These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Second Static for C4s

First post
Author
Kp Amelia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#121 - 2014-08-07 12:39:12 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone, thanks for the feedback so far.

We're aware that the PVE reward progression isn't ideal across the different wormhole classes, and this is something on our radar. Your CSM members are helping us do a bit of mapping and plan making at the moment on that issue.

We're aware that this change will be less welcomed by those who live in C4s with the intention of isolating themselves, but overall we beleive that this change will be positive for Wormholes as a whole. You may find that C4s with C4/C1 statics and other similar configurations may still meet your needs well.

We will not be publishing the list of new statics, but players will be able to investigate them on SISI once it is updated with this change. The second statics are not configured as predictably as they are in C2s, but there are still some patterns that can be discovered.


Fozzie, are you in a position to explain the thinking behind how the incoming changes will benefit smaller wormhole groups? Instead of just making it even easier for bigger wormhole alliances to dictate what happens In WH space.

C4s are currently very good for small groups as its safer due to the lower traffic, with the increase in traffic it will become a lot more dangerous, making it much harder to make isk, as well as increasing the risk of having some big entity destroy all your stuff because they are board.

I am glad you are aware that there are discrepancies in isk making, but your response gives the impression that its not something on the top of the list? Would it be safe to assume that the currently announced changes will be the only ones coming this patch at least? It would be nice to know so that we can start moving out of our C4 or not. I don't mean that to be a childish statement, just the harsh reality that making isk making in a C4 even less efficient, and now very dangerous to bat, there is honestly no reason to live in a C4 anymore.

I respect what you guys are doing and I actually don't disagree with adding a new static, I just believe that the benefit should be scaled accordingly with the risk.
Pavel Sohaj
BAND of MAGNUS
#122 - 2014-08-07 12:44:04 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone, thanks for the feedback so far.

We're aware that the PVE reward progression isn't ideal across the different wormhole classes, and this is something on our radar. Your CSM members are helping us do a bit of mapping and plan making at the moment on that issue.

We're aware that this change will be less welcomed by those who live in C4s with the intention of isolating themselves, but overall we beleive that this change will be positive for Wormholes as a whole. You may find that C4s with C4/C1 statics and other similar configurations may still meet your needs well.

We will not be publishing the list of new statics, but players will be able to investigate them on SISI once it is updated with this change. The second statics are not configured as predictably as they are in C2s, but there are still some patterns that can be discovered.



PVE is not linear and it shouldnt be. Higher class, higher risk at least during the PVE. Dont you dare fix it. Itll screw small ones. And forcing ppl in C4s to guard more then single entrance, that will SURELY make them more popular.

C2s are so great for mostly simple reason - HIGHSEC. Constant access. C4 with c4 and C5, YAAAY. Logoff.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#123 - 2014-08-07 12:47:36 UTC
umnikar wrote:

Why not giving C5/6 a second static since those are the ones in the need of content while whining at the same time loosing thier WH open/close(target select) button?
If they need to roll 12 times an evenening(as read somewhere above) to get the desired content, they might be happy with 12 k-162 or wanderings a day?

And btw. fix the spawn ranges accordingly. If its 120km in c4 make it more in higher class holes.
IMHO the real Bear living in C5+, being able to do full escalations in 5 minutes while having ONE safley controlled static.

Well, all that comin changes simply forces smaller groups to form/join bigger ones... *sigh*


The voice of truth.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

forsot
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#124 - 2014-08-07 13:14:17 UTC
umnikar wrote:
Why not giving C5/6 a second static since those are the ones in the need of content while whining at the same time loosing thier WH open/close(target select) button?
If they need to roll 12 times an evenening(as read somewhere above) to get the desired content, they might be happy with 12 k-162 or wanderings a day?


Giving a second static to C5/c6's would be greatly appreciated then we can leave our one static connected to people like you when you hide in your pos and rage roll the other for targets, I don't think you want that. By giving c4's the second static they are giving you more control over it while still opening up a whole area of space that used to be linear chains of nothing but people logged off or hiding.
Shaklu
State War Academy
Caldari State
#125 - 2014-08-07 13:18:36 UTC
+1
Would also like to see some C4's with the same statics. like a C4/C4/C4.. that would be cool. or C4/C3/C3.. more options are better!
BayneNothos
United Electro-Magnetic Federation
Business Alliance of Manufacturers and Miners
#126 - 2014-08-07 13:23:38 UTC
Kp Amelia wrote:

Fozzie, are you in a position to explain the thinking behind how the incoming changes will benefit smaller wormhole groups? Instead of just making it even easier for bigger wormhole alliances to dictate what happens In WH space.

