These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What is wrong with wormhole space?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Infinite Force
#321 - 2013-09-17 18:53:31 UTC
Borsek
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#322 - 2013-09-17 19:08:59 UTC
Infinite Force wrote:
I'm just going to continually post this here for the people asking for refining updates....



Yes. A thousand times yes. If CCP implement this they may have me (as long as I get to live in a clone afterwards).
Horus V
The Destined
#323 - 2013-09-18 09:04:11 UTC
There is no moon mining. I know that by design wh should'nt have it but at least give some cheap moon goo to make it more realistic. If we can anchor pos then why can't we harvest it? People already lives in whs. its too late to say "wh was never intended for it"
I agree there should be some classes of whs without ability to anchor pos.

V
Admiral Douros
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#324 - 2013-09-18 17:25:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Admiral Douros
Borsek wrote:

Make black holes have a different effect.

There's already a dedicated thread about this, and it sounds like they're going to be changed.

Borsek wrote:

Anyway, I'd like to see ore refining @ 100% in POS (with skills that give you 100% in empire), make all arrays equal rate just different cargo size (5k 40k 100k). Make refining cycles shorter or a lot longer with more volume. Doing 25k every 1.5h is annoying as hell.

Agreed. I don't know that it should be 100% but it should definitely be better than 75%. I also wouldn't mind seeing some kind of buff to mining times in wormholes. Maybe add a 10% yield multiplier to wormhole effects or something. It shouldn't take a mining fleet 20+ hours to clear an ore site that will despawn in 3 days.

Borsek wrote:

On that note, add Ice belts to WH space.

Small ice belts in wspace would be interesting and would help wormhole residents be more self-sufficient by being able to produce pos fuel. Maybe give existing ore sites a chance to spawn a small ice belt or something. Not enough ice to be super profitable -- just enough to make it feel more realistic and allow fuel production without having to import materials from kspace.

Borsek wrote:

Hell to the no to moon goo. No moon goo is what actually keeps the 0.0 folk from moving in, and that's good. Whs don't need more blobs.

Agreed. Although if wspace moon minerals were limited to the low-value stuff like Silicates then it wouldn't be a game breaker.

Borsek wrote:

Data and relic sites are currently low profit, and need a change. No container droppings like in k-space, just make them open like jettisoned containers from ships after hacking.

I don't think data and relic sites need to be changed at all (minus getting rid of the laggy gas effects). I'd like to see the new minigame/container system improved a bit, but that's not specific to wormholes.

I also agree with adding more wspace systems. Not a huge amount, but 1000 new systems would make things a little more interesting.
Kenneth Skybound
Gallifrey Resources
#325 - 2013-09-18 23:36:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenneth Skybound
I'd say simply make the "known" easier and the "unknown" harder:

The Known

POS upgrades - still waiting on that lot.
-- Able to change subsystems at POS (I will happily forgo this in favor of a T3 Deployed mode to refit themselves in space).
-- Better security management
-- Improved refining arrays
-- Ability to repackage ships/modules

The Unknown

Roaming sleepers
-- Small gangs with improved salvage rates on wormholes. Frigs only C1, 1 cruiser C2, multiple cruisers C3, 1 battleship C4, multiple battleships C5/6.
-- POS bashing fleets. Rare occurrence, would favor offline POS but pose sizable threats to onlined, improved salvage rates compared to sites.

Site Adjustments
-- Sleeper respawns in ore/gas sites. Depreciated salvage rates.
-- Introduce randomness with triggers, ships spawned in sites.
-- Don't reset sites after downtime (escalations notably).

Wormhole adjustments
-- Much greater variation on mass limits and time
-- Shorter life span generally
-- Increase number of wandering holes
-- Immediately open statics upon spawning, not upon being warped to


The aim of all of this is to make the tools one goes in with more useful, but the challenge faced more deadly.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#326 - 2013-09-19 09:17:52 UTC
A big issue for me is the inability to change clones depending on the situations i put myself in. As my pod is designed around T3 ships and costs around 1 billion, i'm sometimes reluctant to join our fleets when they go out into null/low sec where we use non T3 fleet doctrines.

CCP should allow us to swap clones at a POS/Rorqual.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Sin Pew
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#327 - 2013-09-19 11:11:04 UTC
Admiral Douros wrote:
Borsek wrote:

On that note, add Ice belts to WH space.

