These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

W-Space Little Things List

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#1 - 2014-09-14 14:51:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Asayanami Dei
We've been working on consolidating and vadilating the ideas you guys were posting so far on the forums. Keep in mind that not every idea made the list, mostly because there were some suggestions that you couldn't really say they were "little things". Don't get mad, keep the ideas flowing. If your idea was a big thing, consider breaking it into smaller things, perhaps.

We've assigned categories to the ideas, so it's a bit more clear what sort of change it would be in the end. Easier book keeping, and it's easier for us to contact the right team of devs in order to get feedback on them.

So far we have a list of general categories, it might branch out in the future. They look like this:


  • [ Environmental ] - Anything to do with changes to the systems themselves, like system effects and their statics or connectivity.
  • [ Gameplay ] - Anything to do with how you play the game, things affecting player behaviour, example: Reverting Ore sites back to signatures.
  • [ Industry ] - That's self explanatory, anything to do with industry that affects W-Space.
  • [ PVE ] - Any changes directly affecting Sleepers, loot, sites, etc.
  • [ Technical ] - Things that are under-the-hood changes, like balancing, small changes to stats of things, server side changes, etc.
  • [ UI ] - Any changes to the UI itself. Example: Having a hotkey for the Scan button.
  • [ Visual ] - Visual upgrades, anythig to do with graphics in EVE, example: Updating W-Space Nebulas.


Of course some changes would require work in more than one field of the game, so sometimes the lines between categories get a little fuzzy, but you get the idea.

Keep all this in mind when suggesting further things you want us to put on the list, it will make maintaining it and getting feedback on it much easier for us.

In the spreadsheet you will also notice a column named "IMPORTANCE", and that it is empty for now. We are planning on doing a little bit of crowdsourcing in the future, so we can see which changes are the most important to the community, of course we already have a general idea of that, but having numbers supporting the ideas is helpful when talking to Devs, I think you understand.

Anyways, here's the list ( LINK ).

NOTICE: This list is no longer maintained.


Reference: Original Thread https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=355941&find=unread



Thread stickied. ISD Ezwal.

I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I--THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY

Youtube: /asayanami

Twitter: @asayanami

wormholefundamentals.com
Aquila Sagitta
Blue-Fire
#2 - 2014-09-14 18:07:07 UTC
[ UI ] Remember zoom level when in map/system map view. Switching between map and normal view you're constantly zooming in and out while scanning.

[ Gameplay ] Remote insurance/Corporation insurance. You don't have to be in a station to get insurance and corps can insure ships much like players can. Will allow sharing ships and the corp would receive insurance payout.

Blue-Fire Best Fire
Andrew Jester
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#3 - 2014-09-14 19:23:13 UTC
[ Visual ] fix POSes

Needed to put that one there for the ******* mongoloids who think the art team does coding stuff.

If thuggin' was a category I'd win a Grammy
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#4 - 2014-09-14 19:27:20 UTC
[UI] Scanning: change the red dot in a way that indicates if it is in-front of or behind the plane of the center for the scanning formation when a single ID is selected for focused scanning.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
Winthorp
#5 - 2014-09-14 20:50:16 UTC
So many things on that list require massive changes and contentious changes at that.

More discussion then was had in a little things thread would be needed before we put a rubber stamp on a list that WH space wants, for example you shouldn't be rubber stamping the below.

Arrow Ice in WH space?
Arrow Encouraging nomadic lifestyle for WH space? (really? what would that even entail?)
Arrow Extending lifetime of wormholes via module/anchorable?

I support the whole thread and the level of work Corbexx has put into this and now your help on making a spreadsheet but i think to put all these on a list to put to devs like all of WH space wants this is a bit misleading. I think the rest of the list looks like things everyone has asked for for years but those three on the list have been argued about for some time.
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#6 - 2014-09-14 21:16:14 UTC
Winthorp wrote:
So many things on that list require massive changes and contentious changes at that.

More discussion then was had in a little things thread would be needed before we put a rubber stamp on a list that WH space wants, for example you shouldn't be rubber stamping the below.

Arrow Ice in WH space?
Arrow Encouraging nomadic lifestyle for WH space? (really? what would that even entail?)
Arrow Extending lifetime of wormholes via module/anchorable?

I support the whole thread and the level of work Corbexx has put into this and now your help on making a spreadsheet but i think to put all these on a list to put to devs like all of WH space wants this is a bit misleading. I think the rest of the list looks like things everyone has asked for for years but those three on the list have been argued about for some time.


