These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bleedingthrough
#1081 - 2014-08-18 20:40:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Bleedingthrough
“After continued discussion with the community we have made some adjustments from the original plan. We are reducing the base range significantly for large ships, and changing the random element to the jump distance. Now the maximum deviation from the base distance will increase for jumping through wormholes that have had significant amounts of mass pass through them. The deviation will be a maximum of 2km for fresh wormholes, and will increase to as much as 5km (in either direction) for a wormhole that is about to collapse. There will also be a lower bound of 2.5km set to prevent the wormhole from decloaking ships.”

As I see it this will not fix the core problem:
The collapser has all the risk and the aggressive “defender” has all the advantage.

Let me explain what this could mean for our C2 with Null/C5 statics:
Some C5s are too hostile for us and we need to roll them. Most of the time we do not have enough BS online to roll it in one go. Let’s give our scout 30s to evaluate the situation before he makes the call to roll it and give the support fleet 1 min to switch to collapsing BS and get on the WH. That gives the defender 6 mins to get a fleet ready before we can crit the WH it with the 2nd pass.

A typical reaction from an aggressive defenders is to get cloaky dictors/hictors on our side and get cloaky t3s in our WH. If we react quickly and in a coordinated fashion, e.g. not warp to the WH one by one, we can safely close the WH if the aggressive defender does not have the balls to more or less blindly jump into our WH.

With the current changes the aggressive defender does not need to have balls. A vigilant and a lucky spawn is all he needs to get a kill.

Edit: Hope the "You don't need balls"-Argument is a new one.
thebringer
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1082 - 2014-08-18 21:11:03 UTC
"Why even have forums and Town Halls if your not going to change what we want to change!" -Hidden Freeman (Lazerhawks CEO)

I want to give some exposure to this thread: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4925543#post4925543

IF CCP won't listen to us then maybe they will listen to this?


This is what it has come to...

Why CCP...
Edgar Strangelove
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#1083 - 2014-08-18 22:03:13 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Edgar Strangelove wrote:
Obil Que wrote:
I suspect that CCP hopes that instead it gets people to venture forth into the chain looking for what lies beyond the next wormhole is something smaller than a capital or battleship.


Like, say, uh...a T3? Just think: wormhole corps planning strategies that carefully pick a few high-mass ships or a single capital and forming a low-mass fleet around it instead. Madness, I know.


If you take just a T3 and Guardian gang out and someone drops a carrier and/or a dread with a T3 fleet on you, you will wish pretty damn quickly that you brought your own carrier.

I can't wait for CCP to implement the same mass-based changes to cynosural fields and then watch all the null-tards who post here under the impression that they know more about wormholes than, say, AHARM, NOHO, or HK, turn around and blast it as a bad change for null.


Either your sarcasm detector is broken or mine is, because I'm 99% certain we're agreeing here.
Saisin
Chao3's Rogue Operatives Corp
#1084 - 2014-08-18 22:23:11 UTC
Querns wrote:
Glad to see the line is still being held on this important issue, despite the vocal minority posting in this thread. It reinforces that you're able to make the tough decisions in spite of a panic-stricken, emotionally-charged wall of feedback. This candor will be necessary in the months ahead.

Ditto

Vote Borat Guereen for CSM XII

Check out the Minarchist Space Project
Belinda HwaFang
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1085 - 2014-08-19 00:13:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Belinda HwaFang
The smaller corps who rely on rolling with caps unsupported are doing it because they lack the numbers, and isn't that fuelled by multibox greed? Can't they just recruit some newbros to fly subcap support like webbing ships? I don't see the argument here. EVE is meant to be primarily social experience. If you do decide to multibox and use a skeleton crew, shouldn't that be higher risk?

The larger corps who are so hungry for pvp content that they rage roll statics can surely afford to have the support webbers / defensive bubblers ready? And if they do getinterrupted while rolling, they got pvp content, didn't they? I don't see how giving smaller gangs the chance to tackle a capital or capitals being used to rage roll could be an issue for said big and powerful c6 groups?