Small ice belts in wspace would be interesting and would help wormhole residents be more self-sufficient by being able to produce pos fuel. Maybe give existing ore sites a chance to spawn a small ice belt or something. Not enough ice to be super profitable -- just enough to make it feel more realistic and allow fuel production without having to import materials from kspace.

Realistic? WH have never been designed to be self-sufficient to begin with. Going to shop in k-space is realistic.
Secondly, each fuel requires faction specific isotopes to cook a fuel block for a racial tower. In what faction do wormhles fall? if any.
That would just remove a potential conflict trigger.

[i]"haiku are easy, But sometimes they don't make sense, Refrigerator."[/i]
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#328 - 2013-09-19 11:26:16 UTC
Sin Pew wrote:

That would just remove a potential conflict trigger.


Or create one

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#329 - 2013-09-19 12:32:44 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
A big issue for me is the inability to change clones depending on the situations i put myself in. As my pod is designed around T3 ships and costs around 1 billion, i'm sometimes reluctant to join our fleets when they go out into null/low sec where we use non T3 fleet doctrines.

CCP should allow us to swap clones at a POS/Rorqual.



Truth being told. Though the *pod it so it does not reship* is an important thing aswell.

Just unsure about that 1bil POD, dedicated strat-clone is a 5% med turret and a 3% surgical for us, together with a bit of Drop :__:
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
#330 - 2013-09-19 14:45:28 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
A big issue for me is the inability to change clones depending on the situations i put myself in. As my pod is designed around T3 ships and costs around 1 billion, i'm sometimes reluctant to join our fleets when they go out into null/low sec where we use non T3 fleet doctrines.

CCP should allow us to swap clones at a POS/Rorqual.



Truth being told. Though the *pod it so it does not reship* is an important thing aswell.

Just unsure about that 1bil POD, dedicated strat-clone is a 5% med turret and a 3% surgical for us, together with a bit of Drop :__:


It's widely accepted among WH dwellers that any clone swapping technique shouldn't allow clone jumping.
Admiral Douros
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#331 - 2013-09-19 17:00:43 UTC
Kenneth Skybound wrote:

-- Don't reset sites after downtime (escalations notably).
-- Immediately open statics upon spawning, not upon being warped to


No no no.

Not resetting sites at downtime would be fine if sites spawned more regularly, but that would introduce other issues. The 3-day uptime and reset at downtime is just fine.

Immediately opening static exits would eliminate capital escalations, period. There's already a big enough danger that a cap-killing fleet has snuck in before you crash all the holes in a system, or that a new hole will pop up while you're in the middle of a site. Nobody will ever bring capitals out if their static is constantly open.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Stay Feral
#332 - 2013-09-19 20:08:50 UTC
Infinite Force wrote:
I'm just going to continually post this here for the people asking for refining updates....


Quoted because still awesome.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Dhuras
The Classy Gentlemans Corporation
Moist.
#333 - 2013-09-19 21:40:56 UTC
Going off on this stuff about rebalancing the refining arrays, can we remove the added material waste to advanced ship assembly arrays? It makes no sense to penalize people who manufacture in a POS when it costs time and money to maintain a POS.
Infinite Force
#334 - 2013-09-19 22:25:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinite Force
Dhuras wrote:
Going off on this stuff about rebalancing the refining arrays, can we remove the added material waste to advanced ship assembly arrays? It makes no sense to penalize people who manufacture in a POS when it costs time and money to maintain a POS.

There is another thread (under F&I as I recall) that talks about this very subject. If I can find it, I'll link it....

Here it is .. Not quite as 'formal' as I thought, but it's at least a start.

>> 12% #07: Remove the penalties from advanced ship assembly arrays

Original forum thread on this here..

HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud

http://tinyurl.com/95zmyzw - The only way to go!
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#335 - 2013-09-20 01:50:08 UTC
Methinks it's time for the short list.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
Kenneth Skybound
Gallifrey Resources
#336 - 2013-09-20 08:16:37 UTC
Admiral Douros wrote:
Kenneth Skybound wrote:

-- Don't reset sites after downtime (escalations notably).
-- Immediately open statics upon spawning, not upon being warped to


No no no.

Not resetting sites at downtime would be fine if sites spawned more regularly, but that would introduce other issues. The 3-day uptime and reset at downtime is just fine.

Immediately opening static exits would eliminate capital escalations, period. There's already a big enough danger that a cap-killing fleet has snuck in before you crash all the holes in a system, or that a new hole will pop up while you're in the middle of a site. Nobody will ever bring capitals out if their static is constantly open.


