These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

An alternate suggestion to the "Mass-Based Spawn Distance" Change.

First post
Author
Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
#1 - 2014-08-19 18:26:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Nazori Naskingar
Just to suggest a possible system that would help make rolling more dangerous but not make a huge mess as this new system is accomplishing.

Step 1: Throw out Mass-Based Spawn Distance

Step 2: Set a "destruction timer" on a wormhole that has received enough mass to close it. Say instead of "verge of collapse" it would say something along the lines of "collapse is imminent". This sets a timer randomly between 3-8 minutes in which the hole will close.

This allows for people to "All in" without the inconvenience of having to scan back home for an hour. In this theoretical scenario one corp might throw 3-4 Orcas through a hole to rush it closed and prevent conflict and would instead receive an intense battle on their side trying to keep their Orcas and forces alive for the next few minutes.

I feel this would be better as it puts risk on both parties pretty equally. It gives a good chance for the people getting rolled to have their chance at an attack and would still apply a lot of risk to the rollers as you would need to have the capability of keeping your force alive/getting them off field on your end.

I feel this would "Shake things up" and actually create more dynamic risk on a wormhole closing situation instead of creating suicide scenarios.

Edit: Adding a Mass Jump limit would resolve any "Mass Cap Jump" issues. Just restrict anything larger than a BC once the hole is in its final phase to close.
Bronya Boga
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2014-08-19 18:36:38 UTC
Interesting. Although to be completely honest you are moving the time extension from one place to another. Although I would prefer that much more over CCPs mechanic.
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#3 - 2014-08-19 18:40:17 UTC
Haven't thought it through, but sounds interesting indeed.

Yet, it's probably not gonna happen ;(
Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
#4 - 2014-08-19 18:54:00 UTC
Ab'del Abu wrote:
Haven't thought it through, but sounds interesting indeed.

Yet, it's probably not gonna happen ;(


Yes, sadly I would feel inclined to agree with you as it seems they are adamant about the coming change.

Though it would solve all the issues their trying to hit.
1: More risk when rolling
2: Longer time to "rage roll"
3: More conflict.

one can dream...
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
#5 - 2014-08-19 19:14:46 UTC
While I like people thinking about alternatives this one is a 0/10.
a) Ragerolling would still lead to a 3-8 minute downtime after every hole, same as with the changes.
b) Instead of only 3 capitals being able to jump into a system this would allow you to bring in all the caps you have on the hole in one go. Then we can have cynos too...
Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
#6 - 2014-08-19 19:16:51 UTC
Shilalasar wrote:
While I like people thinking about alternatives this one is a 0/10.
a) Ragerolling would still lead to a 3-8 minute downtime after every hole, same as with the changes.
b) Instead of only 3 capitals being able to jump into a system this would allow you to bring in all the caps you have on the hole in one go. Then we can have cynos too...


Completely agree, but adding a Mass jump limit to the hole once it goes on its death timer would solve this. "This wormhole will not allow a ship this size to jump as it is imminent to closing"

Van Kuzco
Perkone
Caldari State
#7 - 2014-08-19 20:00:04 UTC
I dont think this is a good idea because it would make wormhole control impossible. You crit a hole and the enemy can still jump in an unlimited number of ships.
Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
#8 - 2014-08-19 20:12:20 UTC
Van Kuzco wrote:
I dont think this is a good idea because it would make wormhole control impossible. You crit a hole and the enemy can still jump in an unlimited number of ships.


Very good point.

Though while I often use the "crit the hole to keep you safe while you run sites" method, some might argue that it is almost too safe a tactic and doesn't really suit dangerous wormhole space. I mean they are trying for more of a feel that wormholes used to have where not every player knew how to calculate mass and jam holes closed on a whim.

Also your attackers would be going all in with no way to return. risk on both sides.
Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#9 - 2014-08-19 20:25:13 UTC
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Van Kuzco wrote:
I dont think this is a good idea because it would make wormhole control impossible. You crit a hole and the enemy can still jump in an unlimited number of ships.


