These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
fueron
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#381 - 2014-08-07 02:05:56 UTC
ROSSLINDEN0 wrote:
Great change, i would have made the distance greater tbh i think you should consider it as 13-17km isnt far enough a snaked nanod nag with links could get back in range fast as hell so please make the distance greater or nerf the speed of mini caps, ty.



I concur. Nerf the speed otherwise it's unreasonable.

Good point there.
Snakes-On-A-Plane
#382 - 2014-08-07 02:08:56 UTC
I'm just going to put two and two together here. I believe that WH loot has fallen in price significantly, and the purpose of this change is most likely intended to control that depreciation. It's 'very CCP' to focus on the market above all else.

Look at what they have actually said about it:
Quote:
This change is intended to ensure that all attempts to control the local wormhole environment are open to risk of player disruption. We are not satisfied with how easy and safe it is to close wormholes that could potentially allow other players to interact with W-space operations, as the risk of player interaction should always be the main source of tension and danger in W-space.

We made the assumption that their goal was to increase conflict. But they never actually said that. Their only stated intention was to disrupt W-space operations.

Think about it. We have 50-60 pages of posts saying that this won't actually increase conflict, but actually reduce conflict. And yet they soldier on with the idea, even going so far as to implement it without asking anyone's opinion.

But when placed in the context of trying to disrupt loot farming, it falls neatly into place. If pursuing this goal, they don't care if people are hugging a POS for a whole day. In fact, that's ideal. The amount of conflict wouldn't actually concern them. Just so long as they aren't farming and flooding the market with the product. The frigate holes also make a lot of sense, in this context.

I feel like they are cloaking their intentions.
Maybe we should be trying to provide suggestions on how to control loot farming, without ruining wormhole mechanics?

Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#383 - 2014-08-07 02:11:58 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Lero D wrote:
We are a small corporation of mostly PvE people, for the simple reason that we like and trust each other, and we also want to avoid the politics and risks of the large numbers.
This change will destroy pretty much our play style by making it impossible for us to roll the WH-s.

Keep in mind, we are closing the WH-s to protect ourselves, not to look for fights.

If we had the numbers to provide a proper defense on the other side of the WH for the ships we use to collapse the exits, we would be a PvP corporation not PvE/Industrial.



The Hammer is coming wormhollers, flee while you can to SOV with the other bears. Bear

So WHs should be worse than renting in null?
Samuel Caldara
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#384 - 2014-08-07 02:15:47 UTC
One of the most frustrating aspects of wormhole living is fighting on a hisec hole. You don't have to worry about losing anything as you emerge right on the hole and you can jump back if things go poorly.

The idea where lower mass ships are kicked out further is a good one. Any situation where caps are used they can be followed back and killed. In any other fight when ships come through they can be webbed and taken down by a superior force.

I know you are trying to limit ragerolling, but in my mind ragerolling is a good thing. It creates new content, and pvp entities are more than willing to follow someone through with a small fleet and a probing ship if it means a good kill (orca anyone?)

That said - Multi-bubble hictors will still be kicked off quite a ways making them open to being killed.
Also Rans
Perkone
Caldari State
#385 - 2014-08-07 02:19:55 UTC
This will surely drive out more people out for Wh space. i will be moving out
Levarr Burton
The Pinecone Squad
Rote Kapelle
#386 - 2014-08-07 02:24:40 UTC
While I support most of these changes, I cannot support the mass-based spawn distance as it currently stands. It falls victim to the same fallacy that the recent jump fuel use changes had: this change assumes that making something more difficult, slower, or more expensive disproportionately affects the largest and most powerful groups, while leaving smaller groups less negatively affected and by extension giving those smaller groups a leg up on using space. In reality, the larger and more powerful groups will be able to most rapidly and readily adapt to the new circumstances, while smaller groups will be left flailing to keep up.

Traiori correctly lists several of the major effects in his post on the first page of this thread. Ultimately this change will lead to less risk being taken, and fewer confrontations.

While I would prefer having any spawn distance changes delayed until after the effects of the other changes can be seen, I do have some suggestions (some my own, some pawned from this thread).

