These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for K162s

First post First post First post
Author
Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#421 - 2014-03-24 20:45:58 UTC
Alundil wrote:
Ravcharas wrote:
Hedge Fox wrote:
Ravcharas wrote:
Hedge Fox wrote:
CCP Development Plan: Focus on ISK-sink creation. We need to blow up more ISK so we can sell more PLEX. Pirate

How is this an isk sink?


When ships blow up, ISK vanishes in varying quantities.
Some may get looted or salvaged, but a percentage of it is removed from circulation entirely. Thus, ISK Sink.

Enabling more mechanics making defensive strategies less effective, would in affect, indirectly consequent in more ships lost, thus adding to the ISK sinks.

Much like making interceptors immune to bubbles and increasing warp speeds for them, makes them prime hunters in 0.0 to catch ratters. More death, more money for CCP.

Ships being blown up are not an isk sink. They are isk faucets, because of insurance payouts.

I don't know what the breakdown is (CCP would though) on the percentage of ships that asplode with insurance or sans insurance.

But I am willing to go out on a ledge and estimate that the number of T2 & T3 hulls that go pop is probably within 15% or so of the number of T1 ships that go pop. Why is this relevant....because T2 and T3 hulls get nearly nothing from insurance. Furthermore, from an ISK efficiency standpoint, it doesn't make any financial sense at all for a pilot to pay for insurance on a hull unless he/she knows it'll asplode in the 3 months the policy is active. Therefore most of the hulls that are in wh space never receive insurance past the initial purchase (if even that).

This doesn't even take into account the 50% (avg) module loss on every destroyed hull, regardless of insurance.

Furthermore, with the mineral re-balance that took place a few months back, the insurance rates (that are based on mineral values, I'll remind you) are badly out of whack even if one wanted to purchase insurance.

Case in point: Dominix Insurance

So....still an ISK sink.....


It doesn't really matter what percentage gets paid out. Insurance is still a faucet. Insurance fees are an isk sink, and if you pay enough in fees the net effect can work out to be a sink. I doubt that the system works out to a net sink, though. It was a faucet in 2010. ( http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q4-2010.pdf - p. 20 )

It may have changed since then. I don't think it has, but I'll freely admit that's me making a guesstimate. That's why I said ships getting blown up is an isk faucet. It was a little bit sloppy of me to say so because technically it's the insurance system but because of default payouts there's no way of getting around the isk injection.

However, ships getting blown up is not an isk sink, even if we get rid of insurance all together. It's a mineral sink. But not an isk sink.

If you keep arguing that it is I'd like you to tell me exactly which isk it is that gets disappeared, and from which wallet, when my ship goes pop.
advii
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#422 - 2014-03-24 20:48:28 UTC
What if the new signature showed up only after the 1st ship that has gone through it decloaks? Probably a pain in the ass to implement though. Maybe too little reaction time? I dunno.
arabella blood
Keyboard Jihad
#423 - 2014-03-24 20:50:50 UTC
So odyssey is dying right in front of our eyes:

1. exploration looting cans will be removed.
2. Scanner will be reversed.

whats left from this expansion?? nothing.
and you know why? because that is what happens when expansions have 0% content and 100% bug fixes+convenience changes.

Troll for hire. Cheap prices.

Jess Tanner
Bangworks Systems Inc.
#424 - 2014-03-24 21:00:40 UTC
Dawin4e
Merchant Union
#425 - 2014-03-24 21:05:54 UTC
This proposal think purely one-sided. It is beneficial only for the striker.
And severely infringes upon the inhabitants of the wormhole. Now there is another decline of the population of the wormhole and most of them are empty. If you want to make the game more dangerous - remove exulted in zeros.
Nightingale Actault
Borderland Dynamics
#426 - 2014-03-24 21:07:29 UTC
I'm convinced no thought went into how this would affect the area of the game that this is proposed for. Unless this is a deliberate bait and switch I am worried, and can see why many wormholers are very adamant that no changes be made.
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
#427 - 2014-03-24 21:09:45 UTC
Ali Aras wrote:

A mass/time delay would resolve the following issues a time-only delay leaves unsolved:

C1-4 residents can no longer be ganked by a fleet without being able to see the fleet or their incoming signature. In C1-4 space, a cloaky t3 gang can cause serious issues for a farming fleet, particularly on the lower side of that range. Should a K162 spawn off d-scan from where the fleet is, the defenders would have literally no warning. Even on d-scan, the available time to detect a cloaky fleet's existence is short, and spamming d-scan is no more fun than spamming probes.

