These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Distance that you're being ejected out of a wormhole depends on mass

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
biz Antollare
The Graduates
The Initiative.
#101 - 2014-08-03 17:29:26 UTC
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
Almost Dangerous
Wolves Amongst Strangers
#102 - 2014-08-03 17:32:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Lemonades
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
'wspace is kill'
'no'
Thom Mangum
Oruze Cruise
White Stag Exit Bag
#103 - 2014-08-03 17:40:13 UTC
Counterproductive
Conniving
People


-1
xpaulx
State War Academy
Caldari State
#104 - 2014-08-03 17:45:43 UTC
CCP please get out.

- Codename-47
Crispinius
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#105 - 2014-08-03 17:45:48 UTC
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.
#106 - 2014-08-03 17:48:54 UTC
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
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2014-08-03 17:53:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Brutus Crendraven
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.

We need smaller corps to live in wormholes and not to be over run by large coalitions.

A few thoughts,

PVP (method of destroying isk to generate a level of income for CCP)
A lot of pvp 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
Camellia Void Cartographics
#108 - 2014-08-03 17:53:13 UTC
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
#109 - 2014-08-03 17:56:52 UTC
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
Avalanche.
#110 - 2014-08-03 17:56:58 UTC
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
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#111 - 2014-08-03 17:58:30 UTC
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
Overload This
#112 - 2014-08-03 17:59:23 UTC
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
Slumbered For Millennia
#113 - 2014-08-03 17:59:31 UTC
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
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#114 - 2014-08-03 18:01:14 UTC
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
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#115 - 2014-08-03 18:02:29 UTC
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
Avalanche.
#116 - 2014-08-03 18:03:18 UTC
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
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#117 - 2014-08-03 18:03:37 UTC
So when can we see this same change applied to Cyno's ?

Titans landing 80km off the cyno.
Kupena
Xenophobics Asylum
#118 - 2014-08-03 18:13:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Kupena
Oh man, love this idea. From my perspective this is going to be a fresh breath to already great environment. W-space should not be easy or friendly to the capsuleer. This brings greater opportunities for pvp.

- 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

My hopes are that the range that cruisers are pushed away is no more than 6-10k. Meaning having someone spawn out of scram range seems a bit excessive.

Adapt or die, hail bob.
Dasani Waters
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#119 - 2014-08-03 18:15:17 UTC
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
The Order of Atlas
#120 - 2014-08-03 18:15:32 UTC  |  Edited by: BeanBagKing
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? Are they trying to nerf rage rolling for some reason? Increase or decrease pvp?