C4s are currently very good for small groups as its safer due to the lower traffic, with the increase in traffic it will become a lot more dangerous, making it much harder to make isk, as well as increasing the risk of having some big entity destroy all your stuff because they are board.

I am glad you are aware that there are discrepancies in isk making, but your response gives the impression that its not something on the top of the list? Would it be safe to assume that the currently announced changes will be the only ones coming this patch at least? It would be nice to know so that we can start moving out of our C4 or not. I don't mean that to be a childish statement, just the harsh reality that making isk making in a C4 even less efficient, and now very dangerous to bat, there is honestly no reason to live in a C4 anymore.

I respect what you guys are doing and I actually don't disagree with adding a new static, I just believe that the benefit should be scaled accordingly with the risk.


It's one extra WH you cycle before doing PvE. That's <30 minutes if you're solo. The only extra incoming WH's we'll get will be from other C4's and since apparently everyone is throwing a hissy fit and leaving, I guess that won't be an issue.
Kp Amelia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#127 - 2014-08-07 13:24:04 UTC
Pavel Sohaj wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone, thanks for the feedback so far.

We're aware that the PVE reward progression isn't ideal across the different wormhole classes, and this is something on our radar. Your CSM members are helping us do a bit of mapping and plan making at the moment on that issue.

We're aware that this change will be less welcomed by those who live in C4s with the intention of isolating themselves, but overall we beleive that this change will be positive for Wormholes as a whole. You may find that C4s with C4/C1 statics and other similar configurations may still meet your needs well.

We will not be publishing the list of new statics, but players will be able to investigate them on SISI once it is updated with this change. The second statics are not configured as predictably as they are in C2s, but there are still some patterns that can be discovered.



PVE is not linear and it shouldnt be. Higher class, higher risk at least during the PVE. Dont you dare fix it. Itll screw small ones. And forcing ppl in C4s to guard more then single entrance, that will SURELY make them more popular.

C2s are so great for mostly simple reason - HIGHSEC. Constant access. C4 with c4 and C5, YAAAY. Logoff.


No disagreement with that mate, I think its more that the reward should scale with the risk.
Pavel Sohaj
BAND of MAGNUS
#128 - 2014-08-07 13:25:01 UTC
forsot wrote:
umnikar wrote:
Why not giving C5/6 a second static since those are the ones in the need of content while whining at the same time loosing thier WH open/close(target select) button?
If they need to roll 12 times an evenening(as read somewhere above) to get the desired content, they might be happy with 12 k-162 or wanderings a day?


Giving a second static to C5/c6's would be greatly appreciated then we can leave our one static connected to people like you when you hide in your pos and rage roll the other for targets, I don't think you want that. By giving c4's the second static they are giving you more control over it while still opening up a whole area of space that used to be linear chains of nothing but people logged off or hiding.


how does more static in C4 help? apart from need to guard another place? If I want another chain, roll 6 BS.
Kara the Navigator
Kerviel Banking Services
#129 - 2014-08-07 13:32:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Kara the Navigator
Hello there,

I am CEO of a 3 months old corp. We are a 15 active men (across 25 chars) corp living in a C4 with a C3 static.

Just wanted to say that we are a growing corp and that having another static in our C4 will ruin it. We have chosen C4 because it's the best type of hole we could have hoped for : one static with low traffic, easy to close with orca support (we have no cap pilot), easy to farm with 3 tengus, and a good ground to hunt anom runners soloing the C3's. We pay our ships by farming the C4 when we have anoms spawn. How will we do if T3 fleets gets catapulted in our hole all the time ? We don't have the manpower to stop them, and we basically need to move.

What is your plan for the small growing corporations ?
I mean, my corp will move out of C4's, they don't want this at all. But where do we go ?

Here the point of view of all the small corp like mine, living in a C4 today :

C1 : LEL

C2 : Nice pvp to have, nothing to farm. We will end up with an atron doctrine because we won't have money and the corp will never grow.

C3 : Ok farming, no w-static, so no hunt in w-space

C4 : Super highway connected from everywhere. No thx, don't wanna get camped by a cloaky fleet everyday, we are only 15 members on 2 timezones god damn !