Very good point.

Though while I often use the "crit the hole to keep you safe while you run sites" method, some might argue that it is almost too safe a tactic and doesn't really suit dangerous wormhole space. I mean they are trying for more of a feel that wormholes used to have where not every player knew how to calculate mass and jam holes closed on a whim.

Also your attackers would be going all in with no way to return. risk on both sides.


Just think how much fun it'll be when an invader can jump their entire cap fleet through to evict you since mass won't kill it))

And then they could jump the entire thing out p easily too

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy

Angrod Losshelin
modro
The Initiative.
#10 - 2014-08-19 20:43:31 UTC
Andrew Jester wrote:
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Van Kuzco wrote:
I dont think this is a good idea because it would make wormhole control impossible. You crit a hole and the enemy can still jump in an unlimited number of ships.


Very good point.

Though while I often use the "crit the hole to keep you safe while you run sites" method, some might argue that it is almost too safe a tactic and doesn't really suit dangerous wormhole space. I mean they are trying for more of a feel that wormholes used to have where not every player knew how to calculate mass and jam holes closed on a whim.

Also your attackers would be going all in with no way to return. risk on both sides.


Just think how much fun it'll be when an invader can jump their entire cap fleet through to evict you since mass won't kill it))

And then they could jump the entire thing out p easily too


Sadly I think Jester has a point, 50 dreads FTW

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!

Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
#11 - 2014-08-19 20:55:12 UTC
Yes, definitely, but like I said a mass jump limit during the final phase would resolve that. I should prob edit the initial post to state that as it would definitely not work without that.
Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#12 - 2014-08-19 21:01:24 UTC
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Yes, definitely, but like I said a mass jump limit during the final phase would resolve that. I should prob edit the initial post to state that as it would definitely not work without that.


I pretty loosely read through the thread and by loosely I mean pretty much only the OP

This would probably make closing holes take even longer tbh. With the current changes, you're adding maybe a minute at most to rolling. Inty to ping, web Orca + Dread to ping, web down, jump web ship + inty back through, jump Orca through, jump dread through.

If you mean a mass limit as in once it hits that stage you can only bring in ships below X mass in, it still facilitates evictions because you could just shove like 50 Ishtars through. If you mean mass limit as once it hits X, nothing else can jump through, well, what's the point then? You just end up with a hole sitting there waiting however long for it to close with nothing able to happen because no one can come in.

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy

Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
#13 - 2014-08-19 21:06:17 UTC
Andrew Jester wrote:
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Yes, definitely, but like I said a mass jump limit during the final phase would resolve that. I should prob edit the initial post to state that as it would definitely not work without that.


I pretty loosely read through the thread and by loosely I mean pretty much only the OP

This would probably make closing holes take even longer tbh. With the current changes, you're adding maybe a minute at most to rolling. Inty to ping, web Orca + Dread to ping, web down, jump web ship + inty back through, jump Orca through, jump dread through.

If you mean a mass limit as in once it hits that stage you can only bring in ships below X mass in, it still facilitates evictions because you could just shove like 50 Ishtars through. If you mean mass limit as once it hits X, nothing else can jump through, well, what's the point then? You just end up with a hole sitting there waiting however long for it to close with nothing able to happen because no one can come in.


Nay you had it right at first, a Mass jump limit. Meaning only ships smaller than X can jump through. And sure 50 Ishtars can jump through, but they could have done that to a fresh hole anyways so there really isn't too big of a difference for eviction risk.
Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#14 - 2014-08-19 21:10:29 UTC
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Andrew Jester wrote:
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Yes, definitely, but like I said a mass jump limit during the final phase would resolve that. I should prob edit the initial post to state that as it would definitely not work without that.


I pretty loosely read through the thread and by loosely I mean pretty much only the OP

This would probably make closing holes take even longer tbh. With the current changes, you're adding maybe a minute at most to rolling. Inty to ping, web Orca + Dread to ping, web down, jump web ship + inty back through, jump Orca through, jump dread through.