Hence crowdsourcing this later on.

I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I--THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY

Youtube: /asayanami

Twitter: @asayanami

wormholefundamentals.com
Winthorp
#7 - 2014-09-14 21:28:10 UTC
Asayanami Dei wrote:


Hence crowdsourcing this later on.


Your definition of crowd sourcing in your OP only puts them in a specific order when i ask why they are even on the list to start with, being how they have been points of great debate?
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#8 - 2014-09-14 21:32:24 UTC
Winthorp wrote:
Asayanami Dei wrote:


Hence crowdsourcing this later on.


Your definition of crowd sourcing in your OP only puts them in a specific order when i ask why they are even on the list to start with, being how they have been points of great debate?

If I had to guess, I would guess that they're on the list because they have been suggested enough that our CSM reps would rather not ignore them outright, thus they made of note of them to discuss further at some later point. That they're often debated is irrelevant because it seems to me like our 2 CSM reps are trying to do their best to give everyone some representation and not just those that Winthorp approves of. Big smile
Have a nice day
Winthorp
#9 - 2014-09-14 21:35:52 UTC
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Winthorp wrote:
Asayanami Dei wrote:


Hence crowdsourcing this later on.


Your definition of crowd sourcing in your OP only puts them in a specific order when i ask why they are even on the list to start with, being how they have been points of great debate?

If I had to guess, I would guess that they're on the list because they have been suggested enough that our CSM reps would rather not ignore them outright, thus they made of note of them to discuss further at some later point. That they're often debated is irrelevant because it seems to me like our 2 CSM reps are trying to do their best to give everyone some representation and not just those that Winthorp approves of. Big smile
Have a nice day


See and that's what i would hope to happen and is what i am asking for not a rank up down system of crowd sourcing as suggested...

And /sigh, sometimes i really wonder why i bother getting involved.
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#10 - 2014-09-14 21:36:08 UTC
Winthorp wrote:
Asayanami Dei wrote:


Hence crowdsourcing this later on.


Your definition of crowd sourcing in your OP only puts them in a specific order when i ask why they are even on the list to start with, being how they have been points of great debate?

Once we have the list in a specific order, we can focus on, say, top 10 things, and push them to the devs. ignore the rest for the time being. Get as many of the top 10 done, as fast as possible.
Once we run out of things from the top 10, we can then take the next, say 5, in order, put them on a new list, get more suggestions (because at that time, with all the changes, something else might pop up no one thought of before), and do it all over again.

That's how we imagine it happening.

I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I--THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY

Youtube: /asayanami

Twitter: @asayanami

wormholefundamentals.com
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#11 - 2014-09-14 21:44:41 UTC
Winthorp wrote:
scorchlikeshiswhiskey wrote:
Winthorp wrote:
Asayanami Dei wrote:


Hence crowdsourcing this later on.


Your definition of crowd sourcing in your OP only puts them in a specific order when i ask why they are even on the list to start with, being how they have been points of great debate?

If I had to guess, I would guess that they're on the list because they have been suggested enough that our CSM reps would rather not ignore them outright, thus they made of note of them to discuss further at some later point. That they're often debated is irrelevant because it seems to me like our 2 CSM reps are trying to do their best to give everyone some representation and not just those that Winthorp approves of. Big smile
Have a nice day


See and that's what i would hope to happen and is what i am asking for not a rank up down system of crowd sourcing as suggested...

And /sigh, sometimes i really wonder why i bother getting involved.

Winthorp, I'm tired today and I reread this a few times and I see your point and I concede that it is a legitimate point after reading Asay's last post. However, I maintain that debate should not stop something from being on the list, although it might be best if those particular points were highlighted for a more structured debate on the merits of the Pro/Con sides.

Asay, I don't completely agree with Winthorp but I do think that some of the more heated debates should be recognized and those points should be pulled to the side and discussed separately from the others. i.e. Sleepers dropping Sleeper Faction loot probably will get a significant number of people for it, whereas encouraging nomadic lifestyles is a much deeper issue that literally has the potential to flip wormhole life on it's head. The latter should probably be the subject of a townhall or somesuch with corbexx and yourself moderating and directing the debate to stay on track.
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#12 - 2014-09-14 21:50:02 UTC
So, for example, having a column there for "debatable ideas" and putting the ones that have mixed reviews so far there, and opening it up for discussion (forums/towmhall) would work?