C5 & C6 : we have no caps, no manpower and no money to live there, it's above us at the moment.


What saddens me is that : C4 were perfect for small group of guys who want to get a grasp on w-space.

EDIT : C5 for us, should have been the next step, not C2 or C3. Don't nerf C4's, add statics in C6's where the highly skilled PvP is.
forsot
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#130 - 2014-08-07 13:40:41 UTC
Pavel Sohaj wrote:
forsot wrote:
umnikar wrote:
Why not giving C5/6 a second static since those are the ones in the need of content while whining at the same time loosing thier WH open/close(target select) button?
If they need to roll 12 times an evenening(as read somewhere above) to get the desired content, they might be happy with 12 k-162 or wanderings a day?


Giving a second static to C5/c6's would be greatly appreciated then we can leave our one static connected to people like you when you hide in your pos and rage roll the other for targets, I don't think you want that. By giving c4's the second static they are giving you more control over it while still opening up a whole area of space that used to be linear chains of nothing but people logged off or hiding.


how does more static in C4 help? apart from need to guard another place? If I want another chain, roll 6 BS.


Unless your rolling more then 3 connections it really adds no time to rolling unless its hostile you have to wait out polarization anyway so it does give you slightly more risk as there might be someone to try and kill you. But by giving it to the c5/c6 crowd you raise your chance of getting connected to those big bad buggy men who you fear so much and they wont let you roll.
Pavel Sohaj
BAND of MAGNUS
#131 - 2014-08-07 13:46:06 UTC
forsot wrote:
Pavel Sohaj wrote:
forsot wrote:
umnikar wrote:
Why not giving C5/6 a second static since those are the ones in the need of content while whining at the same time loosing thier WH open/close(target select) button?
If they need to roll 12 times an evenening(as read somewhere above) to get the desired content, they might be happy with 12 k-162 or wanderings a day?


Giving a second static to C5/c6's would be greatly appreciated then we can leave our one static connected to people like you when you hide in your pos and rage roll the other for targets, I don't think you want that. By giving c4's the second static they are giving you more control over it while still opening up a whole area of space that used to be linear chains of nothing but people logged off or hiding.


how does more static in C4 help? apart from need to guard another place? If I want another chain, roll 6 BS.


Unless your rolling more then 3 connections it really adds no time to rolling unless its hostile you have to wait out polarization anyway so it does give you slightly more risk as there might be someone to try and kill you. But by giving it to the c5/c6 crowd you raise your chance of getting connected to those big bad buggy men who you fear so much and they wont let you roll.


It does add out. Always expect gank. Nobody wants pointless 2nd static just to have it. 99% itll go verge just so ppl can be left alone. And the C5/C6 crowd. if you spot them, you wait them out. Big corps aint waiting on 2 tengus for half a day.
Orange Aideron
Voidlings
V0IDLINGS
#132 - 2014-08-07 14:02:06 UTC
Kara the Navigator wrote:
Hello there,

I am CEO of a 3 months old corp. We are a 15 active men (across 25 chars) corp living in a C4 with a C3 static.

Just wanted to say that we are a growing corp and that having another static in our C4 will ruin it. We have chosen C4 because it's the best type of hole we could have hoped for : one static with low traffic, easy to close with orca support (we have no cap pilot), easy to farm with 3 tengus, and a good ground to hunt anom runners soloing the C3's. We pay our ships by farming the C4 when we have anoms spawn. How will we do if T3 fleets gets catapulted in our hole all the time ? We don't have the manpower to stop them, and we basically need to move.

...

EDIT : C5 for us, should have been the next step, not C2 or C3. Don't nerf C4's, add statics in C6's where the highly skilled PvP is.


Good post but you're thinking is flawed.