So what you're saying is wormholes need to maintain a certain amount of safety beyond watching the holes? We are on about the same -1.0 security space right?
Keleginn
The Hoody Mafia
#337 - 2013-09-20 08:49:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Keleginn
Kenneth Skybound wrote:
Admiral Douros wrote:
Kenneth Skybound wrote:

-- Don't reset sites after downtime (escalations notably).
-- Immediately open statics upon spawning, not upon being warped to


No no no.

Not resetting sites at downtime would be fine if sites spawned more regularly, but that would introduce other issues. The 3-day uptime and reset at downtime is just fine.

Immediately opening static exits would eliminate capital escalations, period. There's already a big enough danger that a cap-killing fleet has snuck in before you crash all the holes in a system, or that a new hole will pop up while you're in the middle of a site. Nobody will ever bring capitals out if their static is constantly open.


So what you're saying is wormholes need to maintain a certain amount of safety beyond watching the holes? We are on about the same -1.0 security space right?


If you ask me, static spawning automatically would not make a blind bit of difference to people running sites, they would just crit them before they started and run sites as normal. With the threat of only some pods and a carrier with 9 T3s being able to get through the hole i think most site runners would fancy their chances against that.

I think also a negative affect of this would be once you start trying to find your chain you're going to come across alot of crit and eol connections which will obviously slow the process of scanning down considerably, who would want to have to bring a hic each time they are scanning to close crit holes to further their own chains?

edit- when i'm referring to site runners i'm talking about cap escalations in you're home system etc
Lexar Mundi
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#338 - 2013-09-21 00:02:17 UTC
Kenneth Skybound wrote:
I'd say simply make the "known" easier and the "unknown" harder:

The Known

POS upgrades - still waiting on that lot.
-- Able to change subsystems at POS (I will happily forgo this in favor of a T3 Deployed mode to refit themselves in space).
-- Better security management
-- Improved refining arrays
-- Ability to repackage ships/modules

The Unknown

Roaming sleepers
-- Small gangs with improved salvage rates on wormholes. Frigs only C1, 1 cruiser C2, multiple cruisers C3, 1 battleship C4, multiple battleships C5/6.
-- POS bashing fleets. Rare occurrence, would favor offline POS but pose sizable threats to onlined, improved salvage rates compared to sites.

Site Adjustments
-- Sleeper respawns in ore/gas sites. Depreciated salvage rates.
-- Introduce randomness with triggers, ships spawned in sites.
-- Don't reset sites after downtime (escalations notably).

Wormhole adjustments
-- Much greater variation on mass limits and time
-- Shorter life span generally
-- Increase number of wandering holes
-- Immediately open statics upon spawning, not upon being warped to


The aim of all of this is to make the tools one goes in with more useful, but the challenge faced more deadly.
I like a lot of your ideas, but some of them not so much

POS bashing sleepers will make everyone put offline towers with guns at every moon. Just fly over in a tanked ship and a few fuel blocks and your set. People could abuse the mechanic very easily. If you miss one... oh well we lost some stront.

Don't reset sites after down time would suck if more action didn't happen more often. as it is WHs are almost a grave yard. Less sites to do would mean even less people living in WHs.

I agree on making W-space more unknown though.
Winthorp
#339 - 2013-09-21 00:34:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Winthorp
Lexar Mundi wrote:
I like a lot of your ideas, but some of them not so much

POS bashing sleepers will make everyone put offline towers with guns at every moon. Just fly over in a tanked ship and a few fuel blocks and your set. People could abuse the mechanic very easily. If you miss one... oh well we lost some stront.

Don't reset sites after down time would suck if more action didn't happen more often. as it is WHs are almost a grave yard. Less sites to do would mean even less people living in WHs.

I agree on making W-space more unknown though.


Yes it could be gamed by players but there is always hotfixes to those such as sleepers unaffected by POS modules, i believe it does go towards getting more people out in the open and vulnerable but not too much as they have their own POS guns on their side if they get jumped.

Getting rid of all the inactive towers from dscan would be a great bonus also.
Micha'ela bat'Ezra
Doomheim
#340 - 2013-09-21 10:38:06 UTC
Moved to a C2, maybe a carebear system, but hard enough for me.
After a few days I finaly had the stuff in and it was time to do the relics.
4 relic sites gave me 120M on sleeperloot and salvage. Thats ok.

The +/- 26 cans gave me 1.6M on wrecked stuff.
Is that the income what it supose to be?

Possible answers:
Yes, well go ashame yourself CCP.
No, go fix it quick.