These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

K-space wormholes

Author
1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#1 - 2014-05-01 15:10:33 UTC  |  Edited by: 1c3crysta1
Wormholes are today vital to the area of eve known as unknown space (WH-space) for obvious reasons, but to known space (K-space) they're nowhere close to the utilization that the gates have. This suggestion won't take them close, but it is in my opinion that they're an underused resource for the game. Their current properties matches the the needs for links between WH-space very well, but it makes them underwhelmning in many situations compared to gates in K-space. The two big reasons for that is they're harder to access and limited in capacity. My idea is to modify the K-space -> K-space wormholes, in order to make them more attractive for a large majority of the population in Eve.

My suggestion is:

  • Make K-space to K-space wormholes into anomalies instead of signatures
  • Increase the total jump mass (not per jump) and/or mass regeneration radically


Reasoning and effect:
Making them into anomalies will increase their use, especially the use by the ppl who stumble upon them. Instead of being neglected by many as signatures since ppl in K-space often don't have a scanner along, they will become opportunities. I know that diligence should be rewarded, but I think the value this would bring to so many outweights that in this particular topic.

Increasing the mass before collapse would make them more relevant for bigger needs. I'm mostly thinking about hauling here, like if a wormhole that connected two tradehubs actually could handle the traffic for a couple of hours. That amount would also enable big fleets to show up where the enemy didn't expect it to or allow a corporation/alliance to realocate easily.

I would guess that atleast the second idea has been suggested before, but I couldn't find it in the stickied "Commonly proposed ideas" and I think that both ideas warrant some attention. What do you say?
HTC NecoSino
Suddenly Carebears
Verlate
#2 - 2014-05-01 16:20:06 UTC
lol learn to scan.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#3 - 2014-05-01 16:42:53 UTC
No. Exploration does not need decrease in content, it needs an increase. Blink

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Nolen Cadmar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2014-05-01 16:44:02 UTC
-1, No. See comments made by 2 above replies

Nolen's Spreadsheet Guru Services

Pre-made spreadsheets available covering market, manufacturing and more!

Custom requests welcome!

Sheet Screenshots

1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#5 - 2014-05-01 17:21:28 UTC
HTC NecoSino wrote:
lol learn to scan.


I know how to scan, which is why I know that they're specific types of ships that you want to scan with and that you scan for specifics types of tasks. No one takes the time look through the systems on route for possible shortcuts since it involves reshipping and getting taking the time to scan those sites. You might say that this begs the question whether anyone deserves that shortcut. I'd say we do. A shortcut serves it purpose better if it's easily accessible. There's a reason as why ppl don't look all over for a random shortcut and that's because it takes more time to find compared to the gain in travel time.
1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#6 - 2014-05-01 17:27:46 UTC  |  Edited by: 1c3crysta1
Rivr Luzade wrote:
No. Exploration does not need decrease in content, it needs an increase. Blink


Ok, so according to you, K-space -> K-space wormholes is content that would be lost if this proposal came to fruitition?
Is it because it wouldn't involve you having to scan it down? Or because you would share it with everyone else?
You know, this proposal would add alot of content. I think that there's alot of other ideas for adding content to exploration and I think that you'd be happy to trade this for a good content-creator for exploration ANY day.
El Geo
Warcrows
Sedition.
#7 - 2014-05-01 17:29:57 UTC
I personally would like to see some type of sleeper homeworld incursion type content, I know this sounds bad right? but hear me out lol.

Basics:

Entries to homeworlds via core systems.
Incursion type dynamic (entries with sleepers around them, added sleepers and possibly new/extra sites in system)
Homeworld entries larger and more stable than standard entries.
Homeworld systems have non anchorable moons.
Homeworld systems have no static exit and can remain closed for days/weeks or even a month.

Twisted
Blodhgarm Dethahal
8 Sins of Man
Stray Dogs.
#8 - 2014-05-01 17:49:58 UTC
1c3crysta1 wrote:
HTC NecoSino wrote:
lol learn to scan.


I know how to scan, which is why I know that they're specific types of ships that you want to scan with and that you scan for specifics types of tasks. No one takes the time look through the systems on route for possible shortcuts since it involves reshipping and getting taking the time to scan those sites. You might say that this begs the question whether anyone deserves that shortcut. I'd say we do. A shortcut serves it purpose better if it's easily accessible. There's a reason as why ppl don't look all over for a random shortcut and that's because it takes more time to find compared to the gain in travel time.


