These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Long-Distance Travel Changes Inbound

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
DNSBLACK
Dirt Nap Squad
#2301 - 2014-10-02 03:15:44 UTC
Kah'Roor wrote:
This thread is awesome. I approve of the tears. The big null powers will be fine. The smaller groups will also be fine. Things change, we (as players) adapt. There was a time before jump freighters, capitals, jump bridges etc. They had empires then as well. The difference was those empires didn't coalesce into 2 powerhouses that could traverse the whole map in a couple minutes.

Keep the faith ccp. Don't flinch now.


Keep the faith
Sakura Nihil
Faded Light
#2302 - 2014-10-02 03:15:58 UTC
Dropping by the thread to toss my strong support behind these changes.

Bottom line is this - the large number of fast-travel devices we have in-game makes it ridiculously easy to travel across EVE in a matter of minutes. It makes no sense as to why I can travel from Syndicate to Curse in minutes, locations on opposite ends of the game universe.

By nerfing power projection, you substantially increase the cost of maintaining coalitions the likes of which we see today. Increased difficulty with logistics, substantial movement of heavy assets, etc. should encourage nullsec alliances to focus more on their home region(s), instead of adventuring around the cluster looking for any cap fight to drop a ton of supercaps onto.

I realize that some of these changes might not stand the test of feedback to Phoebe (med clone pushback being the strongest from the looks of it), but I encourage the devs to keep pushing for these changes. A healthy nullsec is one vibrant with large numbers of alliances and coalitions, rather than one big blue donut. Even if you lose some subs in the process, as happened during past changes (like the Nano Nerf), keeping the game healthy is more important than catering to fickle subscribers.

+1

Glory

Faded Light is recruiting
Jarvis Austin
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2303 - 2014-10-02 03:16:20 UTC
Only thing going on in my mind is all the fresh cap blood that will spill on my blop! (Starts whiping the dust off shela) Cool
Banko Mato
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#2304 - 2014-10-02 03:17:41 UTC
uziel99 wrote:
If my displeasure wasn't already apparent, let me speak to CCP in a language I'm sure they understand.

http://i.imgur.com/RVhKxOX.png

http://i.imgur.com/tyKzdEM.png


Oh dear, the tears in here really start to make the effects of global warming look like a joke... All this "I'm gonna unsub, ebil CCP!!!!" crying as soon as they as much as dare to post the earliest of ideas for a more or less distant patch -.-

Ah, and I really like to see the world of instant teleportation burn, every..last..bit..of..it
Utsukushi Shi
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2305 - 2014-10-02 03:18:20 UTC
118 pages in but I am here to say I love it. Keep up the good work CCP.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2306 - 2014-10-02 03:18:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Onictus
Sakura Nihil wrote:


Bottom line is this - the large number of fast-travel devices we have in-game makes it ridiculously easy to travel across EVE in a matter of minutes. It makes no sense as to why I can travel from Syndicate to Curse in minutes, locations on opposite ends of the game universe.


Yeah, only if someone spends hours FIRST to make sure you have the cynoes there.

Sakura Nihil wrote:

By nerfing power projection, you substantially increase the cost of maintaining coalitions the likes of which we see today. Increased difficulty with logistics, substantial movement of heavy assets, etc. should encourage nullsec alliances to focus more on their home region(s), instead of adventuring around the cluster looking for any cap fight to drop a ton of supercaps onto.


Everyone doesn't live in one region.

Sakura Nihil wrote:

I realize that some of these changes might not stand the test of feedback to Phoebe (med clone pushback being the strongest from the looks of it), but I encourage the devs to keep pushing for these changes. A healthy nullsec is one vibrant with large numbers of alliances and coalitions, rather than one big blue donut. Even if you lose some subs in the process, as happened during past changes (like the Nano Nerf), keeping the game healthy is more important than catering to fickle subscribers.

+1


-4 active subs from me, and 7 more that I have the keys to that I only activate when its wartime.
Ezeria Mistanta
House Of Serenity.
#2307 - 2014-10-02 03:19:27 UTC
+1 CCP, can use some tweaks particularly for logistics ships and the jump clone stuff is a bit sketchy but otherwise win.

Here is hoping for being in the gang that catches the first nullbear jumping his carrier through a gate in renter space and hopefully keeping it bumped off the gate because we're likely going to fail hard at killing it. ;)
DNSBLACK
Dirt Nap Squad
#2308 - 2014-10-02 03:20:29 UTC
Sakura Nihil wrote:
Dropping by the thread to toss my strong support behind these changes.

