These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

new POSes and wormholes - what do w-space dwellers need?

First post
Author
Caldari State
#61 - 2012-08-08 11:31:35 UTC
Two step wrote:
CCP has their reasons for not wanting to have forcefields anymore. The exact reasons got NDA'd out of the CSM minutes, but they are reasonable. As for sitting outside a new POS's docking point, you might be able to do that, but they might also have webs, points and guns to cover that exit. So if you attack that person undocking, they can just dock back up and let their defenses attack you.

I do agree that having some sot of indication via scan probes or d-scan of a pos being offline/out of fuel would be a good thing. I also agree that showing how many people are docked or maybe even what ships they have active would be a really important part of a new system. Frankly, if I have to give that up to get all the other benefits, I think it is worth it though.


Technical reasons bullshit. Forcefield is one of the integral parts in w-space. It lets you be in space and have a buffer from the hostile environment. It also allows you to manage your POS without fear of being ganked by some random cloaky SB. Removing force-fields will make POSes more like stations in k-space and no one wants station games.

CCP mentions that they do not want Jesus features. From what I have read in the minutes this POS revamp sounds like a Jesus feature. There is no need to fix what is not broken!

I would rather have current a bit broken system than a new one without FF.

Burn the land and boil the sea You can't take the sky from me

Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#62 - 2012-08-08 11:42:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Joran Jackson
Two step wrote:
CCP has their reasons for not wanting to have forcefields anymore. The exact reasons got NDA'd out of the CSM minutes, but they are reasonable. As for sitting outside a new POS's docking point, you might be able to do that, but they might also have webs, points and guns to cover that exit. So if you attack that person undocking, they can just dock back up and let their defenses attack you.

I do agree that having some sot of indication via scan probes or d-scan of a pos being offline/out of fuel would be a good thing. I also agree that showing how many people are docked or maybe even what ships they have active would be a really important part of a new system. Frankly, if I have to give that up to get all the other benefits, I think it is worth it though.


I disagree it's worth it, some of those things are extremely important. Indentification of people reshipping in their POS is so key to how w-space operates at the moment I can't imagine how things would change without this feature.

Imagine not being able to see people moving in their POS reshipping to run escalations? Imagine not being able to sit a fleet on someone's static and watch to see if they're reshipping to come give you a fight? It removes the entire intel based game of w-space. Getting eyes in an enemy system without them being aware can completely win a fight for you at the moment. If this was removed it would kill a huge part of what w-space is about.

Don't let that go through without a replacement feature.
WE FORM V0LTA
#63 - 2012-08-08 11:45:51 UTC
I think CCP should clearly line what they want with these changes to POSs.

Do they want to change WH life closer to 0.0-life which should never happen.
CCP managed to do the whole WH-environment pretty close to perfect by the first try.

There should be clear difference with POS and normal stations. But how POS infrastructure
and managing everything for big corporations and alliances have to be smoother.
Better role, cargo, ship etc. management.

If they allow more than one POS anchored to one moon, they should make them appear in different grids.

Luckily we have a experienced Two Steps on CSM who can inform CCP how current WH environment works.


Plucky Adventurers
#64 - 2012-08-08 11:50:31 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Of course it's only one aspect, but an important one. I'm a little concerned that Two steps personal opinions (which are legitimate of course) will pass for "what wormhole dwellers want" in sight of CCP (who obviously have little to no own knowledge of wormhole life for the most part ).


Just wanted to comment on this (and many posts like it). First of all, I don't just present my personal opinions to CCP. I read threads like this, and try to present as many of the opinions I can. For example, I don't care at all about refitting T3s at a POS, but I regularly bug CCP about fixing it.

Secondly, a *lot* of CCPers are in w-space. From CCP Soundwave on down, w-space is very popular with CCPers, for the same reason it is popular with all of us.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

kapolov
#65 - 2012-08-08 11:53:24 UTC  |  Edited by: kapolov
Two step wrote:
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Of course it's only one aspect, but an important one. I'm a little concerned that Two steps personal opinions (which are legitimate of course) will pass for "what wormhole dwellers want" in sight of CCP (who obviously have little to no own knowledge of wormhole life for the most part ).


Just wanted to comment on this (and many posts like it). First of all, I don't just present my personal opinions to CCP. I read threads like this, and try to present as many of the opinions I can. For example, I don't care at all about refitting T3s at a POS, but I regularly bug CCP about fixing it.

