These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

C5, C6 Mass discussion in regards to capitals.

First post
Author
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#21 - 2016-03-12 08:30:02 UTC
Look, being brutally honest here;
1) CCP does whatever CCP wants to does
2) CCP usually just screws you over first, then has a 'consultation' or discussion, leaves the problem to fester for 1 Ishtar length of time, fails to patch/fix/rebalance, then an Ishtar length of time later, just ishtars the thing
3) You are aware carriers are going to be giant bloated ishtars, right? Ishtar!
4) If CCP is going to all the trouble of swallowing a handful of dice and vomiting them out as a 3-part FAX/Fattar/Crapdread system and we're expecting the result to be all 6's, it's going to be all 1's, and at least if they toss the soap on the tiles with wormhole mass and we reach over to grab it, we'll all be equally borked. Except the small guys.

Seriously, our feedback is utterly meaningless. We would be better off sitting down in a pot of vaseline than trying to use logic.

From my conception of the upcoming capital Ishtardation, I can't see how you can make it worth you while bringing anything through a wormhole other than a FAX/Carrier combo. it will be a bit of a shakeup to the meta, and a change of clothes is as good as a romantic date i suppose, and it'll take wormholers a year or two to exhaust the new meta in new ways. So, that'll be cool.

If the mass on wormholes went up to 10 caps each way, it wouldn't matter.

let's be honest, small fry rental cheek-spreader type people in C5 space are boned, unless they can somehow deploy a citadel as a one man farm corp, in which case maybe they'll be hard to dislodge by Quaserknocks WHCFC. Hard, costly, but not impossible. Since when has it taken 5 caps on the inbound to gank a farmer? I'e been away a few months, but wasn't Dura Lexx regularly rage rolling a half dozen caps in to PUG Fleet defenders for mad ganks and dank frags and sick evictions, even at 3 per shot?

Oh my, it's going to take less time to seed a ten dread fleet. Boo hoo.

Brax is right about the nul-C5 and null-C6 connections. But also, remember the N944's and S199's as well, you'll have to change them. Ten dreads each way S199's and N944's will theoretically allow more nullbears to make Sort Dragon cry hate tears into his space diaper, becase it'll be harder to roll them shut with Higgs ruptures, and it might make logistics a bit easier. Easy fix to that is to just nerf their sawn rates even further, ever thought about that as a solution to emergent gameplay, CCP?

Oh, i guess you have. Well, go again. Nerf them until there's one per day in all of EVE.

Conclusion
Do whatever you want, Goonbexx. Just ensure that whenever you jump a wormhole, you're cleared off everyone's watchlists, and Dunce Ravinne will be happy.
unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2016-03-13 09:09:06 UTC
I think the 3 cap max is a good limit.
But i think you guys are forgetting the changes in the capitals mods.
The capital plates will have some weight as the subcap version does.
So if i read between the lines correctly it is more of a problem of added mass to some capitals.
Imagine if you can only fit 2 armor caps through a hole wich would otherwise fit 3 shield capitals.
Or because of the changes to carrier/fax/dread the number would change with each type.
The problem is we don't know what the added mass will be and what mass difference there will be between fax , carrier and dread.

Lets say the mass allows 3 armor fitted caps, but allows 4 shield fitted caps what will be the consequences?
Lets say FAX-mass is between carrier mass and dread mass, what is the effect then?
Is there a possibility to just count the number of caps before a hole dies and not the mass?

THese things can change the meta of wh-capital battles quite a lot.
We do not have engough data, probably CCP is also not sure about where to land all this.

Is there a possibility to just count the number of caps before a hole dies and not the mass?

No local in null sec would fix everything!

Axel Stenmark
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2016-03-13 22:11:06 UTC
"Internal Playtest update: XL citadel successfully reinforced. We entered the field with 41 faction fit dreads, left with 26." - CCP Fozzie

Tweet
Reddit Thread

I've been trying to emphasize the increase in defensive capabilities in all classes of wormholes. Has there ever been a single POS that killed 26 out of 41 faction fit dreads by itself before being reinforced? Imagine attacking a citadel with that much firepower while there is an enemy fleet defending it as well.

