Bob
(no different from any other situation with a cap vs a hic or dic, but by trapping the cap on one side, it gets their mates to commit) President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
|
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 06:53:00 -
[701] - Quote
BayneNothos wrote:Pavel Sohaj wrote: I wonder what hole you literally live in. I had my ship jump to a WH only to have snipers on the other side. Not everybody goes Geronimo straight up, despite your claim IN CAPS LOCK, which in my book totally proves that it is true.
Rest is just a joke. How do kiting ships spread over huge distance help against blobing armor T3 gank, is beyond me.
Speed thing, agree on that.
Oh snap I thought your name seemed familiar. Remember this fight? https://zkillboard.com/br/1392/We'll ignore your Alt posting :P That fight was fun. I knew it was a trap, the Navy Aug kinda made that obvious but I took a swing anyway as I could move around initially. 3/4 of the people on that KM wouldn't be there if whatever it was that caught me had just killed me then and there instead of you guys #falcon'd me to all get on the mail. Even still it was a blast to have. If that was on a WH you woulda caught me before I got any distance and it'd have been over in seconds. Instead I almost took down your Legion. Thats what I'd like more of and this feels like it'd accomplish that. To Meytal: Yes it is too similar to stargates and I'd much prefer something super unique. I'd just like that uniquety to allow more than one type of fleet comp.
Honestly, I dont remember. That was the ganking times. Also all my alts have Sohaj in them so theres not my alts posting I can assure you of that. And that really was not a fight. One of the reasons I got moved out of that group, I didnt enjoy boasting about "PVP" when its 15 vs 1. Owait, re-reading! I REMEMBER'! THe one fast talos that pissed us all off cause speed :D Kudos and props, was scared like ****.
Rek Seven wrote:.... Wait a minute... If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Seriously, these two things combined will be some jita riots, call for the firing of a developer, threaten the cancel my account level of bullshit!
I bet this aint even the end of it all for WH. :D not screwed enough.
HeXxploiT wrote:I think most of you pilots don't realize that this sort of a change would actually encourage a LOT of pilots who don't normally go into wormholes to check them out.
Great Idea to encourage wormhole exploration. Terrible idea for wormhole campers.
Sure sure. Itll be great to have everybody probing everything. And who will fight aside from C5/C6 hole blobs?
|
Dark Armata
Bookmark Both Sides Exit Strategy..
119
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 07:09:00 -
[702] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:Rek Seven wrote:.... Wait a minute... If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Seriously, these two things combined will be some jita riots, call for the firing of a developer, threaten the cancel my account level of bullshit! Look I have to agree, I support the mass/distance change but combined with the removal or polorization I have to wonder what will be next and with CCP's track record I am going to get on the concerned bandwagon I think we need to see a devblog pretty damn soon.
Welcome to the bandwagon. We have snacks up the back. Bad, unpopular snacks that no-one really wants. But don't worry we will take your feedback on the snacks next week. W-Space WAS Best Space*
*Until CCP decided W-Space should be the next null.
|
Winthorp
2481
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 07:13:00 -
[703] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Winthorp wrote:Rek Seven wrote:.... Wait a minute... If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Seriously, these two things combined will be some jita riots, call for the firing of a developer, threaten the cancel my account level of bullshit! Look I have to agree, I support the mass/distance change but combined with the removal or polorization I have to wonder what will be next and with CCP's track record I am going to get on the concerned bandwagon I think we need to see a devblog pretty damn soon. You two crack me up. One game breaker is ok (cuz it doesn't hurt us big guys) but oh no no no this polarization thing hurts my game... this must stop.... now. Looks like 5hit just got real - hahahahaha Sadly I'll even take hypocrits on my side for this one. Welcome aboard.
See i think that's a little harsh even if you disagree with me. like i said i still support the mass/distance change but when you combine that with removal of polarization and hell whatever we haven't discovered yet that has changed it starts to become very concerning especially as the two changes mentioned kinda contradict each others intentions or play style goals. |
Cirillith
Bean-shidh The Nameless Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 07:14:00 -
[704] - Quote
Well - it's not nice to came to work and during EvE forum check find out about another "improve" of W-Space.
