EVE General Discussion

I agree with all of this


For the OP .. here are some really good reasons for the dynamic I see:

1) it rewards preparation.

2) All things being equal, it tends to create an advantage for those who "live" in systems over strangers coming through
Sovereignty isn't the only way to "claim" space...and NPC space can be claimed to a lesser or greater degree with things like having bookmarks, having a POS there, knowing local names and corporations ... forging working relations with other locals.. setting up intel channels with those semi-allies which can help, etc


As to "celestrials" or lack thereof, there are a couple ways to make bookmarks that you should get in the habit of. A virtually effortless manner is to have people and places open and push "create bookmark" a couple times when in warp. It takes extra effort to rename them and assess if they are any good as a bounce, but it is a start that might come in handy.

BEST way for areas where you live or hunt is to fly a interceptor around and make bookmarks 175 400 and 600 above, to the side or below the gate. (600 is off normal grid and they can't see you nor can you see their names but you can easily scan ship types at gate.)

You can warp to the 175 without getting sucked into the warp bubble and almost always warp to the gate and jump from those lateral angles (use your eyes then to be sure there isn't any bubble in line .... if it is camped well.. go the other direction or try the "log off safely" while aligned and/or attention to probing drones etc (separate lesson there)

those "tacticals" can be used to catch others at tacticals near yours or by choosing the warp to within x of them to grab them.


A game should reward some skill and preparation IMO . I'm not a "quick twitch" game guy but I like the "x's and o's" stuff more and I like the idea that not all systems are equal... that they have "man made" features.. one of which are bookmarks I've made.

I knew about these mechanics beforehand and understand the way it works if the bubble is in line with where you warp from to where you warp to. However, (this happened a couple months ago, anecdotal and whatnot) is there some angle associated with that 'line'?

After getting stuck in nullsec once, a friend and I tried to travel to a new destination. We saw a bubble and took precautions. He warped first, got stuck, blew up. I warped from a different planet that should have brought me in from a different angle, but got stuck in the same bubble.

It's very possible my memory is mistaken. Does anyone else have any experience with this?

crying about drag bubbles, the most ancient mechanic in the game



WIthout it, 0.0 camps would have no potency, bombers would be absolutely risk free in fleet fights, making them more of a force multiplier than they already are, and tactical manipulation of battlefields with bubbles would be almost 0. Bubbles are the "terrain" of this game.

While whining about dying is something nobody should do, I can't help but point out, again, that there is no clear documentation in game to aid in understanding how bubbles work. The name is misleading, as Warp Disruption conjures images of being unable to warp, not being forced to warp further than intended. There is nothing wrong with them, though I don't know their full capabilities. For instance, if I place a bubble between point A and point B, without it being at either point, would it cause you to be pulled out of warp when moving between those two points? Or does it only work by being at the end point? If it's the latter than it does not disrupt warpping at all, but rather disrupts your destination while leaving your actual warp untouched. Furthermore, drag bubbles don't seem to disrupt warp either. Instead it appears they supercharge your warp, causing you to fly further than anticipated. If they do not currently effect warp(except to prevent your doing so while within the bubble) I'd like to see them changed so that they do. I want to see(or hear about, since I'm not in a Null Sec PvP Corp) a well placed bubble drag a fleet out of warp and into an ambush. As I said prior, they appear to be more Warp Navigation Disruptor than actual Warp Disruption or Interdiction Field. Personally, I like the idea of Interdictors being able to set up somewhere along a route, deploy and begin dragging ships out of warp. Player controlled toll booths, anyone?

I disagree with your argument that EvE's complexity has any bearing on the counter-intuitive naming of Warp Disruption Fields. The problem is that they do not disrupt warp in any manner unless you're already within their area of effect. This would be great if that was their only purpose, but as it is not, we run into the issue that their name and description give you no hint of this other usage. I don't see a problem with the mechanics behind them, and they aren't very complex at all. If a bubble is anchored at Point A, you cannot warp from Point A. If a bubble is anchored at Point B after you warp to Point B, you pass right through the bubble(meaning it does not disrupt your warp). If the bubble is anchored 100KM behind Point B before you warp there, you will be dragged to it's outer edge(meaning it, again, did not disrupt your warp). The only time it actually disrupts your warp is if it is anchored 100KM in front of Point B before you initiate your warp to said point. The first and last examples are the only time it acts as a "Warp Disruptor," while in the second and third examples it is acting as a "Navigation Disruptor." I just think this is a missed opportunity for adding complexity and tactical planning to EvE.

And at me the big doubts in logical correctness are raised by the Engine Enervator module.
In the description it is told: "Reduces the maximum speed of the ship, using the power streams which are temporarily seizing the ship in a stazis-field and slowing down its movement. "
Thus force of a field made by the module is constant since it consumes constant quantity of energy. And it equally effectively slows down both tiny frigates weighing 1 thousand tons, and enormous battle ships in hundreds thousands tons of weight. logically, they could brake a planet, and can even small solar system :)
I want to tell that it would be quite good to make a penalty on overall performance of this module for the ships which weight categories strongly differ.
p.s. sorry for my bad english :)

To be honest, I don't play World of Warcraft so I have no clue how "complex" it is in naming it's spells and abilities. I have heard, however, that it is quite simple. Complexity has nothing to do with naming a module, or spell as you like to call them, in such a manner as to not cause confusion about it's purpose. It seems that you're not a fan of SciFi so I understand that you would be unfamiliar with the common meaning behind Interdictors and Warp Disruptors, but regardless of this it still comes down to the simple fact that there is absolutely no documentation in game of using Warp Disruptor Fields as a means to change a target's destination.

Now, I understand that not all people can be as intelligent as some of us, and that some are so lacking in the ability to comprehend that they might need a full webpage to do what a sentence can for the rest of us, but that is no excuse for utterly ignoring a function of an in game module(spell).

As to what games I play, I've played the Civilization series since Civ 2. I'm a fan of DF and Aurora 4X. Europa Universalis has recently caught my attention. I enjoy Endless Space and GalCiv, as well as games of Sins of a Solar Empire once in awhile. All of those games, including the two that were and are being developed by a single person each, generally have pretty well written documentation as to what each thing is. Now sure, Aurora 4X can be a bit confusing if you don't know Naval terms, but it still does a fairly good job of letting you know what a CIWS is used for, or what AMMs are used for. The problem I see is that in failing to document a usage for an in game item you are not adding complexity, you're just adding ambiguity, especially when the usage is counter-intuitive to the name. But please, do continue to argue that a game is complex because it comes with incomplete documentation.

Yes. It matters not what distance you warp to if your extended warp "path" intersects with the bubble at some point.

It doesn't necessarily have to be on the same grid, actually. It has to be close though. I'm not sure exactly how far but it's at least 200 km. But it is possible to be pulled into a bubble on a separate grid from your warp destination (both on a grid closer to your departure point and on a grid further away).

PL have been taking advantage of this quite a bit in G-0. They like to manipulate the grid around the 7-1 station to break it at a point about 200 or so km off in the direction of the 5-5 station, and then place a bubble between the two in the second grid.

Since every celestial in the system is within d-scan range of the 7-1 station it's fairly trivial to avoid this, and everyone ought to have tacticals by now anyway. Grid-fu like this is wonky and it's a pretty ridiculous technique but it's certainly not an exploit.

Cov ops as null shuttles are so 2012.