These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE Information Portal

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Dev Blog: Long-Distance Travel Changes Inbound

First post First post First post
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#221 - 2014-10-01 17:50:20 UTC
iskflakes wrote:
I'm running 16 accounts right now -- 8 are cynos, about 5 are supers and titans. If this patch fails to make nullsec 100% local, then you've lost me.

I'm not going to take gates to reach a fight.
I'm not going to wait for a 20 minute timer.
I'm not going to play cruisers online.

I've been waiting years for my titans to be non useless, when will that happen?

Fundamentally, I don't want to defend space from neighbors that just want to rat all day, and I don't want to take their space either.

With no fast way to deploy to a hot region there's nothing left for me to do, and I'm very skeptical that this patch will break up huge coalitions.

This guy gets it. This will do nothing to break up big coalitions. If anything, it's just going to get them to solidify and reinforce their positions in their current sov and hold it. In that light, this will further the stagnation of null.

Also, the whole "fix" to deathcloning is a really bad idea. We need SOME way to quickly deploy to a hot area that requires it. If you're gonna really go through with this CCP, you better be coming up with a way to do a quick deployment method.

Honestly, I feel like rage-ranting, but that won't really do much of anything, so I'll leave my post at this.
Half Empty
#222 - 2014-10-01 17:50:23 UTC
med clone change is super dumb, just nerfs newbies - older/richer pilots can just have more characters with more jump clones in diff places

thats the only totally senseless change imo
Gallente Federation
#223 - 2014-10-01 17:50:30 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:

And I like this a LOT- it finally gives smaller groups the ability to actually do something.

Most of the whining in this thread is coming from members of big alliances- let's see who will be affected the most.

Still, I feel like Black Ops should be exempt from this altogether, or at least in a much less severe way- making them the best covert fleet ship would make a lot of sense- and that, combined with the other idea I keep talking about would make covert fleets into a class of fleet all their own.

Anyhow, back to the matter at hand- people are complaining about how they're not going to be able to just move all the way across the galaxy in 10 minutes- having ships, all ships, as a whole, take a scaled time to travel makes sense- smaller ships, right now, can never keep up with capital ships- this has never really made sense in my mind- making ships all take a similar amount of time to travel from A to B is a VERY good idea.

Also, if caps are going to be able to use gates, just let them come into high sec again- no cynos in high sec, but more fun for everyone- maybe we'd see suicide battleship fleets ganking carriers and dreads on gates P

yes, please don't nerf black ops. you can do whatever to the rest.


[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right

Boomer Humor
Snuffed Out
#224 - 2014-10-01 17:50:46 UTC
CCP Just killed all cap fights, RIP EVE o7
Brutus Crendraven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#225 - 2014-10-01 17:50:47 UTC
TheVault wrote:
This is all a ploy to get more people into wormholes... there are now more wormhole sigs all over...look here is easier way to travel!

Mess with 0.0 but leave wormholes untouched?

An idea for wormholes:

- remove all caps from wormholes and remove the possibility to jump caps into and from wormholes
- remove PI from wormholes or lower it to high sec levels
- remove star bases in wormholes

0.0 suffers, so should the wormholers...

We are suffereing with significant poorly thought out changes. But hey you can shave a hell of a lot on travel through our wormholes. If you need any help traversing with out local etc please give me a shout.
CCP Greyscale
C C P Alliance
#226 - 2014-10-01 17:51:00 UTC
Preface: this is a big change. Yes, the way you play now is, as it relates to things touched by these changes and to varying degrees, no longer going to be viable. If that wasn't the case, these changes wouldn't be worth making in the first place.

This isn't a business-as-usual tuning pass, this is redefining what jump drives are *for* in this game.

Literally Space Moses wrote:
Have you considered the rather long distances between regions? I haven't actually checked the numbers, but I can imagine some regions being nigh impossible to assault, just because no capital ships can actually jump far enough to reach them, or can only reach one or two systems.

e: can caps even reach the drone regions via jump drives after this change?

