These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Long-Distance Travel Changes Inbound

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Aggro Bot
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#3441 - 2014-10-02 15:43:13 UTC
this will markedly represent the end of an era.

GG

going to go buy that beta that is out.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3442 - 2014-10-02 15:43:37 UTC
Metal Icarus wrote:
I think these changes are great!

Even if it means that there will be no low-sec in range of Curse due to that huge gap between Doril and Sendaya. Closest lowsec system is 5.0029 Ly away.

Harder for anyone to resupply, including myself, yes..... Better for Eve, Yes.



Curse will finally be up to its name

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Bobmon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#3443 - 2014-10-02 15:44:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Bobmon
Viktor Raybach
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#3444 - 2014-10-02 15:44:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Viktor Raybach
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Ivory Kantenu wrote:
You're ENCOURAGING people to not want to deploy by making things into a logistical headache for any force, be it large or small. Small guerrilla warfare is sadly NOT the lifeblood of Null, and this isn't going to help the issue.

In addition, the addition to this to Jump Bridges is just silly. You're basically making it so anything with multiple, large regions will have to wait to defend their space in a hurry?


Yes, and yes. Both deliberately.




Large fleet fights are, for many people, the reason to be in null and not in low sec/faction warfare/wormholes.

I've seen nothing that suggests these changes will increase the number of large fleet fights, if anything it will see a reduction as the effort for other entities to attack in significant numbers is exponentially increased.

Have you given this any thought, and if so can you explain in what way you think this will increase the number of large fleet fights, which are a prominent and popular aspect of null sec sov holding, given that it appears on the surface that these changes do the opposite.
Raelaem Eudain
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3445 - 2014-10-02 15:45:47 UTC
Summer VonSturm wrote:
As a NPC nullsec inhabitant, life just got a whole lot sweeter.
Logistics will need us to do some more work, but in terms of fights, its going to mean that the people we fight are once again the people that live near us, so our fights over our 'territory' are just that, local fights, not a fight that any man and his **** can just batphone in a tonne of support if a fight isn't going the way they want it.

I was always concerned that NPC nullsec never had a voice on the CSM, so that it always got overlooked, have to say though, this is one of the better changes Iv'e seen in a long time, Eve got interesting again.

CCP - take the changes, see them through, and you will have a better nullsec at the end of it.

(scurries off to resub accounts for another 6 months.)



See you in N-d and M-M =)
Isengrimus
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#3446 - 2014-10-02 15:45:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Isengrimus
So to sum up (in a subjective way) some of the proposed tweaks to the overall good idea:

- Jump Freighter and Rorqual jump range should be extended in order to ensure that if you managed to carve out a piece of the sov territory (thanks to the capital changes) you won't starve to death there because some big power just block all the reliable midpoints on your JF's route there;

- Black Ops and anything jumping through the BO Portal should get fatigue recovery much higher than a regular caps or fleet travelling through Titan bridge (90% perhaps?) because otherwise the intended "hit and run" BO operations will turn into "hit and become a sitting duck" operations;

- Supercapitals should not be able to use gates in order to keep the sanity of the playerbase intact (also: titan jumping through a system gate will look ridiculous).
Grave Digger Eriker
Doomheim
#3447 - 2014-10-02 15:47:47 UTC
ElectronHerd Askulf wrote:
Aryth wrote:

Personally I would like to see the fatigue cut in half. JF's and Rorqs exempt or with some big role bonus. Then somehow eliminate the need for cyno alts at all.


Rorq/JF with the 90% bonus on exhaustion accumulation is near enough to an exemption. I'll concede that you guys have vastly larger logistical problems than we do, so I suppose even that 10% will get annoying for you. The range, though, is the huge quality of life nerf that will effect anyone who lives further than a few gates into null.

THIS
Ilaister
Binary Aesthetics
#3448 - 2014-10-02 15:47:49 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
Ilaister wrote:
Have none of you read the posts from people that used to escort logistics convoys and how much fun it was?

Tell me more about fun.


http://imgur.com/m64JSTN

The only reason someone would want to live that far from anywhere useful is to rat quietly in peace. Pay for that peace in logistics. It's like buying a house in Greenland and complaining when you can't stroll to the Bahamas.
MonkeyBusiness Thiesant
Pandemic Unicorns
#3449 - 2014-10-02 15:48:34 UTC
Aggro Bot wrote:
this will markedly represent the end of an era.