I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I--THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY

Youtube: /asayanami

Twitter: @asayanami

wormholefundamentals.com
Winthorp
#13 - 2014-09-14 21:52:06 UTC
Asayanami Dei wrote:
So, for example, having a column there for "debatable ideas" and putting the ones that have mixed reviews so far there, and opening it up for discussion (forums/towmhall) would work?


Would work a lot better yes.
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#14 - 2014-09-14 21:52:15 UTC
Asayanami Dei wrote:
So, for example, having a column there for "debatable ideas" and putting the ones that have mixed reviews so far there, and opening it up for discussion (forums/towmhall) would work?

Good place to start.

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#15 - 2014-09-14 21:54:31 UTC
Asayanami Dei wrote:
So, for example, having a column there for "debatable ideas" and putting the ones that have mixed reviews so far there, and opening it up for discussion (forums/towmhall) would work?

I think so. I think that, ideally, it would go a long way towards preventing the kind of resentment that comes from big changes like that being incorporated without people feeling like they got a say.
So, Fix off-grid C4 sites spawns is probably something that can go straight to the Devs once the order is decided, or unstacking D-Scan from the Probe Scan, but allowing deployables to affect wormholes is a very hot debate that has raged for quite a while.
Asayanami Dei
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#16 - 2014-09-14 21:58:37 UTC
We can do that. The reason I don't want to straight strike things off the list is becasue people will keep suggesting them anyways. And we'll have this particular discussion over and over again. If it stays on the list, even in the "other" column, there's a smaller chance for that.

I'm a leaf on the wind, watch how I--THE CAPACITOR IS EMPTY

Youtube: /asayanami

Twitter: @asayanami

wormholefundamentals.com
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#17 - 2014-09-14 21:59:29 UTC
Why is 'Balance T3s' on that list?

A) It isnt WH related
B) It's certainly not a 'little' thing

TBH, there are a LOT of items on there that I don't like at all.
Here's a list for now, I'll provide reasons when I get more time:

Encourage nomadic lifestyle for W-Space
Extending lifetime of wormholes via module/anchorable
Remove dead POS towers after an arbitrary amount of time
Unique PI resources for W-Space
Randomness in sleeper spawns [they shouldn't be like missions]
Sec status increase from killing sleepers
Sleeper capital ship NPCs
Sleeper drop Faction Loot (Sleeper modules)
More randomness, bring back the unknown to W-space
Balance T3s - This one is fine, just shouldn't be on this list as it isn't WH specific and is not a little thing.
Naming your system
Exemp wormhole effect from the shader

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
scorchlikeshiswhiskey
Totally Abstract
O X I D E
#18 - 2014-09-14 22:15:17 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
Why is 'Balance T3s' on that list?

A) It isnt WH related
B) It's certainly not a 'little' thing

TBH, there are a LOT of items on there that I don't like at all.
Here's a list for now, I'll provide reasons when I get more time:

Encourage nomadic lifestyle for W-Space - Not a fan at all
Extending lifetime of wormholes via module/anchorable - Not a fan at all
Remove dead POS towers after an arbitrary amount of time - Definitely a fan
Unique PI resources for W-Space - Interesting, worthy of discussion
Randomness in sleeper spawns [they shouldn't be like missions] - Possibly
Sec status increase from killing sleepers - Possibly, although I think it makes more sense to do it for Incursions
Sleeper capital ship NPCs - No opinion since this would be C5/C6 most likely
Sleeper drop Faction Loot (Sleeper modules) - I am a fan, even more so if they interface with the different system effects. Also makes wormholes a little more profitable
More randomness, bring back the unknown to W-space - Possibly, more discussion to define "randomness"
Balance T3s - This one is fine, just shouldn't be on this list as it isn't WH specific and is not a little thing. - Not WH specific, but big impact of WH's
Naming your system - Neutral
Exemp wormhole effect from the shader - Sure so long as optional, I don't see why not

I am very interested to see why some of these made it on your list of things you don't like at all. If anyone cares I put my opinion in the underlined sections.
umnikar
Fishbone Industries
#19 - 2014-09-14 22:43:23 UTC  |  Edited by: umnikar
wait..is that the list of changes our csm members are fighting for actually or just things people here suggested?

[Gameplay] Encourage nomadic lifestyle for W-Space

^^ pretty much this.

I tried it for a longer time but had to gave up, discovering that whormholes more and more became the opposite - sov and blob style...
I mean, there already is a market for system setup and security.