1. Maximum potential spawn distance should be *inversely* proportional to ship mass, but the minimum potential spawn differences should be similar regardless of mass. This would allow a greater use of kiting setups on wormholes, while also maintaining some risk to cloaky/nullified fast ships, as they could still spawn in a place where immediate cloaking would be impossible. However, this would also allow the practical and sometimes impromptu use of capitals on incoming and outgoing wormholes to continue in similar fashion as current practices. I do not see this as necessarily a bad thing.

2. Jumping one way through a wormhole should initiate a polarity timer which is proportional to the mass of the ship, or a function of the mass of the ship relative to the size of the wormhole. A covops may have a polarity timer as short as the session change. A HAC-sized ship may have a polarity timer as long as the jump cloak. A dreadnought may have a 2-4 minute polarity timer. Combined with the current (not proposed) spawn ranges, this would force rage-rolling and defensive-rolling entities to attempt some measure of hole control, while still allowing rage rolling and defensive rolling to be practical tactics in content generation. This would also allow a ballsy offensive force to jump into a prepared defensive force without being nearly guaranteed that they would be unable to get their capitals into refit ranges.

3. Sort of related to #1, ships should exit a wormhole with velocity away from the mouth of the wormhole. This would, in cases of mass-use jumping and other rolling, discourage ships from holding cloak as long as possible after a wormhole jump. When combined with #2, this would maximize the amount of time which a rolling force is exposed for, without making rolling impractical. It would force pilots to balance the relative safety of the cloak, with the time needed to return to the wormhole, and the polarization timer.
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#387 - 2014-08-07 02:27:49 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
The Hammer is coming wormhollers, flee while you can to SOV with the other bears. Bear

Says the professional forum alt in an NPC corp.
Roll
Klarion Sythis wrote:
For being a group of players who pride themselves on the heritage of taking a set of unknown, hard to live with mechanics and creating an entire community out of it...we sure don't seem to like figuring out new things anymore.

Because WH's were fine at release with the exception of bloody Black Holes?
Because "change" just to change isn't necessarily "good"?
Because once again, their stated goal is actually in direct opposition to their stated fix?
Roll
dephekt wrote:
I just wanted to add to the show of disappointment and mirror the frustration as a ex-long term WH dweller that primarily flew caps and participated in the best w-space PvP the community could make with what few tools we were initially given.

Don't think I've ever shot you before but:

o7

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.

Rei Moon
Perkone
Caldari State
#388 - 2014-08-07 02:46:40 UTC
Also Rans wrote:
This will surely drive out more people out for Wh space. i will be moving out



Sorry to hear that bud.

But i might be unsubbing my 6 scrub-ridden accounts too.

Down the pole podcast "Annhhh"

Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#389 - 2014-08-07 02:48:35 UTC
= Super bad. Thanks CCP.

Honestly, I'll probably unsub my other 2 accounts and screw around in lowsec. At least I'll have some free time for hobbies now.
dephekt
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#390 - 2014-08-07 02:52:36 UTC  |  Edited by: dephekt
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
dephekt wrote:
I just wanted to add to the show of disappointment and mirror the frustration as a ex-long term WH dweller that primarily flew caps and participated in the best w-space PvP the community could make with what few tools we were initially given.

Don't think I've ever shot you before but:

o7

Most of my violence was done to Russians, KILL, SSC, AHARM, NoHo, and others while in the original Narwhals, or Transmission Lost, or Disavowed and Whale Girth. I never ran into Adhoc very often and when we did they usually weren't in a position to fight at that moment, plus any big fights would have been against my cap alt.

Glad to see you guys here and shouting about this mass/distance change too. I would prefer seeing active WH PvP populations growing again, rather than people burning out/abandoning w-space because they can't be asked to roll another hole.
Senji Vuran
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#391 - 2014-08-07 02:59:05 UTC
-1

Everyone has already eloquently stated the reasons, no reason to repeat them here.
Bleedingthrough
#392 - 2014-08-07 03:11:32 UTC
In this patch you are touching the core mechanics the WH community has evolved around – the way WHs work. Any changes to this was completely unasked for by the w-community.

What made you think making rolling WH any more dangerous would be a good thing?

In the video you linked Hillmar was impressed about emergent gameplay. A sandbox will only work if players can manipulate the sand without getting hurt every time. They want to have some level of control over the situation.