First off, I know several people in null who use wormholes to help move small objects but high value through wormholes.

Second off, if you don't have the will to find the short cuts and thus exploit them, then you don't deserve them. So learn and have the willpower to scan.

Third, while yes short cuts are better if its easily accessible, that defeats the purpose of having them. They should be discovered and exploited after work, not handed to you. Stop feeling entitled to things.

Mechanics are fine how they are, don't change them.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#9 - 2014-05-01 17:50:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Alundil
I don't care for this idea. The removal of things that require pilot action (scanning; signatures, ships, etc) and skill (efficiency) for things that do not require any of the aforementioned (anomalies; free effortless content, free effortless Intel, less attention to detail and game mechanics) is a very bad trend.

It should be discouraged whenever suggested by CCP or by player. You should feel discouraged.

I'm right behind you

1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#10 - 2014-05-01 18:04:47 UTC
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
1c3crysta1 wrote:
HTC NecoSino wrote:
lol learn to scan.


I know how to scan, which is why I know that they're specific types of ships that you want to scan with and that you scan for specifics types of tasks. No one takes the time look through the systems on route for possible shortcuts since it involves reshipping and getting taking the time to scan those sites. You might say that this begs the question whether anyone deserves that shortcut. I'd say we do. A shortcut serves it purpose better if it's easily accessible. There's a reason as why ppl don't look all over for a random shortcut and that's because it takes more time to find compared to the gain in travel time.


First off, I know several people in null who use wormholes to help move small objects but high value through wormholes.

Second off, if you don't have the will to find the short cuts and thus exploit them, then you don't deserve them. So learn and have the willpower to scan.

Third, while yes short cuts are better if its easily accessible, that defeats the purpose of having them. They should be discovered and exploited after work, not handed to you. Stop feeling entitled to things.

Mechanics are fine how they are, don't change them.


First off:
When there is a specific need for a shortcut, ppl are sure to look for them.

Second off:
I'm not the one who's going to use them since I don't live in K-space. I simply feel their presence is a waste since it's one of the last things that you're looking for when looking for something in K-space (since they're so random) and you can't access them without scanning them out.
Blodhgarm Dethahal
8 Sins of Man
Stray Dogs.
#11 - 2014-05-01 18:10:09 UTC
And there you go, if you need or it can be useful you look for it and thus use it.

Those who have no need for it, do not care about them.

Seems normal and fine.
1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#12 - 2014-05-01 18:10:22 UTC
Alundil wrote:
I don't care for this idea. The removal of things that require pilot action (scanning; signatures, ships, etc) and skill (efficiency) for things that do not require any of the aforementioned (anomalies; free effortless content, free effortless Intel, less attention to detail and game mechanics) is a very bad trend.

It should be discouraged whenever suggested by CCP or by player. You should feel discouraged.


I can understand if you don't agree with the idea if you want Eve to be a more tedious place. I agree that there are some things that should require pilot actions, such as scanning, but this is not one them.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#13 - 2014-05-01 18:13:12 UTC
1c3crysta1 wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
No. Exploration does not need decrease in content, it needs an increase. Blink


Ok, so according to you, K-space -> K-space wormholes is content that would be lost if this proposal came to fruitition?
Is it because it wouldn't involve you having to scan it down? Or because you would share it with everyone else?
You know, this proposal would add alot of content. I think that there's alot of other ideas for adding content to exploration and I think that you'd be happy to trade this for a good content-creator for exploration ANY day.


No, because not everyone needs to know about secret passages, and we don't need even more stuff where you can easily camp on. Besides, this would be a massive inconsistency. Why are only these WH's anomalies, but others not? The content is already there, you, however, need to look for it first. That is what Exploration is about.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Blodhgarm Dethahal
8 Sins of Man
Stray Dogs.
#14 - 2014-05-01 18:14:25 UTC
1c3crysta1 wrote:
Alundil wrote:
I don't care for this idea. The removal of things that require pilot action (scanning; signatures, ships, etc) and skill (efficiency) for things that do not require any of the aforementioned (anomalies; free effortless content, free effortless Intel, less attention to detail and game mechanics) is a very bad trend.

It should be discouraged whenever suggested by CCP or by player. You should feel discouraged.


