These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

new POSes and wormholes - what do w-space dwellers need?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#261 - 2012-08-14 22:45:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Bane Nucleus
In every c4 and under we have smashed, caps have been a non issue. Also, being able to bring in hordes of people from a static high sec is equal to having a lot of dreads.

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you invaded a c4 or under wormhole?

No trolling please
Archdaimon
Merchants of the Golden Goose
#262 - 2012-08-14 22:45:53 UTC
But now that the FF thing is not up to you, what can we do and what is being done about convincing ccp to consider the needs of wh.

Truth is most people here are afraid they only think off null when continueing with their pos design.

Wormholes have the best accoustics. It's known. - Sing it for me -
kapolov
Doomheim
#263 - 2012-08-14 22:53:08 UTC  |  Edited by: kapolov
What you seem to be avoiding Two Step is the fact hat i and others have mentioned is that it is FACT that more evictions take place in lower class WH's than in C5/C6's. There is nothing at all unbalanced here.

The fact that it becomes to much of an issue for people that live in C5/C6's to go to a C2 and evict someone should not be the problem of every lower class WH dweller, they get evicted by HS rag tag groups all the time for holes, and from the other nasties that live below you.

You will create a massive class difference between C1-4 and C5-6, even more so than it already is. Good luck with the wasteland that will be low end WH's. Our corp will move on from it, it would be inevitably as the risk would be massive.

Last night we counted we had 46 Billion in assets stored in 2 large POS's in a C4 with 22 active pilots, i agree it is the pilots that defend a POS but should we really bloody have to every single weekend when some HS tools stumble upon 2two small POS's filled with gravy. We simply should not have to.


Those 22 active pilots with many many accounts between us all voted for you for the fact you stood for the betterment of the WHOLE WH community not just the elitist bunch of dicks living in C5/C6's, but if that's all you want to remain after the changes good luck to you.

If you leave it developing the way that you seem happy with, the whole thing will be a massive joke.

The trouble with the CSM is now CCP thinks your views are that of your community, LIKE THEY SHOULD BE. We don't even know if CCP will bother to read this or just refer to you for advice. That is more of a problem.
Nycodemis
National Institute of Mental Health
#264 - 2012-08-15 00:05:35 UTC
Two step wrote:

... if you don't agree with my views, you are free to elect someone else next time.

Done... purely over the large tower/lower C-rating issue. Now the issue remains if you are going to represent W-Space for the remainder of your time in CSM or represent only the part of w-space you deem worthy.


Two step wrote:

Defenders in lower class wormholes already have the tremendous advantage of being able to build their own capitals, and as people have pointed out, they have even easier access to highsec, so they should be able to build as many of them as they want.

You speak of fairness in this regard yet you ignore the facts that;
- Sub-C5 evictions never need involve the POS.
- Small corps can call on larger ones that regularly POS bash if they do decide to engage the POS directly.
- You use small corps as the straw man when it's harder for them to defend their large POS due to their low numbers.
- Direct connections to HS/LS are the greatest threat as the attacker can bring in essentially unlimited resources from HS.
- By your logic large towers should be banned from HS as the attacker can't bring caps.

Regarding 10k DPS dreads in sub-C5... Moar Plz. Crunchy on the outside, squishy on the inside to sub-cap fleets.


Two step wrote:

As for the FF stuff, people are blaming me for CCP's decisions here.

I don't know about others, but if I implied blame towards you regarding the FF issue it was not intended. You are, however, our direct route to CCP in this regard hence why the barrel is pointed in your direction. Consider yourself our HS route into their Large POS/Cap fortified C2. Big smile


Two step wrote:

If it were up to me, I don't see a reason to get rid of them, but *it isn't up to me*. My preferred mechanism would actually be that people could choose between docking and having a forcefield, but not both.

I like this. The option to strap on a FF generator instead of docking/mooring arrays (or whatever they'll be called) would work in that respect. One or the other, they don't work together.... assuming that CCP is intent on ditching the current FF.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#265 - 2012-08-15 00:12:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Two step wrote:

Defenders in lower class wormholes already have the tremendous advantage of being able to build their own capitals, and as people have pointed out, they have even easier access to highsec, so they should be able to build as many of them as they want. I don't like this, and I don't see any reason that they should also have the full POS defenses and shield HP that someone in a C5 has. The simplest reason for this is because *any* attacker is going to be bringing *far* less DPS to shoot a POS in a C2 or C1 than they could bring with one or two dreads in a C5 or C6. A single dread is somewhere around 10,000 DPS (and DPS at a range that can hit a POS), in a C1 where you are limited to BC and below you are talking about 600 DPS per ship max. That means each dread is 16 or so pilots worth of DPS.