To me it looks like Fozzie wants to make changes to shake up EVE, why not see what happens and if necessary take action utilising CCP's new improved, shorter, release cycle?
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#1086 - 2014-08-19 00:22:23 UTC
Belinda HwaFang wrote:

The larger corps who are so hungry for pvp content that they rage roll statics can surely afford to have the support webbers / defensive bubblers ready? And if they do getinterrupted while rolling, they got pvp content, didn't they? I don't see how giving smaller gangs the chance to tackle a capital or capitals being used to rage roll could be an issue for said big and powerful c6 groups?


Thing is 9/10 wh you roll a wh (probably more like 99/100) there won't be the threat there to take advantage of that window of vulnerable collapsing ships while just adding tedium for no good reason and those odd times that threat is there the outcome won't have the desired effect.

Not going to honey coat it any more, I'm usually a fan of what fozzie brings to the table but this one is just pants on head ******** from the perspective of someone with 5 odd years of experience of how this would work out.
Belinda HwaFang
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1087 - 2014-08-19 00:32:13 UTC
That's like saying 99/100 times I'm running a combat site in nullsec there won't be anyone in local to scan me down with probes and gank my pve ship, so let's remove this tedious mechanic.

Sorry but I don't follow your line of reasoning. I also have some experience in wormholes, and am well aware how things can be 99% tedious and 1% epic. It's something which imo defines wormhole life.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#1088 - 2014-08-19 01:00:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
That doesn't delay what your doing though, it would be more of an analogue with making you sit uncloaked and unable to warp for 2 minutes at the end of each site just incase someone was about to jump into system and tackle you.

(EDIT: or rather have a scaling timer based on ship type).
Kel hound
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1089 - 2014-08-19 01:05:59 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. I want to thank you for all the reasoned feedback posted here, in your third party blogs, and passed along to the CSM.

We've made some changes to the plan and updated the dev blog with the new version (It may take a few minutes to apply).

The goal with this set of tweaks is to make the time required to return to the wormhole (or to get within refit range of your friends) for average jumps shorter, while keeping a significant element of risk.
To reach these goals, we're pulling the base spawn distance for large ships in significantly, to below 14km.
At the same time we'll be adding a new mechanic that modulates the randomness of your jump based on how close a wormhole is to collapse. For a fresh wormhole with none of its mass limit used, the deviation from the base distance will be a maximum of 2km. For a jump that collapses the wormhole, the maximum deviation (which can send you even closer to the wormhole or farther away) will be a maximum of 5km.

This brings the average jump distance down significantly while preventing complete safety and giving players a new element to consider in their strategic decision making.


This does not address the concerns that the wormhole community has been bringing to you. Instead you are making the act of rolling a wormhole largely luck based while at the same time retaining almost all of the downsides people have been pointing out. The only thing this change actually changes is that it might, might sometimes be faster to slow boat back to the wormhole with a closing dread than it would be to bounce a safe spot.
Whats worse is that you seem intent on pushing this change through in some form regardless of the consensus of the people it affects. Wormhole groups are already able to set traps and ambushes with current mechanics. There is already an element of risk associated with rolling a wormhole and not an insignificant risk either.

This is literally turning into the scatter-can mechanic all over again. Whats even more mind boggling to me is that this change is completely unnecessary. My mind boggles as my previous post becomes prophecy:

Kel hound wrote:
This is starting to feel like the hacking loot-scatter mechanic all over again. Is CCP going full steam ahead with this, despite 90% of w-space trying to tell them why it is a bad idea?

At this point this thread consists of basically 2 things: Schadenfreude, and wormholers against this change.


...actually in a way this is probably worse than the scatter-cans. That change got reversed. With the amount of attention wormholes get from CCP this change might as well be permanent.
Bleedingthrough
#1090 - 2014-08-19 02:10:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Bleedingthrough
Belinda HwaFang wrote:
The smaller corps who rely on rolling with caps unsupported are doing it because they lack the numbers, and isn't that fuelled by multibox greed? Can't they just recruit some newbros to fly subcap support like webbing ships? I don't see the argument here. EVE is meant to be primarily social experience. If you do decide to multibox and use a skeleton crew, shouldn't that be higher risk?


