These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon] Warp Speed and Acceleration

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
El 1974
Green Visstick High
#141 - 2013-10-03 10:49:59 UTC
Natasha Love wrote:
For the love of god, don't make the freighters even slower than they already are...

It's already a huge pain in the ass to do logistics and I don't see why you should hurt the people who do so much for all the other players even more...

I also don't see why a freighter should be the slowest ship to warp as there are other ships which are significantly bigger and have more mass (titans, supercaps, dreads and carriers)

I'm somewhat surprised people haven't complained yet about Orca's which seems to go from 2.7 AU to 1.5. "Ok, guys bonusses will be down for a few minutes while I warp to that next belt."
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#142 - 2013-10-03 10:52:50 UTC
None ofthe Above wrote:
Helicity Boson wrote:
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Liam Inkuras wrote:
So are you saying, that I can actually intercept in my interceptor now? Big smile

I know, crazy isn't it? :)


To rephrase:

"So are you saying, that I can actually intercept in my interceptor now?* "

*unless you're a lowsec pirate


What would be the problem here? Gate guns?

If that's the case this won't make things any worse and I think it opens up opportunities, for catching people on celestials and such.


For low sec think more along the lines of Cov ops setup to warp quickly, you spot a gang, warping off gate ur guys are sitting on a titan or in their blops BS, you see where they are going and go after them, you land first, jump before they land, light cyno, catch everything possible as it jumps in unsuspectingly because the scout has moved to next system
Lifelongnoob
State War Academy
Caldari State
#143 - 2013-10-03 10:58:50 UTC
Natasha Love wrote:
Lifelongnoob wrote:
hi Fozzie

while you are tweaking warp speeds can u please increase the warp speed of freighters/jump freighters.

0.75au/s is just too slow.. even a warp speed of 1.5au/s would make life a bit easier for freighter pilots. then we freighter pilots can offer next day delivery services :P

if supers can warp at higher speeds then there should be no reason why freighters / jump freighters cant


according to the new table Freighters are going to warp 1.33 AU/s and Jump Freighters 1.5AU/s - so there is a 75-100% increase in warp speed ;)



sweet :)
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#144 - 2013-10-03 11:03:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Zappity
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:


Lol The average time it takes me to warp from gate to your anomaly just got lowered from 30s to 11s. Lol

Now, if we could only get a 5-10s delay to "load grid" when entering a system before seeing & showing up in local, I'll never complain about local being used as an intel system again!



Oh yes please! Just a 10 second delay would be great.

Edit: oh, and good job btw. Excellent change, thanks.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
El 1974
Green Visstick High
#145 - 2013-10-03 11:08:16 UTC
Lifelongnoob wrote:
Natasha Love wrote:
according to the new table Freighters are going to warp 1.33 AU/s and Jump Freighters 1.5AU/s - so there is a 75-100% increase in warp speed ;)

sweet :)

But due to the change in mechanics it will actually take longer to travel the average warp even with double the warp speed.
Mioelnir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#146 - 2013-10-03 11:52:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Mioelnir
Lifelongnoob wrote:
Natasha Love wrote:
Lifelongnoob wrote:
hi Fozzie

while you are tweaking warp speeds can u please increase the warp speed of freighters/jump freighters.

0.75au/s is just too slow.. even a warp speed of 1.5au/s would make life a bit easier for freighter pilots. then we freighter pilots can offer next day delivery services :P

if supers can warp at higher speeds then there should be no reason why freighters / jump freighters cant


according to the new table Freighters are going to warp 1.33 AU/s and Jump Freighters 1.5AU/s - so there is a 75-100% increase in warp speed ;)



sweet :)

Which helps very little. The break even for a warp to take the same time before and after the changes is around 80au. Everything below that will have a longer time in warp.

I've posted some numbers for my usual freighter route a few pages earlier, and I'll see around 18% more time in warp - but that is because the route has two >100au warps in it. If I take those two out, the majority of what I'm left with is basically the Rens-Jita route. And without those two accelerated warps, it is an additional 8 minutes or roughly a 28% increase in time spent in warp.

The >80au warps have been accelerated to not make them prohibitive, when the <80au warps will actually be what makes them prohibitive, as those are 97% of the usecase. A friend who had a data dump ready found 22 empire systems with a diameter of more than 100au yesterday. Having seen neither his math nor his queries, that number can be true or false and should be taken with a few grains of salt. But the number feels like it is in the correct ballpark.

Sadly, there are no alternatives to freighters for bulk hauling, freighter Pilots can not switch to a new meta. So the numbers won't reflect a bad change since usage won't change and the change will be considered a success for freighters as well.
When in reality it's a case of
Quote:
the opposite of "good" is "meant well".
I've seen a lot of complaints about freighters over the years on these forums; I can't remember them being to fast being one of them.