1. C4 having 2nd static will just mean better WH management and will help you scan/dscan better, aka getting gud.
2. Extra static = more opportunities of more k-spaces, making logistics easier.
3. You're comparing your C4 static C3 - which is one of the easier wh's to live in. Other C4's are terrible and under utilised when compared to other classes. [insert CCP graphic here]
4. Your carebear attitude disgusts me, and why you like the quiet C4. You might find interacting (even though often violent at first) makes the game more fun, and you'll be surprised how cool the WH community actually is. AKA "hey guys help us kill some nullsec guy 4 jumps from here, join fleet in local" - common ground = killing nullsec people.
5. By the sounds of things, a lower class wormhole may suit better, you can roll it easier and you can still get good c2 > c3 farming wh's.
6. Plenty of experienced pilots live in lower class wh's, I wouldn't call it a step down from a c5. It's just a different life. Moving "up" to a class 5 is actually about active people rather than op skilled characters imo at least.
Kusum Fawn
Perkone
Caldari State
#133 - 2014-08-07 14:17:57 UTC
Orange Aideron wrote:

4. Your carebear attitude disgusts me, and why you like the quiet C4. You might find interacting (even though often violent at first) makes the game more fun, and you'll be surprised how cool the WH community actually is. AKA "hey guys help us kill some nullsec guy 4 jumps from here, join fleet in local" - common ground = killing nullsec people.



That's really funny. Its not true, but its funny.

Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.

Fonac
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#134 - 2014-08-07 14:20:30 UTC
Orange Aideron wrote:
Kara the Navigator wrote:
Hello there,

I am CEO of a 3 months old corp. We are a 15 active men (across 25 chars) corp living in a C4 with a C3 static.

Just wanted to say that we are a growing corp and that having another static in our C4 will ruin it. We have chosen C4 because it's the best type of hole we could have hoped for : one static with low traffic, easy to close with orca support (we have no cap pilot), easy to farm with 3 tengus, and a good ground to hunt anom runners soloing the C3's. We pay our ships by farming the C4 when we have anoms spawn. How will we do if T3 fleets gets catapulted in our hole all the time ? We don't have the manpower to stop them, and we basically need to move.

...

EDIT : C5 for us, should have been the next step, not C2 or C3. Don't nerf C4's, add statics in C6's where the highly skilled PvP is.


Good post but you're thinking is flawed.

1. C4 having 2nd static will just mean better WH management and will help you scan/dscan better, aka getting gud.
2. Extra static = more opportunities of more k-spaces, making logistics easier.
3. You're comparing your C4 static C3 - which is one of the easier wh's to live in. Other C4's are terrible and under utilised when compared to other classes. [insert CCP graphic here]
4. Your carebear attitude disgusts me, and why you like the quiet C4. You might find interacting (even though often violent at first) makes the game more fun, and you'll be surprised how cool the WH community actually is. AKA "hey guys help us kill some nullsec guy 4 jumps from here, join fleet in local" - common ground = killing nullsec people.
5. By the sounds of things, a lower class wormhole may suit better, you can roll it easier and you can still get good c2 > c3 farming wh's.
6. Plenty of experienced pilots live in lower class wh's, I wouldn't call it a step down from a c5. It's just a different life. Moving "up" to a class 5 is actually about active people rather than op skilled characters imo at least.



4. Not all people get off, by shooting stuff. Wanting to do your "own" thing is bad yes. However, this guy is talking about making a corp, and allow it to grow... PvP will probably happen never the less. They're playing the game the way they enjoy it, not what others are telling them is the "correct" way to play.

Also, by having carebears you sometimes get amazing kills, this is not a bad thing.. Well i guess for the elitist vocal few, it is.


All the other points, i totally agree on. O/
Bleedingthrough
#135 - 2014-08-07 15:43:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Bleedingthrough
Our corporation used to live in a C4/C3 because we wanted to grow in a relatively safe environment with the option to roll C3s for something interesting.

The remoteness (no wanderings, no k162s from k-space) was a wanted feature that gave us the sense of security a corp noobish to w-space needed. No one of us had ever lived in w-space before. It was a rough learning curve for us and in the process we lost two carriers, a few Orcs and other blinkies. At some point a smack talking C6 group tried to evict us.

So the C4 had a purpose for us that no other WH class could have offered:

C1 meh
C2 way to hostile unless you have some experienced guys teaching you. And way too dangerous to make some ISK in static(s) for newbies.
C3 no w-space static.
C4 remote and semi good income for smallish corporations. w-space static.
C5 and C6 no chance to start in this.

We learned much since these days and would be perfectly cool with living in a C4 with the proposed changes now. But I fear that people living in C4s for exactly the same reasons we used to live there won't be happy.

Keep in mind, it is not only that C4s will have dual statics, they also will have lot more incoming K162s since C4 statics will most likely become much more attractive.

