These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Hyperion Feedback Thread] Mass-Based Spawn Distance After WH Jumps

First post First post First post
Author
Klyith
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#301 - 2014-08-06 19:54:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Klyith
Dammit I wrote a post and the terrible forum ate it. F it.
Sum Olgy
Perkone
Caldari State
#302 - 2014-08-06 19:56:12 UTC
Sorry for posting the same in two threads but this is still a poor idea for all of the reasons others have covered.

It's a poorly thought through mechanic that will be great for the large WH corps/alliances and bad, really bad, for the smaller ones. Or those mid sized corps who have less active periods like the AU TZ.

You just cannot polish a turd.
Zoneras
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#303 - 2014-08-06 19:59:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Zoneras
These changes damage PvP just as much if not more than 'canceling' content via rolling defensively.

Ragerolling contributes a lot to danger of wormholes for "farmers" as well as assisting in the search for fights and ganks by PvP groups. To make caps spawn farther away when jumping means that a group following the current model of ragerolling, even a group that can support those caps if they are attacked, has to sit there while the cap slowly reapproaches the hole while nothing happens because the static is empty, or off timezone, or the residents are unwilling to attack a capital they fear is well defended. This makes 'ragerolling' more boring and likely that groups will be connected to wormhole chains where no PvP can be found for longer periods of time. A lot of groups are looking for capital and strategic cruiser warfare, so these mini frigate and destroyer connections do not seem like any sort of replacement.

On the other hand, groups that only farm and will roll at first sight of a PvP group (or even just log off!)--formerly emboldened by the apparent safety of rolling as it is now--will not even leave their POS to roll a connection to a PvP group with these changes.

Most irritatingly these new jump mechanics would heavily favor the defender in a large scale fight, as they can already bring as many caps as they have available to them, in a tight formation. Any attacker is limited to 3 capitals and with these mechanics, they could appear very close to being outside of rep range (easily bumped out of it), let alone ever being in refitting range, and with the disadvantages inherit in being potentially outnumbered in capitals, refitting is a must. Fights that have the randomly spawning capitals far away from each other could be manipulated to ridiculous proportions outside of the attacker's control. Too much chance, no appropriate methods of defense against this random chance, unless machariels and 100mn stabbers are supposed to be part of an armor t3 fleet to bump ships back towards one another. If you can't guarantee that you have the littlest chance of getting into refit range, then it is hard to ever justify jumping into a waiting fleet except with subcaps only, meaning that capital PvP becomes seeding capitals in someone's dead timezone to gank them with later. Not exactly conducive of great wormhole brawls lasting an hour or more.

Summarily, I would like to say that random spawn directions across large distances on a grid are bad from a PvP standpoint when both sides actually want to fight. A compromise would be to have capitals jumping together spawn near one another, even if they are off the hole. More to say, but out of space.


My post draws heavily from Blackish Person's post:

blackish person wrote:
Sorry this is such a long post but Fozzie please read it!!

I really don't post much because i'm bad at writing but this thread needs some constructive comments.

The main issues I see with this are (in order of importance):

1. Rage rolling is much slower. Landing ~15k out of jump range in a dread and then burning back at 80m/s is a real pain. You could fit some kind of nano dread/carrier and do it a little faster (still not that fast). If one of these "rolling caps" get tackled we suddenly have a **** fit cap stuck on the other side of the wh with no way of refitting. We then have a small amount of mass left on the wh to work with when trying to save this cap. As a result this wont create a fight. Just a cheap fit carrier getting ganked... meh.

The net result of all this is people will just stop rolling. I know this is just speculation but im the kind of guy that logs in to coms and says "you guys are doing nothing, lets roll!". I will stop doing this I think because its not worth risking a cap dying to roll holes slower than I could before. If people stop chain rolling or even just rolling for a new chain to find something to do; wh space will become really bad.

2. I think one of the big things that stops people from taking fights in wh space is the fact that jumping 3 caps and 20 t3s through a wormhole and closing it behind you is really scary. You are jumping ~40b (2 super carriers in value) through a hole in to someones home system where they can just cap blob you with like 10 dreads if they have the pilots, yes there are groups that can do this to you. After doing this you have no means of quickly extracting. If you win you then have to sit there rolling holes (which is now more risky) looking for an exit completely naked with no means of posing up. If you lose you are in a world of hurt. You are stuck in someone else's system potentially being combat scanned. You have to wait out your 15 min timer and log, trapped until you get a sneaky exit which could be days later. (This is if the people you are fighting are total dicks, some people are total dicks). The people you are jumping in to on the other hand can just warp back to towers if **** goes good or bad.