This change is just not good enough – Wormholes deserve better

I feel it would be much healthier for w-space if you balanced the income side. It seems ridicules to me that some lower class WH people join Incursion fleets to make ISK. This is just wrong. If these people have a pecuniary incentive to be in w-space and an interesting environment to PvP we will see lot more people in here.

I am mildly panicking at this point and I really hope corbexx can convince you to reverse this change.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#393 - 2014-08-07 03:32:46 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
The Hammer is coming wormhollers, flee while you can to SOV with the other bears. Bear

Says the professional forum alt in an NPC corp.


Flee while you can, the rejuvenating fires of war are coming to your systems and will drive out the timid and weak and replace them with the motivated and strong.

The ISK Fountain Era is over, for you at least. Scream all you want, but in space, no one can hear you.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Scud Maximillion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#394 - 2014-08-07 03:41:43 UTC
Great change.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#395 - 2014-08-07 03:58:55 UTC
CCP is going to do this. You WH pilots are just wasting your breath.
Svodola Darkfury
Heaven's End
#396 - 2014-08-07 04:04:13 UTC
Samuel Caldara wrote:
One of the most frustrating aspects of wormhole living is fighting on a hisec hole. You don't have to worry about losing anything as you emerge right on the hole and you can jump back if things go poorly.

The idea where lower mass ships are kicked out further is a good one. Any situation where caps are used they can be followed back and killed. In any other fight when ships come through they can be webbed and taken down by a superior force.

I know you are trying to limit ragerolling, but in my mind ragerolling is a good thing. It creates new content, and pvp entities are more than willing to follow someone through with a small fleet and a probing ship if it means a good kill (orca anyone?)

That said - Multi-bubble hictors will still be kicked off quite a ways making them open to being killed.



I like this idea. Do the inverse, throw small, mobile ships further out. Heavy ships are already easy to catch on a hole because they get timered and can't warp anywhere. Small ships just play jump/cloak games until they can instant warp somewhere.

Svo.

Director of Frozen Corpse Industries.

Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#397 - 2014-08-07 04:08:09 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
The Hammer is coming wormhollers, flee while you can to SOV with the other bears. Bear

Says the professional forum alt in an NPC corp.


Flee while you can, the rejuvenating fires of war are coming to your systems and will drive out the timid and weak and replace them with the motivated and strong.

The ISK Fountain Era is over, for you at least. Scream all you want, but in space, no one can hear you.

No more moon goo?
Dark Armata
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#398 - 2014-08-07 04:37:13 UTC
KIller Wabbit wrote:
CCP is going to do this. You WH pilots are just wasting your breath.


So we should just sit down, be quiet and take it?

What if I suggested the same mass based spawn range for ships jumping to cynos? Would null/low pilots just sit there and say quiet?

Why should jumping caps to a station be completely safe. Oh wait it isn't you say, well neither is the current method of rolling wormholes.

And to everyone that says the current method is risk-free I ask one simple question.

Have you ever destroyed a ship trying to roll a wormhole?

W-Space IS Best Space

Wedge Rancer
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#399 - 2014-08-07 04:40:11 UTC
Dark Armata wrote:
KIller Wabbit wrote:
CCP is going to do this. You WH pilots are just wasting your breath.


So we should just sit down, be quiet and take it?

What if I suggested the same mass based spawn range for ships jumping to cynos? Would null/low pilots just sit there and say quiet?

Why should jumping caps to a station be completely safe. Oh wait it isn't you say, well neither is the current method of rolling wormholes.

And to everyone that says the current method is risk-free I ask one simple question.

Have you ever destroyed a ship trying to roll a wormhole?


100% agree, if CCP gave cynos the same treatment then I would be willing to bet there would be a second round of Jita protests.
Andiedeath
We Aim To MisBehave
#400 - 2014-08-07 04:44:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Andiedeath
+ 1 for this being an awesome change!

All it means is people will need to work better together to rage roll WHs... Carriers can still insta warp with webs the same as Ocras... If you then think about it for more than 2 seconds there is an EASY workaround for those that want to rage roll...

This also means MOAR fights with LESS rage rolling required! As people will NO LONGER be able to jump an Orca or BS into a WH from K Space without being at risk of getting blapped... And if worried get a friend to web you off the WH... Or even better get a fleet to protect you! We will happily fight you!

Awesome change CCP Fozzie! Keep up the great work.

Director

Sefem Velox

INGAME CHANNEL: Sefem Public