If you mean a mass limit as in once it hits that stage you can only bring in ships below X mass in, it still facilitates evictions because you could just shove like 50 Ishtars through. If you mean mass limit as once it hits X, nothing else can jump through, well, what's the point then? You just end up with a hole sitting there waiting however long for it to close with nothing able to happen because no one can come in.


Nay you had it right at first, a Mass jump limit. Meaning only ships smaller than X can jump through. And sure 50 Ishtars can jump through, but they could have done that to a fresh hole anyways so there really isn't too big of a difference for eviction risk.


With a fresh hole the defenders could roll it out and shut the door in the would-be evictors face, with this method they cannot. Not to mention this would make it much easier to get scouts in as well so that even if they couldn't form enough people in the time it took to close the hole, they could easily form to get the next one. On top of that, you wouldn't even be able to roll scouts out if they're quick, so if you miss snagging a covops because of a server tick then you're SOL.

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy

Nazori Naskingar
Edge of Existence
#15 - 2014-08-19 21:17:22 UTC
Andrew Jester wrote:
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Andrew Jester wrote:
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
Yes, definitely, but like I said a mass jump limit during the final phase would resolve that. I should prob edit the initial post to state that as it would definitely not work without that.


I pretty loosely read through the thread and by loosely I mean pretty much only the OP

This would probably make closing holes take even longer tbh. With the current changes, you're adding maybe a minute at most to rolling. Inty to ping, web Orca + Dread to ping, web down, jump web ship + inty back through, jump Orca through, jump dread through.

If you mean a mass limit as in once it hits that stage you can only bring in ships below X mass in, it still facilitates evictions because you could just shove like 50 Ishtars through. If you mean mass limit as once it hits X, nothing else can jump through, well, what's the point then? You just end up with a hole sitting there waiting however long for it to close with nothing able to happen because no one can come in.


Nay you had it right at first, a Mass jump limit. Meaning only ships smaller than X can jump through. And sure 50 Ishtars can jump through, but they could have done that to a fresh hole anyways so there really isn't too big of a difference for eviction risk.


With a fresh hole the defenders could roll it out and shut the door in the would-be evictors face, with this method they cannot. Not to mention this would make it much easier to get scouts in as well so that even if they couldn't form enough people in the time it took to close the hole, they could easily form to get the next one. On top of that, you wouldn't even be able to roll scouts out if they're quick, so if you miss snagging a covops because of a server tick then you're SOL.


You have a really good point with the Covops thing, I often roll to get scouts to panic jump back out and hopefully catch and kill them and that would effectively stop that. But with the current system their about to roll out Covops will be effectively impossible to grab as they will appear distanced from the hole always able to cloak.

I just find this system a much better alternative to what they are trying to implement and I feel it helps serve the purpose they are trying to accomplish.
Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#16 - 2014-08-19 21:23:43 UTC
Nazori Naskingar wrote:
You have a really good point


It's rare, but it happens.

Like I said, if you're properly rolling with the new method, it shouldn't really be that bad and it's still pretty quick. If you want to be even safer, just use 3 nano phoons instead of an Orca. Short of a cloaked hic/dic on the hole, webbing a dread to a ping will still be pretty safe. If you're scared it won't be totally safe, remove either a gun or the siege module and fit a cloak. Should something show up, use the ceptor to web it to a safe and just log it/cloak it until it becomes safe.

Slightly more risk, but all in all, not that much longer. Silly change yeah, but I don't see it being reverted.

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy

ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#17 - 2014-08-19 23:43:42 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
As there is already a thread on the same topic (an official feedback thread no less), this one gets a lock.

The Rules:
16. Redundant and re-posted threads will be locked.

As a courtesy to other forum users, please search to see if there is a thread already open on the topic you wish to discuss. If so, please place your comments there instead. Multiple threads on the same subject clutter up the forums needlessly, causing good feedback and ideas to be lost. Please keep discussions regarding a topic to a single thread.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)