Ok i'm getting to the point; Having your caps jump through the wormhole and then land out of refitting range and randomly spaced out makes it even harder to fight people in their home system. There is no way we would have taken this fight http://www.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=24659592 if our caps were going to land out of refitting range.

Also if your caps can land 40km apart then you only have to bump them for ~12km before they are out of archon cap transfer range. ~17 to be out of carrier rep range.

EVEN WORSE All the defenders have to do is make a warp-in for carriers/dreads 30 km away from your dread on the opposite side of the dread to your carrier. Suddenly all their caps are out of rep range of your carrier which is fine except for the fact that your sub-caps cant go close to them to do anything. To neut with a neut legion suddenly you have to be out of rep range and you WILL die. They can kill your dread and you WILL lose the fight. [...]
Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#304 - 2014-08-06 20:01:03 UTC
Witchway wrote:
corebloodbrothers wrote:
Since i am no wh dweller, is it the rolling of interconnected holes that you guys are upset with, or also the connections to regular space, like null?

Cause from the null sec point as fc i hate when fights end with the jumping of caps and the level of security they do it with. If i go through a gate in null i risk everything at spawn distance, in the case of regional gates a ***** on logi with a damp on em.

Th rolling of interconnected whs i dont know thr pro s and cons, can wh people share some info on if its both?


The problem with your statement is the limit in which we can bring capitals to the fight. In my time in wh space which is over two years now I've seen everything from large nullsec capital escalations to super escalations on wormholes where the traditional bring more than they have theory of nullsec space provides an almost instant victory for nullsec everytime.

Even the few corporations who have and could field super fleets aren't going to counter nullsec supers which means if our caps now spawn 20 km+ off a wormhole in null they are already dead and that's a guarantee. If you want to remove my capital mass from affecting wormholes I will concede to landing off hole but until that day this is probably the dumbest argument I've seen and a clear reason why nullsec is the way it is...


I can confirm that goons have dropped multiple titans on our null incoming after we brought a triage Archon to support our 20 T3s. It's kind of needed when you're facing off against 100 dudes in hacs....

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.

Kirasten
Perkone
Caldari State
#305 - 2014-08-06 20:03:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Kirasten
Traiori wrote:
20km or 40km, the time it takes a dread to warp off a hole and back to the hole remains the same. All the issues that we've brought up previously are still problematic, so I'll bring them up again on behalf of the community:

1) Rage rolling becomes much more annoying for large groups. This limits their ability to find content that they can take, whether it be site-runners to kill (which you *have* to rage-roll for, incidentally) or other large groups. The proposed change slows down chain-rolling, slowing down the speed at which content can be found. This also has the side effect of making farming safer, because the probability being rolled into whilst running sites comes down to how many holes can be opened whilst your caps are not in their POS. Less holes=less chance of dying to everyone else.

2) Rage rolling becomes essentially impossible for small groups. They also have to find content, and rolling the chain is often the only way to reliably find content of interest - whether that be PvP or PvE or anything else. The proposed changes stop you from being able to do this without fighting the larger groups... which you can't do because numbers are important in every case. Small groups can no longer rage-roll consistently, especially given that most larger groups will seed scouts into their chain.

3) Committing capitals to wormholes outside of home systems requires winning the fight or losing the cap... which in turn means that it won't be committed by anyone that hasn't already got the forces on-grid to win it. The proposed change ensures that capitals shoved into another wormhole can't get back into home system. Whereas we currently see Triage used to balance out fights against bigger entities, smaller entities can't afford to lose the triage carrier every time, so they'll just stop bringing them. Less fights is bad for everyone.

4) Using our capitals in nullsec (and arguably losec) means losing them. We're not stupid. The proposed change would strand our capitals 15-20km away from the hole. The fight would become a race against time: will they be able to form up capitals/supercapitals to kill our triage archon before we get it back into the hole? In most cases, the answer will be no. Power projection means that we can no longer commit capitals. It's bad enough at present, without increasing the scope of the problem. Once again, less fights is bad for everyone.

5) Sub-capital wormholes also suffer from the problem because orcas land far away too. The major difference between rolling C4 wormholes and C5 wormholes is that C4 wormholes use Orcas. If those orcas are guaranteed to be in danger, they're also guaranteed to die. We'll take orca kills any time of the day. So will other groups. This means that C4 groups also need to be fielding support fleets for their orca if they don't fancy losing them daily. Bad for small groups, which means they'll leave, which means we lose more groups and hence, lose content.