Secondly, a *lot* of CCPers are in w-space. From CCP Soundwave on down, w-space is very popular with CCPers, for the same reason it is popular with all of us.



Three pages of negative responses from the WH community to the changes and lack of information presented to us in the CSM minutes and that's all the response you give?

Also CCP live in Wh's yet had to have a lot of mechanics explained to them by yourself?
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#66 - 2012-08-08 12:01:28 UTC
kapolov wrote:
Two step wrote:
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Of course it's only one aspect, but an important one. I'm a little concerned that Two steps personal opinions (which are legitimate of course) will pass for "what wormhole dwellers want" in sight of CCP (who obviously have little to no own knowledge of wormhole life for the most part ).


Just wanted to comment on this (and many posts like it). First of all, I don't just present my personal opinions to CCP. I read threads like this, and try to present as many of the opinions I can. For example, I don't care at all about refitting T3s at a POS, but I regularly bug CCP about fixing it.

Secondly, a *lot* of CCPers are in w-space. From CCP Soundwave on down, w-space is very popular with CCPers, for the same reason it is popular with all of us.



Three pages of negative responses from the WH community to the changes and lack of information presented to us in the CSM minutes and that's all the response you give?


Amarr Empire is wormhole space now?

Get off the guy's back, he's clearly reading the thread, let's be constructive and not a bunch of forum shitposters.
kapolov
#67 - 2012-08-08 12:07:20 UTC
Joran Jackson wrote:
kapolov wrote:
Two step wrote:
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Of course it's only one aspect, but an important one. I'm a little concerned that Two steps personal opinions (which are legitimate of course) will pass for "what wormhole dwellers want" in sight of CCP (who obviously have little to no own knowledge of wormhole life for the most part ).


Just wanted to comment on this (and many posts like it). First of all, I don't just present my personal opinions to CCP. I read threads like this, and try to present as many of the opinions I can. For example, I don't care at all about refitting T3s at a POS, but I regularly bug CCP about fixing it.

Secondly, a *lot* of CCPers are in w-space. From CCP Soundwave on down, w-space is very popular with CCPers, for the same reason it is popular with all of us.



Three pages of negative responses from the WH community to the changes and lack of information presented to us in the CSM minutes and that's all the response you give?


Amarr Empire is wormhole space now?

Get off the guy's back, he's clearly reading the thread, let's be constructive and not a bunch of forum shitposters.


Our wings grow far.

And yes from reading the minutes Two Step sounded very generalized in his opinions and on the one major section that will relate heavily to WH space i feel he didn't do it justice at all.

He can say all he wants that he had to look at it from all perspectives and not just his own opinions but he was voted in because he lives in a WH and its bullshit to say otherwise. Even shitpoasters vote.
#68 - 2012-08-08 12:12:38 UTC
Two step wrote:
Secondly, a *lot* of CCPers are in w-space. From CCP Soundwave on down, w-space is very popular with CCPers, for the same reason it is popular with all of us.

That's good (and surprising) to hear. I hope they aren't all solo carebears who get ganked in their pve tengus all the time and are now going to punish us with their nerfbat ;)

If the people who will decide this are living in w-space, they cannot seriously consider removing forcefields without giving us something else that provides the same sort of protection and intel value (for both sides).

Still, all we got for now is the CSM minutes and they gave us reason to be alarmed, so we'll probably remain a little wary...

.

Plucky Adventurers
#69 - 2012-08-08 12:24:42 UTC
Reading through the thread, I think a lot of people need to re-read the minutes. Specifically:

Quote:
CCP has been exploring adding mooring modules that would protect a ship that was able to physically get near the module with a small force field around just the ship. This system might replace ship maintenance arrays.
Two step pointed out that this system might be nice for docking as well, so that people can get some indication of how many people are active in a starbase, especially in w-space where there is no local chat.


Quote:
CCP Greyscale suggested that perhaps the larger power cores might require freighters to move around, which would prevent them from getting into lower class wormholes.
(Note that this might also apply to the docking module)

One thing that wasn't in the minutes, because it was talked about outside the summit, was that mooring would be the primary way that people interact with a POS, and the docking module would be more expensive (and/or perhaps require a freighter to move).

