Wormholes

Will the distribution of new statics (assuming this change remains as stated) be available on SISI prior to the release for those of us living in a C4 already to have advance knowledge of what our systems will changing into on release day?

Would it be possible for it to be a random static? Maybe some what tilted towards certain types but any type being possible.

For example: you have a static y683 at all times. but you also have a random static.
you have a small chance of a HS,low sec, null, a low chance of a c1, c2,c6, medium chance of a c3, c4, c5.

Maybe make it a new type of wormhole, so you actually have to go through it to know where it goes and you could also differentiate it with your other static.

So you open your new static and find it goes to a c6, re-roll it and the new one opens into LS.

Edit:
I understand the implication could be that you roll your static until you get a direct highsec K-space connection would be there. With a low enough chance and a reasonable mass limit combined with other proposed changes it could make rolling it interesting.

Sounds like me and my corp :) Except you youngsters are only coming up on your *second* year of living in a C4. We've spent 3, in 2 different C4s, one of which was C4-C4. I'm not sure I'd categorize C4 with C4 static as "the ragged edge" as much as "the a** end of nowhere" but I spent over a year living in one with my corpies, most of whom are older guys with jobs and lives and stuff. Logistics in/out of the C4-C4 was a major chore. Even if a route existed, chances are it would be 4-8 jumps deep. More than 8 and we'd give up and roll the hole. And to think that we started doing this before corp bookmarks existed *shudder*.

Anyway, cheers to a fellow C4-C4 occupant. I loved the isolation back then. I love having easier routes to k-space now :)

so this is actually a good change i think. The more randoms are more important tho. is there anyway the 2nd c4 static could be random? so its something different? 1 normal static and 1 static that could lead anywhere in w space.

While I love that wormholes are getting the attention that they sorely deserved, I have a few problems with the way several of the changes are going to interact with our c4 home.

As the CEO of a medium sized C4 corporation I am very concerned with how my members will be affected by these changes. We live in a Wolf Rayet wormhole, and with the changes in the armor and the already Sig reduction, combined with the randomly spawning 'small ship' wormholes that will last 16hours, we have no advantage in attacking, if we leave our hole, but incoming fleets of frigates and destroyers will have EHP and dps on par if not exceeding T3s, and with very small sigs. Yes, we have the same options available, and I look forward to trying new things, but it means that we will always have to treat these persistent threat wormholes just as dangerous as normal connections.

We also have the opportunity for more PvP, on the offensive side, through a new additional static. While I welcome this change, it will also further hurt the income of the corporation. C4s will need some sort of revisit in income in order to make them viable for larger PvP groups to utilize, and a change up on the pve side of lower class wormholes has been just as sorely needed as these mechanics changes.

I love to PvP, but the combination of many of these changes put some wormholes in a purely defensive footing, especially with how the wolf Rayet effect in C4s will interact with the wandering small ship wormholes.

I am not a carebear, but I believe that a group in wormhole space should be able to support itself, and all of these changes hurt lower class wormhole income while benefiting high class wormhole connectivity. It is clear what class of wormholers gave the green light on these changes.

Should these changes go through as stated here I will most likely have to move my corporation out of our home that we have had for almost a year, because the income will simply not support the population needed to take advantage of the new wormholes.

Try and be respectful, there are many pvpers in wormhole space that directly turn whatever income they make into PvP ships. I love PvP, it is part of why I love wormhole space. But unfortunately the changes proposed, while improving PvP, reduce the income of the pvpers that rely on sites to fund them.

As someone who loves hunting risk averse pve players in wormhole space, in addition to normal wormhole brawls, these changes make it even harder for those players to earn a living.

Why not try to make wormhole space more lucrative as well as more dangerous. If CCP is not careful with the balance of risk versus reward it won't matter how many wormholes you are connected to, you still won't find any targets.

too bad that they will all be empty of people

If wormhole content comes from your static. then C4s will be the place to be.

Good change, will make every C4 worth scanning.

Please, take your 10-30 kills pr months pro pvp and go make me a sandwich.. If you cant be respectful that theres other people in WH space that actually enjoy the current situation their selected home is giving them, then this discussion is already dead. Its not a peeing contest i know, but our group in C4 have far more pvp content than you seem to have, and still you have the nerve to call us bears just cause we're opposed to a idea that would make C4's a superhighway instead of a place people actually would want to settle down.

More connections between Wspace, great, bring it on! Random connections for everyone!! But dont force those that already found their niche in C4 space based on a meaningful choices (that CCP always advocate). Instead your making our home transitsystems to generate more content for those not living in C4s. Im all about more content, but not on the costs of forcing C4 people to move down to a C3 or C2 just cause they prefer their 10-15man corp over joining a 405man WH alliance.

Let us keep our choices, C4s dont need more statics, we just needs more wandering holes across all of wh space as already suggested. If anything, give C4s a higher chance of wanderings maybe, but not more statics.

A hard change for some who moved to C4s looking for solitude, but I think overall this will improve W-space. It adds very important transit system role to C4s, that of W-W gateways, to complement the C2 W-K gateway role.

To further cement their role as transit systems, I'd suggest having one static for C1-C4, and the other static for C4-C6. Then, by reducing random K-W connections to C5/C6, and reducing C1-C3 static options from C5/C6, C4 would become the Low Class - High class W-space gateway. Please do note that was reduce, not eliminate; as long as capital ships are deemed suitable for C5/C6 systems, there should remain a way to move them in and out.

Alternatively, if possible, have each static be truly random. You may encounter the C4 with a C2 and a C3 connection. If C3 connection collapses, a connection to a C5 may spawn in its place. This would make C4 systems truly unique in all of W-space.