The error here is the belief that all groups can afford to field support groups. We can't. We aren't 10000 man coalitions, because wormholes can't support that kind of lifestyle. There is a maximum limit to how many people can fit into a wormhole, and unless we're now expecting all pilots to be on all of the time, that means that this change will make smaller groups increasingly unfeasible.

I originally made most of these points on a reddit post here: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2cro9k/where_are_the_devblogs/cjihkl9. Some inital discussion over it can also be found.


EDIT: A better solution would be to invert the numbers: have distance landed be proportional to a function of mass and speed, making it so that lighter and faster ships landing further away from the hole. This would allow us to use kiting HACs as well as brawling T3s.

EDIT 2: In the interest of clarifying my suggested change, I propose that distance landed from the hole should be inversely proportional to mass (higher mass=close) and directly proportional to maximum speed (higher maximum speed = further away).


Quoted for emphasis.

The great thing about wormhole living is that we can carve out our content with small groups of friends. This suggested change favors the large and will be more than crippling to the small groups. However, the suggestion in the edits could very dramatically change fleet composition, where currently we are all but forced to fly Proteus fleets (or other close range brawlers). That could be a nice shake up to fleet doctrines, and possibly draw more people out to fight that otherwise wouldn't engage.

I get that the goal is to increase the danger of our regular activities, but looking at the big picture of your current suggestion will force smaller corporations into one of 2 choices:

  1. consolidate into larger entities
  2. leave w-space

We have said many times in many places that what we really want are MORE PEOPLE in wormholes, (and to that end more small to medium size groups of people are far better than more large entities). Find a way to entice more people into wormholes, and the danger will take care of itself.
Adrea Bloom
Happy Homeless
#306 - 2014-08-06 20:06:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Adrea Bloom
the ccp just want to close pvp on wh... the cap ships got large signature so them need to out close to hole... smaller ships longer distans it simple fiziks.

also only 1 place where ppl can got pvp on Capitals with small groups and with this change its dead.
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
#307 - 2014-08-06 20:07:13 UTC
corebloodbrothers wrote:
Since i am no wh dweller, is it the rolling of interconnected holes that you guys are upset with, or also the connections to regular space, like null?

Cause from the null sec point as fc i hate when fights end with the jumping of caps and the level of security they do it with. If i go through a gate in null i risk everything at spawn distance, in the case of regional gates a ***** on logi with a damp on em.

Th rolling of interconnected whs i dont know thr pro s and cons, can wh people share some info on if its both?


Well, all you have to do is jump your fleet into the wormhole the moment your scout inside sees a cap landing. Ofc then you are on the wormholers hometurf but if they come out to fight you why don´t you come in? At that moment the wormholers are polarized and have no way of disengaging while your fleet can jump out at any time. There is no doubt that any capital cought in your nullsec out of jumpdistance from the hole will be dead since you have the easy logistics to bring in reinforcements or your own capitals/supers.

Fairly certain many people agree that it is too easy to roll esp a c5>c5 or C5>null, but this change will make it almost impossible to close a hole with any hostiles on the other side. One scout with a web or even an anchored bubble will be enough reactiontime. And since most holes only have that one static if there is f.e. NoHo or VFK on the other side most corps will be the equivalent of stationhellcamped for 24h without any possibility for any content but shipspinning inside the forcefield.

On the other hand people in the lowends have to roll 2/3 of the same mass but with battleships while a c5 crew can do it with pretty much 3 pilots. So yes, many highendinhabitants are a bit whiny and should be forced to roll C1s for a week.
Ofc the alliances on the other side of a c5 are bigger than those in lowends, just because of the higher income.

I´m kinda shocked how torn I am on this change. It would probably be for the best if CCP deployed the other changes, see how they play out and then do or don´t do this 2 months later. Maybe they even come up with something better.
Witchway
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#308 - 2014-08-06 20:08:54 UTC
Adrea Bloom wrote:
the ccp just want to close pvp on wh... the cap ships got large signature so them need to out close to hole... smaller ships longer distans it simple fiziks.

mo fiziks, mo problems.

That's what I say.

Official Shit Talking Captain, Bastard of Hard Knocks Inc.

Cosmic Scanner
Overload This
#309 - 2014-08-06 20:11:43 UTC
blackish person wrote:
.....

TL;DR

1. This will stop us from rolling

2. This will stop us from taking fights

3. This will stop us from killing rolling caps

4. This will stop people from doing stuff in general and this will make wh space a dark empty sad place :(

What Blackish said.

