Wormholes

All of this is good except removing the sleepers from the gas/ore sites in C1-C3, gas in particular. That group of systems will spawn all gas sites except the C5/C6 Core sites with C320 and C540. The rest of the gas is already less profitable to harvest than it is to go ice mining, and removing sleepers would make it even more so.

I'm not sure how the dynamic would change if you removed sleeper spawns from ore sites, though I know Nullbears would throw a royal tantrum, so it's not likely to happen anyway.


There appear to be two main viewpoints of W-space. One is that you're progressing deeper into the unknown as you move from C1 to C6. You have an interconnected web of systems leading across unknown space with K-space connectivity an incidental, not essential, feature. The focal point-of-view is W-space; W-space is the origin, W-space is the destination, W-space is the purpose. Most players who live in W-space seem to hold this viewpoint based on conversation and posts.

The database itself which separates out W-space into its own universe would tend to support this W-space centric point of view as well. You have K-space, you have W-space, and you have random and varying connections between the two.

The other viewpoint is that they're all somewhat equally accessible (except C4) from K-space, though some have harder (PvE) content than others. W-space systems are not necessarily much more than exploration sites you can find in K-space, though harder and more dangerous. The focal point-of-view is K-space; W-space is a temporary diversion from K-space. CCP, particularly in recent discussion around C4 ideas with consideration to adding K-space connections to C4, seemed to hold this point of view. I asked, but they would not clarify their purpose and goals for W-space.


What they do to W-space depends greatly on their point of view of what W-space is and how it is to be approached.


Personally, I'd like to see the first concept more fully realized:

- C1 and C2 would basically be unchanged, though C2 would lose C5 and C6 statics.
- C3 would remain similar, though increased wormhole mass allowances to permit freighter traffic.
- C4 would gain a second static: one static for C1-C3 space, and one static for C5-C6 space. Freighter traffic permitted.
- C5 and C6 would have fewer K-space connections, and lose direct connectivity to C1-C3.

Then introduce short-lived, random wormholes, some large and some small, that could connect any W-space system to any other W-space system, C1 through C6.


After that, new regions of space could be added to the game that use W-space as the transit between current K-space universe and the new K-space universe. You could, for example, create a constellation-centric universe (as opposed to the system-centric universe of W-space) where you build a mini-empire throughout the entire constellation, cynos work within the constellation, stargates could be constructed between systems within the constellation, etc. You would travel through wormholes (sometimes into W-space) to travel between constellations. It could be similar to Nullsec except you can only project power within your own constellation, allowing small groups to build an empire where it is impossible now in Nullsec without kissing someone's pinky ring.

C6 and maybe C5 systems could be the connecting systems to this new region of space. It's not quite C7, it's not quite Nullsec, and it's not quite W-space. Needless to say it is also not like Hisec, though I suspect you'd still have to pay silly industry taxes out there.

why do you want freighters in c3 and c4 that would make logi really easy for them

A year ago dealing with logistics sucked. Nowadays it is a bit easier. T1 industrials are now around that can haul ore/compressed ore, large amounts of PI, and Refined minerals. T2 deep space transports can how haul in more general stuff as needed too. In addition, pos modules can now be made in POS's (I believe this is now so, which was usually the major hauling point for stuff).

Nowadays, hauling is manageable (it still sucks but at least I don't want to tear my head off now).

I will not comment about moving of sleepers from gas/ore sites, but I will comment regarding moving them from relic/data sites in c1's through c3's (I have a much stronger stance regarding this aspect).

Regarding the Relic/Data of C1's through C3's. I've always found it odd that these would be so firmly guarded, yet people really don't want to be bothered very much with them. I do believe that explorers/scouts "newbros" in C1's through C3's should have a option for accessing relic/data sites in wormhole space besides what shows up in their wormhole. Part of wormhole space is exploration, and not just farming sleepers. I don't want them nerfed, I want the combat to be put into combat sites and the relic/data sites to be made more of a exploration gift/challenge to your scouts and probers. To clarify, Move/transfer/ADD the Sleepers from Relic/data to combat sites.