The era has already ended. Go look at eve-offline average weekly figures, they're fallen off a cliff, down by almost a third since last year, and back to levels not seen since 2007.

That's what the current state of nullsec has done to Eve, and why it needs a shake-up this drastic.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#3450 - 2014-10-02 15:49:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
Work for your space or GTFO!

These changes are going to be great, and the return of having to plan ahead and escort shopping/convoy runs is not the end of the world, we used to somehow manage to have a good time and get logistics done back before jump freighters and instant gratification power projection. This plan needs (and will likely receive) a bunch of tweaking, and I bet a LOT more players are going to bother giving feedback and use the test server this time around.

For all those cap pilots who are quitting over this, how many dogdamn *active* combat cap pilots do you you think there are right now that a bunch of you leaving would be of any real significance?

I predict a return of a lot of bitter vets to the game.

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
handige harrie
Vereenigde Handels Compagnie
#3451 - 2014-10-02 15:50:40 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

The Ironfist wrote:
CCP Greyscale Do you guys have someone asking the question "is this fun?" during the development process? Just how much time do you think people are willing to spend on a game that is not fun at all. Right now logistics from deep null-sec to empire spaces takes about half an hour. After this change it will be around 7 hours do you really think people are willing to spend that amount of time on a game for literally no progress or reward?

I'm sure this is just a first draft but seriously ask the question is this fun? Will this be fun gameplay? I look forward to your reply.


We ask "is this going to add net positive value to the overall game experience for a sufficient number of players to justify its downsides".


How does the JF nerf add a 'overall positive experience' to the game?

Baddest poster ever
Thalen Draganos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3452 - 2014-10-02 15:50:43 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


Crysantos Callahan wrote:


Did you already run tests with larger capital/supercapital fleets using gates and the possible bumps that will happen?

Thanks in advance!


- Yup, Masterplan is doing some fine-tuning of warp logic to make this sort of thing smoother. There's no good way to warp 20 titans to a gate at once without bumping, though.


Perhaps you could add a little bit of code to change the activation range of a gate depending on ship size. If the ranges are set right you would eliminate that problem all together.
Andrea Keuvo
Rusty Pricks
#3453 - 2014-10-02 15:50:56 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:


We ask "is this going to add net positive value to the overall game experience for a sufficient number of players to justify its downsides".


Let me guess, CCP employees are both asking and answering this question? Maybe you should try asking the CSM instead, and let them answer since they actually play the game. My rough guess is that 50% or more of the rage in this thread is related to nerfing JF to 5LY range. Had you consulted with the CSM I'm sure they could have described the major quality of life issues this will cause for your player base and it could have been addressed before you dropped a ragequit inducing dev blog on your paying customers.
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#3454 - 2014-10-02 15:52:31 UTC
Suggestion for Black Ops. What about while jumping through a cover jump portal, the cooldown timer is greatly reduced? Fatigue would still remain the same. Something like 50% (maybe lower)?

That is if you jumped 7 LY on the first jump, your cool down timer would be 4 minutes and your fatigue would be 8 minutes. After 4 minutes you do another 7 LY jump resulting in a cool down of 7.6 minutes and a fatigue of 60.8.

The advantage of giving a reduced cool down timer would be that BLOPS could jump more quickly for the first few jumps, but still build up fatigue at the normal rate.

Thoughts?
350125GO
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3455 - 2014-10-02 15:53:25 UTC
I had no idea how many people fly jump freighters. By the looks of this thread, it's everyone!

Though having done logistics before, I empathize with the people who actually have to do it, however, it's what everyone asked for innit?

You're young, you'll adjust. I'm old, I'll get used to it.
Alexis Antollare
Phoenix Freight
#3456 - 2014-10-02 15:53:28 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Keegan Teutorix wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Sorry, lost a few from earlier when the forum ate a post

Chirality Tisteloin wrote:
Exponential growth of fatigue seems to overdo it.

Better use "logistic growth":

At each jump:

If Fatigue < jumpdistance:
Fatigue = jumpdistance + 1
else :
Fatigue += R*Fatigue*(1-Fatigue/K)


The parameter R controls how fast a character exhausts (could be lowered through skills / implants ...?)
(baseline might be R=2)

The parameter K is the "maximum" Fatigue a character can get. (something like 30-45 seems realistic)
Fatigue decays with time as suggested in Dev blog.

