These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kalissis
#3821 - 2014-10-02 18:16:44 UTC
Letrange wrote:
@greyscale @anyFC

Sudden though, could FC's chime in on this?

Would it be possible to add some form of jump fatigue indicator of a fleet and not just the individual pilots? I think that FC's would like to know what the max jump timer and max fatigue (and possible average jump timer and average fatigue with a x/y indicator indicating how many pilots are still part of the average) for a fleet without having to manually ask the pilots in the fleet to yell out how much jump cooldown they have left.

New tab on the fleet panel, some other indicator. Since there's now a cool-down after a jump and it's influenced by fatigue, it may be different for various members of a fleet. Also knowing if anyone still has fatigue going INTO a fleet since this means that parts of the fleet may take longer before they're able to jump than the rest of the fleet.

Also good for normal fleets using bridges since fc's may want to keep "sudden movement" capability of using jump bridges in reserve and knowing how much fatigue is in the fleet as a whole and how much that'll hang up their ability to use the next jump bridge may need to factor into their decision making.


Its the individuals responsibility to know when you can and cant jump, if you even take that away we are back at "Press F1" monkeys army.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#3822 - 2014-10-02 18:17:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Demonfist wrote:
Querns wrote:
Demonfist wrote:
Alliances love tech moons, right?

Man your playbook is dated

Thanks for your input. Next time if you could suggest alternate options that would stimulate conflict more efficiently that would be swell.


This is what happened last time CCP tried to 'stimulate conflict' (using the same "nerf things till people fight" thinking as displayed with the current changes).

Quote:
tl;dr There's now a reason to fight for better space again: sov upgrades will spawn better cosmic anomalies in lower truesec space; cosmic anomalies spawned by methods other than sov upgrades are unaffected.


This is why CCP should always work to provide more tools rather than thinking they can nerf-herd people in a desired direction.
Lady Spank
Get Out Nasty Face
#3823 - 2014-10-02 18:17:21 UTC
Just a few more pages and this will be a bigger threadnaught than the nano-nerf.

(ಠ_ృ) ~ It Takes a Million Years to Become Diamonds So Lets Just Burn Like Coal Until the Sky's Black ~ (ಠ_ృ)

Vhaine Vhindiscar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#3824 - 2014-10-02 18:18:07 UTC
Imolus wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Planned new feature to address new player movement:
Thoughts? Pasting this into the FAQ and also trying to get it into the blog proper.

Genuinely new players should not be going straight into nullsec unless they are well informed and had done a decent amount of research on the game.



Here's a history lesson for you...GF, Dreddit, and BNI. These entities drive content in the game and rely heavily on newbies. All of them have intense newbie training systems and resources. Would you like to compare retention rates for those guys vs the people who learn eve via the tutorial? I think you'd be surprised. You could be shooting red crosses and running npc courier missions your first week or you could be locking down gates for massive fleet fights with dudes giving you isk showers. I think everyone knows which one of those is actually fun and rewarding.
Heat-seeking Moisture Missile
Deep Thought Labs
#3825 - 2014-10-02 18:18:40 UTC
@ CCP GreyScale

please remove the B-DBYQ <---> J5A-IX gate.

mwuahahhahaha
Captn Hammer
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3826 - 2014-10-02 18:19:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Captn Hammer
CCP Grayscale,

Congratulations. You've kept a level head and even a sense of humor amid a tidal wave of feedback/rage. Keep it up.

I won't pretend to have my head really wrapped around how the changes will shake up the sandbox, but I totally agree that drastic measures were in order.

I do wonder, though, if totally nerfing/redefining 4 major areas all at once is a proportionate response to the serious problem of Capital Force Projection.

1) Maximum Jump Distance to 5LY
2) Introducing Jump Fatigue
3) Obliterating Death Cloning (with a generous work around for newbros)
4) Nerfing Jump Bridges/Portals

Taken in isolation, I see the logic behind each. Their cumulative effect, however, is less nerfing of Capital Force Projection but rather full-on castration.

In the debut episode of o7 you posit that the rationale behind these changes are (and this is just my hasty transcription from the YouTube link) that you "want to constrain use of jump drives and jump portals for long range while not ... " (the audio was indistinct, I tried to parse it out 5-6 times) and just previously had you stated that 'We are happy with how Jump Drives work in a small area, but for long-distance travel" it's a problem that you mean to fix - forgive my rough paraphrase.

So if your main motive is to stop long-distance force projection (and the resulting server-killing mega battles and stagnation through fear of hot-dropping that strangles nullsec presently) then I see how point 3 (from my points listed above) closes a loophole. I see how point 4 and 2 really shift a focus toward thinking regionally, making it very difficult or impractical to be responsible for the security of multiple regions. I'm sure I'll grr at Jump Fatigue at one point or another, but I see how it's necessary.

My greatest concern is point 1 - the 5LY max. If you're 'happy with how jump drives work in a small area' (I interpret that as a single region, correct me if I'm wrong) then why is it necessary to nerf jump distances so dramatically; it seems a JDC 5 Dread will have 40% of it's former LY jump capability for a single jump)? What if we only had points 2, 3, and 4? I think your goal of stopping long-distance force projection would still be met, but life within a region or for logistic wings of Alliances would not receive a needless quality-of-life nerf. I have 3-4 capital characters, and I've invested a great deal in them and training because of their utility and versatility, yet I fear in the name of stymying power projection, you'll make capital ships, a major end game goal of many players, too weak.The capacity to jump around a region doesn't seem over powered, if granted in conjunction with points 2, 3 and 4. Rather nerfing/castrating all 4 at once seems disproportional.