A lot of well-known people are for this change and it certainly is not terrible. However, I would have taken a less drastic approach:

Adding a lot of wandering WHs to C4 space (these are random WHs that originate from the C4, they do not exist atm) would probably be the thing I would have done. It allows these smallish C4 groups that need that extra false sense of security to roll them away – giving people control over the sandbox – and at the same time make C4s better connected.

What if wandering WHs became the defining feature of C4 space? That could be truly unique.
Cara Forelli
State War Academy
Caldari State
#136 - 2014-08-07 16:14:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Cara Forelli
I rather like this change, assuming none of the new statics are empire statics. It will be nice for C4s to get more traffic from wormhole space, but I would not like to see them open up to empire. Being isolated from the "real world" is what makes them unique and interesting.

In fact I'd like to see the variety of all the classes preserved with these changes - especially with the new wandering holes. What makes different classes special are the way they interact with other classes though their connections. Adding too many types of wandering holes just homogenizes the (w)hole thing. Be careful that you don't pave over the intricate sandcastle with mud, please.

Want to talk? Join my channel in game: House Forelli

Titan's Lament

Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
#137 - 2014-08-07 16:30:50 UTC
Pavel Sohaj wrote:

PVE is not linear and it shouldnt be. Higher class, higher risk at least during the PVE. Dont you dare fix it. Itll screw small ones. And forcing ppl in C4s to guard more then single entrance, that will SURELY make them more popular.

C2s are so great for mostly simple reason - HIGHSEC. Constant access. C4 with c4 and C5, YAAAY. Logoff.


Higher class, more isk risked, but less risk because harder to engade and less traffic is more like it.
C2s are great because access to k-space including lowsec statics and a static of your choosing for your ratting needs.


I´ll repeat myself here again: C4 guys, none of those t3blobbing C5 groups you are so scared about have a C4 as a static, so you will see much more impact from the new randoms than from the second static. There are even barely any big C2->c4 groups left.

And you small farming groups should be superhappy, f.e. use the static c4 if you have a few peeps online, otherwise just solofarm the static c3. You have a new static c5? Finally you have access to those big gassites.
Wanna shoot people in the face and not be bored to death? Huge chains to scout with multiple pilots instead of the old C4-C4-C4-c4-c5-I´ll shoot myself-c5-c5-null chains.
sysiu
Golden-Lions Uncharted
#138 - 2014-08-07 16:41:12 UTC
I have jsut read about the other changes come with the patch.

It is necessary to discuss the changes at once.

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Other change include k162 spawn only if you jump through it.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
So, with this change, C4 managing 2 statics is still do-able.

Let's say, warp to a 24h static right after downtime, then do some sleeper.
after 7-8 hours warp to the other 16h static.
This way ensure your chain control, although you may lost security later, wormhole will still reset everyday if you stay active.

The combined effect to me, is good.
I am living in a C4 24h static to C5. Live is hard.
Although logistic is maintained by me, 95% of my corpmate quitted the game.
I am very pleased if CCP apply these two changes at once.
However, it may become sad for the overpriced C4 static C3 or static C2.

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
CCP is also trying to fix the ragerolling, the imbalanced pvp strategy,
capital jump will be spawn at 19km distance from wormhole, ship will be spawn base on mass.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
This is awful, as battleship is already a bad idea for wormhole pvp, now they get a nerf for no reason.
Also, if you are not going to need orca to reset the chain, why should orca be nerf and spawn at 10km away when no one later will need an orca to close it for safety?

I suggest that, all C5 with a downward static get another C5 static. All C6 get another static C6.
this way, you don't delete the strategy but reduce the incentive.
Also people can still close the null hole, as most of the holes are to nullsec.
if capital spawn at 19-20km from wormhole, it is not doable. you will just logoff.

as if k162 won't spawn unless you jump, overall spawned wormhole will be reduced, even from k-space.
if you add another static to the C5/C6, it will make a balance. Half of the time I do reverse exploration to look for the orgion.
If k162 didn't even spawn, I can't even explore. Thus, changes should also come with the C5/C6 extra statics.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#139 - 2014-08-07 16:42:53 UTC
C5/c4 and c6/c4's will become very popular.

But currently yes nobody wants them ATM.

Yaay!!!!

Kireitsugu Secheh
Les chips electriques
#140 - 2014-08-07 17:13:02 UTC
In this thread, farmers gonna whine, pvpers gonna shine.
Small corps gonna tremble.