These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Nash MacAllister
Air
The Initiative.
#481 - 2014-08-04 20:17:28 UTC
As I try and tackle the threadnaught here, I will simply have to wait for further iterations from CCP but I am leaning towards this being negative to w-space overall. However, my real issue: Of all the areas of the game to spend resources on, CCP, you choose this??? Are you kidding me? If you want to tackle w-space then work on content not mechanics. And for the love of God fix POS mechanics/security first!

Yes, if you have to ask yourself the question, just assume we are watching you...

Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#482 - 2014-08-04 20:23:40 UTC
Nash MacAllister wrote:
As I try and tackle the threadnaught here, I will simply have to wait for further iterations from CCP but I am leaning towards this being negative to w-space overall. However, my real issue: Of all the areas of the game to spend resources on, CCP, you choose this??? Are you kidding me? If you want to tackle w-space then work on content not mechanics. And for the love of God fix POS mechanics/security first!


I assume their thinking is that through changing mechanics, they're creating content. It's a **** way to create content, but it's the only reason I can think of for why they'd change this instead of something else

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

Alundil
Rolled Out
#483 - 2014-08-04 20:26:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Alundil
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
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.


Hmm where is it

I'm right behind you

Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#484 - 2014-08-04 20:28:51 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
I'm starting to suspect that there was a mistake in my original post


That's putting it lightly.

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

scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#485 - 2014-08-04 20:29:50 UTC
*I did have a quote block here but there were too many quotes and I'm too lazy to trim it.*
Andrew Jester I didn't realize that my original post was so ambiguous about what I meant, from my perspective you were ignoring the quote you approved of when you were actually referring to searching posts by corbexx for something he never said.

As for Rorquals, I had the idea that they should be able to act as on-grid super mining boosters, a single module is created that is scripted to accept T1/T2/faction mindlinks and allow the Rorqual pilot to boost individual pilots with added effect. Added role bonus of being the only ship to fit the module, the Orca can still do off-grid boosting but if you warp in the Rorq you get X number of super boosts per Rorq, as well as not needing hauling runs because the Rorq can simply store the insta-compressed ore. I don't know about the specifics of it, but ideally the use of the module wouldn't impact the Rorq's fitting any more than the standard mindlinks, this would facilitate the fitting of survival mods.
This would get Rorq's into belts were everyone and the grandma will want to kill it, and it also allows the miners the option to have combat ships in the hangar and put up a fight instead of running, thereby creating even more content. Further more, even if it doesn't make the Rorq more popular than it was, it will make useful again which will give industrials a reason to build it and compete for the teams. Miners and industrials win, gankers win, PvPers win.
X4me1eoH
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#486 - 2014-08-04 20:57:56 UTC
Sorry, very bad speak english, but it's very very stupid idea Evil
unimatrix0030
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#487 - 2014-08-04 21:24:35 UTC  |  Edited by: unimatrix0030
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:

So what? i draw the line at 6 holes deep who are empty before i stop , get someone else to roll the hole or do something else or try to roll the hole myself.
We have lots of scanners who go way beyond that.
But let me ask you , where did you find pvp in that chain?
And would the change discussed here improve that?

No local in null sec would fix everything!

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#488 - 2014-08-04 21:48:31 UTC
I'm starting to come round on the idea. With some refinements it could mix things up in a good way. Sure it will negatively effect rolling and small groups but the gameplay of ambushing and fighting on wormholes may improve.

I still want new content though! A wormhole generator or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way...
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#489 - 2014-08-04 21:53:32 UTC
unimatrix0030 wrote:
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:

So what? i draw the line at 6 holes deep who are empty before i stop , get someone else to roll the hole or do something else or try to roll the hole myself.
We have lots of scanners who go way beyond that.
But let me ask you , where did you find pvp in that chain?
And would the change discussed here improve that?


If larger chains like that become the norm, it kind of sucks that we can no longer monitor api data, as nobody will assign scouts to monitor all those systems.
Cirillith
Czarna-Kompania
Czarna-Kompania.
#490 - 2014-08-04 22:04:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Cirillith
Rek Seven wrote:

A wormhole generator...


Well - please forgive me a bit of criticism - so wormhole under POS? just outside grid of it? - I do not think it would be the best idea.


Rek Seven wrote:

or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way...


This would only help to rageroll.... No help with pvp part - you know capitals and support shattered across grid around hole

UPDATE:
Forgot to mention surprise feeling of that conventional rolling crew which will encounter someone with that ship ^^
Icarus Able
Refuse.Resist
#491 - 2014-08-04 22:06:20 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
I'm starting to come round on the idea. With some refinements it could mix things up in a good way. Sure it will negatively effect rolling and small groups but the gameplay of ambushing and fighting on wormholes may improve.