Bottom line is this - the large number of fast-travel devices we have in-game makes it ridiculously easy to travel across EVE in a matter of minutes. It makes no sense as to why I can travel from Syndicate to Curse in minutes, locations on opposite ends of the game universe.

By nerfing power projection, you substantially increase the cost of maintaining coalitions the likes of which we see today. Increased difficulty with logistics, substantial movement of heavy assets, etc. should encourage nullsec alliances to focus more on their home region(s), instead of adventuring around the cluster looking for any cap fight to drop a ton of supercaps onto.

I realize that some of these changes might not stand the test of feedback to Phoebe (med clone pushback being the strongest from the looks of it), but I encourage the devs to keep pushing for these changes. A healthy nullsec is one vibrant with large numbers of alliances and coalitions, rather than one big blue donut. Even if you lose some subs in the process, as happened during past changes (like the Nano Nerf), keeping the game healthy is more important than catering to fickle subscribers.

+1



Keep the Faith, CCP do not flinch
Slap Chop
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2309 - 2014-10-02 03:20:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Slap Chop
Aurora Tali wrote:
look how big and strong you are and now you are afraid using gates with your Dread/Carrier xD pity :-P


Nobody is afraid of jumping capital ships through gates, ******.

We're afraid that the changes will make the game so tedious that it just won't be fun any more.
Ariel Marquette
Doomheim
#2310 - 2014-10-02 03:21:17 UTC
I endorse this product or service.

Null tears taste best!
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2311 - 2014-10-02 03:21:31 UTC
Slap Chop wrote:
Aurora Tali wrote:
look how big and strong you are and now you are afraid using gates with your Dread/Carrier xD pity :-P


Nobody is afraid of jumping capital ships through gates,******.

We're afraid that the changes will make the game so tedious that it just won't be fun any more.



Afraid, I KNOW gates, with a carrier? GTFO.

I did.
ergherhdfgh
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#2312 - 2014-10-02 03:21:46 UTC
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
Retar Aveymone wrote:
The abolition of podjumping makes it massively difficult for our newbies to join us in Deklein. Has any thought been put into that?



Then they can put on big boy pants and fly out there like everyone else did, have organized fleet ops and escorts to move cargo out there like everyone else did.


0.0 can afford to get off their butts and do hauler escorts to move people out there. If you are in an alliance then you should work at one.


My first 0.0 experience was moving my corp out of branch and escorting 2 full iteron V's from K8- to NGM in the drone regions. 53 jumps of 0.0 goodness. And how did i get out to k8? I loaded up an atron with the clothes on my back and flew out there like a bat out of hell.



How many years ago was that? Eve is different now. If you want to go back to those days don't be surprised if the sub numbers similarly revert.

Want to talk? Join Cara's channel in game: House Forelli
Kalissis
#2313 - 2014-10-02 03:22:16 UTC
Sakura Nihil wrote:
Dropping by the thread to toss my strong support behind these changes.

Bottom line is this - the large number of fast-travel devices we have in-game makes it ridiculously easy to travel across EVE in a matter of minutes. It makes no sense as to why I can travel from Syndicate to Curse in minutes, locations on opposite ends of the game universe.

By nerfing power projection, you substantially increase the cost of maintaining coalitions the likes of which we see today. Increased difficulty with logistics, substantial movement of heavy assets, etc. should encourage nullsec alliances to focus more on their home region(s), instead of adventuring around the cluster looking for any cap fight to drop a ton of supercaps onto.

I realize that some of these changes might not stand the test of feedback to Phoebe (med clone pushback being the strongest from the looks of it), but I encourage the devs to keep pushing for these changes. A healthy nullsec is one vibrant with large numbers of alliances and coalitions, rather than one big blue donut. Even if you lose some subs in the process, as happened during past changes (like the Nano Nerf), keeping the game healthy is more important than catering to fickle subscribers.

+1

+1
smokeydapot
Moon Of The Pheonix
#2314 - 2014-10-02 03:22:16 UTC
Aiwha wrote:
Jump fatigue is tracked for each character, persisting between play sessions and over downtimes as appropriate.