As for the NPC corp alt that doesn't feel I am doing a good job representing them, feel free to run against me next time. Of course, I don't think you will do that, since you would probably have to run with your main.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Caldari State
#70 - 2012-08-08 12:35:09 UTC
Two step wrote:
I also agree that showing how many people are docked or maybe even what ships they have active would be a really important part of a new system. Frankly, if I have to give that up to get all the other benefits, I think it is worth it though.


I seriously hope you are not so far detached from the community you are seated to represent as to genuinely mean this.


Two step wrote:
CCP has their reasons for not wanting to have forcefields anymore. The exact reasons got NDA'd out of the CSM minutes, but they are reasonable.


If this is in fact that CCP is unwilling to put the time and effort into developing two seperate UIs, one for docking and one for nPOS hangar functionality (which would be a true POS re-work, as we have now been promised for ages) then I neither find it reasonable as an argument or reasonable to NDA it; we should have the right to know if this boils down to a lack of willingness to commit resources to spaceships in space by CCP.
#71 - 2012-08-08 12:46:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Terrorfrodo
Two step, now that you're writing that I realize that it wasn't the minutes itself that resulted in strong reactions, but your post in this thread:

Two step wrote:
CCP has their reasons for not wanting to have forcefields anymore. The exact reasons got NDA'd out of the CSM minutes, but they are reasonable. As for sitting outside a new POS's docking point, you might be able to do that, but they might also have webs, points and guns to cover that exit. So if you attack that person undocking, they can just dock back up and let their defenses attack you.

I do agree that having some sot of indication via scan probes or d-scan of a pos being offline/out of fuel would be a good thing. I also agree that showing how many people are docked or maybe even what ships they have active would be a really important part of a new system. Frankly, if I have to give that up to get all the other benefits, I think it is worth it though.


Maybe you didn't mean it that way, but what I'm reading here is: Yeah, forcefields are important and all, and we should be able to see people in POSes, but "if I have to give that up to get all the other benefits, I think it is worth it though".

edit: And this personal statement from you also seemed to imply that the direction CCP is going is such that we're going to have to "give up" on those features, meaning that their development plans do not include scanning when docked, visibility when docked etc. and those are things we'll have to fight for and probably not get because it's too much effort and is not considered so very important.

.

SOLAR WING.
#72 - 2012-08-08 12:57:05 UTC
Two step wrote:
Reading through the thread, I think a lot of people need to re-read the minutes. Specifically:

Quote:
CCP has been exploring adding mooring modules that would protect a ship that was able to physically get near the module with a small force field around just the ship. This system might replace ship maintenance arrays.
Two step pointed out that this system might be nice for docking as well, so that people can get some indication of how many people are active in a starbase, especially in w-space where there is no local chat.


Quote:
CCP Greyscale suggested that perhaps the larger power cores might require freighters to move around, which would prevent them from getting into lower class wormholes.
(Note that this might also apply to the docking module)

One thing that wasn't in the minutes, because it was talked about outside the summit, was that mooring would be the primary way that people interact with a POS, and the docking module would be more expensive (and/or perhaps require a freighter to move).

As for the NPC corp alt that doesn't feel I am doing a good job representing them, feel free to run against me next time. Of course, I don't think you will do that, since you would probably have to run with your main.


I think it's ok to make a docking module, but it should be like 0.0 only and require sov to anchor/online. Mooring should be enough for w-space.
Plucky Adventurers
#73 - 2012-08-08 13:02:12 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Two step, now that you're writing that I realize that it wasn't the minutes itself that resulted in strong reactions, but your post in this thread:

Two step wrote:
CCP has their reasons for not wanting to have forcefields anymore. The exact reasons got NDA'd out of the CSM minutes, but they are reasonable. As for sitting outside a new POS's docking point, you might be able to do that, but they might also have webs, points and guns to cover that exit. So if you attack that person undocking, they can just dock back up and let their defenses attack you.

I do agree that having some sot of indication via scan probes or d-scan of a pos being offline/out of fuel would be a good thing. I also agree that showing how many people are docked or maybe even what ships they have active would be a really important part of a new system. Frankly, if I have to give that up to get all the other benefits, I think it is worth it though.


Maybe you didn't mean it that way, but what I'm reading here is: Yeah, forcefields are important and all, and we should be able to see people in POSes, but "if I have to give that up to get all the other benefits, I think it is worth it though".