Yes, we have. The 5 LY range was chosen after looking at gaps between regions. 5 allows you to cross many of them. The larger gaps, such as some of the drone region jumps, were never going to be crossable with any of the range of ranges we'd be comfortable with. In some cases yes, this will lead to gate bottlenecks for capitals, and the geography of these areas will become very significant, yes.

(BRT-OP to C-4D0W is 2.52 LY)

X ATM092 wrote:
JFs and Rorqs are getting a 90% reduction to fatigue for obvious reasons, they're logistical ships not a part of power projection which are likely to be doing a lot of back and forth. However you need to add regular freighters to that list because you don't need a jump drive to get jump fatigue, being bridged gets it too. Please add, I'm reasonably sure it's an oversight but if it's not then it needs some explaining.

We'll have a look at the consequences of this.

Retar Aveymone wrote:
I need to do the math on this, but the range change to Rorqs/JFs seems like a massive nerf if they're also getting the 5LY max treatment (which does not make sense given the blog says the intent is not to nerf them). Are they?

Yes, they are. The blog says the intent is not to nerf them too hard, not to not nerf them at all.

Retar Aveymone wrote:
The abolition of podjumping makes it massively difficult for our newbies to join us in Deklein. Has any thought been put into that?

Yes, but it's a thing we're still not happy with the state of. We're going to discuss this specific issue more tomorrow, with the aim of coming up with a reasonable solution that deals with the newbie use case without opening the door to more general problems. Stay tuned for more info.

Sentient Blade wrote:
Nobody in their right mind would move a capital through a gate when you can get tackled by a frigate when it takes until christmas to get a lock on them to launch drones and defend yourselves.

I'm sure people will find a solution to this.

Angelique Duchemin wrote:
So I'm trying to work out the math here. Even at 90% reduction. A Jump freighter would be looking at a 15 minute cooldown after its third jump wouldn't it?

1.88 minutes after jump 3, assuming 5-LY jumps. (At least assuming I'm looking at the right spreadsheet...)

Lydia Maulerant wrote:
First, I think I'm reading an inconsistency in the blog post.

After a jump is complete but before your fatigue is increased, you gain a jump cooldown timer. The length of this timer is a number of minutes equal to your jump fatigue (before being increased by that jump!), and you are unable to make another jump of any kind until this timer expires.

Which suggests that the cooldown should be zerAnd later...
His first jump, of 4.85 LY, takes him to U-TJ7Y. Because he has no fatigue before the jump, he gains a minimum-length jump cooldown timer: 1 minute, plus 4.85 minutes for the distance travelled, for a total of 5.85 minutes,

Good catch. I'll fix that in a bit; should always have minimum-length timer, but it's not specified correctly.

Erasmus Phoenix wrote:
Are you planning on having supercarriers and titans jump gates, or only normal capitals?

Yup, all ships in the game will be able to use gates after this change. (Masterplan is looking into gate-warping physics to tidy up the way large ships land in relation to the gate.)

Alain Colcer wrote:
If you are using arbitrary tools to limit jump mechanics, Why not make it a capacitor depletion?

A short jump uses a small ammount of capacitor, and reduces very slightly your cap regen for a small ammount of time.
A long jump uses a fair ammount of capacitor, and drastically reduces your cap regen for a longer ammount of time.

Making it a risky proposition to cross the galaxy (unless you first secured the exit point), yet a safe one to make short jump for defensive deployment. Wouldnt that make more sense?

The simple implementation with cap regen is loose, in that you can have people cap boost you along the way. We had a more involved cap-based solution that locked off a portion of your cap after jump, so you couldn't get the cap requirements because some of your cap couldn't fill up, but we decided it was a little too gimmicky and didn't get to the heart of the problem cleanly enough. When we're working with player motivation we generally want to leave things as wide-open and interesting as possible; in the few cases where we feel the need to work against player motivation, we try to make the fix map as closely to the exact desired outcome as possible, because wiggle room will be exploited.
#227 - 2014-10-01 17:51:11 UTC
This is genuinely awesome, thx CCP!
Ai Mei
Starfish Operating Syndicate
#228 - 2014-10-01 17:51:18 UTC
onefineday wrote:
Rip eve , every one welcome to 2007. no more quick response fleets no more cap fights every one is gonna sit in its little space corner and take gates all around cos ccp solution to solve bad Hardware is to nerf a game to 2007, as a player am really sad i need to pay money for this game sad its nothing else even similar on a market . Sad to see such a terrible solution you apply to a game i hope you gonna put last nail in a coffin witch nearly happened whit incarnia.

