These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Changes to wormhole mass limits ?

First post First post
Author
Sarina Rhoda
Doomheim
#1 - 2012-01-31 00:29:44 UTC
Recently we've been noticing a few issues with our static wormhole. It has closed 3 times now well before we have exceeded the mass limit. For example the other night we put a carrier through a c6-c6 wh which was above 50% to have the wormhole collapse straight behind it.

I just made this thread to enquire if anyone else has had any similar issues and hopefully can get ccp to comment on whenever they have altered the wormhole mass limits without mentioning anything?
Ajita al Tchar
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-01-31 01:32:02 UTC
That's happened to me a number of times in the past. For example, I know the static is fresh because the old one *just* despawned and a new sig appeared, yet it collapses way before it should have (and I know no one but my Appropriate Hole Roller went through due to keeping eyes on the wh). I've had it happen the other way around, too, when the hole didn't collapse even though it most definitely should have.

I guess this is the unpredictable nature of wormholes. Unless something *did* change recently, on purpose or accidentally because :ccp:
R0Y4L
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#3 - 2012-01-31 01:45:14 UTC
our 5-4 seems fine to me been closing it all day

**IF  YOU   DONT  WANNA  DIE  DONT  FLY  **

Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2012-01-31 13:58:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Kidd
There is a random variance in total mass of a wh. Of the times I've kept track, I've seen as much as 18% variance of mass either more or less. Just recently had one collapse without ever going critical. I was not keeping track of the times we jumped but I would put it's variance at 25%, perhaps. I've collapsed a lot of holes and never seen one with that much variance.

If anything CCP made the variance more frequent and larger.

It's another stealth nerf for w-space on CCP's march to make null the only viable space. Perhaps I should stop fighting it, go join null and get my very own army of bots to feed CCP's RMT. I mean, that's what it looks like they want.

On second thought, Fk it! If it comes to it I'll just leave Eve rather than deal with the mess in null. I love w-space. Most w-space inhabitants do.

Don't ban me, bro!

Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-01-31 14:08:02 UTC
Mr Kidd wrote:
There is a random variance in total mass of a wh. Of the times I've kept track, I've seen as much as 18% variance of mass either more or less. Just recently had one collapse without ever going critical. I was not keeping track of the times we jumped but I would put it's variance at 25%, perhaps. I've collapsed a lot of holes and never seen one with that much variance.

If anything CCP made the variance more frequent and larger.

It's another stealth nerf for w-space on CCP's march to make null the only viable space. Perhaps I should stop fighting it, go join null and get my very own army of bots to feed CCP's RMT. I mean, that's what it looks like they want.

On second thought, Fk it! If it comes to it I'll just leave Eve rather than deal with the mess in null. I love w-space. Most w-space inhabitants do.

What he said. WH mass limits are not set in stone. They do vary to some degree.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

corbexx
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2012-02-01 23:10:36 UTC
ok we had this happen a few times in last week.

number 1 carrier jumps through wh is above 50% wh collaspes (even with a minus 10% wh this shouldng happen)

number 2 moving 3 dreads through a brand new wh should be easy but wh collaspes after second dread

number 3 wh above 50% and dread went through and wh collaspes

number 4 wh above 50% and dread jumps through wh collaspes (ok was a phonix heavy arse dreadsbut should still be able to jump out even with a -10% wh if its over 50%)

my guess is either a stealth nerf and stuff not been put in patch notes or just something gone wrong and they dont know


Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#7 - 2012-02-01 23:14:29 UTC
I knew a guy who allegedly petitioned this and the response was a wormhole mass deviation of 20 %.
Aidamina Omen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#8 - 2012-02-01 23:18:23 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
I knew a guy who allegedly petitioned this and the response was a wormhole mass deviation of 20 %.


We've petioned and escalated it, and the response was:

Quote:
" While some players may have figured out how they usually behave, results sometimes may vary. This is by design. What you experienced is not abnormal for a wormhole. "
Sarina Rhoda
Doomheim
#9 - 2012-02-01 23:26:09 UTC
We don't mind if they have changed it from +-10% to +-20% I just wish they would comment on it and at least let people know that they have changed it.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#10 - 2012-02-01 23:50:43 UTC
I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.
Skydell
Bad Girl Posse
Somethin Awfull Forums
#11 - 2012-02-01 23:55:50 UTC
I don't think it's a mass issue. WH times seem to be very short, sometimes despawning 8 hrs after they spawn
Lyrrashae
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2012-02-02 00:00:42 UTC
Mr Kidd wrote:
There is a random variance in total mass of a wh. Of the times I've kept track, I've seen as much as 18% variance of mass either more or less. Just recently had one collapse without ever going critical. I was not keeping track of the times we jumped but I would put it's variance at 25%, perhaps. I've collapsed a lot of holes and never seen one with that much variance.

If anything CCP made the variance more frequent and larger.

It's another stealth nerf for w-space on CCP's march to make null the only viable space. Perhaps I should stop fighting it, go join null and get my very own army of bots to feed CCP's RMT. I mean, that's what it looks like they want.