I can understand if you don't agree with the idea if you want Eve to be a more tedious place. I agree that there are some things that should require pilot actions, such as scanning, but this is not one them.


People do not have short cuts in real life without effort involved.

People do not get any gain for no work.

People should have to scan K-Space wormholes for any benefit they may bring.
1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#15 - 2014-05-01 18:16:36 UTC
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
And there you go, if you need or it can be useful you look for it and thus use it.

Those who have no need for it, do not care about them.

Seems normal and fine.


You're generalizing and missing the point. First off, they're random, so you can't be certain to find anything even if you scan through every system within 10 jumps. And are you really sure that only the ones that need something, care for it?
I'm saying that wormholes can be so much more than it currently is.
1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#16 - 2014-05-01 18:19:51 UTC
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
1c3crysta1 wrote:
Alundil wrote:
I don't care for this idea. The removal of things that require pilot action (scanning; signatures, ships, etc) and skill (efficiency) for things that do not require any of the aforementioned (anomalies; free effortless content, free effortless Intel, less attention to detail and game mechanics) is a very bad trend.

It should be discouraged whenever suggested by CCP or by player. You should feel discouraged.


I can understand if you don't agree with the idea if you want Eve to be a more tedious place. I agree that there are some things that should require pilot actions, such as scanning, but this is not one them.


People do not have short cuts in real life without effort involved.

People do not get any gain for no work.

People should have to scan K-Space wormholes for any benefit they may bring.


That's a lie and you know it. But this is not going to add to the unfairness that surronds us.
Blodhgarm Dethahal
8 Sins of Man
Stray Dogs.
#17 - 2014-05-01 18:21:06 UTC
1c3crysta1 wrote:
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
And there you go, if you need or it can be useful you look for it and thus use it.

Those who have no need for it, do not care about them.

Seems normal and fine.


You're generalizing and missing the point. First off, they're random, so you can't be certain to find anything even if you scan through every system within 10 jumps. And are you really sure that only the ones that need something, care for it?
I'm saying that wormholes can be so much more than it currently is.


Wormholes in W-Space are random in destination as well (this includes statics, its just a more of a focused random).

So should those wormholes be Anomalies as well?
1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#18 - 2014-05-01 18:22:40 UTC
Rivr Luzade wrote:
1c3crysta1 wrote:
Rivr Luzade wrote:
No. Exploration does not need decrease in content, it needs an increase. Blink


Ok, so according to you, K-space -> K-space wormholes is content that would be lost if this proposal came to fruitition?
Is it because it wouldn't involve you having to scan it down? Or because you would share it with everyone else?
You know, this proposal would add alot of content. I think that there's alot of other ideas for adding content to exploration and I think that you'd be happy to trade this for a good content-creator for exploration ANY day.


No, because not everyone needs to know about secret passages, and we don't need even more stuff where you can easily camp on. Besides, this would be a massive inconsistency. Why are only these WH's anomalies, but others not? The content is already there, you, however, need to look for it first. That is what Exploration is about.


How many are using these secret passages, as you call them? They're not worth their time 99.99% of the time. And it wouldn't bring an inconsistency, since K-space -> K-space are a different kind of wormholes compared to K-space -> W-Space.
1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#19 - 2014-05-01 18:24:25 UTC
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
1c3crysta1 wrote:
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
And there you go, if you need or it can be useful you look for it and thus use it.

Those who have no need for it, do not care about them.

Seems normal and fine.


You're generalizing and missing the point. First off, they're random, so you can't be certain to find anything even if you scan through every system within 10 jumps. And are you really sure that only the ones that need something, care for it?
I'm saying that wormholes can be so much more than it currently is.


Wormholes in W-Space are random in destination as well (this includes statics, its just a more of a focused random).

So should those wormholes be Anomalies as well?


Imo, no, since everyone and his grandma in W-space got a scanner with him/her. The random whs are just a piece of the daily work out here.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#20 - 2014-05-01 18:30:06 UTC
Enough people use them, people who want to have fun without other people knowing where they come from or where you go to. These hidden passages are priceless for roams into far away territories, where you can come and go undetected. These WHs being anoms would make this easier to do, but also a whole lot less secret. And I certainly don't mind tedious tasks.

And they are wormholes regardless of their different nature, as you called it.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

12Next page