These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Different idea to bring more conflict in wormholes

Author
Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2013-01-29 19:08:09 UTC
As this seemed to have been buried in the other thread...

More unpredictability for wormholes is how you increase conflict, for example by adding a completely random second static to each wormhole (by this I mean the connection can change between high sec, low sec, null sec and all classes of wormholes and once it collapses, it would be randomized again) and by removing the requirement to scan down your new static before it's visible on the other side. This removes the methods used currently for safe farming, and as such automatically encourages more fights without changing the actual balance of the game one bit (ie. the holes would still be mass restricted just like they are now).

By increasing the amount of connections, you increase the chances of encounters with actual players, thus naturally increasing PvP without changing game balance or introducing any new mechanics. By making those connections more unpredictable you remove the other problem that just about all active wormhole corporations have, which is running into the same groups all the time. While accomplishing both of those, this would also bring some more danger into site running by making it more difficult to create safe conditions for doing so. Obviously you could still reduce the mass to critical and bubble up every time you start your daily farming, but I really don't see any real drawbacks in making these proposed changes.

And no, I don't consider the troubles of farmers to be a drawback in the least. Nor do I consider it a drawback that this would make C4 holes less secluded.
Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#2 - 2013-01-29 19:14:26 UTC
I don't know about random statics but giving some existing wormholes duel statics would give people a reason to fight over systems.
Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2013-01-29 19:18:53 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
I don't know about random statics but giving some existing wormholes duel statics would give people a reason to fight over systems.


I think of it the other way, instead of having useless systems that give you absolutely no reason to be there, this might actually bring some more life into those. Creating another variable that improves certain systems, definitely brings more conflict to that specific system, but overall the change is rather small and would only result in the major WH powers to fight over the possibly very limited systems with the most desirable static combinations, while the other wormholes still wouldn't see more action, possibly even less.

Do you have anything specific in mind that makes you reluctant to be against the random statics?
Klarion Sythis
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-01-29 19:21:54 UTC
Not that I dislike the idea, but removing the "warp to" requirement wouldn't stop safe farming. They'd just crit their holes.
Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2013-01-29 19:26:01 UTC
Klarion Sythis wrote:
Not that I dislike the idea, but removing the "warp to" requirement wouldn't stop safe farming. They'd just crit their holes.


There are several examples of people who have overcome issues like this by jumping pods into the critical hole, followed up by a carrier full of small but effective ships such as t3's. That said, would it be inherently worse that instead of collapsing their connections, they'd change to critting them instead? Afterall, with the change we are looking for improvements, if none can be thought with the change, then the change is bad. I gave an example of a scenario that would be made possible with this, so naturally it would allow something that the current ways do not.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Top Belt for Fun
#6 - 2013-01-29 19:35:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
The problem I always had with WH PVP was the fact it's virtually impossible to get a fight out of people that aren't online. WH inhabitants seem to never, ever, ever be online. I think this is an artifact of the timezone I fly in and the fact that all the content in a WH tends to be done before the later TZ people log in.

So, what I'd like to see is content that spreads itself out over the day. This would mean it's worthwhile for a EU TZ corp in a low class WH to have some AUS TZ people online. :)

-Liang

Ed: Yes, you can knock over a POS to force a if that's your thing. But that seems awfully heavy handed.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#7 - 2013-01-29 19:38:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Borlag Crendraven wrote:

Do you have anything specific in mind that makes you reluctant to be against the random statics?


No not really... I guess the more i think about it, having a random second static in a C5 for example would be more valuable/interesting than a set static.

I really think that the larger groups in particular need more reasons to fight each other, other than to have "good fights".

I had the idea of introducing ten C7 wormholes with 4 statics with increased maximum mass but people where saying that what I had in mind would be OP. Blink
Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2013-01-29 19:40:01 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
The problem I always had with WH PVP was the fact it's virtually impossible to get a fight out of people that aren't online. WH inhabitants seem to never, ever, ever be online. I think this is an artifact of the timezone I fly in and the fact that all the content in a WH tends to be done before the later TZ people log in.

