Wormholes

So you agree with me then?? I'm confused.

If you're FC is going to be plagued by people saying "should i use my frigate clone for this frigate roam or my slave set?", your FC/corp has bigger problems.

I want to Rek I really do. Your arguments are getting stronger on the forums and making far more sense but clone swapping is so close to allowing what Null Sec does that, as I've stated before, one more step to what they do gives them one more reason to petition hard for the things they want to change e.g. Stabilizers.
Personally I don't see frig wh's providing more than a flash content that will last weeks not months. Low/Null are out there for frigs/af's/cruisers hell any kind of roam or adventure and change clones to do a well organised roam to boot.
The only people I feel have a case for clone swapping in WH's atm is the poor buggers in 1-4's who built a Rorqual and got given the royal fist-f%&k by CCP but even then it's still not enough to sway me to believe this will help content.

+1

I didn't mind anything else about the patch, and was seriously considering moving back into a C3/4/5 until I read about the mass chances.

I'm pretty happy with Asay's positions as they were laid out. I would like both CSM's pushing back on the mass/spawn distance changes. Besides the points he laid out, I just don't like having "stargates" in w-space. Its unoriginal. Its stale. Its too k-spacey. And it doesn't mesh well with mass limitations.

I'm also not satisfied with the "swiss cheese" effect of all the random holes and frig holes. These things limit player choice if you're in a small group. "Well we can do PvP today, same as the last 5 days", is not what I call player choice. It really is like picking up nickels on the freeway if you're a PvE guy in a small corp. Whats worse is CCP left in the mechanic where you can seal off your wormhole by crashing all the randoms and statics. So if you're a big group, no problem, just takes a bit longer to crash everything and if your rolling ships get jumped you can easily defend them.

But if you're a small group, you're just plain SOL. Buffing site incomes and "mini-escalations" will help, but I think it doesn't address the core problem with Hyperion ... that it was a "shaddap and eat your peas" patch, meaning less player choice and player control. The old w-space allowed a significant degree of player control over how your w-space home connected to the outside, and it allowed things like combat rolling to slam the door on blobs. The new w-space is almost actively anti-small gang and in many ways works against small groups trying to live in wormholes and experience the whole of w-space life (not just daytripping for PvP).

That's not to say I want w-space to be a friendly happy carebearville like a themepark MMO, but the swiss cheese and the "stargates" changes have made small PvE-oriented corps sort of an endangered species now. PI and wormhole POS industry remains viable, but that's not putting any worthwhile ships at risk doing that outside of cheap haulers. Most importantly Hyperion made the jump from highsec life to wormholes, say from highsec to a C1 or a C2 more like a cliff than a stepping stone. The risk/reward is really starting to look bad especially with ice being so valuable now, my noob recruits have literally no interest in running our wormhole sites, only PI and using our lowsec static for FW and small ship roams.

So Asay, I hope you can work with Corby to help with some of these big picture balance issues. And get behind the idea of making w-space more strategic and challenging through returning control over these environments to players in creative ways, rather than having the game dictate what we can do from day to day.

Good explanation? Yes, a legible description of futile attempt at rationalizing a subjective issue and demanding the game to be changed accordingly.

The game offers choices (in this case pirate implant sets) that come with consequences (risk of losing the invested ISK). He wants to remove the consequence by using the argument "because K-space can swap clones easier, wormholes should have that too".

And we all agree that "because in k-space" is non-valid argument for any changes to w-space.

Oh and what comes to the actual topic: Congrats Asyanami! It's simply great to have another rep in CSM and I wish you and corbexx best of luck in your job.

If anyone has a weak argument here it's you with your "we shouldn't have it because k-space has it" argument that is barely an opinion and just stems from an irrational fear that one day CCP will add fixed gates, stations and concord to w-space.

The issue that i have isn't "i'll get podded if i fly a frigate" it''s "if i get podded in this 20 mil frigate, i'll lose 2 billion so i think i'll sit this one out"... If after that you can't see how allowing clone swapping would encourage more people to participate in non T3 combat, i must be talking to a moron.

If i'm wrong give me three good reasons why this would be bad for wormhole space and wouldn't result in more PVP combat.

Edit: sorry for hijacking your thread Asayanami

Where did i say "i want it because k-space has it" i clearly say that i want it because it would encourage me to fly other ships and take more chances.

I'm not bothered if i lose a 200 billion clone in a 10 million isk cruiser as long as the pod is designed that ship but a 1 billion isk t3 would provide extra protection against getting podded. So yes, i would be happier knowing that i did everything i could even if i ended up losing.

I already acknowledged that it was down to my tendency towards risk/stupidity averse gameplay, so try and keep up.

Now kindly address this:

You said that it's a wormhole specific problem because rest of the universe has immediate access to clones.

You do realize that you are far more likely to get stuck in a bubble in a Proteus than in a frigate, and therefore less likely to lose your pod when flying a frigate? It's your actions as a pilot that prevent podding, not EHP around you.

I only give one reason because it's as many as you gave.

1) it only caters to the risk averse (as you already admitted that reducing your risk is the only reason you want clone swapping)




It's ok, there's tons of carebears who never leave hisec because they fear losing their +5s. Game goes on without them no worries. Many people make excuses to not fight and it's impossible to remove all their imaginary barriers, they will invent new ones.

Did I say that risk averse is a bad thing? You seem to feel like it is. Some people just are risk averse and it is ok. I just don't think this game specifically caters to them, or that wormholes as a sub environment in EVE should be modified to suite them better.

Wormholes already allow for varied strategies. The perceived limitations you present are only subjective results of personal choices.