Wormholes

CCP Fozzie:

I love the fact that you made this statement. I hope CCP posts these design goals in a sticky post somewhere so we all know what you are striving to achieve.

I would like to suggest this mild correction to your design philosophy:

The ultimate experience in Eve Online, the greatest tension, the greatest satisfaction, the greatest risk/reward, should come from interaction with other players.


Please invert your proposed function so that frigates/recons are further away, and larger ships closer to the hole.

Giving Small Class pilots further distance from gates allows them to make this decision to engage other players or not ... It adds a great deal of tension because there is still the possibility of them being pulled into a conflict... and they HAVE to be alert. This still accomplishes your goal of player exposure.

Sure, it should be much more difficult to collapse wormholes. BUT, this should be done in a trade-off, that there are other means to defend a System... For example, give POS types specific bonuses in wormhole space to compensate.

That being said, always allow players to engage others. But ALSO provide players to pick and choose their fights when confronted--give us the option to retreat. Industrialists and Recon/Explorers should have the advantages at retreat.

I feel like an adult telling a kid over and over that if they eat the whole box of cookies they are going to be sick.........

Living in wormholes has made eve for me, I never truly enjoyed and invested myself in the other gameplay options. They didn't interest me.

A lot of us almost think the reason w-space is currently so awesome in regard's to mechanics compared to the rest of eve is sheer accidental blind luck. Sure we have small nitpicks but by and large a lot of the core mechanics of w-space. (Polarity/mass/statics and no local) are why we are here. They are why we subscribe and struggle and work.

Wormholes have let me grow my corp beyond 2 guys starting out into something that im seriously proud of. A big part of how and why that happened was the ability to efficiently roll holes in the search for pvp/pve. Unlike null/low/high sec we are not guaranteed content.

There are no missions, bounties or anything that are permanent. Even our POS can be taken down/run out of fuel. Everything we play with in w-space is at risk. No other space in eve has this. Even if you lose a war in null there are still stations and places things can be saved. If you **** off the wrong person or just are in the wrong place you can lose it all in w-space.

Despite all this we find it compelling to be here, despite the fact that some days we can literally spend 5-8 hours rolling and scouting and not find a fight, we come back and do it again the next day.

Changes to the way we can roll holes affect this dynamic. Fair fights are a minority its reality....part of the head games that go on is sizing up the opposing force and figuring out what you can do to get the advantage. Polarity and the jumping things back/massing the hole is a big part of our tactics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snfi2AsJu_c

Watch that video, fights like that is what this change will kill. If this is the type of gameplay you feel isn't compelling/doesn't provide content and value then go right ahead.

You CCP have that your gameplay experience in nullsec isn't what it could be. The mechanics in place which basically mean once a fight is engaged your there win or lose lend themselves to the massive blobs and powerblocs that dominate there. Currently in w-space you can take a fight that isn't a sure thing and retreat back through the hole into a more advantageous position. This change will promote the same type of environment in w-space

Taking away that option will end exactly where people have described, less total fights and engagements short of derpy people losing ships they would likely lose under the current system already.

This change will mean the era of small corps rolling for engagements in their range will likely end, it means rolling over holes during off times will likely just stop. Things will slowdown, this is bad for w-space and therefore bad for the whole game.

We truly want to believe that you have our best interests in mind, prove it to us and don't kill off our way of life.

I agree that there should be a distinction in these mechanics based on ship roles. I especially believe that frigates and recons should get the most distance.

The safety of battleships and dreads/carriers quite beside the point, and changes should not be made to them. (Maybe a little for battleships).

Incursions into wormhole space should be possible. Starting with small ships and working upwards... This can only happen if recons and frigates have some advantages.

Thanks for picking up on that. I don't agree or disagree either, and think it might be a little bit of tin-foil hattery tbh.

But at the same time, it fits the facts very neatly.

Why should you punish recons and scouts who have invested so much SP and ISK into these roles?

It seems there is great consensus that carriers/titans/dreads should not be affected.

So, at least a discussion on smaller classes is merited.

Why shouldn't certain roles, (such as recons, scouts, cloaky haulers), get a bonus to the distance they spawn from gates?

I will go even further and state that these changes should affect /ALL/ gates, stargates, and jumpgates...

This would even help get more cruisers into faction warfare.

Dear Rivka

Again this will cause the complete opposite. If you as a scout spawn 100km off the WH nobody can tackle you. So this inital conflict is already eliminated with the new system. Then you can easily observe whether you want to engage or not.
Nowadays if you jump through a wormhole with a scout and face a camp you most of the times have to react immediately and therefore have the conflict CCP wants to have. You get decloaked maybe by cans or you have just 2 quick options. Jump back and get caought by enemy scouts / tacklers or try to burn away first anc cloak.

And if the camp looks engageable for you you engage now and as well with the new mass feature they plan.

I think you have stated what I would like perfectly.

EXCEPT: I believe the luxury of spawning 100km away from a wormhole/gate should be reserved for specific ROLES, like recon, cloaky haulers, etc, who have heavily invested SP and ISK into those roles, (specifically navigation, astrometrics, recon, cloaking, etc).

I believe they should get the greatest advantages when it comes to spawning distances.

This gives gate camping a vulnerability--and not always a sure win, and not always some massive slug fest, but a more surgical and tactical outcome. :)

You're behind the times. Check that thread; they're adding a timer.

When is the next DTP podcast being recorded? Look forward to hearing you talk about this.

Have you flown a capital ship (esp since the changes to warp)? It is one click to warp to the nearest planet, so it is simple. Simple to initiate doesn't get you to the planet and back. Anything inside 54km makes you 'simply pointable' by a proteus. The only ship that can 'simply web' you at that range is a loki. They have the same lock time, the point is instant and the web helps,but isn't instant. So... getting 'simply pointed' is what will simply happen when you 'simply warp to the closest planet''. Anything that can't cloak/get into warp before proteus point 'simply doesn't go anywhere'.

The mwd orca is a different issue. It may actually have a chance. If I can get up to speed it might be able to just coast into the wh and jump back. Things that will prevent that - bumping it out of alignment before it gets up to speed, webs, scrams. I would bet on getting up to speed and coasting into jump range to be a slim chance.