These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Distance that you're being ejected out of a wormhole depends on mass

First post First post First post
Author
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#461 - 2014-08-04 18:54:11 UTC
I would think it only proper for cynos/bridges to spread the ships more as the mass goes up.

1 carrier = 40 km
2 carrier = 50 km
3 carrier = 60 km

Think of how this would unstagnate null sec. It would be so dynamic to litter the whole grid with 100 carriers. As a neat benefit it would probably uncloak everything on grid. This is and outstanding feature and should immediately be implemented across the board.

Would this help the carrier/sentry blob problem go away? (we all know the answer)
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#462 - 2014-08-04 18:57:35 UTC
call me helplessly optimistic. as disappointed as I am, I'm already imagining the Rorqual's comeback. It's gotta be something epic after such a hard nerf to what little utility it has left. I'll just have to take my Rorqual gameplay elsewhere in the meantime, I guess. Shame on me for trying to make it work in a wh.

not very reassuring that it shares the fate of my phoenix pilot who I spent so long training to perfect skills. people told me it was a bad idea and I should have listened.

but i mean, I figured the rorq would be safe from nerfs due to its specialized role. wrong again.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#463 - 2014-08-04 19:05:44 UTC
Have no fear, it can always be used as a single use hole closer with the new mechanics, there will be none left to worry about in a week.......Roll

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Meytal
Doomheim
#464 - 2014-08-04 19:08:10 UTC
Winthorp wrote:
Meytal wrote:
NPC ALT RAMBLINGS

I really would love to debate with you further but i have always held the policy of not replying to NPC alts, even a well known NPC alt like yours.


Winthorp wrote:
Apparently though if you don't agree with the masses and think the change is good people think that instead of debating the reasoning with you they have some right to ask where i get my experience from or what is your corp history.

Pot. Kettle.

Winthorp wrote:
(long description of high-class fleet stand-offs)

This is why my corp and I prefer low-class w-space, specifically C2/HS/C4, and is why we have seen many high-class groups leave high-class space. Maybe we're a little more wreckless than other groups -- we certainly don't have a perfect efficiency -- but when we see a fleet we think we can handle, we will go for it, win or lose. If this means jumping into their home, we'll do that. If it means only fighting until they land their capitals on grid, we'll do that too.

If we know we have more numbers and think we can bait them to get them to commit something else that they might not have brought otherwise, we'll do that. If we know we don't have many numbers at all, and can't fight our targets head on, especially in their home system, we'll hop in for a small skirmish and run before we are overwhelmed.

Most of the time people are SO risk averse that they won't follow a small fleet that just polarized itself because obviously there are far, far more on the other side waiting to pounce. They rarely think people have the balls to jump a small fleet into a much larger one without major backup. We've kicked several C5 corps in the nuts and then run away like this. It's pretty good one-sided fun, though understandably frustrating for the other side :)

If mechanics changed such that you jump into a fleet and land everywhere on grid, smaller groups can't engage larger groups on the hole. They, we, only engage when massively outnumbered because we can jump and try to get away while the other side has to wonder if we're just a bait fleet or if we are everything, while we try to shoot whatever we can. If we land everywhere within 40k from the hole, we'll just die. People won't do that for very long. Little by little, with their changes CCP is removing gameplay options from W-space.


Maybe we're doing everything wrong. We don't usually rage-roll, but instead scan our W-space static chain and then jump out our hisec static and start scanning surrounding systems for wormholes. A new hisec means a whole new fresh avenue to explore; why would we need to rage-roll unless we're looking for a specific hisec destination? Our mapper has some beautiful chains sometimes, even if it does take effort. But when we do want to roll, whether to find PvP or to find PvE, increasing the time it takes doesn't accomplish anything and only adds tedium, as already has been mentioned.

I've already said this change won't affect us much, because aside from doing it wrong by using combat-fit ships for rolling instead of stabby jammy Scorpions when we're not rolling a fresh hole with Orcas, we generally use battleships and cruisers. We'll be able to adjust easily. But the guys in C5/C6 will have a harder time adjusting. Smaller corps will have an even harder time in any class of W-space. "Use Cruisers", sure, but +/- 10% is a big variation that Cruisers can't cover. That's more than Battleships in 3 bil holes.