It's logic like this that baffles me.... You make out as if people in low class wormholes have some huge advantage. They are not the ones earning tens off billions on an average sleeper op to spend on filling their system to the brim with capital ships, that they can then jump out into other systems to have a little fun.

How many corps have you fought in low class wormholes who droped more that 2 caps on you and actually knew how to fly them?

Just because you are used to using caps to reinforce a pos now, doesn't mean c1-c4 should be nerfed to allow you to do it in the same time but with sub caps. You are the exception, not the rule.

The fact is, we all knew what we were getting into - you could either go into a high class wormhole with minimal ristrictions, massive rewards and massive risk or, you could go into a lower class wormhole with a lot of restrictions less reward and less risk of being steam rolled... And now it looks like you and CCP feel that low class wormholers should be suseptable to blobs too? Shocked

Maybe you have a point if we are just talking about C1's that you can't fit a battle ship in, but that's not what you are saying. If we're not careful here, w-space will end up just like null sec where a few alliances dominate. A lot of people live in w-space to get away from that.

And you are right. I am free to elect who i want but i elected you because i liked your attitude and thought that you would fairly represent all wormholers and not just a spoilt few. CCP are the developers so I don't really care for your personal vision and desires for eve, I just want you to fairly represent the communities concerns/views.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Ketplunk
Glory-Hole
#266 - 2012-08-15 00:22:04 UTC
Two step wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Nycodemis wrote:

Two step, you were elected in hopes that our voices, through you, would lead to the betterment of W-Space as a whole and all of the corps within... not just AHARM and C5/C6 dwellers.


The man has a point Two Step. Can you honestly say that you are doing your best to represent all of the wormholers that voted for you and not just the people in the upper level wormholes?



Absolutely. As you can see in this thread, not everyone agrees with everyone else. I think I have been quite clear on where I personally stand, and if you don't agree with my views, you are free to elect someone else next time.

Defenders in lower class wormholes already have the tremendous advantage of being able to build their own capitals, and as people have pointed out, they have even easier access to highsec, so they should be able to build as many of them as they want. I don't like this, and I don't see any reason that they should also have the full POS defenses and shield HP that someone in a C5 has.


People who build capitals in the lower class wormholes are in the minority, and not very smart about what they're doing, since they can't get them out. So you're not going to come across corps that have "built as many of them as they wanted"......
Senn Denroth
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#267 - 2012-08-15 04:10:31 UTC
After reading the thread up to date (and skipped several posts by alts) all I have left to say is that Two Step: I hope you listen to the concerns listed in this thread and present them to CCP to have potential issues resolved.

I would hate to see that fine line between wormhole space and nullsec dissolved. Just because you've built a viewpoint and direction in which you would like to take things, doesn't mean that the greater wormhole community as a whole wishes to go that way also.


Also -

Nycodemis wrote:
I like this. The option to strap on a FF generator instead of docking/mooring arrays (or whatever they'll be called) would work in that respect. One or the other, they don't work together.... assuming that CCP is intent on ditching the current FF.


Give this man the golden medal, he has actually solved all the issues with this one statement here! Choose between a forcefield module or a docking module, have both of them use 51% CPU of what a large tower can put out, this will only enable one per tower.. or something to that effect (it doesn't have to be the CPU thing).
kapolov
Doomheim
#268 - 2012-08-15 05:14:56 UTC  |  Edited by: kapolov
Senn Denroth wrote:
(and skipped several posts by alts) .



You know what though we actually have to post on alts when posting sensitive information like i did about our WH on alts to get our point across because hey there is actually people in C1-4's that go after gravy WH's to evict people.

It's not all cookies and cake being passed around while we hug each other and paint glitter filled rainbows like Two Step would have you believe.

The difference is you guys in C5/C6's have your gud fights gf it up in local then go back to your home system do a couple of sites, suck a little gas and replace all your losses the very same day. Evictions are very rare in C5/C6's against well established entities, i dare you to prove me wrong on that.

In lower class Wh's we still have fights and have them often but when we lose it takes more than one day to replace losses and if we go to far in inflicting losses against other people they turn up the next week in massive numbers to evict you, simply because they can, it's not as hard as Two Step would make out at all its really very easy. But hey i suppose we should put up with a little more of what you call fair and do it all out of a small POS.