If less holes get rolled because it is too cumbersome, how exactly does that increase the risk for these farmers?
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#1091 - 2014-08-19 02:29:07 UTC
Querns wrote:
Glad to see the line is still being held on this important issue, despite the vocal minority posting in this thread. It reinforces that you're able to make the tough decisions in spite of a panic-stricken, emotionally-charged wall of feedback. This candor will be necessary in the months ahead.


Don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.

If this indicates the future of wormhole space, of null sec entities blobbing it up with sub caps and farming it out, then I don't feel so bad about leaving. And my old corp didn't even use caps to close holes, nor to shoot Sleepers.

The bit where nothing ever spawns within decloak range of the WH is just icing. The CovOps and the nullified cloaky T3 will become catchable only if the pilot gets supremely unlucky or makes a real head-meet-desk kind of piloting error.

I have no doubt that you and yours will enjoy it.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Belinda HwaFang
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#1092 - 2014-08-19 06:05:42 UTC
Bleedingthrough wrote:
Belinda HwaFang wrote:
The smaller corps who rely on rolling with caps unsupported are doing it because they lack the numbers, and isn't that fuelled by multibox greed? Can't they just recruit some newbros to fly subcap support like webbing ships? I don't see the argument here. EVE is meant to be primarily social experience. If you do decide to multibox and use a skeleton crew, shouldn't that be higher risk?


If less holes get rolled because it is too cumbersome, how exactly does that increase the risk for these farmers?


If they don't roll the holes they don't get to hide behind unspawned K162's, so they either have to sit and wait (and not make ISK) or make ISK with the risk of being scouted while doing so from outside.
Aender Wiggin
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#1093 - 2014-08-19 08:59:41 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:


You discuss and present things well,

I am pretty sure just about everyone in all classes of WH, understands just how bad the core concept is. Including those who do not and are celebrating the idea, but they don't live here, and just see a few easy kills for a short while, and as they have no interest in the long term survival of wormhole life, just want to see us burn.

Whilst I applaud your ideas to make things, a little less horrible, we must be careful not to let CCP believe that every bad thing can just be gold plated.
Every other change in this release has the core of a good idea, and can be balanced, maybe not as we want initially, but can be good for the long term vibrancy of life.

This however just will never stop stinking until it is taken away and disposed of.
Hopefully, CCP now understand the magnitude of this issue and will find a polite way of doing so.
And we should have the decency to be thankful, and never speak of it again.


Merits another +1

Go with Bob, keep Him always in your heart. He is your Sword, Shield, and the Knife in your back.
William Walsh
Litla Sundlaugin
#1094 - 2014-08-19 09:57:23 UTC
50 Shades of Brown

It is quite evident that CCP had no intention of listening to any of the player feedback on the Mass-based spawn distance thread. It was simply a means of damage mitigation by CCP, i.e. ‘’we are giving you this whether you like it or not but please feel involved in the process by posting on this thread’’. I mean come on guys really… 20 days before the launch are CCP going to start making changes?

What ticks me off more than this insult to our intelligence is the fact that CCP, by dropping the ball so badly (intentionally or unintentionally, I am not quite sure) has diverted the majority our attention away from something else………CCP have not actually created anything new for WH’s since 2008. So what can we eagerly anticipate in Hyperion? Some new content? Something all wormholers can get involved in, explore, experience, enjoy??? Unfortunately not. We are just getting the same content we have had for the last 6 years with different mechanics. It’s the cop out, the get around the great evasion of doing any real work and creating something new. The meeting for this mechanic may have gone something like this: ‘’ let’s just mix things up a little and see what happens’’ ‘’erm yeh ok sounds good to me’’. Meeting finished. I mean realistically that’s probably not how it went, but it would have given us the same outcome.