Besides, the biggest justification for this change so far seems to be "Waah, they're not playing the game the way I want because they rage roll, or because they instantly close their holes for (insert reason)! CCP change it!" That is simultaneously the most amusing aspect of this thread, but also the saddest aspect of this thread.
Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#465 - 2014-08-04 19:12:39 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
call me helplessly optimistic. as disappointed as I am, I'm already imagining the Rorqual's comeback. It's gotta be something epic after such a hard nerf to what little utility it has left. I'll just have to take my Rorqual gameplay elsewhere in the meantime, I guess. Shame on me for trying to make it work in a wh.

not very reassuring that it shares the fate of my phoenix pilot who I spent so long training to perfect skills. people told me it was a bad idea and I should have listened.

but i mean, I figured the rorq would be safe from nerfs due to its specialized role. wrong again.


Your Phoenix pilot was obviously destined to fly the magnificent logi or ECM phoenix.

Train up some capital rep skills on your Rorq pilot and you're back in the game!

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy

Gospadin
Bastard Children of Poinen
#466 - 2014-08-04 19:13:30 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.


I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that.

He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#467 - 2014-08-04 19:20:36 UTC  |  Edited by: scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Gospadin wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.


I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that.

He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair.

It was at bottom of the post you quoted, I paraphrased a bit but I'll even go grab the quote so you don't have to think outside the box. Don't strain yourself, I'll Edit with the quote. It's understandable to get overwhelmed with ego stroking and not finish reading the article you want to quote and support.

Edit: "You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH." -Quoted by Gospadin #444Posted: 2014.08.04 16:47

corbexx has been asking for opinions on either side, how to make it better and how to get rid of it. I'm not trying to toot his e-horn but as a CSM rep it appears that he is actually trying to bring our concerns to CCP instead of what we can see up there. ^^

Does it create content if I am the only one online in my home system and I'm enjoying to PvE content shooting a combat site to clear up the scan, then I see a new sig and POS up. I now lack the ability to crash this hole by myself even if I wanted to, crashing with an oversized cruiser is very time consuming solo, so I have 3 options: Sit on the hole and watch people parade through my system, POS up, or log off. Let's imagine I sit and don't see anyone, I watch until I feel confident that there probably isn't anyone there, but it would be pretty stupid to go back to my PvE content with an open hole and no backup, so I either POS up, log off, or crash a hole 1 oversized T3 at a time. That sounds a whole lot like one-sided content to me, and in my mind it is a tip in the direction of the Null Sec blobs where numbers become everything.

Will this kill WH's? Probably not, people adapt, but it will kill a lot of small corporations in WH's and will be the reason for the future "How to fix C1/C2/C3 WH's" threads where everyone can discuss at what point CCP handed the keys to J-space to the major alliances.
Snakes-On-A-Plane
#468 - 2014-08-04 19:27:44 UTC
Wormhole mechanics are the absolute heart of the gameplay in J-space, and their 'iteration' approach is to just drive a sword through it and see who screams.

If this was null, they would pluck a stray hair from somewhere near the gameplay, study it under a microscope for 10 months. create spreadsheets and analyze them with a committee for 10 more months, and then finally: do nothing.

Lol
Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#469 - 2014-08-04 19:27:47 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Gospadin wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.


I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that.

He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair.

It was at bottom of the post you quoted, I paraphrased a bit but I'll even go grab the quote so you don't have to think outside the box. Don't strain you'rself, I'll Edit with the quote


Since you're a think outside the box type yourself, do you have any ideas for what a Rorqual could be used for?