Give me a break.
Skippidipp
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#269 - 2012-08-15 05:51:18 UTC
This is a very interesting post. Finaly CCP is fixing POS and ofc we have all the complaining. Yea, it will change WH living. Yea, some of the changes might hurt some people. But ffs, no changes can ever take place with out it effecting someone badly. I for one am very happy that they finaly got off there asses and are doing something about the ****** gameplay POS represents. This is a fix/replacement we have been waiting for, for a long time. Mini statinons are mutch better than the ****** forcefield in the fact that you cant just cruise 1k off and start shoting stuff, than 1 sec later go back in, and woop you are safe.

With the changes they propose the only things i would like them to change at the same time, is the max range for directional scanner, and an option to se if a pos is online or offine on directional. Yea it will make catching gassers near imposible if they pay attention to directional, but at least every system will be the same, "as in they would be like small systems are now".
SpaceSavage
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#270 - 2012-08-15 06:18:28 UTC  |  Edited by: SpaceSavage
Two step wrote:


Absolutely. As you can see in this thread, not everyone agrees with everyone else. I think I have been quite clear on where I personally stand, and if you don't agree with my views, you are free to elect someone else next time.

Defenders in lower class wormholes already have the tremendous advantage of being able to build their own capitals, and as people have pointed out, they have even easier access to highsec, so they should be able to build as many of them as they want. I don't like this, and I don't see any reason that they should also have the full POS defenses and shield HP that someone in a C5 has. The simplest reason for this is because *any* attacker is going to be bringing *far* less DPS to shoot a POS in a C2 or C1 than they could bring with one or two dreads in a C5 or C6. A single dread is somewhere around 10,000 DPS (and DPS at a range that can hit a POS), in a C1 where you are limited to BC and below you are talking about 600 DPS per ship max. That means each dread is 16 or so pilots worth of DPS.


most BS stuff ever, start picking on people your own size???

all of us here know how little reward in low class wh is and how small low class wh corp is due to the fact that if the corp grow too big, reward becomes even less than running level 4 in hisec.

PS: change clone is also BS, if you're too scared to fly your +5 clone to pvp in wspace, go back to empire.
Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#271 - 2012-08-15 06:29:27 UTC
Skippidipp wrote:

With the changes they propose the only things i would like them to change at the same time.... and an option to se if a pos is online or offine on directional.


You can already do that. If you dscan in the direction of a pos, and it doesn't show a forcefield on dscan, it's offline.

No trolling please
Ashimat
Clandestine Services
#272 - 2012-08-15 06:57:56 UTC
Quote:
People who build capitals in the lower class wormholes are in the minority, and not very smart about what they're doing, since they can't get them out. So you're not going to come across corps that have "built as many of them as they wanted"......

Minority? maybe.

But they are the ones that do it right, or at least try to. You don't seriously think that it's a bad idea to build caps in a low class WH because you cant get them out do you?

That the same minority in most cases either opts to not use them or cant fly them properly when they are really needed is another matter.

Got blog: http://thecloakedones.blogspot.com
Senn Denroth
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#273 - 2012-08-15 07:45:32 UTC
kapolov wrote:
Senn Denroth wrote:
(and skipped several posts by alts) .



You know what though we actually have to post on alts blah blah blah


Didn't read it. No offense but I can get my point across without revealing super secret squirrel information.

Bane Nucleus wrote:
Skippidipp wrote:

With the changes they propose the only things i would like them to change at the same time.... and an option to se if a pos is online or offine on directional.


You can already do that. If you dscan in the direction of a pos, and it doesn't show a forcefield on dscan, it's offline.


I believe he was saying once the changes have been implemented, that is to say if there's no forcefield involved anymore.
SpaceSavage
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#274 - 2012-08-15 07:53:03 UTC  |  Edited by: SpaceSavage
Archdaimon wrote:
Meytal wrote:
I would say that it's MORE dangerous to live in a C2/HS/?


That is the same thing as saying it is safer to mine in Zero sec than in Hisec!

You comment is laughable. Do you have any idea what it requires to live in a c6? from an organizational point of view?

1) There are so few c6 that if any one wants to find you, they will find you. You see? With a static c6, you can cycle hole for every 5 min. which mean that you should find the right hole once every day. Means that within a week you should be able to get a cap fleet into the system. You cannot hide, you have to fight.

2) No one lives in a c6 without a large cap fleet of there own. Yes we loose less ships in homesys to random ganks, but if we loose home sys the loss can hardly be counted in billions.

3) The only reason we do not loose ships to random ganks (which we btw still do, cause in order to logistics done, we have to go through lower class because of logistics), is the effort put into hi class wh.

4) We solo as much as the next isk hore in lower class wh, when there is nothing else to do.