Now I would like to take you all on a journey with me, to a not so distant land occupied by United Systems Commonwealth, where an uncanny similarity occurred 2 Christmases ago. Its Christmas morning and young Alzuule is eagerly awaiting his Christmas presents. He is in for a real treat. CCP Santa has brought him an awesome remote control fire engine. It’s great, it makes loads of noise, its red, it fly’s around the living room and he loves it………

The following Christmas CCP Santa paints Alzuue’s fire engine brown and gives it him back…Well Merry Christmas!!!!!!!. CCP Santa then tells Alzuule, ‘’hey kid, its ok, don’t worry, this Christmas I didn’t give anyone new presents I just repainted their old ones brown. But there is this awesome online forum where you can go give me your feedback.

Alzuule races to the forum to tell Santa that he is a big red Christmas Grinch and that he should really re-consider giving kids back their old presents in a different colour as this might discredit him as a man responsible for bringing Christmas joy to all.
CCP Santa cannot be bothered to solve the problem properly because too many kids have complained, so he comes up with a cunning plan ...I will paint the all the toys a slightly different shade of brown and give them back. Problem solved.

Thank You and Good Night

P.S If you give me 1 billion isk I will paint things brown for you
Necharo Rackham
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#1095 - 2014-08-19 10:36:32 UTC
Faren Shalni wrote:
Well as expected Fozzie didn't listen. He tweaked numbers but that's not enough. During the round table he put his points across very well and we can agree on his points.


I'm not sure he did put his point across. He was repeatedly asked about the specific rational for this particular change and the particular figures being used - and each time he spoke purely in the most general generalities.


Furthermore, when you start off with one set of figures and then radically halve them - that seems to indicate to me that process for deciding on those figures was broken to start with. This isn't just restricted to just this particular change - you can look at the ship balance threads for more examples (see the sudden increase of the sig radiuses of medium towers etc).

It's not like CCP just announce these things - presumably they spend hours/days thinking about such changes, discussing them internally etc.
Nimrod vanHall
Van Mij Belastingvrij
#1096 - 2014-08-19 10:49:32 UTC
You can move the man out of Goonswarm but you cannot remove the goon out of the man. CCP fozzy is clearly still a goon going all out to ruin other people's game experience.
thebringer
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1097 - 2014-08-19 11:35:02 UTC
Belinda HwaFang wrote:
Bleedingthrough wrote:
Belinda HwaFang wrote:
The smaller corps who rely on rolling with caps unsupported are doing it because they lack the numbers, and isn't that fuelled by multibox greed? Can't they just recruit some newbros to fly subcap support like webbing ships? I don't see the argument here. EVE is meant to be primarily social experience. If you do decide to multibox and use a skeleton crew, shouldn't that be higher risk?


If less holes get rolled because it is too cumbersome, how exactly does that increase the risk for these farmers?


If they don't roll the holes they don't get to hide behind unspawned K162's, so they either have to sit and wait (and not make ISK) or make ISK with the risk of being scouted while doing so from outside.


Right and how do you think that effects wormhole PVP?

The farmers will just POS up and log if there is a threat instead of rolling the hole, therefore wasting both the 'farmers' and the PVPer's time, combined with the increased length of time it takes to roll a hole means less content for all participants...

Why CCP...
thebringer
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1098 - 2014-08-19 11:44:22 UTC
William Walsh wrote:
50 Shades of Brown

It is quite evident that CCP had no intention of listening to any of the player feedback on the Mass-based spawn distance thread. It was simply a means of damage mitigation by CCP, i.e. ‘’we are giving you this whether you like it or not but please feel involved in the process by posting on this thread’’. I mean come on guys really… 20 days before the launch are CCP going to start making changes?

What ticks me off more than this insult to our intelligence is the fact that CCP, by dropping the ball so badly (intentionally or unintentionally, I am not quite sure) has diverted the majority our attention away from something else………CCP have not actually created anything new for WH’s since 2008. So what can we eagerly anticipate in Hyperion? Some new content? Something all wormholers can get involved in, explore, experience, enjoy??? Unfortunately not. We are just getting the same content we have had for the last 6 years with different mechanics. It’s the cop out, the get around the great evasion of doing any real work and creating something new. The meeting for this mechanic may have gone something like this: ‘’ let’s just mix things up a little and see what happens’’ ‘’erm yeh ok sounds good to me’’. Meeting finished. I mean realistically that’s probably not how it went, but it would have given us the same outcome.