I know I wrote post above we should be calm and that we should wait, but I think this approach is obsolete now.
C'mon - polarization mechanic is something making W-Space different from k-space, and of course a BIG tactical element of a fight... So maybe CCP will also give us aggression timer on WH - since they are purely trying change WH space into null-sec.
I guess they will take our opinion under consideration only when we will repeat something called as "Incarna incident"
This is truly sad that CCP was able to learn from its mistakes then and now is repeating them again...
|
Darren Fox
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
48
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 07:40:00 -
[705] - Quote
I look forward to the devblog. I hope it explains what this change is supposed to accomplish, because right now it just feels like a way to say "we never intended ragerolling/chaincollapsing to happen, so we're making it harder".
There are a couple of good suggestions in this thread if a change to wh-jump mechanics is happening no matter what, like the inverse mass (high mass ships land close, low mass further out), but my preference would be to leave this alone and rather focus dev effort on something else. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Ixtab.
1678
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 08:04:00 -
[706] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Winthorp wrote:Rek Seven wrote:.... Wait a minute... If what i'm hearing about polarization timers is true, you can forget everything i've said in support of the proposal. Seriously, these two things combined will be some jita riots, call for the firing of a developer, threaten the cancel my account level of bullshit! Look I have to agree, I support the mass/distance change but combined with the removal or polorization I have to wonder what will be next and with CCP's track record I am going to get on the concerned bandwagon I think we need to see a devblog pretty damn soon. You two crack me up. One game breaker is ok (cuz it doesn't hurt us big guys) but oh no no no this polarization thing hurts my game... this must stop.... now. Looks like 5hit just got real - hahahahaha Sadly I'll even take hypocrits on my side for this one. Welcome aboard.
Just because people don't agree with your idea of "game breaking" doesn't make them hypocrites.
I'm not sure if you are trolling or if you are dimwitted... If the polarisation timer gets removed, large groups like ours will not be affected by the range change as we can just jump 20 T3s in and out until the hole closes, without having to worry about slow-boating and polarization timers.
Nothing you say makes any sense +1 |
Kira Hhallas
Very Drunken Eve Flying Instructors Brotherhood Of Silent Space
383
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 08:09:00 -
[707] - Quote
Okay o take a fast look over the postings here since page 30.... So polarization will be also change.
hmm..... interesting. So the Only thing what can be is to make a consistent mechanic for EVE, so everyone know the rules. And I could life with the change. because you could rolle Holes faster. No more 4 Min Waiting.
But after this there is the final Boarder.... no aggression timer for Wormholes.....
Kira Hhallas - Austrian EvE Community - ingame =+ûsterreich= -
Cuiusvis hominis est errare, nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare |
Aelyras Altol
Stryker Industries
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 08:57:00 -
[708] - Quote
Just note CCP fozzie just posted in the polarization thread saying that its a bug, so that might not be a change they are making. |
mulgrew Zero
Weyland Mulgrew Corporation Dominatus Atrum Mortis
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 09:00:00 -
[709] - Quote
ok new stuff coming dont like this 1 pretty much or at all, but may i ask is the same mechanic going to be used for cynos ? |
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 09:19:00 -
[710] - Quote
mulgrew Zero wrote:ok new stuff coming dont like this 1 pretty much or at all, but may i ask is the same mechanic going to be used for cynos ?
u dun break favorite part of the game! |
|
Alabugin
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Exit Strategy..
6
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 09:26:00 -
[711] - Quote
As a long time pilot in EVE I have only recently joined a c6 wormhole corp; I finally found something that was interesting again.
This change saddens me, as content is already so limited out here.
Why did I move into a wormhole? Because nullsec is stagnant (Please see introduction of incursions)
These changes, as they currently stand, will greatly diminish the content delivered in WH and will turn them into nothing but farming grounds.
