These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[118.7] Warp Bubble Dragging Change

First post First post
Author
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#21 - 2016-07-01 12:14:52 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Kahanis Inkunen wrote:
The hard cap on bubble drag range makes the following possible: Anchor a t1 small bubble 499 km from a gate and a t2 large 501 km from the gate. When somebody warps to the gate they end up on the edge of a small bubble, deep inside the large.


This is also possible now :)


are you saying this is fine, or are you saying you'll fix this some other time?

it's not fine btw, it's really awful



Why? Should warping to direct gate to gate unscouted not be punished?


getting dragged off by a bubble is being punished. getting dragged into the centre of 50 bubbles is just ridiculous, and I think an unintended thing with the grid changes
gr33nCO
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#22 - 2016-07-01 12:18:28 UTC
you could also make anchored bubbles in space time out after downtime. That would resolve a lot of the issues.
Archbishop of Banterbury
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#23 - 2016-07-01 12:22:17 UTC
gr33nCO wrote:
you could also make anchored bubbles in space time out after downtime. That would resolve a lot of the issues.


actually a good idea and easily doable by CCP.... but well.....................
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#24 - 2016-07-01 12:24:08 UTC
gr33nCO wrote:
you could also make anchored bubbles in space time out after downtime. That would resolve a lot of the issues.


I'd probably say "after a time period" rather than "after downtime;" otherwise, if you anchor a bunch of bubbles in USTZ or before downtime, you get shafted out of many hours of potential life. But yeah, expiration on bubbles is something that would be good.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#25 - 2016-07-01 12:27:00 UTC
giving anchored bubbles a duration of a couple of hours would be good, and would be much easier than thinking up a clever way to stop people spamming 100 of them
Raging Beaver
Bean-shidh
The Nameless Alliance
#26 - 2016-07-01 12:28:51 UTC
Introducing a hard cap doesn't seem like a good solution (if anything, it seems a bit lazy). As I presume, the main objective of this change would be to get rid of the gatecamping Fortizars, maybe disallow anchoring bubbles within - say, 100km of the citadels?
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#27 - 2016-07-01 12:33:08 UTC
Kahanis Inkunen wrote:
The hard cap on bubble drag range makes the following possible: Anchor a t1 small bubble 499 km from a gate and a t2 large 501 km from the gate. When somebody warps to the gate they end up on the edge of a small bubble, deep inside the large.

I'm pretty sure this just means that you'll be pulled to the edge of the large bubble since it's closer than 500 km. The location of the anchored mobile warp disruptor isn't what's used to determine pulling/stopping, the field edge is.
Archbishop of Banterbury
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#28 - 2016-07-01 12:37:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Archbishop of Banterbury
Querns wrote:
gr33nCO wrote:
you could also make anchored bubbles in space time out after downtime. That would resolve a lot of the issues.


I'd probably say "after a time period" rather than "after downtime;" otherwise, if you anchor a bunch of bubbles in USTZ or before downtime, you get shafted out of many hours of potential life. But yeah, expiration on bubbles is something that would be good.


that sounds even better. also grid bubble limit set to 10 - fixed.

TrouserDeagle wrote:
giving anchored bubbles a duration of a couple of hours would be good, and would be much easier than thinking up a clever way to stop people spamming 100 of them


also a cheeky option to fix it...+1
ApolloF117 HUN
Puritans
We want your ISK
#29 - 2016-07-01 12:41:23 UTC
Kahanis Inkunen wrote:
The hard cap on bubble drag range makes the following possible: Anchor a t1 small bubble 499 km from a gate and a t2 large 501 km from the gate. When somebody warps to the gate they end up on the edge of a small bubble, deep inside the large.

Thanks for ideas,
ShadowZoor
ElitistOps
Snuffed Out
#30 - 2016-07-01 12:45:25 UTC
A good change, however, being able to exploit the exact range with anchorable bubbles to have your target land inside the second bubble seems like something that shouldn't be possible. Can be highly inconvenient even when it isn't manned, and takes away what would normally be a player's role (sitting on the edge of the bubble in a hic/dic).

I like the idea of having anchorable bubbles expire after a period of time though.
The Economist
Logically Consistent
#31 - 2016-07-01 12:52:59 UTC
Please no.

Capqu
Half Empty
#32 - 2016-07-01 12:56:45 UTC
put it back to being infinite on destination grid

the current issue is because of having an arbitrary limit. this means you can anchor a small bubble @999km and a large bubble at 1001km and whoever warps to the destination point will land in the very centre of a large bubble, on the edge of the small bubble, and require burning over 30km to escape

this previously was never the case as before the citadel release the furthest you could land inside a bubble was 2.5km, without grid fuckery (which, you could still burn off the grid from if you knew what was happening)

also just remove ess from the game, they serve no purpose other than gay traps and completely missed their intended implementation of being a lucrative target for people hunting ratters or for forcing small-scale skirmishes because they are always put in a dangerous place for the attacking party
Raging Beaver
Bean-shidh
The Nameless Alliance
#33 - 2016-07-01 13:00:08 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
giving anchored bubbles a duration of a couple of hours would be good, and would be much easier than thinking up a clever way to stop people spamming 100 of them


Sounds good. Make the anchorable bubbles cheaper and smaller but one-time use only.
Archetype 66
Perkone
Caldari State
#34 - 2016-07-01 13:04:46 UTC
Cool

One thing still need clarification: what is considered inline ? What approximation of angle is tolerated ? 1degre, 2, 3 ?
Or is it that the virtual line between your startpoint and endpoint have to "hit" the buble, even at the edge. Or pass close to it.

Thx for your answer. I'm wondering since 2008..
Primary This Rifter
Mutual Fund of the Something
#35 - 2016-07-01 13:06:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Primary This Rifter
Nevermind.
Elenahina
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2016-07-01 13:07:25 UTC
Seems like a fair and balanced change CCP. Ship it.

Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you. Also, iderno

Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#37 - 2016-07-01 13:13:41 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Kahanis Inkunen wrote:
The hard cap on bubble drag range makes the following possible: Anchor a t1 small bubble 499 km from a gate and a t2 large 501 km from the gate. When somebody warps to the gate they end up on the edge of a small bubble, deep inside the large.


This is also possible now :)


are you saying this is fine, or are you saying you'll fix this some other time?

it's not fine btw, it's really awful



Why? Should warping to direct gate to gate unscouted not be punished?


getting dragged off by a bubble is being punished. getting dragged into the centre of 50 bubbles is just ridiculous, and I think an unintended thing with the grid changes



You'll still only ever have like a (I can't remember T2 large radius exactly right now) 30km burn max with this proposal.
Rain6637
NulzSec
#38 - 2016-07-01 13:18:06 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
Nevermind.

people are mistaken. you land inside a bubble like this
Je'sus Quintana
Doomheim
#39 - 2016-07-01 13:28:46 UTC
Yes, this would be a good change.
Madden Canrende
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#40 - 2016-07-01 13:31:53 UTC
Great idea, can't wait to see it implemented

Member of #TweetFleet @Madden_Canrende