Note that the OP mentions high-class WH mass only. If you get an XL citadel up in a C1-C4 it will be nearly impervious as you can focus all defenses entirely on subcaps.

C6-C6 should have an appropriate amount of risk for the higher site payout. Part of that has risk has been invasions, which has led to some of the most memorable fights. It would be a shame if invasions become impractical/irrelevant in the citadel expansion. WH space is supposed to be dangerous, not just an ISK printing option.

That said, hopefully the capital escalation changes are done right to keep the reward side balanced as well.
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#24 - 2016-03-14 03:55:35 UTC
Well, if the rate of attrition for a nullsec blob style dread fleet is 30% going up against an XL Citadel, and the most dreads per side in wormholes is...er, lets say 30, then clearly when Hard Knocks builds its XL Citadel in its C6 Magnetar it will become literally impregnable.

Which is fine, because the way the meta has been going lately in high-end evictions, what you are doing is actually forcing losses on the attacker in the RF phase instead of the usual way things go, which is that the attacker spends 23 hours of solid brain death RFing 68++ Large POSs which are utterly helpless against even a couple of dreads, and then you fight on the timer during the mopping up phase.

So I'm not sure that this really changes much, it just removes the boring gameplay of RF timers for POSs and forces a major battle to occur in the RF phase. The honest "evict for gudfite" crowd will get their gudfite at day zero, instead of having to seed 16 yachts and spend a month being a PITA and then 72 hours of structure grind to loot pinata. They'll lose some dreads, big whoop, go grind some more krab pots.
Winthorp
#25 - 2016-03-14 06:54:33 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
then clearly when Hard Knocks builds its XL Citadel in its C6 Magnetar it will become literally impregnable.
.


**** when did HK move into a C6 mag, i am so behind on the intels.........
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2016-03-14 12:45:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
I would like it so that you could do 4 capital jumps through a C5/6 wormhole. This would make it so that you could field 2 capital ships in a connecting c5/6 and then return home. This is especially important if CCP are still planning to change the escalation mechanic to incentive farming your static instead of your home.

As for capital size plates, their volume should be carefully considered to ensure that we can fit several of these in our cargo bay.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2016-03-14 12:53:33 UTC
unimatrix0030 wrote:

Lets say the mass allows 3 armor fitted caps, but allows 4 shield fitted caps what will be the consequences?


People would switch to shield capitals. What?
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#28 - 2016-03-14 13:38:39 UTC
Winthorp wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:
then clearly when Hard Knocks builds its XL Citadel in its C6 Magnetar it will become literally impregnable.
.


**** when did HK move into a C6 mag, i am so behind on the intels.........


I dunno. I'm just spitballing.

I think that the current meta is pretty much exhausted as far as C5/C6 Lyfe goes. We have had six years o develop a meta around 3B mass, 3 caps + small fleet one way, or any combination thereof, and counters to it. The meta has evolved with the nerfs and buffs and rebalances to subcaps insofar as to what subs you bring along with what capitals (+/- how pimp you want your Nid to be or Peenix, etc etc).

Theres been some interesting metas. The Nid + Sleip fleet. The Nid and Curse + Cerbs. Etc etc. But the basic maths are to make a fleet work around a set number of caps, even if you go in YOLO style and plan on losing everything for a gudfite.

One argument is that this should change. I don't see why not, especially if you're going to have to lose a dozen dreads taking out a XL Citadel owned by one bear with no defence fleet. Anyone who says this won't happen, just see the toon Iron Bank. QED.

So, the caps through a hole equation might change the number of subcaps through the same hole, because maths. But lets not fool ourselves, we've seen 250 a side fights in wormholes before, multiple times. Mass per connection is no object as long as people want to let a batphone brew up for a nice fight and a nice vid of one side wiping the floor with the other or whatever.

Thus, CCP really needs to make a decision whether they decouple frigate holes from subcap holes from capital holes, or just keep mass alone as the sole attribute governing hole capacity.

for example, frigate holes have a mass set below cruisers (except HICs). C2-C4 holes have a mass set below capitals. Adding mass to C5 and C6 holes to allow more caps through will change the number of smaller ships you can jam through, complicate rolling time and maths, etcetera.

