Wormholes

Being able to open up new WH's is essential to most serious WH groups....
--- This opens up new pastures to plow and allows the hunting down and invasion of opponent WH's.

Being able to close a WH is NOT IN THE LEAST bit essential....
--- This allows clever traps to separate an enemy fleet or ships (good thing).
--- This allows you to fortify your WH, inhibiting any truly potential danger from bother you (this is mostly a bad thing).

The whole point of the 50/50 chance, is you're not supposed to purposely close a WH.... and without you'll just run plated HICs back and forth until you close one....

I like that you want to make comments on the mechanics of wormholes, what I don't like is that you don't have a single kill in wspace that I could spot. What is it that makes you feel that you can comment on the mechanics on an area of the game that you appear not to have any experience of?

I have little to no experience pewing in null/low so I refrain from commenting, what you are suggesting would well and truly kill the current mechanics, which from my significant experience, don't appear to be broken.

With respect,

Ef.

Easy translation for the whole reason for this thread being "suggested" ........ Null Sec corps and alliances have worked out a way to crack/exploit/blob/control/dominate almost every aspect of the game ....... except WH's. They KNOW a well organized 10 man WH corp can turn one of their blobs into mush just with a well-timed lemming Orca jump. What's next? Some new idiotic idea to have a mod that stabilizes the mas........ oh wait scratch that.
WH's have limited resources. Null Sec unlimited. So of course you wouldn't mind trying shoving your entire blob through you have absolutely nothing to lose unlike the residents of the WH (Your pods all go back to your clone vats btw).
WH PvP is Elite PvP. It requires patience, skill, the ability to react with exactly what's needed in an instant if necessary and the real chance of absolute loss. Your kinf of undock, bridge and blap just needs forward planning and the abundance of pilots.

Hush now there's a good chap.

um, no...
see, you seem to think that being able to close WHs causes less PVP, when in fact the exact opposite is true.
there are MANY c5-6 wh corps that spend hours each day chain collapsing their statics to find PVP.
a good crew can collapse a WH about every 5min, give or take, meaning theyre opening 12 connections an hour.
with your changes, they'd be limited to 1 connection a DAY. please, explain to me how that is good for pvp....

oh wow, you actually suggested spawning new statics at 45% mass left >_<
i swear i did read your whole post but my mind must have blocked that out... my bad i guess.

ok, fine, let's look at that suggestion.
lets say a corp lives in a C6 static WH.
assuming theyre PVP oriented, their day would then consist of spawning as many WHs as possible at the 45% mass mark and looking for **** to blow up.
inevitably, after a few dozen connections they would have multiple connections to the same systems.

this would make it beyond easy to seed a massive fleet into any system, more or less at will.
it would be by far easiest in a C6 (as there are so few C6s) but you could do the same thing in and class WH.

is this a bad thing? well, no it's not for the powerful groups, but it very much is for everyone else.
it's not quite a WH stabilizer, but it's a half way step IMO.
bottom line is that collapsing extremely hostile WHs is the only defence many smaller WH corps can employ against someone like EXHALE, TL, BITIT, AHARM, NORCORP ect.
it's a legitimate and often needed defense mechanism that can be prevented by attacked just as easily as implemented by defenders.

would it lead to more PVP? sure, more connections = more PVP.
personally, id rather add more (read: a lot more) roaming WHs, both adding connection types and upping the spawn rate significantly, and leave the static mechanics as is.
hell, even doing something like adding a bunch of 4 hour roaming WHs that can spawn in any WH class and lead to any WH class would be awesome.
(reasoning for the short timer is so that they respawn often on their own, without needing to be collapsed.)

look, I can see where your ideas are coming from but the way statics (and WH mass/time mechanics) work is fine, it doesnt need changing.
if you want more connections, which I would like too, just add more connections. dont mess with existing mechanics that work perfectly fine.

yeah my bad, see my last post.

I think the mass mechanics are fine the way they are. However, i would like it if CCP added a new ship and module to hold a wormhole open past its lifetime and mass limit.

Why do people want to mess with wh mechanics, and as pointed out, people who spend little to no time here? The only good suggestion I read was increase of wandering wh's in Jack's post. Stop trying to fix something that isnt broken, statics are fine, if you don't like it gtfo out and go to null, seriously.

He has a point in the fact that making 50/50 chance to get stuck will snuff out the ever living will out of any pilot. People will stop collapsing wormholes, not because they would be afraid to lose ISK but because it will be a hassle of getting back into home system or waiting for OTHER people to scan you back in. I like your enthusiasm I really do, but you seem to lack any experience of living in w-space. If you have a 50/50 chance of losing a player during collapsing procedure you will soon have all your players stuck in w-space, waiting for the very few scanners trying to scan them back home.

Furthermore, you will lose all those awesome moments when you place a cloaked carrier and trap someone's dread when they are trying to collapse. Or watching a lower class wh's crew collapse their low class connection with Orcas and decloaking a sabre on them. You think collapsing limits potential from pew, from the experience I have I must disagree, some of the most memorably fights I had was going Geronimo into someone else's WH in hopes of killing their collapsing crew.

I'm going to guess you weren't in w-space during the "static storm" bug. There was a period of a few weeks wherein by sitting on a hole about to die and spamming the jump button between its collapse and the sig despawning, additional statics would spawn all over the system. Thus, you could leave someone with a nice present of thirty statics.

This did not make PvP happen more. It just gave everyone who launched probes a huge headache, not to mention keeping track of what went where was a nightmare.

Now, to me, this situation sounds an awful lot like what you're proposing, only it becomes even easier to spawn a million holes in someone else's system. Instead of having to wait for perfect timing, you just crash down their holes a bit. Now not only do they have a million holes opening into their system, they have no clue how much mass is left on them. Even if this was done by a friendly fleet looking for a fight somewhere, they have to communicate to everyone else who might log in how much mass was put through each one of those holes. You have to keep track of spawn times for all of these holes. Now imagine that down each of these chains, someone else has been chainrolling in their system. Imagine keeping track of where everything goes. If it doesn't look like an Escher painting in your mind, you're not imaging hard enough.

In this situation, people won't bother with a critical hole at all. They'll check it off and move on because they are dealing with so many freaking sigs that it just won't be worth it, even if they are solo and have probes and are looking for solo-able prey. If they don't care about backup and think "aha, someone is trying to keep themselves safe by crashing down to critical! I have you now, my pretty!" and jump and the wormhole crashes, they have 50% odds of not even getting through the hole. They are getting pewblocked by the wormhole itself and, in crashing that hole, doing their prey a favor.

Further, you already can manipulate wormhole mass or set up crash traps to mess with a foe's fleet composition or potential backup. You don't need to add all of this if that's what you want. Your ideas just mean that it's less appealing to play with wormhole masses for combat reasons, not more.



Yes, a fleet will jump into a critical hole...when it's tactically sound. To make that decision, you have to have a good idea of how much mass is on it and what's on the other side. Just throwing a fleet at a critical hole is a good way to get a third of the fleet welped or trapped. There's never an assured margin of "we can definitely put a few ships through here" on a critical hole when you have no idea of what's been through it. There's only "oh god, I crashed that with a stealth bomber".

If you haven't tried using wormhole mechanics to ruin someone else's day, I recommend that you try it. I think you might find that the current mechanics are a lot more fun than you think they are.