That sentence only applied to the 2nd paragraph. Let me rephrase it:

In exchange for all the new POS stuff (personal storage, possible docking, modular POSes, etc), I would be willing to give up the current system of knowing if a POS is out of fuel on d-scan and even how many people are inside a POS and what ships they are in. My preference is that CCP finds a way to still give us all that information, but if it isn't possible, I would be willing to accept that because of all the other benefits a new POS system would bring.

I understand that lots of folks are worried about docking games, and I have a couple of responses:
1) Docking modules will not be on every POS. They will at least cost a lot of fuel to operate, and may not fit into lower class wormholes at all
2) Being docked is, as was pointed out, both an advantage an a disadvantage. When docked you don't have intel on what is going on outside the POS, and people don't know what you are flying.
3) Docking in a POS will be different than at a station. For one thing, you have guns, webs and points on your POS to attack campers. Consider the situation right now, how many of you camp random POSes with defenses online?
4) How are docking games any worse than forcefield games right now? With a forcefield, you can even enter while agressed, unlike docking currently (though I have no idea if POS docking would have the same restrictions).

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Adhocracy
#74 - 2012-08-08 13:03:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Ethan Revenant
Two step wrote:
One thing that wasn't in the minutes, because it was talked about outside the summit, was that mooring would be the primary way that people interact with a POS, and the docking module would be more expensive (and/or perhaps require a freighter to move).


This just reminded me: one of the ideas tossed around was restricting the power cores or what-have-you for the largest class of tower so that they could only be moved by freighter. I would shed a nostalgic tear if this came to pass. People in lower class wormholes are people too.

oh hey you ninjapoasted, I do have responses to that too

Two step wrote:
2) Being docked is, as was pointed out, both an advantage an a disadvantage. When docked you don't have intel on what is going on outside the POS, and people don't know what you are flying.
...
4) How are docking games any worse than forcefield games right now? With a forcefield, you can even enter while agressed, unlike docking currently (though I have no idea if POS docking would have the same restrictions).


2) So...why should we introduce that to w-space at all? What's the benefit to altering the geography like that? Are some services only going to be available while docked and that's why we should want it?

4) I have had way more fun with force field games than I have ever had with docking games. We've gotten some great stories about really wacky things involving force fields that simply could not have happened with docking. With force fields, you can see when they're approaching the shield and respond accordingly. You don't have that warning with docking. Again, it's all about the transparency we're all used to.
#75 - 2012-08-08 13:30:33 UTC
Two step wrote:

I understand that lots of folks are worried about docking games, and I have a couple of responses:
1) Docking modules will not be on every POS. They will at least cost a lot of fuel to operate, and may not fit into lower class wormholes at all
2) Being docked is, as was pointed out, both an advantage an a disadvantage. When docked you don't have intel on what is going on outside the POS, and people don't know what you are flying.
3) Docking in a POS will be different than at a station. For one thing, you have guns, webs and points on your POS to attack campers. Consider the situation right now, how many of you camp random POSes with defenses online?
4) How are docking games any worse than forcefield games right now? With a forcefield, you can even enter while agressed, unlike docking currently (though I have no idea if POS docking would have the same restrictions).


1) I don't think restricting this feature to some people makes it any better. It's either good or bad. If it's good, people in lower-class wormholes should have access to it as well, if it's bad, it shouldn't happen.

2) You can have one scout outside who sees everything, and 50 invisible people docked up. Huge advantage for the residents (right now you can also have 50 people invisible, but they can't do anything useful). I'm not even talking about fairness. But if we lose the ability to determine (not without effort, but within a short timeframe) whether there is activity in a system, there will be less fights, less interaction in w-space, which is bad.

3&4) Agreed, I don't see docking games as the biggest problem because right now, nobody decloaks intentionally at a POS unless they are invading in full force. But, in the event of an invasion, station-like docking would be disastrous for the defenders. Unlike a real station, you can't just sit the campers out or clone-jump when they have superiority... because they are killing your station. Defenders need a way to get into the fight, and not only at zero right before their POS.

We need to have visibility of any player who interacts with anything: A POS module, a can, switching ships, doing industry. I could probably even live with not seeing what goes on inside a station, after all it's hidden from view. But at least we need information like "7 players currently docked" when on the grid of the station. (You know, in the movies they say something like "our scanners show there is life on board that ship" ;-))

And the people in the station need access to d-scan... how silly is it that you can't see into space from a station anyway? It's not like they couldn't install some cameras and antennas, right?