But setting a hard integer limit on capital jumps, exclusive of subcap jumps, might be an option. Ten caps, but only 2B subcap mass, for instance. Bring ten carriers and dreads but only 20 BS (50 cruisers, 250 dessies and 1000 frigs) one way.

This will change the meta of wormhole fights at the big end of town. No longer just 3 caps one way, plus a subcap fleet. Shake things up. Might be exciting.
helana Tsero
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#29 - 2016-03-14 23:31:23 UTC  |  Edited by: helana Tsero
Axel Stenmark wrote:
"Internal Playtest update: XL citadel successfully reinforced. We entered the field with 41 faction fit dreads, left with 26." - CCP Fozzie

Tweet
Reddit Thread

I've been trying to emphasize the increase in defensive capabilities in all classes of wormholes. Has there ever been a single POS that killed 26 out of 41 faction fit dreads by itself before being reinforced? Imagine attacking a citadel with that much firepower while there is an enemy fleet defending it as well.

Note that the OP mentions high-class WH mass only. If you get an XL citadel up in a C1-C4 it will be nearly impervious as you can focus all defenses entirely on subcaps.

C6-C6 should have an appropriate amount of risk for the higher site payout. Part of that has risk has been invasions, which has led to some of the most memorable fights. It would be a shame if invasions become impractical/irrelevant in the citadel expansion. WH space is supposed to be dangerous, not just an ISK printing option.

That said, hopefully the capital escalation changes are done right to keep the reward side balanced as well.


Invasions are fun for the victor (well after they win) but cancer for the alliance/corp that loses all its stuff.

Why should we care... cause once a eviction happens a significant proportion of the evicted leave w space.. either for k space or the game entirely.

maybe its just me... but i want the prey to stay in w space... breed... and so i can kill them another day.

but with the death of cloaky hunting in w space after citadels... hey maybe evictions.. will be all we have left.

"...ppl need to get out of caves and they will see something new.... thats where eve is placed... not in cave."  | zoonr-Korsairs |

Meanwhile Citadel release issues: "tried to bug report this and the bug report is bugged as well" | Rafeau |

Paul Vashar
CTHS
#30 - 2016-03-15 17:57:30 UTC
Without more info.... Das ist mir wurscht
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#31 - 2016-03-20 01:47:19 UTC
Hm, just realised...the introduction of capital prop mods will create an interesting choice: do you change the max jumpable mass to allow caps to go through wormholes hot, or leave it (more or less) as is, thereby forcing capitals to wait till a MWD cycle is over before jumping?
Bleedingthrough
#32 - 2016-04-05 08:41:20 UTC
Adding a “WH effective mass” as a new attribute for ship hulls would allow a much broader balancing.
Atum' Ra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2016-04-05 21:04:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Atum' Ra
Titans in WH... Sounds like a dream Roll
Cordella Rex
Transporting important stuff
#34 - 2016-04-05 22:06:51 UTC
Allowing more than 3 capital to pass through the hole would be a huge problem for smaller groups, they will get blobbed even worse by groups who reckless abandon gank and take the maximum amount of capitals they can and rely on scanning themselves out through a different hole.

i feel very strongly that this will just further promote faggotry with more hero dreading etc to reduce risk because defending against in rollers will just be that much more harder....

after all, most of the people that roll in claim to be after "PvP" not butchering people in smaller groups that can't hope to defend themselves if their capital number superiority is now null and void.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#35 - 2016-04-06 09:12:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Cordella Rex wrote:
Allowing more than 3 capital to pass through the hole would be a huge problem for smaller groups, they will get blobbed even worse by groups who reckless abandon gank and take the maximum amount of capitals they can and rely on scanning themselves out through a different hole.

i feel very strongly that this will just further promote faggotry with more hero dreading etc to reduce risk because defending against in rollers will just be that much more harder....

after all, most of the people that roll in claim to be after "PvP" not butchering people in smaller groups that can't hope to defend themselves if their capital number superiority is now null and void.