Honestly. We live as much in c2's as you do. My bet is you never lived in a c6.

What we cannot do is to expect to find a certain low class wh within a week with our major logistics through hi, low and zero.

I wonder how many invasions you've done?

confirm pos bashing is elite pvp

Two Step wrote:

Things you get from docking: (off the top of my head, and in no particular order)
1) Markets
2) Contracts
3) Secure Trade
4) Ship spinning
5) Captains Quarters/Whatever other Incarna stuff shows up
6) Assemble/refit T3s
7) Fit from saved fittings
8) Access to personal and shared storage
9) Repackaging, repairing, refining
10) Real container access
11) Real access rights, including the different corp hangar access for "based at" vs "other" stations
12) Possibly in the future, the ability to switch clones (not jump clone into and out of w-space, but switch implant sets)

1. useless
2. useless
3. useless
4. useless
5. god awful reason.
6. could be useful
7. useless
8. make CCP to code so that individual sma, corp hangar can be set access
9. useless
10. useless
11. useless
12. too worried about your +5, stay in empire

basically if you're so desperate for a station, go take sov in 0.0.

I believe most people here only concern about fixing broken role/access system.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#275 - 2012-08-15 08:09:37 UTC
Nycodemis wrote:
Two step, you were elected in hopes that our voices, through you, would lead to the betterment of W-Space as a whole and all of the corps within... not just AHARM and C5/C6 dwellers.


He's not speaking on behalf of c5/c6 dwellers in general either, since none of us want stupid docking games.
Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#276 - 2012-08-15 08:14:57 UTC
Senn Denroth wrote:


I believe he was saying once the changes have been implemented, that is to say if there's no forcefield involved anymore.


My bad! lol

No trolling please
Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#277 - 2012-08-15 08:20:30 UTC
SpaceSavage wrote:


I believe most people here only concern about fixing broken role/access system.


This and the T3 subsystem change. I don't know why they feel they need to change the whole damn thing. It's like buying a new car because your old one had a flat tire.

No trolling please
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#278 - 2012-08-15 08:23:24 UTC
oh and the continued idiocy against lower class wormholes is laughable. Claiming they have a huge advantage because the attacker can't drop dreads on them is ignoring a thousand other things stacked against them, such as the fact they realistically aren't going to have a huge cap fleet to defend themselves (because who wants to invest in a ship-in-a-bottle when the bottle can be taken over by someone else with ease), that the residents generally have far less income to help fund defense fleets/mercs/etc, that the logistics for enemies to bring in huge numbers of subcaps is easier thanks to low/high sec entrances, or the general reality that evictions in low class wormholes happen waaaaay more than evictions in high class ones already.

I mean I personally don't like those baby class wormholes and would never live in one, but asking for them to be nerfed into the ground is just ridiculous.

More like Boo Step
Indo Nira
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#279 - 2012-08-15 08:27:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Indo Nira
Two step wrote:

As for the FF stuff, people are blaming me for CCP's decisions here. If it were up to me, I don't see a reason to get rid of them, but *it isn't up to me*. My preferred mechanism would actually be that people could choose between docking and having a forcefield, but not both.




ok ok ok, you're funny!!! did you ever consider doing stand up comedy? I think you'd be able to make a living by doing so.

but did you tell them that? or are you just an ass-kissing wannabe politician sucking up to the people that are paying for your trips to Iceland?

as for your corpmate, if you want a market, contracts and stuff, move to nullsec, ain't that hard.

and don't worry, i'm pretty sure you won't get the chance to be on csm again, so don't make any plans regarding that



Bane Nucleus wrote:
SpaceSavage wrote:


I believe most people here only concern about fixing broken role/access system.


This and the T3 subsystem change. I don't know why they feel they need to change the whole damn thing. It's like buying a new car because your old one had a flat tire.


because it seems they can't code. and they know what they're doing™, take a look at incana they knew what they were doing then aswell
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#280 - 2012-08-15 08:47:49 UTC
Indo Nira wrote:
but did you tell them that? or are you just an ass-kissing wannabe politician sucking up to the people that are paying for your trips to Iceland?


I imagine it went something like this:
CCP: *throws around some ideas, including very bad ones*
Two Step: Yup yup yup yup *just happy to be there guy* yup yup yup
Two Step on forums: *praise these ideas*
Everyone who voted for him: Wow, no. These are bad because ...
Two Step: Well it's ccp doing it anyway, but I do love it. Yup yup yup.

and in the future:
wormhole space in ruins
two step never getting near a seat on the csm again