.

#76 - 2012-08-08 13:31:54 UTC  |  Edited by: TheGunslinger42
Two step wrote:
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Of course it's only one aspect, but an important one. I'm a little concerned that Two steps personal opinions (which are legitimate of course) will pass for "what wormhole dwellers want" in sight of CCP (who obviously have little to no own knowledge of wormhole life for the most part ).


Just wanted to comment on this (and many posts like it). First of all, I don't just present my personal opinions to CCP. I read threads like this, and try to present as many of the opinions I can. For example, I don't care at all about refitting T3s at a POS, but I regularly bug CCP about fixing it.

Secondly, a *lot* of CCPers are in w-space. From CCP Soundwave on down, w-space is very popular with CCPers, for the same reason it is popular with all of us.


You don't care about refitting t3s, but do like the idea of station games

you are a crazy person

as for
Two step wrote:
3) Docking in a POS will be different than at a station. For one thing, you have guns, webs and points on your POS to attack campers. Consider the situation right now, how many of you camp random POSes with defenses online?


lmao. Really? What happens when a fleet decides to knock over a tower? Anyone who is docked at the time is at a massive disadvantage. Even if you undock three times as many people you're going to get torn to pieces on the undock. At least with a forcefield you have a way to properly form up / fall back to a different location.

I also see similar problems with the stuff mentioned about mooring and ships that are moored having personal little forcefields or whatever. An enemy fleet could sit itself at point blank range on moored ships, and the second their mini-fields drop they're in a world of ****. The size of current forcefields provides a nice 'buffer' to prevent that kind of crap, and while there may be good reasons to get rid of forcefields, that kind of functionality must remain imo.
#77 - 2012-08-08 14:19:57 UTC
Chitsa Jason wrote:
[quote=Two step]Forcefield is one of the integral parts in w-space. It lets you be in space and have a buffer from the hostile environment. It also allows you to manage your POS without fear of being ganked by some random cloaky SB. Removing force-fields will make POSes more like stations in k-space and no one wants station games.

CCP mentions that they do not want Jesus features. From what I have read in the minutes this POS revamp sounds like a Jesus feature. There is no need to fix what is not broken!

I would rather have current a bit broken system than a new one without FF.


Chista puts it well, absolutely no one sane wants station games in wormhole space and the FF definitely makes a lot of the flavor that is wormhole space, that feeling of sitting in a little bubble of relative safety in a hostile landscape.
Adhocracy
#78 - 2012-08-08 14:56:44 UTC
Let me put my main concern up front: I'm worried that introducing docking to w-space would reduce all interactions between w-space corps to two ships passing in the night, completely unaware of each others' presence. Docking games etc. would just be a tremendous annoyance on top of that.

There are three conditions under which I would say docking in w-space is in any way acceptable:

1. Docking at 0 only.

The docking radius on a station is invisible. Half the source of all docking games is how you can engage without getting out of that invisible docking radius, and then disengage and redock within a minute. FFs have an unambiguous boundary. You're in or you're out. If docking were implemented in w-space, this would be one half of what is required to prevent the addition of docking from also adding docking games.

2. No timers.

The other half of preventing docking games. There are only two timers in all of w-space: session change and polarity. These set w-space apart from the rest of EVE. It's more transparent, because you can always duck back inside your FF (if you are close enough) or jump through a hole (if you aren't polarized). When I PvP in K-space, gate and docking timers are almost always the death of me, simply because they are invisible and I don't normally have to deal with them. Furthermore, they make w-space more dangerous and exciting. You can run and gun in ways that k-space does not allow, and it comes down to your reflexes rather than some arbitrary timer whether you can escape a bad situation (unless you get yourself polarized, but that's your own damn fault). Whether or not you could defend your 'undock', without timers and with a 0m docking radius, the new "docking" module merely becomes a more localized FF.

3. Transparency

As many people have said, it is absolutely essential to be able to see how many people are online in a POS. Fights in w-space almost invariably go to the party with superior information. While being able to see what's outside while in your POS is important for defensive purposes, I would say it's even more important to be able to see who's inside a POS from the outside. I can't see any way of doing this that would inform what ship they were docked in (as I understand the technical mechanics of docking, when you are docked you aren't really in a ship at all), but at a minimum a list or count of docked players visible from the outside or on d-scan would be essential.