I still want new content though! A wormhole generator or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way...

Yeh coming from a char from a 200 char corp.... FOr anything smaller if for example you roll into us. As you have before we wont even be able to attempt to get away. Our only response is to welp a 15 man fleet into a 50 man fleet or pos up and log. At least with the current mechanics we can attempt to roll before you fleet arrives and that has a higher chance of spawning a fight than us just logging off.



CCP...Please give one example of a positive change for this.
Ev0l Hireling
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#492 - 2014-08-04 22:17:40 UTC
I don't think it'll be helpful to people trying to roll holes in anything but large numbers who could rush to a larger ship's aid.
I can understand that CCP want to add extra risk to wormhole ISK making, but this isn't the way to do it.

Perhaps adding better a use for black holes would balance things out: more people would inhabit them, and as more hostile entities would reside within WH space it'd make everything more dangerous...

Even with a shorter spawn distance I personally think this will deter peopel from fights and even make them leave wormhole space. Some, I'd sadly even go so far as to say, would even leave EvE.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#493 - 2014-08-04 22:21:15 UTC
Cirillith wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:

A wormhole generator...


Well - please forgive me a bit of criticism - so wormhole under POS? just outside grid of it? - I do not think it would be the best idea.


Rek Seven wrote:

or a ship that can gradually reduce the mass of a wormhole without jumping would counteract this change in a small way...


This would only help to rageroll.... No help with pvp part - you know capitals and support shattered across grid around hole

UPDATE:
Forgot to mention surprise feeling of that conventional rolling crew which will encounter someone with that ship ^^


For the generator it could be a deployable that is anchored at the sun or near a planet, just like a poco.

For collapsing without mass, maybe there could be a BS only mod that slowly reduces mass (e.g. 5 minutes per stage) and the mod could prevent the ship moving or jumping while it is active.

Just a thought... I know some people won't like the idea and would just prefer CCP don't make the proposed change but I don't think that's going to happen.
Undermine Dahl
Refuse.Resist
#494 - 2014-08-04 22:30:10 UTC
This addition would have made my corp's weekend horrible:

A reason this would have been bad is my corp has just invaded a c5 with a c3 static to get more pvp, isk and so on.
When we had the op planned we had our scout report that Ixtab had a hole open and was scouting our target. There was a stratios and a scanning frig in the target hole so we waited until it looked good. we logged on the seeded caps and crashed the hole as our support t3s landed to hopefully keep our caps safe. we ended up trapping the strat and killing it. If we where not able to quickly crash a hole by roundtripping the stage 2 hole with 3 t3s and a carrier then we would have had to wait for either ixtab to warp stuff to the hole and close it (which would also take longer because of either a bunch of battleships or caps having to burn or bounce) or we would have to wait until it crashed in 24 hours. This does not sound like any fun as we where already going to be bashing the inactive peoples pos so we could use it for pvp.

If someone sees a way around this please explain how this could have been done better if the new sisi mass-distance thing was added
Samuel Wess
Doomheim
#495 - 2014-08-04 23:03:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Samuel Wess
I rarely went into whs but this sounds awful. Why dont make the same thing with the cyno jump and the gates than
to be consistent (ironic). A better timer is required instead of this.

Walk into the club like "What up? I got a big cockpit!"

Hatshepsut IV
Un.Reasonable
#496 - 2014-08-04 23:10:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Hatshepsut IV
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:





Pshhhhh please +1

http://m.imgur.com/kkQCvmQ

Public Channel | Un.Welcome

Rei Moon
Perkone
Caldari State
#497 - 2014-08-04 23:13:26 UTC
Oh well.

Right when i was moving into wspace...

I've found the forums awesome!

You guys are the best!

And now, to lowsec...

Down the pole podcast "Annhhh"

Winthorp
#498 - 2014-08-05 00:16:57 UTC
Meytal wrote:
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)

MORE NPC ALT RAMBLINGS


You see the difference my character i take my stance on has an ingame WH history, ingame future and ingame risk. When you are prepared to put your assets and future employment at risk everytime you sperge on the forums like i do then i will respond to you further.
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation
Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
#499 - 2014-08-05 00:17:42 UTC
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Being a pilot who has always been part of smaller wormhole pvp fleets. There is always 2 ways to handle a very large wormhole entity that you get connected to.