Carebears can't roll their holes in perfect safety. If a hole is time-limited only, some carebears good with rolling ships can hop in and out inside the timer, and the hungry PvPers they've inadvertently rolled into have no opportunity to attempt a gank or slip a scanning alt through.
.


Ermm, nope.
b) you can get almost all holes (not c1s and those with 3B mass) critted with 2-3 jumps. That takes about 30 secs even if you do it one after another and with ejecting on the hole. That´s not enough time to launch probes on the other side, scan it down and bookmark/give warpin there. And if you jump anything through chances are good you will be stuck. The rollers can even put the capitals on the hole before jumping a scanner, because they are 100% safe there too.

a)The sig will appear the moment the fleet aligns towards you and the T3, covertops, bomber or SOE ship uncloaks next to you and points. So at exactly the same time they show up on dscan or combatprobes. Throwing a purely cloaky T3 fleet at any serious farminggroup will just lead to lots of lossmails. So the only change will be people not using heavytackle but mass-light tackle to maximise the delay.

So overall there is almost no difference between timedalayed and time/mass delayed.
Pretty much as already said here, but I finished typing before reading further...
Also there seems to be a missconception about this change being good for PvP. It´s not. It is good for ganking but actually horrible for forcing actual fights (most of those happen for holecontrol or on the roll).

Any change based on dscanrange makes the detection a diceroll if you hit a <14 AU or a huge system. Is that a good gamemechanic?

It´s really nice to see CCP looking at least a small bit at j-space, but there are way better suggestions and discussions about the issues here on the forums. Pretty much starting at day 1.
I really hope this suggestion wasn´t discussed with the CSM (esp the Wh guys) before posting it here, if they seconded it as it is dickpunching might be appropriate. Roll
Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#428 - 2014-03-24 21:14:31 UTC
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:
No one said 5 minutes, there is no mention of 5 minutes anywhere. Right now we are talking about the delay in general, the details of the duration are not even being addressed. I think 2 minutes or less is still good enough of a change.


If by "no one," you mean "Two Step," then yes.


and if by "5 minutes", you mean "I didn't read the whole post", then yes.

All the worries about rolling holes before someone notices are kinda silly. Very few people sit around waiting for a K162 to open into them to gank the hole closing ships. Nealy all deaths are from people trying to close holes minutes or hours after they open. I wouldn't worry about being unable to gank people that are trying to close their hole, I worry about being unable to gank those people when they think they are "safe"

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Faxanadu Phantasm
Magister Mortalis.
#429 - 2014-03-24 21:18:57 UTC
Desimus Maximus wrote:
I'm sure this came about from 'leet' pvpers whining about not having enough targets that won't/can't fight back.

W-space has no local. This is it's inherent danger. Don't punish players for being efficient at game mechanics such as scanning down signatures quickly and keeping d-scan up. Stop rewarding whiny pvpers who only have the balls to attack soft targets with easier and easier mechanics.

If a w-space corp is lazy then they will be punished appropriately by losing many many assets.

If you want to fight go to low or nullsec you pussies. Or just live with the perfectly fine scanning mechanics as is. You will find all the pvp you want... Problem is, you are AFRAID. You are the REAL carebears of Eve.


Quoted for truth

If you're finding it unrewarding to chainroll for pew, please consider that nullsec has plenty of targets that are very vulnerable to hit and run


Two step
Aperture Harmonics
#430 - 2014-03-24 21:24:09 UTC
Tyrant Scorn wrote:

I am sorry Ali but I don't know who you talked to but I seriously doubt you've seriously considered all options. The change is going to be terrible and only favors PvP. if CCP only wants to favor PvP, they should never have introduced PvE in wormholes in the first place but the fact is that it's there in large bulks.

I am sorely disappointed by the post you just made...


Oh dearie me, god forbid w-space has any of that evil PVP in it. I know when I think "Where can I go to PVE in safety?" the first thing that comes to mind is in w-space. Come on. The whole point of w-space is that the PVE is supposed to be tough enough that even if you get jumped you at least have a reasonable shot at fighting back. People fail to gank site runners all the time. I've been on both sides of a failed site gank more than 20 times.

Perhaps if people are getting ganked more they might have to think outside the box and set traps of their own? Perhaps they might have to have more than the bare minimum number of people to run the site? Does that sound like a bad thing?

CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog

Tyrant Scorn
#431 - 2014-03-24 21:28:54 UTC
Two step wrote:
Tyrant Scorn wrote:

I am sorry Ali but I don't know who you talked to but I seriously doubt you've seriously considered all options. The change is going to be terrible and only favors PvP. if CCP only wants to favor PvP, they should never have introduced PvE in wormholes in the first place but the fact is that it's there in large bulks.