Also to the people talking about the grav sites, this does not change how fast your Hulk enters warp. You will just be in warp longer.
El 1974
Green Visstick High
#147 - 2013-10-03 11:55:12 UTC
Ow and mining barges and exhumers... Currently 6 AU/s, I wonder if that will remain the same? If so, can we please get tackle bonus on the Skiff and Procurer instead of mining bonusses as it'll be a great heavy interceptor.
BloodMia
The Scope
#148 - 2013-10-03 12:31:44 UTC  |  Edited by: BloodMia
Tragedy wrote:
Caldari 5 wrote:
Am I reading this correctly a Freighter will take 22seconds to warp 150Km?
My Interceptor does about 5.3Km/s, which means that it can do 150Km in 28.3seconds, I'm sure that there are some Interceptors that can do better, but this Freighter speed is only just faster than an Interceptors SubWarp Speed :P

Because of the accel and deceleration times. Just think of a loaded semi truck vs a formula 1 car. That example is basically pure accel and decel, yeah the inty/formula 1 car is gonna smoke it, it wont be so bad for a freighter travelling several AU.


The way bigger align time on his own make a difference on start to stop travel from a point A to a point B. All this tables are purely showing the effective warp time, but we need to keep in mind the total travel time, including align time. Big ship are already heavily penalized with their mass/align time link.

Based on that observation, I think the changes are too accentuate. The extremes become too affected because of the already big align time difference.

Align Time (all V / no implant)
Inty: = ~3s
Freighter: ~36s
=> 12x slower

Travel Time
Before:
Inty: 33+3 = 36s
Freighter: 55+36 = 91s
=> 2.75x slower (1.8x slower w/o align time)

After:
Inty: 12+3 = 15s
Freighter: 80+36 = 116s
=> 7.7x slower (6.6x slower w/o align time)

They are already 12x slower to align, and already ~3x slower in warp
After, freighter will become 6.6x slower in warp than inty!

The bigger the ship is the greater the align time will affect the difference. That's why I think it would be wise to adjust the re-balance curve more toward the already fast ship and let heaviers practically untouched! By including align time in the process, you can still keep a big enough delta between, let's say, inty and bs, while not letting already slowspacetruck become more boring!

Ultimately, why is there any "warp acceleration/deceleration", align times on their own must be enough to make the difference. Why not just having an mechanism which allows to instant top the warp speed as soon you enter in warp(pretty much like when you jump with a cap through the jump tunnel - strartrek like "blink" away).

I've the feeling that you want to accentuate a behavior (fast ship travel faster) that is already implemented (align time / warp speed) but miss-compensated by the weird "warp acceleration issue"!

The key is the total travel time:
Now: align time (well balanced) + warp accel. (issue) + warp time (ballanced) + deceleration (issue)
After: align time (ignored in the calculation) + warp accel. / warp time / decel. (some sort of jiggering)
Ideal: align time (the "acceleration phase" - 75-80% speed needed to enter warp) + warp speed (balanced)

No need to add a second acceleration phase in an already "too long" process in a capsuleer life, namely "the travel time"
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#149 - 2013-10-03 12:48:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Warde Guildencrantz
can we get a low slot module that increases warp speed? like a nano. Maybe add this as an effect to the overdrive module. It makes sense that a module that increases warp speed will reduce your cargohold. Also, almost 100% of the time a nano is better than the overdrive injector. Making it affect warp speed as well would give an interesting choice between align time and slower max speed with very fast max speed, longer align time, but faster warps.

The reason I ask this is because it basically prohibits armor ships from increasing their warp speed through the hyperspatial velocity optimizer rigs, since those reduce your max armor.

(Can we take off the penalties on electronics rigs for shield or and navigation rigs for armor? It makes it so those rigs are impossible to use for certain ships, which is bad design. By using navigation rigs on an armor ship you are already not getting the armor bonus of trimarks, that's enough of a negative effect. By using electronics rigs on a shield ship you are already not getting shield extender or resistance bonuses. Once again, enough negative effects, doesn't need to reduce tank even more.)

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Andy Koraka
State War Academy
Caldari State
#150 - 2013-10-03 12:52:50 UTC
The main issue I have with the changes is the huge quality of life Nerf battleships arr receiving. When you add in 10% TiDi (read: any relevant nullsec warfare) the 20au warp time on a battleship jumps from an excruciating 6 minutes all the way up to 9 minutes. When I can enter warp, walk to the store and buy a 6 pack, and still be in warp when I return it's too long.

Combined with the mobile cyno jammers this kills off capital escalations. Fleet 1 drops their caps, onlines jammers, then the enemy has to jump in off grid and waste up to 15 minutes aligning and warping to the engagement grid. By that time fleet 1 has killed the dictor bubbles and extracted, fight over.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#151 - 2013-10-03 13:06:18 UTC
Andy Koraka wrote:
The main issue I have with the changes is the huge quality of life Nerf battleships arr receiving. When you add in 10% TiDi (read: any relevant nullsec warfare) the 20au warp time on a battleship jumps from an excruciating 6 minutes all the way up to 9 minutes.


