These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
19 Pages123Next pageLast page
 

[Hyperion Feedback Thread] Second Static for C4s

First post
Author
C C P Alliance
#1 - 2014-08-06 12:56:36 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Fozzie
Hey everyone! This thread is for all of your feedback and discussion surrounding the introduction of a second static connection for Class 4 wormholes that we announced in our recently released dev blog.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

Gallente Federation
#2 - 2014-08-06 14:37:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
+1 for CCP and the CSM here.

Edit: Ok +1/2 for CCP and CSM. Following needs to be addressed.

I have a issue with a C4 having a new C1 static, as it is extremely difficult to roll (the max mass it can accept is a retriever, to roll requires 20+ retriever passes).

If you were to do sometype of C4-C1 static, please increase the Max mass capable of fitting into all C1's to 60,000,000 (up from 20,000,000).

This permits Hulks to jump into C1's. And also denies all battleships from jumping into C1's EXCEPT the Nestor.

The Nestor is 56,000,000 mass. With 1 plate, its 59,750,000. This means that no battleship could fit into a C1 except a Nestor. You don't unbalance C1 functionality, but you give it a bit more flexibility, especially if they are to be more C4-C1 connections.

Yaay!!!!

Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2014-08-06 14:38:27 UTC
+1 for second C4 statics
Illusion of Solitude
#4 - 2014-08-06 14:50:25 UTC
This idea seems reasonable, opening up opportunities while still retaining a level of control.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Amarr Empire
#5 - 2014-08-06 15:02:02 UTC
As a player who lived in a c4 wormhole for quite some time(and no longer does) I'm welcoming the changes of more statics with open arms. I do however believe, that the changes are not really concentrating on the "real" issue with c4's. And there are a few.

1. The logistical part of c4's are a nightmare, they're always behind atleast one WH (c3 or c4) whereas a c3 can connect directly to K-space. While it's awesome for someone doing PvP, to have access to more potential prey it's still as hard as before to do actual fueling, and/or buy a skillbook, update a clone... Or whatever you need in k-space.

2. The sites compared to the isk value, is simply not worth it. C3's offer anomalies that are far easier to run, than in c4's. Not only does the c4's do way more damage, they also neut alot more. But perhaps the biggest difference, is the range of the spawn's.
Most spawns, are at atleast 80-120 km away, which is a major difference compared to any class below, that is more in the range of ~30-60 km away.

A C3 site, average out at about 60-80 million isk, and a c4 at about 100-110.
You can run a c3 solo, you can not(without alot of bling) run a c4 solo. This means you need to team up with a buddy, and that right there halfs your income per site, and to some extend makes it worth less than just doing the c3 yourself.



Otherwise all the other changes seems okay, with abit of iteration.
However one thing i think you should consider, is to increase the amount of WH's of all classes, seeing that it's getting more and more crowded.


/Fonac fanboy of CCP Fozzie!
Reckoning Star Alliance
#6 - 2014-08-06 15:03:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Obil Que
Not terribly excited simply due to that fact that we've recently occupied a C4 specifically because it had a single C3 static. That environment suited us well. Obviously a concern is what completely random static we will end up with will very much determine the suitability of the hole for us.

Is there any information that could be made available on what combinations C4s will get based on their current static types? Similar to how C2 with C3 will always have a HS. Will a C4 with a current C3 have a specific kind or possible set of additional statics or be totally random?

Overall, I am far more in favor of increased spawns/randomness vs. additional statics in C4 space since the later permanently changes the landscape of our chosen system potentially resulting in the need to move if the result is unfavorable.

EDIT: Clarification on information request and additional thoughts
#7 - 2014-08-06 15:04:31 UTC
I think this is a great idea.

It would be cool if there was a way to tell which hole is which before warping to it, so we could keep one of them closed for a while if we chose to. That might be making it too easy though Big smile
Interhole Revenue Service
#8 - 2014-08-06 15:05:20 UTC
+ 1

Some people aren't going to like it but i think this change is good for the overall health of WH space.
PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
#9 - 2014-08-06 15:12:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Luminocity
Lapin Poilu wrote:
I think this is a great idea.

It would be cool if there was a way to tell which hole is which before warping to it, so we could keep one of them closed for a while if we chose to. That might be making it too easy though Big smile
Should be a non-issue with the Hyperion release. And I quote from the dev blog:
Quote:
As of Hyperion, we are planning to have K162 signatures appear as soon as the first player jumps through their wormhole connection. This prevents players in the destination system from receiving unfair early intelligence while also ensuring that a vigilant player can determine if a potentially hostile intruder has entered their system through a new wormhole connection.


For the additional static of C4 wormhole systems - will these be only W-space to W-space connections (C1-C6) or will K-space statics also be in the pool of options (since currently direct K-space connections are impossible from/to C4 systems)
Adhocracy
#10 - 2014-08-06 15:13:23 UTC
Lapin Poilu wrote:
I think this is a great idea.

It would be cool if there was a way to tell which hole is which before warping to it, so we could keep one of them closed for a while if we chose to. That might be making it too easy though Big smile


Holes only open when you jump through them now. Buff to your lifestyle and other C2 lifestyle I suppose.
Gallente Federation
#11 - 2014-08-06 15:18:29 UTC
Fonac wrote:
As a player who lived in a c4 wormhole for quite some time(and no longer does) I'm welcoming the changes of more statics with open arms. I do however believe, that the changes are not really concentrating on the "real" issue with c4's. And there are a few.