[Nomadic Space]
- add mobile PI command centers or reduce the volume of current ones
- remove customs offices, or make em npc owned again
- limit POS tower size and certain modules. Or add a specialized(limited) wh tower, which is temporary.
- an orca like vessel which can carry enough ships and stuff! Probably with a Forcefield module Lol
- add random officer like spawns, remove escalations.
- sites do not get triggered on initiate warp, they stay until done(maybe need a limit then)
- further increase distance spawn, **** up the capacitor, randomly offline modules, polarization - mass based. Twisted
- adjust wormhole mass and their max jump mass acording to class more linear
- add a discovery probe to get info about a state of a wormhole while making the masses more random
- make ore sites grav sites again.
- remove low end ore
- remove J# and/or tracking api
- make PvE a challange, more randomness in spawns, rework the AI


[Sov Space]
- Naming your system Shocked I love this one.
- cloning, repping, insurance. Roll want a station?
- moon goo. (If so not with pos modules.)
- Sec status increase from killing sleepers
- Ice in W-space
- Extending lifetime of wormholes via module/anchorable
- Modify wormhole mass with either matter or antimatter bombs
- Mini Escalations and increase blue loot
- Sleeper capital ship NPCs


If $demand == $Sov Space;
goto null;

Make drop-in industry safer again, let people come into wh space and let em decide risk/reward on their own by choosing gameplay, instetead of being placed in front of a gank-button-blob. It's already at an ******** state.
If pilots are awake and watch their space, they deserve a chance to be alive?
Well, I'm not a miner myself, but I think the current mechanic is pretty unfair. They can't fight back! Think, I had more tears than the miner I ganked some time ago. Oops

Maybe I'm asking for a completely new space in eve. I thought it was w-space in the first though.

PS: I already got "evicted" and I don't care.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#20 - 2014-09-14 23:33:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Miton
Here's my do-not-want list with reasons:

Encourage nomadic lifestyle for W-Space:
What does this even mean? I mean, you can be plenty nomadinc in WHs if you want to be but people don't. Do you know why people don't? Because NO ONE likes moving. I've moved a fair few times in WH space and I've never met a single person who actually enjoys it.
As it stands currently, you can move systems every day if you want to so you already can be nomadic so what's the issue/goal here? To make it actively difficult/bad to stay in 1 system long term? If so, PLEASE NO!

Extending lifetime of wormholes via module/anchorable:
Just NO! This is actually a joke right? Do I really need to dig up the old forum post on WH stabilizers? This is an absolute no go.

Remove dead POS towers after an arbitrary amount of time:
Let me bottom line this for you: People who want this just want to be able to make free ISK by scooping dead sticks.
There's zero benefit in touching this POS mechanic and there ARE valid reasons to put up offline towers.

Unique PI resources for W-Space:
Why? This is a pure money grab and when WHs already have the best PI of anywhere, seems incredibly self serving without actually adding anything of value content wise.

Randomness in sleeper spawns [they shouldn't be like missions]:
Ok, this again. People who want this, please go find me a single group of people who willingly run C5 Quarantine Area sites (which are already random) over the non random sites.
Making PVE even more tedious is NOT a good thing for WHs.

Roaming Sleepers:
Why do people want this? WHs are hostile enough without needing to worry about getting 3rd partied by stupid gate rats.

Sec status increase from killing sleepers:
Makes no sense lore wise, Concord are not a thing in WHs.

Sleeper capital ship NPCs:
I mean... why? NS doesn't spawn faction caps, why should WHs? Does it add anything to the game? PVE shouldn't be the end goal in WHs, it's a means to an end.

Sleeper drop Faction Loot (Sleeper modules):
Eh, I guess this is fine as long as it's balanced correctly but I really don't see the need given how easy it is to make raw ISK in WHs.

More randomness, bring back the unknown to W-space:
WHs are plenty random. Adding randomness might sound cool to people by realistically it just adds tedium and anoys people.

Balance T3s:
This one is fine, just shouldn't be on this list as it isn't WH specific and is not a little thing.

Naming your system:
Um, why should you be able to do this? You can't even do it in NS and they get actual sov.

Exemp wormhole effect from the shader:
Look, I get it, people want to see the WH colors on low graphics settings. However, if I can run 5 clients at max settings with no issues on my 5+ year old PC, this really shouldnt be an issue for anyone and it's a waste of dev time even bringing it up.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
123Next pageLast page