Cosmic Scanner / muu lufragga

Joredi
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#310 - 2014-08-06 20:13:16 UTC
I think that a better way to approach this new mechanic, would be to have direct proportionality between the wormhole mass and the jump distance, rather than the ship mass and the jump distance; whilst also cutting down the maximum range from 20km (which I believe is a little too far) to around 12km.

In summary:

1) Initially, with the wormhole at 100% mass, jump distances would be nominal (i.e. <= 5km)
Benefit: normal traffic through the wormhole would be largely unaffected.

2) As the wormhole mass decreases (for example, when rage rolling, or when a significant fleet is passing through), there is a proportional increase (or perhaps even an exponential increase) in the distance one spawns from the wormhole.
Benefit: the goal of increasing risk during "wormhole-rolling" is maintained, but larger fleets and larger vessels do not have to put up with the greater jump distance the entire process; only as the wormhole is becoming low on mass.

3) Alongside this, a mechanic could be incorporated that enables you to spawn near to other ships in your fleet (40km total distance apart is not workable as a game mechanic in my opinion)
Benefit: This would allow support fleets for larger ships to remain within "support" range, even if the whole fleet ends up 12km+ away from the hole.

My view is that this would be better than ship-specific jump ranges, whilst still achieving the goal of increased jump-risk.

Joredi.
xpaulx
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#311 - 2014-08-06 20:16:06 UTC
Cosmic Scanner wrote:
blackish person wrote:
.....

TL;DR

1. This will stop us from rolling

2. This will stop us from taking fights

3. This will stop us from killing rolling caps

4. This will stop people from doing stuff in general and this will make wh space a dark empty sad place :(

What Blackish said.

Witchway
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2014-08-06 20:17:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Witchway
Shilalasar wrote:
corebloodbrothers wrote:
Since i am no wh dweller, is it the rolling of interconnected holes that you guys are upset with, or also the connections to regular space, like null?

Cause from the null sec point as fc i hate when fights end with the jumping of caps and the level of security they do it with. If i go through a gate in null i risk everything at spawn distance, in the case of regional gates a ***** on logi with a damp on em.

Th rolling of interconnected whs i dont know thr pro s and cons, can wh people share some info on if its both?
On the other hand people in the lowends have to roll 2/3 of the same mass but with battleships while a c5 crew can do it with pretty much 3 pilots. So yes, many highendinhabitants are a bit whiny and should be forced to roll C1s for a week.


You're assuming all the large entities haven't already been in your place and lived in the lowend. Hard Knocks wasn't born into C5 space, we started out in lowend just like yourself. We paid our dues and we've earned everything we have, you want large systems to live in then you need to make that happen for yourself. No one is forcing you to live in lowend space.

Official Shit Talking Captain, Bastard of Hard Knocks Inc.

Enthropic
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#313 - 2014-08-06 20:17:38 UTC
xpaulx wrote:
Cosmic Scanner wrote:
blackish person wrote:
.....

TL;DR

1. This will stop us from rolling

2. This will stop us from taking fights

3. This will stop us from killing rolling caps

4. This will stop people from doing stuff in general and this will make wh space a dark empty sad place :(

What Blackish said.


Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#314 - 2014-08-06 20:17:44 UTC
Ned Black wrote:

Rolling holes in WH space, especially in deep WH space is REQUIRED to be able to live there.

It does not matter if you roll to find sites or people to shoot, rolling is still REQUIRED.


Ah the classic problem of inviting too many friends to your isk fountain. Perhaps you should evaluate who's in your corp, or where it is that you chose to live.

I hear people fighting over systems to live in creates content, unlike roaming gank gangs that are fighting over absolutely nothing.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Edgar Strangelove
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#315 - 2014-08-06 20:18:30 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
I think the point of contention may be this:

How easy should it actually be to roll a wormhole? It would seem to me as if the wormholes themselves were not designed with rolling in mind, they were designed for the mass limits to be spooky and mysterious and cut large fleets apart before they realized what was happening. Hole rolling is essentially a metagame phenomena, with no direct mechanical support.

There are two perspectives:
A) It should be easier, since hole rolling is done primarily as a way to seek content, not to escape it.
B) It should be harder, to make it more difficult for people to escape from a 'bad' situation.