CCP - Ive played since 2008 - Its been my favorite because of its strong orientation towards open PVP. These changes to wormholes will only create less PVP, less content, less FUN as it will cause more players to leave WH space. It will become as stagnant as nullsec after the introduction of incursion sites in highsec.
Please let us keep the only part of EVE that is untouched from your previous mistakes - LEAVE BRITNEY(WH SPACE) ALONE!!! |
Winthorp
2484
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 09:32:00 -
[712] - Quote
Alabugin wrote:As a long time pilot in EVE I have only recently joined a c6 wormhole corp; I finally found something that was interesting again.
This change saddens me, as content is already so limited out here.
Why did I move into a wormhole? Because nullsec is stagnant (Please see introduction of incursions)
These changes, as they currently stand, will greatly diminish the content delivered in WH and will turn them into nothing but farming grounds.
CCP - Ive played since 2008 - Its been my favorite because of its strong orientation towards open PVP. These changes to wormholes will only create less PVP, less content, less FUN as it will cause more players to leave WH space. It will become as stagnant as nullsec after the introduction of incursion sites in highsec.
Please let us keep the only part of EVE that is untouched from your previous mistakes - LEAVE BRITNEY(WH SPACE) ALONE!!!
So you move into a C6 WH with no other WH class exp and you think you are entitled to have things stay this way forever, seems legit............................... |
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
520
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:04:00 -
[713] - Quote
just a quick posts so Iknow where Iam up to in the thread.
keep it civil and on topic and constructive cos it will really help me that way.
Wait for the dev blog as well. Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15574
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:05:00 -
[714] - Quote
can Rorquals be exempt from this change please President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Bjurn Akely
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:31:00 -
[715] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:can Rorquals be exempt from this change please
Why should they? What is your reasoning? |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
743
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:35:00 -
[716] - Quote
Alabugin wrote:As a long time pilot in EVE I have only recently joined a c6 wormhole corp; I finally found something that was interesting again.
This change saddens me, as content is already so limited out here.
Why did I move into a wormhole? Because nullsec is stagnant (Please see introduction of incursions)
These changes, as they currently stand, will greatly diminish the content delivered in WH and will turn them into nothing but farming grounds.
CCP - Ive played since 2008 - Its been my favorite because of its strong orientation towards open PVP. These changes to wormholes will only create less PVP, less content, less FUN as it will cause more players to leave WH space. It will become as stagnant as nullsec after the introduction of incursion sites in highsec.
Please let us keep the only part of EVE that is untouched from your previous mistakes - LEAVE BRITNEY(WH SPACE) ALONE!!!
but wormhole space is full of mistakes and bad design. |
Mini SS
Taking Inc Swine Aviation Labs
32
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 10:46:00 -
[717] - Quote
Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it.
Yep sounds exactly like jumping through a regional gate in null sec, and yeah you can cover 80km with a couple of bubbles np. HTFU |
Rain6637
Team Evil
15574
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 11:21:00 -
[718] - Quote
Bjurn Akely wrote:Rain6637 wrote:can Rorquals be exempt from this change please Why should they? What is your reasoning? because otherwise they're not good for anything President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub | Rainfleet on Twitch | Twitter | Rainfleet mk.III | Imgur |
Bjurn Akely
Knights of Nii The 20 Minuters
64
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 11:28:00 -
[719] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Bjurn Akely wrote:Rain6637 wrote:can Rorquals be exempt from this change please Why should they? What is your reasoning? because otherwise they're not good for anything
I don't get it. I'm not saying you're wrong. Good at what? Closing holes? |
epicurus ataraxia
Lazerhawks
899
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 11:49:00 -
[720] - Quote
corbexx wrote:just a quick posts so Iknow where Iam up to in the thread.
keep it civil and on topic and constructive cos it will really help me that way.
Wait for the dev blog as well.