Might give designers better knobs to tune than the exponential growth model.

Cheers, Chira.


Nicer tuning options, yes, but we want to keep the math as simple as possible, so people can more easily wrap their heads around it.


because complicated math is so rare in eve? In reality this will all just get put into a tool like dotlan and explained in the three sentences Chira used. This would be no worse (probably far better in fact) than the gun and missile damage formulas and only needs to be understood once you reach a certain level in the game, so a two week old character who is still trying to understand the basics will never see this. You also wouldn't need to calculate this on the fly (again compare to damage formulas), you would plan in advance and have all the time you need to do the math.

The idea of being able to set a maximum fatigue seems reasonable. what purpose does fatigue of more than one or two weeks serve?


No, because complicated math is already too common in EVE. Sometimes it's necessary. Here, it's not.



What about a basic addition instead of the exponential growth of multiplication
.
If Cooldown = 1+Number of light years jumped then make fatigue -

Post jump Fatigue = Pre Jump Fatigue + Cooldown
Murauke
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#3457 - 2014-10-02 15:53:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Murauke
I couldn't care less about these changes since null sec for me died many years ago when I got married and stopped playing the game 23/7.

However I do see the need in first of all change the cyno mechanic. This is what makes force projection easy. If you already have cyno gens etc you've obviously already worked at the grind so to me that is still perfectly acceptable. The cyno mechanic makes it far too easy to project force. Having an improved cyno mechanic that doesn't hurt the immediate fun should be the thing we aim for. The thing I think about when it comes to a more active cyno-ing role is a more than "click" - Cyno's up.

And many people have already stated - how much time do you think your customer base has to "play" when we have other things to contend with, like paying bills.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#3458 - 2014-10-02 15:55:51 UTC
After thinking it through, I want to empathically state the following:

DO NOT EXTEND THE 5 LY RANGE ON CAPITAL JUMPS UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES

After spending some time last night with a jump planner set to JDC 0 dreads, I have determined that the number of logistics routes into 0.0 have decreased dramatically. This allows for much greater control on what gets into space, and provides meaningful options for fighting an insurgent force (or, by the same token, disrupting an entrenched one.) It is imperative that the restriction stay in place.

If we want to tune things, fatigue is the right place.

Also, I propose nerfing Jump Drive Calibration somewhat -- with the current proposal, caps have a base 2.22 LY jump range, which gets extended to 5 with JDC 5. I'd recommend drastically reducing JDC to 5% per level (currently 25%) and bumping base range to 4. This makes caps a lot more useful without a 37d train tacked on.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Dalia Rensini
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3459 - 2014-10-02 15:56:27 UTC
Degalo wrote:
Greyscale,

You seem to have forgotten that, while this is your job, this is actually a game for paying customers.

How much time do you think people have to play your game?

How much of the customers' time do you think you can waste by saying 'this playstyle is not allowed' before they stop paying?

Your jokes about the max fatigue being somewhere around 8000 years show that you are not treating this seriously.




this

and secondly the 'Is this fun?'' question

Why would I want to play a game where if I want to move from A to B I have to sit in a station waiting1hr between jumps for 'fatique'' cooldown?
Polo Marco
Four Winds
#3460 - 2014-10-02 15:57:23 UTC
My My .... why is the GS interviewer here slow pitching to Greyscale? Isn't this plan supposed to emasculate them?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=warning&l=http%3a%2f%2fthemittani.com%2ffeatures%2fccp-greyscale-long-distance-travel-changes&domain=themittani.com

Well I know why.

Allowing cap travel thru gates and choking off any possibility of JF/Rorq bypass will bring back BoB.

And everyone of the Megacorps knows this and is panting to be THE NEW BOB.

Sure there will be a BIG war.....Then we will have to listen to the losers blame Greyscale :D.

Most of the small corps in null will have to pull out or get swallowed. Whoever owns your jump gate to empire will own you.

But then it's EVE :) so we will have the fun of sitting back and watching the chief perpetrators of this crash suffer while cooler smarter heads help us clean up the mess.

Eve teaches hard lessons. Don't blame the game for your own failures.