2007 EvE > 2014 EvE.

Battle ship slug fests. Large hac fleets, large fast atack frig fleets. it was glorius!

It was a time when you held 0.0 territory you actually had to work as a team to hold it, to move people out there you had to escort them out there.
Arun Tadaruwa
State War Academy
Caldari State
#229 - 2014-10-01 17:51:28 UTC
Makalu Zarya wrote:
o7 eve and thanks for all the fish, it's been fun.

get wrecked

edit, to add how much I'll be enjoying the PL tears

Alt posting because yes.

Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#230 - 2014-10-01 17:51:30 UTC
getting the general gist of this it hurts the little guy a bit too much

maybe go with the idea of mass effecting cyno's ie stagger the use of cyno's linked to mass or something i dunno lol
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#231 - 2014-10-01 17:51:33 UTC
I see a lot of overreaction here
Knightrider Of Doom
Amarr Empire
#232 - 2014-10-01 17:52:04 UTC
cfc/pl/nc. tears best tears TwistedTwistedTwisted
#233 - 2014-10-01 17:52:12 UTC
It seems i might have to take a break for archeage soonBig smile
Zugleich Techniken
#234 - 2014-10-01 17:52:50 UTC
Glasgow Dunlop
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#235 - 2014-10-01 17:52:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Glasgow Dunlop
mmmm tears Cool

@glasgowdunlop #tweetfleet

TDSIN Director : Join 'TDSIN pub' for more info, Join today!

Glasgow EVE Meets Organiser

Obadiah Giaourtakos
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#236 - 2014-10-01 17:53:14 UTC
Cooldown timer sounds good, id prefer it to have an effect for regional jumps. Reduce jump range, that works too, again penalty on ly range for changing regions ( able to jump anywhere within the same region + the fatigue thing).

Capitals jumping gates...hmmm not really a good idea, i can already see the hell (gate) camps. Unless you want to allow them in high sec too

Have you ppl ever thought about removing supers from the game, and redesign them or forget about them? The way i see it, if u remove the portal from titans, and fighters bombers from supers, that fixes alot of things. No more blobs in your face, and lets face it, FBs were a mistake.

What you could consider is allow the capital bonuses to become active only on triage / siege mode, outside of triage an archon doesnt receive its tank bonus and rep range, Thanatos doesnt receive drones bonus and rep range, etc. Plus you allow launching fighters while in triage. And maybe allow carriers to launch max 5 FBs ( or just forget about FBs, big mistake...), until you fix supers...?

You remove portal from a titan, therefore titan loses 50% of its utility...maybe anchor these behemoths and make stations out of them, or better, REMOVE THEM. They were fun, lets move on.

Overall mindset is good, things need a change, but you are taking it to the extreme, hope you really get it right


Mercury Inc.
#237 - 2014-10-01 17:53:24 UTC
McGeeUK wrote:
Idea Well that's £30 a month I can save! Idea

£40 here
Ai Mei
Starfish Operating Syndicate
#238 - 2014-10-01 17:53:38 UTC
Twizted3 wrote:
CCP Just killed all cap fights, RIP EVE o7

EvE was just fine before cap fights and super cap brawls. also 0.0 was less stagnant and more of the player base actually lived out there.
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#239 - 2014-10-01 17:53:41 UTC
StarFleetCommander wrote:
It seems i might have to take a break for archeage soonBig smile

Contract your stuff to Bamboozlement, I'm in jita 4-4 btw.

I have a Ph.D

Aerich e'Kieron
#240 - 2014-10-01 17:53:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Aerich e'Kieron
I'm so excited.

This is absolutely amazing.


Gonna get some of my buds to resub and bring back my other accounts now I think. /o.o/