This is the only thing I'm not jiving with. One of the big things in EVE that makes it leagues better than any other MMO is the offline aspect of timers. You train SP offline, your JC timer proceeds offline, your killrights tick away offline, ect. Forcing us to keep our clients logged in for long periods of time makes no sense whatsoever, it just means you're consuming more electricity on a global scale.


It is good for making your login numbers look good though... :tinfoil:


CCP have to make themselves feel better about the PCU dropping I've noticed it and I'm sure a good number of other people have noticed the drop also.

CCP Greyscale wrote:

If anyone manages to actually get their cooldown that high, I will personally ensure that a developer manually resets it to 0. Or I would, except it'd take 778 years' worth of cooldowns to get it that high, and I'd probably be dead by then.


I don’t see why we need timers that could go on for weeks, months and years, Reinforcement timers don’t even last that long.

CCP Greyscale wrote:
Ncc 1709 wrote:
Will cyno jammers stop caps jumping in through your gate?


Nope, that's what bubbles are for.


So the structures that are meant to keep caps out of systems no longer keep caps out of systems.
Sounds like another useless POS module to me.

CCP Greyscale wrote:
The blog says the intent is not to nerf them too hard, not to not nerf them at all.


Yes because CCP has such a stelar history when it comes to hitting things just right with that metric tone nerf hammer.
Meanwhile the players have to deal with broken or non functional crap until proper thought can be given.
Sakura Nihil
Faded Light
#2315 - 2014-10-02 03:23:07 UTC
Slap Chop wrote:
We're afraid that the changes will make the game so tedious that it just won't be fun any more.


Fun fact - you don't have to drag capital ships to every fight, ever. Once upon a time, I recall Goons flying around in hordes of subcaps, traveling via gates.

Glory

Faded Light is recruiting
Bisches McFrosty
Doomheim
#2316 - 2014-10-02 03:23:39 UTC
Kassasis Dakkstromri wrote:
Three simple words of warning about this 'idea' in it's current form:


STAR WARS GALAXIES


Forever a text book example of what NOT to do in a MMORPG, on all levels, and in every way. CCP you should be fully aware that such a upending, New Eden shattering, modification to a LIVE game is wholly and absolutely replicating the mistakes others have made in the past!

With that said, a few points (if there is no averting this change):

- Ship Jump Drives, NOT the pilots should have a cool down timer -- If I fly both Carriers and JF's for an Alliance, and after pew-pew I need to haul some blue's stuff from here to there, I am still stuck with the same fatigue timer!

- Light Year (LY) range should NOT be universally capped at 5LY - Diversity of choice should rule the day. For example, LY distance (even if reduced) should be staggered based on the ship type, as well as the 'energy' needed to jump ship mass (more about that in a moment). So i.e. Titans would be limited to the 5LY, while other capitals, like Carriers, get a longer jump range.

This forces choices on what capital ships to take vs. being able to throw the 'kitchen sink' at a problem and having massive escalations of Caps and Supers at the same time so quickly. So in essence, just like sub-caps have varying warp speeds, regulating how quickly they can get from place to place, CCP should just apply the same principle as regards LY distance thereby creating more emergence and choice.

- Jump Drives consume Fuel, perhaps marrying Fuel to the Mass of a Capital could be and option. The Bigger they ship the more fuel needed to create the energy necessary to 'jump' the Mass of the ship. Automatically this means that bigger ships will need maximum fuel for less range because of the enormous mass of the ship. Whereas lighter capitals (respectively speaking) require far less fuel to generate the same energy to jump the equivalent distance of a Titan's max jump range.

And while there is a version of this now, it can be ramped up so as to address some of the underlying issues CCP is attempting to address, but in a way that isn't a total redesign of the Jump system.

- CYNOS SHOULD HAVE restrictions - Any Cyno beacon should have a "BANDWIDTH" and maximum "SIGNAL STRENGTH" by which only a certain number / type of ships can lock on to it. Any ship attempting to lock onto a cyno that has maxed it's bandwith would receive a error message regarding signal distortion and an inability to lock onto beacon source.

There should also be different types of Cynos, with differenct Bandwidth and Signal Strengths, that a player can use to accomplish the task of lighting a Cyno, for a Capital Fleet to jump to.