1. The logistical part of c4's are a nightmare, they're always behind atleast one WH (c3 or c4) whereas a c3 can connect directly to K-space. While it's awesome for someone doing PvP, to have access to more potential prey it's still as hard as before to do actual fueling, and/or buy a skillbook, update a clone... Or whatever you need in k-space.

2. The sites compared to the isk value, is simply not worth it. C3's offer anomalies that are far easier to run, than in c4's. Not only does the c4's do way more damage, they also neut alot more. But perhaps the biggest difference, is the range of the spawn's.
Most spawns, are at atleast 80-120 km away, which is a major difference compared to any class below, that is more in the range of ~30-60 km away.

A C3 site, average out at about 60-80 million isk, and a c4 at about 100-110.
You can run a c3 solo, you can not(without alot of bling) run a c4 solo. This means you need to team up with a buddy, and that right there halfs your income per site, and to some extend makes it worth less than just doing the c3 yourself.



Otherwise all the other changes seems okay, with abit of iteration.
However one thing i think you should consider, is to increase the amount of WH's of all classes, seeing that it's getting more and more crowded.


/Fonac fanboy of CCP Fozzie!


I used to live C4 myself and logistics was a nightmare. I do believe it is a little easier now though. Its a commitment to be in C4 space. I think it should still stay about as "tough".

I do agree with the C4 site running though. That needs to be looked at. With the Dual static though the ability to farm the other wormholes should make it a bit more viable (extra connection = extra isk).

Yaay!!!!

You Are Being Monitored
#12 - 2014-08-06 15:23:58 UTC
I greatly look forward to this change +1
#13 - 2014-08-06 15:29:58 UTC
How is this useful to those who already have a C4 with C2 or C1 static and already get a ton of traffic? I personally think this should be implemented only on C4 systems with static C4s and higher.
PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
#14 - 2014-08-06 15:31:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Luminocity
Logistics for living in a C4 is not a nightmare. It all depends on the capabilities for planning/execution of the inhabitants.
If anything it will be more difficult now because rolling for a suitable chain to haul through is hindered by two new factors that were not in place before:
a. you need to deal with two statics instead of one (rolling both or leaving a scout on one)
b. mass affects the distance a ship ends up off the wormhole after jumping (using Orca-s to mass the wormhole is more difficult)
PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
#15 - 2014-08-06 15:32:18 UTC
TomyLobo wrote:
How is this useful to those who already have a C4 with C2 or C1 static and already get a ton of traffic? I personally think this should be implemented only on C4 systems with static C4s and higher.
I support this product and/or service!
#16 - 2014-08-06 15:33:05 UTC
Will the statics be low-end(C1-C3) and high-end(C4-C6) each? Can a hole have two same-class statics?
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2014-08-06 15:35:50 UTC
Luminocity wrote:
Logistics for living in a C4 is not a nightmare. It all depends on the capabilities for planning/execution of the inhabitants.
If anything it will be more difficult now because rolling for a suitable chain to haul through is hindered by two new factors that were not in place before:
a. you need to deal with two statics instead of one (rolling both or leaving a scout on one)
b. mass affects the distance a ship ends up off the wormhole after jumping (using Orca-s to mass the wormhole is more difficult)



As someone mentioned earlier, it should probably keep the "remoteness"
The point however still stands, that c4's does not offer enough reward who does the hassle.

And i dont think this "little" change does anything to change that.


Illusion of Solitude
#18 - 2014-08-06 15:36:57 UTC
Before we moved to our current hole, we lived in a C4 with a static C4. This was... isolated, to say the least. Logistics chains were usually at least 4 jumps deep, sometimes 7-8 (usually we gave up after 8 jumps if we still hadn't found a route to kspace, and rolled the hole to start again). This level of isolation was great for staying uninterrupted during PVE, but that's about it. After about a year of living there, the corp moved to a new hole with much better likelihood of routes in/out, as well as more daily pvp opportunities.

So all that said, will the new w-space static for the C4s be guaranteed of a different type than the current static? Or could you possibly have a C4 with a static C4 and another static C4? I'm honestly not sure how I feel about that possibility, but I'm curious.

A C4 with two static C3s could be a pvp dream, since C3s seem to be the most heavily k162'ed holes in existence.

I will also agree with the notion that C4 sites tend not to be as desirable as C3 sites. The numbers and time required to run C4 sites scale up much faster than the profit from those sites. I honestly cannot recall the last time we bothered with a relic or data site in a C4, when there were C3 sites available to run.
PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
#19 - 2014-08-06 15:38:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Luminocity
WoAz wrote:
... Can a hole have two same-class statics?
Kennesaw Breach wrote:
So all that said, will the new w-space static for the C4s be guaranteed of a different type than the current static? Or could you possibly have a C4 with a static C4 and another static C4? I'm honestly not sure how I feel about that possibility, but I'm curious.

As per the dev blog no, the additional static can not be to the same system class as the first one.
C C P Alliance
#20 - 2014-08-06 15:42:19 UTC
The new static is indeed guaranteed to be for a different class than your current static.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie

19 Pages123Next pageLast page
Forum Jump