Pls respond))

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy

Blodhgarm Dethahal
8 Sins of Man
Stray Dogs.
#470 - 2014-08-04 19:28:11 UTC
unimatrix0030 wrote:
Not being able to roll the hole will get small corp out of w-space.
Because if there is nothing in the chain you bether log of.
I have scanned chains as long as 6 hole from the "home" hole with nothing in it.
Not being able to roll will just leave you with one option : log off.
I remember the days in a corp where we coudn't roll the hole, it died because people didn't show up because there was never any content. Wich made less people log in wich mean even less people to be able to roll the hole... .
Large corp will need to wait untill there are engough people online to be able to roll the hole safely.
Even more waiting will mean more people playing world of tanks like you said whinthorp.
It will make w-space even more slower then it already is.
Now people who wants fast kills left us for low sec. Farmers left us for incursions.
We need more reasons for people to go to w-space not less.



http://i.imgur.com/hPQktFT.png plz
Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#471 - 2014-08-04 19:34:13 UTC
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
unimatrix0030 wrote:
Not being able to roll the hole will get small corp out of w-space.
Because if there is nothing in the chain you bether log of.
I have scanned chains as long as 6 hole from the "home" hole with nothing in it.
Not being able to roll will just leave you with one option : log off.
I remember the days in a corp where we coudn't roll the hole, it died because people didn't show up because there was never any content. Wich made less people log in wich mean even less people to be able to roll the hole... .
Large corp will need to wait untill there are engough people online to be able to roll the hole safely.
Even more waiting will mean more people playing world of tanks like you said whinthorp.
It will make w-space even more slower then it already is.
Now people who wants fast kills left us for low sec. Farmers left us for incursions.
We need more reasons for people to go to w-space not less.



http://i.imgur.com/hPQktFT.png plz


Casual

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy

Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#472 - 2014-08-04 19:34:39 UTC
Perfectly predictable rolling has always been ********.

Numbers need tweaking and testing, and this should most probably be connected with other changes like for example total number of wormhole systems, number of statics and random wormhole spawns.

In other words, I support changes that increase risk and interaction between wormhole inhabitants, whether this change as presented achieves those goals is currently debatable- but the general direction is certainly right.


scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#473 - 2014-08-04 19:37:33 UTC  |  Edited by: scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Andrew Jester wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Gospadin wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.


I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that.

He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair.

It was at bottom of the post you quoted, I paraphrased a bit but I'll even go grab the quote so you don't have to think outside the box. Don't strain you'rself, I'll Edit with the quote


Since you're a think outside the box type yourself, do you have any ideas for what a Rorqual could be used for?

Pls respond))

Wait, this is a thread about the Rorqual? Wow, I was under the impression that this was a thread discussing a change to the range at which you will spawn after transiting a wormhole. I'm so sorry for the mistake.
What's that? This is what that thread is for and all this talk about the Rorqual is off-topic and belongs somewhere else?

Here's another out of the box idea for you, take the Rorqual discussion to yet another Rorqual thread and slobber on Winthrop's e-knob there.

Have a nice day,
Smile


Edit: I edited my previous post so you don't have to go looking for the quote or my opinion, just to stay on topic.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#474 - 2014-08-04 19:39:14 UTC
Along with cynos, also please add this feature to station undocking, and end 11 years of terrible station games. Bear

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Light Shock
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#475 - 2014-08-04 19:51:14 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
I would think it only proper for cynos/bridges to spread the ships more as the mass goes up.

1 carrier = 40 km
2 carrier = 50 km
3 carrier = 60 km

Think of how this would unstagnate null sec. It would be so dynamic to litter the whole grid with 100 carriers. As a neat benefit it would probably uncloak everything on grid. This is and outstanding feature and should immediately be implemented across the board.

Would this help the carrier/sentry blob problem go away? (we all know the answer)



One of the better suggestions I've ever heard.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#476 - 2014-08-04 19:52:31 UTC
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:


The reason why fighting in a wolf-rayet is always an awesome idea. 15j from home? Take the crowfleet.

Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#477 - 2014-08-04 19:54:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrew Jester
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Andrew Jester wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Gospadin wrote:

I went back through his posts, and at no time does he say that.

He does ask for people to give reasons on their feedback, which is perfectly fair.