Now I would like to take you all on a journey with me, to a not so distant land occupied by United Systems Commonwealth, where an uncanny similarity occurred 2 Christmases ago. Its Christmas morning and young Alzuule is eagerly awaiting his Christmas presents. He is in for a real treat. CCP Santa has brought him an awesome remote control fire engine. It’s great, it makes loads of noise, its red, it fly’s around the living room and he loves it………

The following Christmas CCP Santa paints Alzuue’s fire engine brown and gives it him back…Well Merry Christmas!!!!!!!. CCP Santa then tells Alzuule, ‘’hey kid, its ok, don’t worry, this Christmas I didn’t give anyone new presents I just repainted their old ones brown. But there is this awesome online forum where you can go give me your feedback.

Alzuule races to the forum to tell Santa that he is a big red Christmas Grinch and that he should really re-consider giving kids back their old presents in a different colour as this might discredit him as a man responsible for bringing Christmas joy to all.
CCP Santa cannot be bothered to solve the problem properly because too many kids have complained, so he comes up with a cunning plan ...I will paint the all the toys a slightly different shade of brown and give them back. Problem solved.

Thank You and Good Night

P.S If you give me 1 billion isk I will paint things brown for you


XD This is amazing and so true!

Why CCP...
Enthropic
Infinite Point
Pandemic Horde
#1099 - 2014-08-19 12:20:12 UTC
thebringer wrote:

Right and how do you think that effects wormhole PVP?

The farmers will just POS up and log if there is a threat instead of rolling the hole, therefore wasting both the 'farmers' and the PVPer's time, combined with the increased length of time it takes to roll a hole means less content for all participants...


Exactly.

This is what Fozzie doesnt get. Well, he's a smart guy, he probably gets it, but wants to see if it will really be so.

Im convinced it will be, we will have a lot less people in WH space thanks to this stupid change.
Setting up a PvP or PvE (both, doesnt matter) operation in WH space already takes a long time.
With this ******** change, it will take even longer.

Fozzie, there are people with a real life, a family and a job (well a second job in addition to Eve), many of us wont go through the tedious process of rolling for content with your changes.
Adjusting the spawn distance does not solve the problem, it makes your idea of 'improving' whs just a tiny bit less terrible.

So no matter what we post here, there have been a TON of excellent posts by knowledgeable people in the WH community, Fozzie is gonna do his thing anyway.

The only thing that you now can do is wait for them to implement it and hope (lol) they will revert it if after they observe a decline in W-space activity.



(Yes, I post with my main (a Nullbear to you), who is not in WH space, but I have more than one account, and I have been very active in WH space for the last four years)
Ettig Grunar
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1100 - 2014-08-19 12:59:00 UTC
Enthropic wrote:
thebringer wrote:

Right and how do you think that effects wormhole PVP?

The farmers will just POS up and log if there is a threat instead of rolling the hole, therefore wasting both the 'farmers' and the PVPer's time, combined with the increased length of time it takes to roll a hole means less content for all participants...


Exactly.

This is what Fozzie doesnt get. Well, he's a smart guy, he probably gets it, but wants to see if it will really be so.

Im convinced it will be, we will have a lot less people in WH space thanks to this stupid change.
Setting up a PvP or PvE (both, doesnt matter) operation in WH space already takes a long time.
With this ******** change, it will take even longer.

Fozzie, there are people with a real life, a family and a job (well a second job in addition to Eve), many of us wont go through the tedious process of rolling for content with your changes.
Adjusting the spawn distance does not solve the problem, it makes your idea of 'improving' whs just a tiny bit less terrible.

So no matter what we post here, there have been a TON of excellent posts by knowledgeable people in the WH community, Fozzie is gonna do his thing anyway.

The only thing that you now can do is wait for them to implement it and hope (lol) they will revert it if after they observe a decline in W-space activity.



(Yes, I post with my main (a Nullbear to you), who is not in WH space, but I have more than one account, and I have been very active in WH space for the last four years)




thread could be closed with this post until patch day imo Blink