(As an additional option: One could even map out a 'BROADCAST' Range so a cyno Pilot would also know the maximum distance away from the fleet they can deploy their beacon; in the same way that Captial pilots can see their max jump range now)

- Captials should not EVER use gates - 1) It's totally against the 11 year Cannon of EVE Online 2) You can count on the Players figuring out a way to make such a mechanic broken, just to spite CCP for the overall change - Roaming Gangs of Carriers in low sec anyone?


Now... for the WTF are you thinking?!?! part:

I finish the skill Fighters V tomorrow morning, and was looking forward to finally being able to acquire Fighter Bombers, and after all these years, this is what I find you cooking up CCP?

I'm sorry, I get that something needs to change to dissolve some of the identified issues that plague Null Sec; but WTF is this? You can't sell this to the players, in this format and after all these years of players understanding that Captials Jump space while subcaps travel it by gates, and you will absolutely lose subscribers. You might even kill the game with such a cheap solution that doesn't even make sense from a Sci-Fi, Cannon, nor Common Sense point of view.

This isn't a 'change' for the better, it's an evisceration of a fundamental and tenured part of the game. And while what exists is untenable, this is a well worn path of error that CCP best avoid; and not attempt an Alchemy of Development that NO ONE has yet to pull off, of trying to radically redesign something in a LIVE game!

I don't know what the answer to Null Sec is... but even I can tell that 'this' is not it.

I mean if your really dead set on this, and public comment is just for show (like the Phoenix changes were), then just get on with it and start making EVE 2 ...


This.
Joey Zasa
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2317 - 2014-10-02 03:23:40 UTC
Heaven"s Gate is recruiting for all characters interested in Biomassing en masse as a protest against the upcoming changes.....

We will be serving Jim Jones Punch and listening to the Pan Flute on Comms.....
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#2318 - 2014-10-02 03:23:57 UTC
I like the idea of "jump fatigue", but I'm not so keen on the jump cooldown timer. We already have too many countdown-style timers in the game; it is fast becoming a worn out theme.

How about using the jump fatigue to randomize the actual arrival point? The higher the jump fatigue, the higher the probability of a mis-jump, resulting in you landing somewhere else. The error distance could also be a factor dependent on the fatigue level - more fatigue means larger error distance.

This lets pilots decide on how much risk they are willing to take, based upon their current fatigue level and their destination.
Neesa Corrinne
Nyx Legion..
Breakpoint.
#2319 - 2014-10-02 03:23:58 UTC
Alp Khan wrote:
Under the current system, it already takes me two different pilots making multiple jumps. Nobody directly jumps into Jita from null, educate yourself and learn about null logistics. With these proposed changes, you would need more characters, more midpoints and on top of everything, time you would spend wasting staring at timers.

You obviously do not live in the null (or you do, and a village somewhere is missing their ~special~ person), so have fun when a) When hemorrhaging of subscribers intensifies even more after this day and EVE gets even more unpopulated b) When this starts to affect availability of goods and prices. Surely you will enjoy the circlejerk you will have with a whopping 5000 people online at weekend prime time until CCP decides to pull the plug.



... and someone who isn't fat and lazy from sitting around raking in trillions of renter ISK for the past five years will slide in and take your place.

Buh bye, thank you, buh bye, have a nice day sir, buh bye.
Nazri al Mahdi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2320 - 2014-10-02 03:23:59 UTC
DNSBLACK wrote:
Sakura Nihil wrote:
Dropping by the thread to toss my strong support behind these changes.

Bottom line is this - the large number of fast-travel devices we have in-game makes it ridiculously easy to travel across EVE in a matter of minutes. It makes no sense as to why I can travel from Syndicate to Curse in minutes, locations on opposite ends of the game universe.

By nerfing power projection, you substantially increase the cost of maintaining coalitions the likes of which we see today. Increased difficulty with logistics, substantial movement of heavy assets, etc. should encourage nullsec alliances to focus more on their home region(s), instead of adventuring around the cluster looking for any cap fight to drop a ton of supercaps onto.

I realize that some of these changes might not stand the test of feedback to Phoebe (med clone pushback being the strongest from the looks of it), but I encourage the devs to keep pushing for these changes. A healthy nullsec is one vibrant with large numbers of alliances and coalitions, rather than one big blue donut. Even if you lose some subs in the process, as happened during past changes (like the Nano Nerf), keeping the game healthy is more important than catering to fickle subscribers.

+1



Keep the Faith, CCP do not flinch

Agreed, don't flinch, other mmos deserve us more.