It was at bottom of the post you quoted, I paraphrased a bit but I'll even go grab the quote so you don't have to think outside the box. Don't strain you'rself, I'll Edit with the quote


Since you're a think outside the box type yourself, do you have any ideas for what a Rorqual could be used for?

Pls respond))

Wait, this is a thread about the Rorqual? Wow, I was under the impression that this was a thread discussing a change to the range at which you will spawn after transiting a wormhole. I'm so sorry for the mistake.
What's that? This is what that thread is for and all this talk about the Rorqual is off-topic and belongs somewhere else?

Here's another out of the box idea for you, take the Rorqual discussion to yet another Rorqual thread and slobber on Winthrop's e-knob there.

Have a nice day,
Smile


Edit: I edited my previous post so you don't have to go looking for the quote or my opinion, just to stay on topic.


There's no reason to be so hostile friend! I was simply asking for your input. Since your intellect is so vastly superior to mine, you should've realised far before I did that this thread will cause nothing to change, it's simply a place for people to vent. You were the one who linked corbexx's quote, so you should absolutely be aware that this change will be going through. Every change/iteration suggested in this thread is to get rid of it. Obviously that isn't going to happen as CCP has decided that this is the best thing for WHs.

The Rorqual talk is obviously not off-topic, as if it was, an ISD would've come along long ago and removed all posts talking about Rorquals. If all posts here were on topic, this thread would be half its current size.

Also please don't be daft this is the WH section I don't know why you'd ever think a post would stay on topic. It's okay I forgive you for your mistake and forgive your transgressions. Stay mad friend))

Serendipity Lost wrote:
I would think it only proper for cynos/bridges to spread the ships more as the mass goes up.

1 carrier = 40 km
2 carrier = 50 km
3 carrier = 60 km

Think of how this would unstagnate null sec. It would be so dynamic to litter the whole grid with 100 carriers. As a neat benefit it would probably uncloak everything on grid. This is and outstanding feature and should immediately be implemented across the board.

Would this help the carrier/sentry blob problem go away? (we all know the answer)


What kind of casual doesn't cyno caps to a ping and then warp them in?

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy

corbexx
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#478 - 2014-08-04 20:05:25 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.


If you want to call me out that's fine, but two can play that game so. Please point out where I said this? If you can't I'll expect an apology

Also please dont try and paraphrase me cos that sort of **** pisses me off.

I've posted what I think on this, I'm not to happy about it like most people, will I be discussing it with CCP, yes.

Which is why I also asked for people to be constructive and post what they think on this as that can also potentially help me.

Now if you mean this.

Winthorp wrote:

You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH.


This isn't me.

Should I expect the apology here or in the mail?
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#479 - 2014-08-04 20:08:52 UTC
I use a rorqual as a capital hole roller. i'm particular affected by a mess nerf to hole rollers. it's added insult to injury when a rorqual costs so much more than a carrer
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#480 - 2014-08-04 20:12:43 UTC  |  Edited by: scorchlikeshiswhiskey
corbexx wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Don't forget about the part we he advises "Shut up and take it", doesn't sound like something a CSM rep should be putting out there to me.


If you want to call me out that's fine, but two can play that game so. Please point out where I said this? If you can't I'll expect an apology

Also please dont try and paraphrase me cos that sort of **** pisses me off.

I've posted what I think on this, I'm not to happy about it like most people, will I be discussing it with CCP, yes.

Which is why I also asked for people to be constructive and post what they think on this as that can also potentially help me.

Now if you mean this.

Winthorp wrote:

You guys need to accept this is happening and you are probably too late to stop it and instead start working on ideas and iterations on how you think they could make it better TBH.


This isn't me.

Should I expect the apology here or in the mail?

I'm starting to suspect that there was a mistake in my original post, what I meant was indeed that post you linked. If you scroll up you can see I was discussing it with Andrew Jester.
I am going back to check my original post now to fix it
Edit: I see where the misunderstandings where happening, I was referencing the "Winthrop for CSM" line, not trying to pin anything on corbexx.