So, what I'd like to see is content that spreads itself out over the day. This would mean it's worthwhile for a EU TZ corp in a low class WH to have some AUS TZ people online. :)

-Liang

Ed: Yes, you can knock over a POS to force a if that's your thing. But that seems awfully heavy handed.


That's pretty much an impossible thing for CCP to fix though. Some timezones will always be more quiet than others. Personally I play from 6AM EVE time to midnight, sometimes beyond. with those early hours being my prime simply because that's when I have my kids in school/daycare and have all the time in the world to play. Meaning I definitely get how the AU/EU time zone can be quiet, I suffer from it too. All we can do pretty much is hope that more people from our timezone move on to W-space.
Tisisan
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#9 - 2013-01-29 20:07:37 UTC
For better or worse, it would kill 'hardcoreness' of c5s and c6s, with regard to logistics. Need pos fuel? Roll static 2 till you get a hs. Invade someone? Roll static 2 all night bringing 3 caps at a time in all the lows and nulls you run across.
Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#10 - 2013-01-29 20:20:20 UTC
accept the static would be random so rolling a c1 in the hope that the next one would be a c6 to the system you are looking for would be a waste of time.
Tisisan
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#11 - 2013-01-29 20:26:04 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
accept the static would be random so rolling a c1 in the hope that the next one would be a c6 to the system you are looking for would be a waste of time.


I didn't say anything about looking for specific wh systems... that would be a pain in the ass. But if you are just looking for A high sec or A lowsec/null a 1:5 to 1:10 chance (depending on how the probabilities are calculated) isnt bad at all. Presumably some types of holes would be harder to roll than others (your c1 obviously) but a large group should be able to do most of them in short order.
Svodola Darkfury
Heaven's End
#12 - 2013-01-29 21:07:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Svodola Darkfury
Borlag Crendraven wrote:
Klarion Sythis wrote:
Not that I dislike the idea, but removing the "warp to" requirement wouldn't stop safe farming. They'd just crit their holes.


There are several examples of people who have overcome issues like this by jumping pods into the critical hole, followed up by a carrier full of small but effective ships such as t3's. That said, would it be inherently worse that instead of collapsing their connections, they'd change to critting them instead? Afterall, with the change we are looking for improvements, if none can be thought with the change, then the change is bad. I gave an example of a scenario that would be made possible with this, so naturally it would allow something that the current ways do not.



Instead of leaving the hole untouched, we'd crit it and leave a scout on it. Still untouchable; wouldn't fix the problem.


Svo.

Director of Frozen Corpse Industries.

Qvar Dar'Zanar
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#13 - 2013-01-29 21:34:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Qvar Dar'Zanar
I find a must to limit this random static to the possible holes for the static: No K-space random-static connections for C6, no wh random-static for C1 and C3. They would change too many things.

On the other hand, I would welcome the automatic opening of the K162.
Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2013-01-29 21:34:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Borlag Crendraven
Tisisan wrote:
For better or worse, it would kill 'hardcoreness' of c5s and c6s, with regard to logistics. Need pos fuel? Roll static 2 till you get a hs. Invade someone? Roll static 2 all night bringing 3 caps at a time in all the lows and nulls you run across.


That's an aspect I didn't consider, but personally I don't see any real problems in logistics. Any WH corp worth a damn creates their connections for logistics whenever they need it already.

edit in response to Qvar: that would work as well, perhaps even better than my original idea. Afterall, the idea of that random static wouldn't be to make logistics easier, but to increase chances of encountering other players.
Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2013-01-29 21:39:32 UTC
Svodola Darkfury wrote:
Instead of leaving the hole untouched, we'd crit it and leave a scout on it. Still untouchable; wouldn't fix the problem.


Svo.


Obviously there's always going to be ways to make it safer, no ones denying that. There's various methods for hole control, there's probe pickets, there's sound pickets at holes etc etc. Still, as long as there is a connection, there is always some amount of danger, especially if you play with capitals that are in siege or triage. Your scout wont help that one bit unless the cycle is already ended.
chris elliot
Hateful Intent
Triumvirate.
#16 - 2013-01-29 21:43:41 UTC  |  Edited by: chris elliot
Borlag Crendraven wrote:
As this seemed to have been buried in the other thread...