Under option A, the players are the ultimate controlling force for the space. The players move their statics around, adjust the chains to suit their needs, and rage roll to force themselves into the chains of others. The wormhole is like the location changing door in Howl's Moving Castle. If this is what we want, if this is what we're going for, then you could hypothetically at that point start introducing structures that ****** with wormhole behaviour. This is the path for wormhole space that says 'the players want an environment they can manipulate the **** out of' and make the way everything behaves highly controlled, and turn it into the '0.0 that never was' I, as someone who enjoys the idea of construction, colonization, exploration, and expansion as directions for my gameplay, I can appreciate this path, but I do understand why it is definitely not everyone's cup of tea.

Under option B, the game controls the wormholes, and the players are forced to ride the twisting networks of wormhole connections, essentially at its mercy. The new, tiny, mass regening wormholes are the ultimate examples of this. In many ways completely uncontrollable, and could end up forming a 'second network' of frigate only corridors through space. If option B is what you want, then the change to spawn distance is also good, because it makes it harder and unsafer to roll a hole, taking the perspective that taking direct control of the wormhole network in that manner is Meddling In Forces Beyond Our Ken. If that's the direction you're taking it, then make all the holes mass regening, add the mass spawn thing, cut the lifetime of every hole in half, and sit back and see what we players do. Because trust me, we'd still figure out how to abuse the **** out of all of it.


Howl's Moving Castle best analogy thus far in thread.
Sherpa tsi
United System's Commonwealth
#316 - 2014-08-06 20:21:07 UTC
Kadm wrote:
I like this change and think these numbers are perfectly acceptable. This will make people much more hesitant to just try and roll away hostiles.


Probably what will happen is that if a smaller group cannot roll away a larger hostile group, they will just log-off and go play something else, since they have few options for further game play.
I think the proposed jump range changes will make wormhole activity too risky for many activities, and the result will be to reduce game play and content, not increase it. I hope ccp leave this aspect of wh space alone.
Please ccp add more content to wh space rather than making it more difficult for those who already live there, especially smaller groups.
Deeone
Deadspace Zombie Factory
#317 - 2014-08-06 20:24:59 UTC
so instead of just not doing it you guys nerf it down to where its still a minor annoyance and provides no pvp advantages.....why make a change at all?
Kadm
Catfish Gumbo
#318 - 2014-08-06 20:29:19 UTC
Sherpa tsi wrote:
Kadm wrote:
I like this change and think these numbers are perfectly acceptable. This will make people much more hesitant to just try and roll away hostiles.


Probably what will happen is that if a smaller group cannot roll away a larger hostile group, they will just log-off and go play something else, since they have few options for further game play.
I think the proposed jump range changes will make wormhole activity too risky for many activities, and the result will be to reduce game play and content, not increase it. I hope ccp leave this aspect of wh space alone.
Please ccp add more content to wh space rather than making it more difficult for those who already live there, especially smaller groups.



Then stront check their towers. Shoot their POCO's. If they're not fighting with you, why aren't you taking things that they care about? Why aren't you forcing fights? Are you capable of generating content yourself, or do you imagine that rolling into a new hole is just like queuing into an arena in another nameless fantasy MMO, and that you should be automatically served good fights? Go earn your good fights with some hard work.
Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#319 - 2014-08-06 20:30:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Dominus Alterai
Nope

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.

Dominus Alterai
Star Freaks
#320 - 2014-08-06 20:32:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Dominus Alterai
Deeone wrote:
so instead of just not doing it you guys nerf it down to where its still a minor annoyance and provides no pvp advantages.....why make a change at all?


CCP: Kings of minimal customer research and the Dukes of time wasting.

Kadm wrote:
Sherpa tsi wrote:
Kadm wrote:
I like this change and think these numbers are perfectly acceptable. This will make people much more hesitant to just try and roll away hostiles.


Probably what will happen is that if a smaller group cannot roll away a larger hostile group, they will just log-off and go play something else, since they have few options for further game play.
I think the proposed jump range changes will make wormhole activity too risky for many activities, and the result will be to reduce game play and content, not increase it. I hope ccp leave this aspect of wh space alone.
Please ccp add more content to wh space rather than making it more difficult for those who already live there, especially smaller groups.



Then stront check their towers. Shoot their POCO's. If they're not fighting with you, why aren't you taking things that they care about? Why aren't you forcing fights? Are you capable of generating content yourself, or do you imagine that rolling into a new hole is just like queuing into an arena in another nameless fantasy MMO, and that you should be automatically served good fights? Go earn your good fights with some hard work.


Not sure if you realize, but grinding that stuff is boring as hell and very time consuming/stupid damgerous, even with 3 dreads on field. Doing it any faster requires seeding which, let's face it, no one will do for minimal returns.

Reducing your holes to a quivering mess since 2009.