I am sorely disappointed by the post you just made...


Oh dearie me, god forbid w-space has any of that evil PVP in it. I know when I think "Where can I go to PVE in safety?" the first thing that comes to mind is in w-space. Come on. The whole point of w-space is that the PVE is supposed to be tough enough that even if you get jumped you at least have a reasonable shot at fighting back. People fail to gank site runners all the time. I've been on both sides of a failed site gank more than 20 times.

Perhaps if people are getting ganked more they might have to think outside the box and set traps of their own? Perhaps they might have to have more than the bare minimum number of people to run the site? Does that sound like a bad thing?


No Two Step, that is not what I am saying. I am not against PvP and I don't mind PvP motivating features... But if you have PvE content, you should address both forms of play and not only favor 1 above the other.

The way wormholes work right now is fair for the people who are on the ball and pay attention. It's fine, it's been fine in the past and people should learn to adept to small changes. I had no problems adjusting to the changes when they introduced the Overlay.
Marcus Gideon
Triglavian Assembly
#432 - 2014-03-24 21:32:30 UTC
When people first started going into wormholes, there was tons of comparisons to Null Sec.

WHs don't have local Intel. WHs don't have Sov. WHs have a lot more logistics to worry about.

But the nice part was, while you may not know straight away if there was a lurking boogeyman cloaked out there somewhere, he didn't know where you were either, unless he used some Combat probes which you could notice right away.

So then... CCCP decided to make all the sites stick out like sore thumbs. Now intruders can find you in a heartbeat, b/c the site you're in is broadcasting to the cosmos.

And then this? Make the backdoor those intruders snuck in through, hidden away until well after their gang has crawled up your ass already?

WHO DOES THIS BENEFIT? OTHER THAN ROAMING GANKS? THIS SURE AS HELL DOESN'T BENEFIT WORMHOLES.
Marcus Gideon
Triglavian Assembly
#433 - 2014-03-24 21:33:55 UTC
Two step wrote:

Oh dearie me, god forbid w-space has any of that evil PVP in it. I know when I think "Where can I go to PVE in safety?" the first thing that comes to mind is in w-space. Come on. The whole point of w-space is that the PVE is supposed to be tough enough that even if you get jumped you at least have a reasonable shot at fighting back. People fail to gank site runners all the time. I've been on both sides of a failed site gank more than 20 times.

Perhaps if people are getting ganked more they might have to think outside the box and set traps of their own? Perhaps they might have to have more than the bare minimum number of people to run the site? Does that sound like a bad thing?

Spoken like a true Null Sec'er.

The same ones who whine and cry daily about how Cloaks should burn fuel or something. All because they get worried when a scary face appears in Local chat.
Winthorp
#434 - 2014-03-24 21:35:02 UTC
Two step wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Gnaw LF wrote:
No one said 5 minutes, there is no mention of 5 minutes anywhere. Right now we are talking about the delay in general, the details of the duration are not even being addressed. I think 2 minutes or less is still good enough of a change.


If by "no one," you mean "Two Step," then yes.


and if by "5 minutes", you mean "I didn't read the whole post", then yes.

All the worries about rolling holes before someone notices are kinda silly. Very few people sit around waiting for a K162 to open into them to gank the hole closing ships. Nealy all deaths are from people trying to close holes minutes or hours after they open. I wouldn't worry about being unable to gank people that are trying to close their hole, I worry about being unable to gank those people when they think they are "safe"


So while sieging a system and maintaining hole control you never watch for new sigs? I know everyone else does...

Tyrant Scorn
#435 - 2014-03-24 21:40:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyrant Scorn
Oeps... misread...
White Bear Maricadie
Downloaded Bears
#436 - 2014-03-24 21:41:50 UTC
i would be very dis appointed to see a change like this implemented, since the only people who would benefit from a change like this would be the very large PVP groups in W-space. please dont allow Wh space to become like null sec, that only caters to 1 group. please keep balance in the game, attackers and defenders should have equal ground to fight on.
Deeone
Deadspace Zombie Factory
#437 - 2014-03-24 21:43:00 UTC
Two step wrote:
Tyrant Scorn wrote:

I am sorry Ali but I don't know who you talked to but I seriously doubt you've seriously considered all options. The change is going to be terrible and only favors PvP. if CCP only wants to favor PvP, they should never have introduced PvE in wormholes in the first place but the fact is that it's there in large bulks.

I am sorely disappointed by the post you just made...