Option 1: Combat roll the hole
Option 2: Afk in POS for the day

If this change takes effect there will be only 1 of those options left...


Sigh, still wrong


Current:
Option 1: Combat roll the hole with minimal risk if they scan the new WH out fast.
Option 2: Afk in POS for the day

New:
Option 1: Combat roll the hole with a bit more risk and a bit more time for them to scan the WH down.
Option 2: Afk in POS for the day

Nothing changes in your options. If the gang was there at the WH you wouldn't be doing the combat roll anyway, that doesn't change. All that changes is there's now a minute long window in which they can scan you down. Congrats you now have to risk something to continue your bearing.
Winthorp
#500 - 2014-08-05 00:20:10 UTC
Gospadin wrote:
Winthorp wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Winthorp wrote:

I have never seen half the people in this thread bitching about how this is so game breaking ever come to Wh forums to come to discuss any WH mechanics or ideas until their perfect little world of insta rolling away issues is threatened.


People don't complain about things they consider to be working reasonably well...

Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? Please explain your answer.


People don't complain when they think things are stale and boring either, they just leave to do other things in the game or leave the game all together. Look at current login player numbers over a week period, look at the breakup of so many groups and their major consolidation of WH groups into only a few players and tell me you think everyone is happy with the current form of WH's.

Do you really think the way WH's are at the moment are in anyway interesting and fun? (trying not to answer a question with a question but..)

Look the only thing i don't like about this change is it isn't showing any consistency in the goal direction of WH space from CCP and that concerns me that they are not being open with what they want from us.

- They leave instant sig overlay (carebear safe mode)
- They come up with a 5min delay for new sigs (no carebears will stay)
- Then they forget they ever mentioned the idea (back to carebear mode)
- They removed sleeper API data becauseit was too powerfull (carebears get a little safer)
- Now this change (clearly a PVP driven idea)

They need to be more consistent with the direction they want to take because they are not balancing it well currently.


Do you think this change will result in more activity in wormhole space (more wormhole connections, more people running sites, more people rolling) or less? [i] Please explain your answer. [/i


I think if they wanted to do something that resulted in more people in WH space they could have chosen something else entirely instead of this, i have never once said this will result in more people in Wh's. The above carebear mode changes have resulted in more people in wh space (You can't deny that)

What i have said is the current way all these players in Wh space interact with each other is stale and SAFE. The people in this thread that are trying to say its not perfectly safe to roll away hostile chains are ******* delusional. There is only very situational times that you can ever kill people rolling away a C5/6 chain on you.

How many times have you found a group you thought would and could fight you only to hear your scout say "nevermind they are rolling" when they want to do it is all over by then with not a thing you can do and that group then picks and chooses its interactions with whoever they want in what is supposed to be a dangerous area of the game.

I actually do feel this will lead to more fun had by WH people and more interactions, the larger groups will still roll holes like they always have with it only taking them a few minutes longer and yes the smaller groups may be more hesitant to do so but now instead of them safely picking the perfect chain whenever they want they will be forced to scan a chain they may have just rolled away because they saw a known entity in the chain.

So yes i think it will lead to less people rolling chains but maybe they shouldn't be rolling away non optimal chains and be forced to interact with other players in an MMO. If you want a safe escalation period and roll away or crit your static you should be at risk to make that happen. if you want to get your 30B or so escalation loot to HS or replace that fleet you just lost you should have to risk more then just rolling the C5 or C6 untill you get a C2/3 HS, you should have to go down some more risky chains or be forced to risk a little more to roll that chain to get the one you want.

The way it is is too easy and too safe. Not only is it safe to roll now it is STOPPING interactions with other players by the chains you get to pick and choose at will in perfect safety at no cost.

If by your own arguments it will stop rage rolling in its tracks then won't people by that same argument be more inclined to run sites if they feel safer that less people are rolling? Won't they then leave their chain open for you to find them? Or bubble it up now for "safety"?

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.

EDIT: Loving the hate mail from your alts by the way guys, i feed off that thanks.


Winthrop for CSM10. (In addition to corbexx)

The more I read, the more I like the idea. Yes, it makes my own life more difficult. It also means more ambush opportunities and puts a premium on good intel.



<3 Thank you for taking the time to read it without anger at being scared for change is all i ask.

Screw ever running for CSM, i would have to tell so many sooks and loosers to fuckoff and that doesn't go down to well.

I pity Corbexx at a time like this TBH and i think he is doing a great job and has been one of the most publicly hard working WH CSM's we have had.