Er, you might want to check that figure of 6 minutes for a 20 AU warp in a BS. OP says 54 s (was 37 s).
Psihius
Perkone
Caldari State
#152 - 2013-10-03 13:34:30 UTC
I really appreciate this being done, please thank CCP Masterplan for doing an effort for this, I know from personal experience how tough and ugly it can get with outdated non-documented systems :)

On the sidenote - warp-entering effect? I really wana see a suddle, but cool effect when a ship enters warp and kind'a blinks off the grid :) Just like with the "I was there" trailer (obviously that probably was the Micro Jump Drives used there), but something similar in it's nature.

It just kind'a makes sense from every angle you try to look at it :) Yes, yes, I know - 500 ships jumping off the grid - that's why I say'd suddle. 500 sensor boosters running on the grid make a lot more mess :)
Rockstara
Reaction Scientific
#153 - 2013-10-03 13:54:42 UTC
how do gang warps work with this change?

As ti stands now, if you gang warp, you warp at the slowest speed and so all come out of warp at the same time.
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc.
The Fourth District
#154 - 2013-10-03 13:54:53 UTC
I'm sure one day this change will cost me my rating battleship.

Thinks fozz/masterplan. Blink

Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows...
BloodMia
The Scope
#155 - 2013-10-03 13:55:21 UTC
Psihius wrote:

On the sidenote - warp-entering effect? I really wana see a suddle, but cool effect when a ship enters warp and kind'a blinks off the grid :) Just like with the "I was there" trailer (obviously that probably was the Micro Jump Drives used there), but something similar in it's nature.


I want to emphasize on that, why the mjd make an insta "blink" warp where the warp drive make need to accelerate ? Just suppress it for standard warp too and... .ziooouf no more there (and actually not as easy to read where the target goes!)
BloodMia
The Scope
#156 - 2013-10-03 13:57:00 UTC
Rockstara wrote:
how do gang warps work with this change?

As ti stands now, if you gang warp, you warp at the slowest speed and so all come out of warp at the same time.


https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3685554#post3685554
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#157 - 2013-10-03 13:58:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Before we start, here's the correct music to accompany this thread.

Get real foozie the music for all of these threads should be;

Rubicon
NinjaStyle
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#158 - 2013-10-03 14:02:57 UTC
CCP Masterplan wrote:
Berluth Luthian wrote:
Will agility affect warp acceleration? Will my low grade nomad implants have a higher demand?

No. Agility only factors in to sub-warp mobilty. (They will help you hit the 75% alignment slightly quicker, but once the warp kicks in, you need something else like a rig)


Then give Freighters rigs because making them even slower is just nuts! people are allready stabbing themselves from spending most their time in Freighters!
Wrayeth
Inexorable Retribution
#159 - 2013-10-03 14:35:56 UTC
I'm generally in favor of the smaller ships getting a bonus to their warp speed. However, I don't believe it's necessary to slow down the larger ships to do it.

As it stands now, it already takes forever and a day to travel anywhere in a BS, and I see this change making them even less frequently seen on the battlefield than they are already. In fact, the only place I expect them to be common will be in missions and incursions.

In short, if my real life time investment goes up due to travel time, which often has no enjoyable gameplay associated with it, it's going to discourage me from using heavier ships at all. I don't know if that's the intention, but that will be the net effect in my case.
El 1974
Green Visstick High
#160 - 2013-10-03 15:01:38 UTC  |  Edited by: El 1974
BloodMia wrote:
...
The bigger the ship is the greater the align time will affect the difference. That's why I think it would be wise to adjust the re-balance curve more toward the already fast ship and let heaviers practically untouched! By including align time in the process, you can still keep a big enough delta between, let's say, inty and bs, while not letting already slowspacetruck become more boring!

Ultimately, why is there any "warp acceleration/deceleration", align times on their own must be enough to make the difference. Why not just having an mechanism which allows to instant top the warp speed as soon you enter in warp(pretty much like when you jump with a cap through the jump tunnel - strartrek like "blink" away).

I've the feeling that you want to accentuate a behavior (fast ship travel faster) that is already implemented (align time / warp speed) but miss-compensated by the weird "warp acceleration issue"!

The key is the total travel time:
Now: align time (well balanced) + warp accel. (issue) + warp time (ballanced) + deceleration (issue)
After: align time (ignored in the calculation) + warp accel. / warp time / decel. (some sort of jiggering)
Ideal: align time (the "acceleration phase" - 75-80% speed needed to enter warp) + warp speed (balanced)

No need to add a second acceleration phase in an already "too long" process in a capsuleer life, namely "the travel time"

I've been looking at that part as well. When a ship alligns, he alligns to at least 75% of his maximum velocity. The moment he enters warp his speed is reset to 0 and the warp calculation starts with an accelleration from 0. It would already make a significant difference if ships started their warp accelleration from their pre-warp speed. That way fast ships accellerate from a higher starting point than slower ships (capitals) and the 'some sort of jiggering' doesn't need to be this extreme. Ofcourse we could have a much better discussion about the 'jiggering' if CCP told us how it worked.
We would however also need a better visual display of going into warp when ships no longer stop before warping off.