Ok, I must be honest, waiting for the dev blog is usually a point in time where it is too late when one considers past experience, but I am incredibly impressed with what I have seen of your efforts since you started working in the CSM and I do believe that Fozzie is the most competent and honourable Dev regarding changes, he may not always make the best changes, every time first time, but he does listen and seems to genuinely care. But of course he does have to follow orders. With that in mind..
here's hoping. And thank you for doing such an excellent job, and for working so hard on our behalf. There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE |
|
Pavel Sohaj
Anoikis Exploration
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 12:28:00 -
[721] - Quote
If only devs would fix poses, access rights, make POS guns actually any good and if you do need to mess with wormholes,
make new, C? unknown mass, special spawns, you name it. NEW CONTENT. Itll be bugged! Sure it will! But hell, we will all go there fearless no matter what, treasure awaits!
make regular WH mass more variable but for gods sake, dropin caps 30k off. Lawl. I guess ill be awesomely happy to live in c4 without risk to caps then.
also entrance - exit speeds are great idea imo. |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
555
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 12:42:00 -
[722] - Quote
corbexx wrote:just a quick posts so Iknow where Iam up to in the thread.
keep it civil and on topic and constructive cos it will really help me that way.
::spins around frantically with flame thrower strapped to his back and a smile on his fate.
Ready to burn forums to ground sir!!!!
corbexx wrote:Wait for the dev blog as well.
....I'm all dressed up in my BURN CCP clothing and my Flame Thrower of Justice and your telling me to wait....
hmph!!!! Guess I'll have a cup of tea....
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Ok, I must be honest, waiting for the dev blog is usually a point in time where it is too late when one considers past experience, but I am incredibly impressed with what I have seen of your efforts since you started working in the CSM and I do believe that Fozzie is the most competent and honourable Dev regarding changes, he may not always make the best changes, every time first time, but he does listen and seems to genuinely care. But of course he does have to follow orders. With that in mind.. here's hoping. And thank you for doing such an excellent job, and for working so hard on our behalf.
I'm inclined to agree. There is 20 days till Hyperion Expansion is out (yea 20 DAYS). There's been little less than a peep, and there will be almost 0 time for feedback due to the timetable.
(We now see the issue with such a frantic patch schedule, no time for player feedback). Yaay!!!! |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
3589
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 13:08:00 -
[723] - Quote
Taking bets on which number sticky this will end up in! Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/ |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
577
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 13:17:00 -
[724] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Taking bets on which number sticky this will end up in!
If it's sticky one then it's all downhill from here If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Disavowed.
128
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 13:26:00 -
[725] - Quote
If is its all downhill then there will be 13 sticky's! |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
555
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 13:29:00 -
[726] - Quote
:: Primes the flamethrower::
... I'm going to need more gasoline... Yaay!!!! |
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel
744
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 13:32:00 -
[727] - Quote
whoops, announcing game changes outside F&I again |
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
577
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 13:38:00 -
[728] - Quote
TrouserDeagle wrote:whoops, announcing game changes outside F&I again
Implying people actually use the proper sections If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
Janeway84
Its a good day to die
91
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 14:02:00 -
[729] - Quote
omg fozzie made several sticky threads, just waiting to be filled with content Omg what if the next release is going to be all about wormholes? |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2296
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 14:07:00 -
[730] - Quote
Janeway84 wrote:omg fozzie made several sticky threads, just waiting to be filled with content Omg what if the next release is going to be all about wormholes?
If this thread is any indication of what we have to look forward to x6 then I'm seriously scared. |
|
Andrew Jester
Origin. Black Legion.
578
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 14:12:00 -
[731] - Quote
#1-5 are going to be teases, and #6 is just going to say that WHs are going to be completely removed. If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy |
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
10887
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 14:29:00 -
[732] - Quote
We've now released the dev blog that goes over the changes we are proposing for Hyperion in detail. Please take a look and then feel free to direct your feedback on wormhole jump spawn distance changes in this thread.
Since this thread is based on incorrect numbers I'm going to lock it and direct people to the new thread now that we have released the blog. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: [one page] |