Alternative proposal:

What benefit would docking have for w-space at all? The only good thing I can think of offhand is the ability to refit T3s. I don't want to see entire corps just docked up and doing nothing. If I wanted that, I'd go to lowsec or nullsec. However, if docking allows you to do some specific things that "mooring" does not, then make docking a module in the same way your guns are a module. Give it a 5-minute or so cycle time that burns up a lot of fuel or some other consumable resource. Do not allow permanent docking, only docking as long as is required to complete whatever operation docking allows that mooring does not.

Alternative proposal 2:

I quite understand that nullsec wants docking modules on their POSes and I say more power to them. Thanks to local, there's no guesswork about how many people are online in a system, even if they're docked up. They also get jump bridges, cyno beacons/jammers, and moon mining modules. In other words, just make it so you can't put up docking modules in w-space. There's no need to eliminate them from the game altogether, but the ability to dock (under current docking mechanics) would take away a huge part of what makes w-space unique and wonderful. It would render both hunters and hunted deaf, dumb, and blind.

Also, while docking modules may be costly fuel-wise and/or restricted to higher-class WHs, don't think for a second that will make them uncommon in any way. CCP learned long ago that sheer expense is no obstacle to players. Needing a freighter to get such a module in and a lot of fuel to keep it going would be no obstacle to any corp that lives in a C5 or C6.
Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
#79 - 2012-08-08 15:01:26 UTC
Relax.. You guys are getting all hyped over nothing...
If you actually read the minutes, you'll notice this at the beginning of the pos chapter..

Quote:
- It has not had its initial direction pinned down
- It’s not had any kind of formal design assessment
- It’s not had any kind of formal technical assessment
- It’s not had any kind of formal art assessment
- It’s not had any kind of formal QA assessment
- Nothing has been signed off by anybody at any stage of the decision-making process, beyond the initial instruction to begin concept work


Sounds to me like they are just getting ideas, and haven't thought about possible game-play consequences yet. Wich is good, you don't want to restrict brainstorming because that will block `out of the box` ideas.


Also, on page 66:
Quote:
3) Force fields (or lack thereof). CCP wants to have docking modules, but they don't want them to be cheap, and they may want to limit the number of ships that can be docked. CCP has been exploring adding mooring modules that would protect a ship that was able to physically get near the module with a small force field around just the ship. This system might replace ship maintenance arrays.
Two step pointed out that this system might be nice for docking as well, so that people can get some indication of how many people are active in a starbase, especially in w-space where there is no local chat.


Sounds like an awesome replacement for forcefields.
Plucky Adventurers
#80 - 2012-08-08 15:15:18 UTC
Things you get from docking: (off the top of my head, and in no particular order)
1) Markets
2) Contracts
3) Secure Trade
4) Ship spinning
5) Captains Quarters/Whatever other Incarna stuff shows up
6) Assemble/refit T3s
7) Fit from saved fittings
8) Access to personal and shared storage
9) Repackaging, repairing, refining
10) Real container access
11) Real access rights, including the different corp hangar access for "based at" vs "other" stations
12) Possibly in the future, the ability to switch clones (not jump clone into and out of w-space, but switch implant sets)

The main point with docking is that we can see from the current system that CCP is bad at maintaining 2 separate systems for how players interact with hangars and storage. Getting docking means that whatever features and improvements CCP makes to the station interface comes for free for wormhole people.

Clearly I need to write up another blog post about this, because I think folks are missing the point here. I fully agree that docking would change things, but I also think some change is really good for folks.

I also wanted to respond to one specific point from Chitsa and Rroff:
Chitsa Jason wrote:
Forcefield is one of the integral parts in w-space. It lets you be in space and have a buffer from the hostile environment. It also allows you to manage your POS without fear of being ganked by some random cloaky SB


I think this is 100% wrong. W-space is about lack of information, and making people work hard just to survive there. The exact mechanics of a forcefield or no forcefield has nothing at all to do with the reason people enjoy living in w-space. I'd challenge *anyone* to ask people for their top 10 reasons they like w-space and see POSes *anywhere* on that list. POSes (in their current form) are something we all *suffer* through in order to live in w-space, not the reason w-space is good. People like w-space because of the small gang fights, or because there is no local, or because the PVE is harder than most k-space, they don't love bouncing off POS mods when trying to warp or having to enter a POS password every single time you want to pick up some ammo.

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Forum Jump