More unpredictability for wormholes is how you increase conflict....



Not really, it will increase the opportunity for cheap ganks that are hella boring but that's about it. If people are going to fight you they are going to fight you, if not they are just going to POS up and go play WoT or something.

The people posting on these forums about finding ways to make wormholes interesting or more fights are almost all universally from groups who have reputations for blowing "fights" out of the water with t3's balls and 3-1 odds. People see you in the chain and decide "nope nope nope nope". And roll you away with all haste, or if you do find them by a direct roll, they just sit in their towers and give you the boredom treatment until you go away. No one is going to intentionally jump on you when they know what it is you do all the time. You make it unfun to fight you and so no one wants to fight you.

What we have on our hands is a product purely of our own making. We have made this lovely little bed of ours now shut up and lay in it.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Top Belt for Fun
#17 - 2013-01-29 21:58:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Borlag Crendraven wrote:

That's pretty much an impossible thing for CCP to fix though. Some timezones will always be more quiet than others. Personally I play from 6AM EVE time to midnight, sometimes beyond. with those early hours being my prime simply because that's when I have my kids in school/daycare and have all the time in the world to play. Meaning I definitely get how the AU/EU time zone can be quiet, I suffer from it too. All we can do pretty much is hope that more people from our timezone move on to W-space.


I don't object to the fact that there's fewer people in my timezone. I'm objecting to the fact that by the time we log on there's literally no content at all in WH space. That's a design problem, not a player problem.

-Liang

Ed: That is to say, people will never move to WH space as long as all the content is completed for the day by the time they log in. I'm asking for the content to be delivered a bit more slowly and throughout the day.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.

Borlag Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2013-01-29 22:09:47 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Borlag Crendraven wrote:

That's pretty much an impossible thing for CCP to fix though. Some timezones will always be more quiet than others. Personally I play from 6AM EVE time to midnight, sometimes beyond. with those early hours being my prime simply because that's when I have my kids in school/daycare and have all the time in the world to play. Meaning I definitely get how the AU/EU time zone can be quiet, I suffer from it too. All we can do pretty much is hope that more people from our timezone move on to W-space.


I don't object to the fact that there's fewer people in my timezone. I'm objecting to the fact that by the time we log on there's literally no content at all in WH space. That's a design problem, not a player problem.

-Liang

Ed: That is to say, people will never move to WH space as long as all the content is completed for the day by the time they log in. I'm asking for the content to be delivered a bit more slowly and throughout the day.


So by content you mean siterunning. Why don't you simply roll your static connection and run the sites there? Either way, that's not really what this suggestion is about...
Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#19 - 2013-01-29 22:15:24 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Borlag Crendraven wrote:

That's pretty much an impossible thing for CCP to fix though. Some timezones will always be more quiet than others. Personally I play from 6AM EVE time to midnight, sometimes beyond. with those early hours being my prime simply because that's when I have my kids in school/daycare and have all the time in the world to play. Meaning I definitely get how the AU/EU time zone can be quiet, I suffer from it too. All we can do pretty much is hope that more people from our timezone move on to W-space.


I don't object to the fact that there's fewer people in my timezone. I'm objecting to the fact that by the time we log on there's literally no content at all in WH space. That's a design problem, not a player problem.

-Liang

Ed: That is to say, people will never move to WH space as long as all the content is completed for the day by the time they log in. I'm asking for the content to be delivered a bit more slowly and throughout the day.


i don't know wtf you're talking about lil' kid Shocked

Are you saying that someone is coming into your wormhole everyday and running your sites before you get online?
Axloth Okiah
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#20 - 2013-01-29 22:26:37 UTC
IMHO the best way to bring more conflict is to increase population and traffic in wspace. That means making wspace more "habitable" for newcomers. Solving roles/POS ship security would help a lot and allow many smaller corps grow and bring more people. Having some form of alliance bookmarks would also help.
123Next pageLast page