On second thought, Fk it! If it comes to it I'll just leave Eve rather than deal with the mess in null. I love w-space. Most w-space inhabitants do.



^^Not sure if sarcastic, but I think/hope/pray that that is the case.^^

Because even as a part-time "holie," that last statement applies to me, and I'm sure many others.

IME though, there has always been at least a bit of variance in the limits, though I never thought it was that significant.

Ni.

Lyrrashae
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#13 - 2012-02-02 00:03:31 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.


Could you address this, please (Haven't seen it myself yet, but this isn't the first I've heard of it, either, since Crucible):

Skydell wrote:
I don't think it's a mass issue. WH times seem to be very short, sometimes despawning 8 hrs after they spawn.


Thank you.

Ni.

sgtk
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2012-02-02 00:48:54 UTC  |  Edited by: sgtk
something has changed.........the worm hole takes like 5 -10 sec after u jump thru the wh to post the u are trapped message. where as before the patch it was imediate. further more a 1.3 billion mass ship should not close a wh with 3 billion mass and has had limited traffic on 1 trip thru. and the wh didnt show the indications of having mass reduced on it i.e. the wormhole has had its stabuility reduced, but not to a criticil degree or or the worm has had its mass criticaly reduced and is on the verge of collaps
Sarina Rhoda
Doomheim
#15 - 2012-02-02 00:52:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarina Rhoda
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.



Hi,

Thank you for your response. Just to clarify though when you say mass limits do you mean just the expected standard mass value or does that include the +-% changes to wormholes as well.

I think the main fear for me and my corp mates is that after we filed the bug report over an issue with wormhole mass calculations that the bug has been fixed and that you have altered how mass is taken off the wormholes. The reason why we are concerned is that we keep getting people stuck out whilst chain collapsing when jumping through wormholes that appear to have more than enough mass to accommodate the capitals we are jumping through

Examples being jumping an archon through a WH which has above 50% mass and closing straight after. Even with a -10% wormhole it should have at least 1.35b mass left meaning our archon of 1.15b mass should not close it.

3/4 times that the wormhole has closed when we weren't expecting it we have received the following message:
21:37:26 Info The wormhole collapses before your travel completes, spitting you back out."

After living in wormholes for over 2 years no one in our corp has ever seen this message before so we can only conclude that it is something new. We are simply wondering if the wormhole mechanics have been changed and if we can get a dev to comment or explain the differences in what is happening.

Thank you

Sarina
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#16 - 2012-02-02 02:24:20 UTC
they probably fixed the random number generator ;)

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Hamatitio
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#17 - 2012-02-02 02:31:13 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.


We filed a petition for a bug report that i can almost guarantee introduced this new 'feature'. Unfortunately it was regarding a possible exploit so I don't want to discuss it openly on the forums...

What member of the dev/QA team deals with wormholes, so I know who to address a petition / bug report to?
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#18 - 2012-02-02 12:07:05 UTC
Just to clarify, those mass cap changes in 1.0.2 were the *only* changes we've made to the stats of the wormholes themselves since Apocrypha.

Hamatitio wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.


We filed a petition for a bug report that i can almost guarantee introduced this new 'feature'. Unfortunately it was regarding a possible exploit so I don't want to discuss it openly on the forums...

What member of the dev/QA team deals with wormholes, so I know who to address a petition / bug report to?


I'll bump this across to the relevant person, I believe I know the defect you're talking about.
Riley Moore
Sentinum Research
#19 - 2012-02-02 13:05:17 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Just to clarify, those mass cap changes in 1.0.2 were the *only* changes we've made to the stats of the wormholes themselves since Apocrypha.

Hamatitio wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.


We filed a petition for a bug report that i can almost guarantee introduced this new 'feature'. Unfortunately it was regarding a possible exploit so I don't want to discuss it openly on the forums...

What member of the dev/QA team deals with wormholes, so I know who to address a petition / bug report to?


I'll bump this across to the relevant person, I believe I know the defect you're talking about.



The plot thickens!

Large volumes of highly researched Ammo, drones, charges and ship bpo's. Biggest BPO store in EVE! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=445524#post445524

CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#20 - 2012-02-02 14:47:06 UTC
Riley Moore wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Just to clarify, those mass cap changes in 1.0.2 were the *only* changes we've made to the stats of the wormholes themselves since Apocrypha.

Hamatitio wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.


We filed a petition for a bug report that i can almost guarantee introduced this new 'feature'. Unfortunately it was regarding a possible exploit so I don't want to discuss it openly on the forums...

What member of the dev/QA team deals with wormholes, so I know who to address a petition / bug report to?


I'll bump this across to the relevant person, I believe I know the defect you're talking about.



The plot thickens!


Relevant person says the fix shouldn't have anything remotely like the effect described in this thread.

As far as we're aware nothing's changed in the code or the content that should have any impact on anything to do with collapse rates.

If you're getting consistent and verifiable issues, please submit a bug report and mark it as "Urgent/FAO BellaBee" and/or find a QA dev to get it bumped along - if there is something broken, it'll be easier to find if we can look at it the same day rather than the next week Smile
123Next pageLast page