Oh dearie me, god forbid w-space has any of that evil PVP in it. I know when I think "Where can I go to PVE in safety?" the first thing that comes to mind is in w-space. Come on. The whole point of w-space is that the PVE is supposed to be tough enough that even if you get jumped you at least have a reasonable shot at fighting back. People fail to gank site runners all the time. I've been on both sides of a failed site gank more than 20 times.

Perhaps if people are getting ganked more they might have to think outside the box and set traps of their own? Perhaps they might have to have more than the bare minimum number of people to run the site? Does that sound like a bad thing?


yeah because ccp broke discovery b4 that we had no problem ganking ppl. like I said b4 at least 70% of ppl farming didn't spam probes b4 and I seriously doubt they will start now........your right tho instead of dropping probes I should have to set drag bubbles and decloaking cans in every site I want to run(totally balanced to your just being able to roll a static and warp in on people b4 anyone even knows there is a new connection I mean that takes the same effort as setting 100s of bubbles and moving them all the time right?).......ppl complaining that spamming dscan and probes isn't fun......that's why it dont get done.....that's why its vigilance. you can have all the fun u want ignorance is bliss just dont cry when the cloaky t3s get u. there is no way that a site that ppl can come thru from a different system should not show up on probe scans. that's just crazy. all that needs to be done is to rollback discovery scan and most wh residents are back to happy and waiting for the pos changes......there is plenty of pvp in wh. we have a whole community that tells ppl they will evict you if you dont give good fights........I find it more disturbing however that you seem to think that larger entities need to be taking wh......this is like the last place u can get 0.0 style small gang warfare(20v20ish and smaller) and tbh most of us would like to keep it that way. its why we dont live in null. and one last point about "god forbid there be pvp in wh"......im gonna go out on a limb and say that PER CAPITIA WH has the most pvp in eve. If probes are nerfed like this ganks will spike then the pvp will fall off as everyone just moves out cuz the only profitable thing Is rolling your static looking for suckers. I guess that's how u get a big blue doughnut in wh space as well.......well played ccp well played
Alundil
Rolled Out
#438 - 2014-03-24 21:45:55 UTC
Ravcharas wrote:

It doesn't really matter what percentage gets paid out. Insurance is still a faucet. Insurance fees are an isk sink, and if you pay enough in fees the net effect can work out to be a sink. I doubt that the system works out to a net sink, though. It was a faucet in 2010. ( http://cdn1.eveonline.com/community/QEN/QEN_Q4-2010.pdf - p. 20 )

It may have changed since then. I don't think it has, but I'll freely admit that's me making a guesstimate. That's why I said ships getting blown up is an isk faucet. It was a little bit sloppy of me to say so because technically it's the insurance system but because of default payouts there's no way of getting around the isk injection.

However, ships getting blown up is not an isk sink, even if we get rid of insurance all together. It's a mineral sink. But not an isk sink.

If you keep arguing that it is I'd like you to tell me exactly which isk it is that gets disappeared, and from which wallet, when my ship goes pop.


So, in complete T1 concerns, perhaps more of a mineral sink than an ISK sink. So I stand corrected. This is exacerbated by the fact that build volumes take far more materials than are considered in regards to the insurance though.

As for ISK sinks and ships/modules - this comes into play in the faction/LP item market as that is a very definite sink and a not insubstantial one at that when you consider that it's not uncommon to fly with LP modules that might be worth a good percentage of the hull value. LP based ships and implants are also ISK sinks.

So while the hull exploding, alone, is not necessarily a sink, the fact that many (if not the majority - speculation on my part) of explosions including modules and possibly implants represents a sink in the somewhere in the system. This is under the assumption that people realize ins is a bad deal (currently) even on T1 stuff.

I'm right behind you

White Bear Maricadie
Downloaded Bears
#439 - 2014-03-24 21:46:00 UTC
if you feel that defenders have it too easy take 1 simple step.

Step 1 = Disable the sensor overlay in WH space altogether, make it so the only way a wh dweller knows what sigs are there is by scanning.
Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
Kitchen Sinkhole
#440 - 2014-03-24 21:46:42 UTC
Tyrant Scorn wrote:

The way wormholes work right now is fair for the people who are on the ball and pay attention. It's fine, it's been fine in the past and people should learn to adept to small changes. I had no problems adjusting to the changes when they introduced the Overlay.


I find the changes made with Odyssey to be against what wormholes are all about. Free intel is NOT what most people want. They believe it should be worked for. Making sigs automatically show up on scan and making ore sites auto warp to's is NOT the way to go.

Please CCP, let wormholers work for intel. No freebies. No hand holding. This benefits both attackers and defenders.

No trolling please