If it makes people probe more for the chance at loot in C1's through C3's, I say it is a viable option. The combat sites in C1's through C3's will have more sleepers to pew (increasing their Isk per hour), and the relic/data sites will be a free for all for scouts, hunters, explorers, and both newbros and old salts who relegate hours of their time to probing out wormhole space, just to see it wiped out the next day when the hole collapses. It gives them some "incentive" and possibly great rewards for probing out wormhole space, and finding such sites that are readily accessible to them, without having to shift into combat mode to kill sleepers, then salvage mode to scoop crap, then back to scan mode to scan down the stuff. There are too many steps in the lower end holes (higher end holes, c4-c6, no problem with them as they are supposed to be dealt with as a team). The lower end relic/data sites in C1-s through c3's should function as they do in low and null as this would essentially be more of a training ground and stepping stone for explorers, especially when they upgrade to higher end holes.

To summarize my thought process. C1's through C3's relic/data sites should not have sleeper pve combat in it. Move those sleepers to the other combat sites in C1's through C3's, increasing the combat sites isk per hour, and leave the relic/data sites to more of an exploration type site in these lower end wormholes.

No nerf, sleepers moved around a little, isk per hour and time spent increased for combat oriented players in lower wormholes.

I don't see it. The "explorers" would be able to hack/analyze some wrecked sleeper pieces (basically BPC's), and/or some data cores, decryptors in c1's through C3's. The combat pve pilots would get new spawns of sleeper mobs, increased combat, more loot in a condensed timeframe. Basically it makes the combat people do combat in the combat sites, and the exploration people do exploration in the exploration sites.

This kills no market, as there was no real market for the stuff to begin with. This is more of a teaching/educational training step for newbros and old salts for living and exploring wormholes (brings back a little bit of adventure). Also gives a person something to do inbetween scanning down there 11th wormhole in their scanning ship.

Will the veteran wormhole pilots in C1's through C3's really bother with hacking these sites? Probably not. Will the new people want to? I'm sure they'll give it a go.

The freighters in C3/C4 would accompany the reduction in K-space connectivity for C5/C6. I included it solely to allow freighter use to continue between Hisec and C5/C6 via C3/C4 since there would be fewer direct Hisec/C5/C6 wormholes spawning under such a system.

Since a direct Hisec into C5/C6 is random, and not guaranteed like a static, perhaps the answer might be to only have random, short-lived heavy wormholes that can be used for freighter traffic. Freighter traffic would still be possible, and it would still be opportunistic as it is now for C5/C6 instead of guaranteed via static.

It doesn't really matter to me personally either way, since we're in a C2 and have zero plans whatsoever to move. It might increase freighter traffic resulting in more freighter explosions, though it might also reduce indy traffic resulting in fewer indy explosions. On hisec, things are often impossible to catch if scouted and people aren't stupid, so it probably doesn't really matter much for C3 traffic; I guess it could reduce annoyance. But mass reduction traps work for Orcas, so they'll work for Freighters as well, with even better results :)

If the W-space community even supports such a proposal, and if CCP ever looked at it, I would be fine with whatever they would decide about freighters.

I consider this a feature, not a bug.

I think C3's should be changed so that they also have a w-space static. While ISK/HR in these systems is adequate, the absence of a w-space wh makes it hard for corps living there to grow and make money in w-space without relocating.

A consequence of this is that most people living in systems with a C3 static have a hard time finding people to shoot at (This is from personal experience after living in a c5-c3 EUTZ for about a year)

I think Wh relic/data site cans should explode after failing twice. you know, like everything else in eve.

Why does WH space have to be the same as everywhere else in Eve?

You also currently don't have to fight through "hordes" of NPCs in order to hack Kspace sites while in WHs you do.