Wormholes

What is this particular change supposed to do again?

"This change is intended to ensure that all attempts to control the local wormhole environment are open to risk of player disruption. We are not satisfied with how easy and safe it is to close wormholes that could potentially allow other players to interact with W-space operations, as the risk of player interaction should always be the main source of tension and danger in W-space."

Uhmm, by metrics sure rolling WHs is "easy" the pros have it down to an art form, but that is after a lot of practice. Don't believe me? Have someone do it without any experience and see what happens. Rage-rolling only really happens with local superiority, without that it becomes really dangerous. If you want more engagement in WHs you need more people in WHs. More people and rage-rolling becomes a lot harder, there is always the chance to get dropped on and your rolling can get stomped on. The real problem is that you have to find people doing it. The extra 30 seconds maybe a minute that this will add is pointless. All you have to do is have another 'toon web you to about 180 Km away, and another stationed there to web ya back, it that easy. This entire code turns into a waste of time, leaving very little input.

"The basics of this proposal is for the mass of any individual ship to influence the range that they appear from the wormhole when they emerge on the other side. This should provide a more interesting tactical environment in wormhole combat and ensure a basic level of risk to rolling a wormhole without proper support."

Uhmm, what? I lived in a C6 for about a year, now living in a C4, this rarely happens. When evicting C6 residents you quietly bring in caps, warp them to a safe spot and when you think you have the numbers you bash POSes. Also remember that C5s and C6s are the ONLY WHs that can SUPPORT CAPS. Every other WH is barely effected, only Orca's are truly affected by this change and I have already solved the problem earlier in this post.

Let's face it, the jump range is a joke at best, it will be figured out in about a week maybe 2 weeks at most, more likely 3-4 days, that's it.

Not to be derogatory, but for anyone involved in wormhole pvp, jumping back through a hole is understood to not make you invulnerable. A small gang of even remotely competent pvpers will place cloaked dictors/hictors on either side and just follow someone through with their main force if they try to disengage by jumping through. This is no different than the games played on gate camps. A quick look at a corp's setup, and you can get a pretty good idea of whether or not they will try to close your connection with them and you can lay a trap. This change just complicates in space refitting for caps and adds a minor irritation for anyone rolling a hole for content. It also does not meaningfully increase risk.

And why actually group of 5-6 people have to be allowed the same level of comfort while accessing the highest level content in the game, as huge entities have? Or should we ask while one multiboxer with 5-6 accounts should (which is not so uncommon in wh)? Well, if he can overcome all difficulties and manage it somehow - I bow to him again. But why should game mechanic help him in any way? This is mmo, and it has to favor bigger players' communities, like it is happen IRL actually. It is bad when smaller entities banned from some content or space entirely. But to allow them the same unrestricted access to the top of the notch content as greater entities have - is another extreme, imo. They should be given their niche, this is more reasanoble approach. There are a lot of low level holes around there, if you hard-boiled solo player or prefer to stay in your small friend corp - you should go try do them, and visit higest ones occasionally, when you just happen to find one with safe statics (so you don't need to roll over). Or adapt.

The attempt to create more variation is admirable, though I believe the consensus is that the proposed change is handling the problem incorrectly. Rather than increasing the spawn distance, what about changing the physical size of high end WHs. For instance a C5-C5 could have a radius of 15k. Without changing spawn distance it would still mean that a capital could spawn just outside of refit range but would also still be within range to jump back.

**Edit: Re-posted my idea on page 35 with better explanation.**

Make the spawn thingy and remove the polarization.

Mass, speed and inertia entering a wormhole should reflect on exiting the wormhole.

While a fun mechanic the problem would be its too unreliable and not always practical, i.e. you could end up at 0 on a wh with it too risky to burn off to get the run up so as to pull the extra range you need on the other side. Some way of flagging your desired outcome when jumping i.e. having prop mod on when jumping would be more reliable.

Reading through the different sticky threads' comments, I just find it amusing the reactions they all get (except bookmarks)
Large / PVP cops are indifferent / like them
Small / PVE hate them
The ones that both groups disagree with, the fix is to do the exact opposite of the proposed changes (like this one)

More large corp stuff
More pvp stuff
No plan to balance risk and reward / help out pve (seems pretty typical)

I wonder if someone could simply guess what the next expansion would be just via topic (like WH) by simply following the above recipe.

I have to agree that bigger/heavier/slower ships should be closer to the WH, and smaller/lighter/faster ships further away - it makes sense via math + science, and it just seems like a better policy overall. Imagine you find a wormhole (like in real life) you shoot a probe/satellite through it, immediately followed by your ship. Which one is going to be where on the other side of it? Well, your big ship will just be leaving the WH while the smaller faster whatever is flying away at high speeds.

If these changes go ahead, then rage rolling for smaller groups will die because of the double whammy of rolling being more dangerous and tedious, plus the massive disadvantage of the invading party compared to the defender when deploying caps, because of the issue of spawning out of refit and capacitor feeding range.

It's not so bad for large alliances like NoHo, we'll probably change tactics, with a specialised rolling cap and defensive fit BS for rage rolling, and for the fight itself go with a 50+ T3 and Guardian blob to counter the inevitable cap escalation by the defenders. I think it'll pan out like this - because only large alliances will be able to field a viable offensive T3 blob, farming will get safer overall, so the number of bears will go up. We'll actually benefit, as the K162 not spawning until jumping in will give an edge to the attacker with a 50 man blob formed up.

For people not able to field a 50 man blob, that leaves opportunistic kills of rolling crews (now easier, but the caps will be ****-fit) and the good old log in trap. In summary, great for big groups, and a massive kick in the spuds for those C5/C6 PVPers who can field 15-30 pilots.

Please CCP, take our concerns on board - whilst well intentioned, the mass-based spawn is going to hurt the up and coming and intermediate sized groups the most, and for the bigger groups make life more boring and less varied. The big dogs will just get bigger, smaller entities be forced to congeal together (I use this term deliberately) and we'll end up becoming mini-Goons in our little wormhole ghetto.

I'm not against change, but I can't see how this will improve anything?