I doubt allowing one additional cap can be considered a "huge problem". If someone is willing to crash their own hole using three caps and a subcab fleet to kill someone in the connecting wormhole, they will almost certainly win the fight with or without a fourth capital. Allowing 4 capitals to pass through a wormhole is primarily intended for people to make one round trip with 2 capitals, be it to run sites or fight someone in their home.

IMO only C6 wormholes should have their mass increased to allow 4 cap jumps through. This will give people a reason to fight for c6 systems.
Cordella Rex
Transporting important stuff
#36 - 2016-04-06 14:31:47 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Cordella Rex wrote:
Allowing more than 3 capital to pass through the hole would be a huge problem for smaller groups, they will get blobbed even worse by groups who reckless abandon gank and take the maximum amount of capitals they can and rely on scanning themselves out through a different hole.

i feel very strongly that this will just further promote faggotry with more hero dreading etc to reduce risk because defending against in rollers will just be that much more harder....

after all, most of the people that roll in claim to be after "PvP" not butchering people in smaller groups that can't hope to defend themselves if their capital number superiority is now null and void.


I doubt allowing one additional cap can be considered a "huge problem". If someone is willing to crash their own hole using three caps and a subcab fleet to kill someone in the connecting wormhole, they will almost certainly win the fight with or without a fourth capital. Allowing 4 capitals to pass through a wormhole is primarily intended for people to make one round trip with 2 capitals, be it to run sites or fight someone in their home.

IMO only C6 wormholes should have their mass increased to allow 4 cap jumps through. This will give people a reason to fight for c6 systems.


Well forcing 3 in to intentionally collapse behind you is already alot if ur running escalations because they are fit for full pvp and you might not be and post patch you can't refit and in addition you will have to choose between subcap weaponry or capital weaponry. and let's say 5 enemy dreads come at you with capital weapons, it's over... before if ur 3-4 ppl with alts you could atleast depend on cap superiority if not number superioirity, to atleast make a fight of it. if they change that, we're screwd.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2016-04-06 14:49:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Nah what you describe is even more of a reason to increase it...

Allowing 4 caps through a connection would let you bring a carrier and a dread and return home. The carrier would allow the dread to refit/adapt as well as provide reps.

If you are worried about someone ganging you in your home with 4 caps, just increase your cap pilots/ships by one.

Overall I feel it is more balanced. You can have a fight in a hostile system on a wormhole using two cap and, in theory, be able to get back home. The if the enemy escalate, you would also be able to do so in a more forceful/balanced way than you can now.
Cordella Rex
Transporting important stuff
#38 - 2016-04-06 14:55:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Cordella Rex
What!? how did you take the insinuation that the attacking side will have an even bigger advantage post patch with the refitting change to mean that you should be able to **** people even harder as the attacking side AT YOUR CONVINENCE!

you are bascially advocating that the attacker is going to win anyways, so why struggle? make it even easier for them to slaughter small groups because it's going to happen anyways, and if things go the way you want, they might bring less capitals for the convience of going back just to be nice and make a sport out of it? sheer insanity.

if ccp want's to make wormhole space unlivable for small groups, have at it, increase the wormhole mass, but call a spade for a spade.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2016-04-06 14:58:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Cordella Rex wrote:
What!? how did you take the insinuation that the attacking side will have an even bigger advantage post patch with the refitting change


How will they have a bigger advantage? ... You can still refit post patch btw.

CCP have already catered for weaker corporations... it's called C1-C3 space.
Cordella Rex
Transporting important stuff
#40 - 2016-04-06 15:03:48 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Cordella Rex wrote:
What!? how did you take the insinuation that the attacking side will have an even bigger advantage post patch with the refitting change


How will they have a bigger advantage? ... You can still refit post patch btw.




bigger advantage being:

1: you Can bring 4 PURE pvp capitals to bear if they want to, might just bring 2 at first as you say, but if things go south they have the option to escalate further than before.

2: if the agression timer refit thing goes live, any person caught on warpin will likely be in a pve focused fitting and have to wait for siege to drop and then another minute without shooting back before you can refit to capital guns or more tank etc.