The counterbalance offered to the 4-point projection nerfing/castrating is the capability to use gates. Surely you've noted how BS/BC fleet useage has already plummeted owing to just how tedius and slow and mind-numbing they've become with the warp speed changes. Those changes were good, on the whole, but if your alternative to jump range, even for intra-Region local work, is to use gates, please take note how tedius and terrible that would be. I feel BS/BCs have already been severely damaged by the tedium of warping them around, that's not a tenable solution for the mainstay transport of Capitals.

TL:DR Capital Projection is OP and needs balancing, but nerfing it 4 ways at once is disproportional to the problem, which can be solved by implementing 3 of the 4 steps.
Hendrick Tallardar
Doomheim
#3827 - 2014-10-02 18:19:43 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Can supers use gates after this change?
Does a titan providing a bridge gain fatigue when people jump through it?
No. Only if the titan itself jumps.


Can we possibly discuss the long desired movement of the "Jump To" and "Bridge To" locations on the UI now?
Demonfist
New Eden Capsuleer College
Higher Education
#3828 - 2014-10-02 18:20:08 UTC
John McCreedy wrote:
Greyscale, I think the biggest problem with this blog/proposed change right now is people who live in null sec simply cannot understand how this fits in with improving null sec? It feels like yet another nerf to 0.0, that's just had one nerf after another these past few years, rather than any kind of improvement. I don't think any of us can understand how this addresses the stagnation of null sec. Perhaps you might take the time to explain how this improves the lives of people who live there so we can understand the reasoning behind this.

This change lays the groundwork for player owned jump gates going in to correct the downsides that this creates. You can't "fix what is broken" if it isn't broken first. So they're taking the step of breaking it now. Sure it will be painful for all of us in the short term, but think bigger picture and it can only be a positive thing. I've seen other games push massive nerfs live that without them many other things they later added simply wouldn't have been possible.

eBil Tycoon > we're more like megacapitalistic psychotic space cowboys with raging epeens and 3% real girls.

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#3829 - 2014-10-02 18:20:12 UTC
Vhaine Vhindiscar wrote:

with dudes giving you isk showers

i would like to take this time to remind everyone that all activities performed in goonswarm federation occur between two consenting adults of legal age

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3830 - 2014-10-02 18:20:51 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Gospadin wrote:
People asked for the change to "help them recruit newbies," CCP responded with a newbie only fix, and then those who asked for the original are upset because in reality they were asking to not nerf power projection.

I'm not sure that phrase means what you think it means.


Basically someone brought up the concept of recruiting noobs and bringing them into nullsec, and that by changing current medical clone mechanics, would make it exceedingly difficult to get them in there, diminishing the new player experience.

CCP makes their following change, which provides all non-new characters no reprieve from the change, but still keeps a viable new player experience going for actual new characters and players.

It was an attempt to undo the suggested change for everybody new and old, by putting it all under the veil of "it'll diminish the new player experience".

It was a political play. It did not work.

You and Gospadin must be reading a different thread from what I'm reading, because from where I'm standing we asked for a way to get newbies to our space, and we got it. So we're happy.

No political play or no attempt to "not nerf power projection".
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#3831 - 2014-10-02 18:21:04 UTC
Demonfist wrote:
Querns wrote:
Demonfist wrote:
Alliances love tech moons, right?

Man your playbook is dated

Thanks for your input. Next time if you could suggest alternate options that would stimulate conflict more efficiently that would be swell.


I am thinking a dynamic true sec system directly inveresed to the occupancy levels... I.E the more built up the space the lower the true sec as the NPC pirates will move elsewhere... this will then cause corps and alliances to want move to the better space as thats where thier respective SRP will come from.

Though this will be a tug of war as you wont want to move too far away from your home base as thats where the industry is done.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Miyammato Musashi
Freeport Exploration
Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
#3832 - 2014-10-02 18:21:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Miyammato Musashi
Lady Spank wrote:
Just a few more pages and this will be a bigger threadnaught than the nano-nerf.

Oh... this will be bigger. This is the biggest game changer since I started playing in '06. Big smile

Edit: Correction - Forgot about warp to zero... the end of regional g2g bookmarks

I am a meat popsicle. 

350125GO
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3833 - 2014-10-02 18:21:05 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Planned new feature to address new player movement:

For players less than thirty days old, once per player corporation joined, and
For all players, once a year

You may push a button in your corp interface (while a member of a player corp and docked) that:
- Moves your medical clone to a station designated by your corporation, and
- Automatically moves you to your medical clone

Exact method of corporations designating target station still being ironed out, but it will involve at the very least being able to designate a default station for all corp members, and will likely be allowed for *any* station with a corp office, regardless of system sec status.


This seems to us like it solves the "I want to recruit people to nullsec" concern, and also gives non-nullsec recruiters an easier way to get genuinely new players to the right location easily.



Thoughts? Pasting this into the FAQ and also trying to get it into the blog proper.



I don't see why this is necessary. New players can find ways into null, and their corps should support the new recruits, not find the magic elevator to take them there.

This, of course, provides no benefit to WH corps, and most of us won't care, but if it starts up the allow jump clones in WHs argument again imma gonna start disliking you.

You're young, you'll adjust. I'm old, I'll get used to it.

JC Anderson
RED ROSE THORN
#3834 - 2014-10-02 18:21:30 UTC  |  Edited by: JC Anderson
Lady Spank wrote:
Just a few more pages and this will be a bigger threadnaught than the nano-nerf.


Once it hits page 209, then it will also have bypassed the removal of ghost training 208 page threadnaught.

Come to think of it, a lot of people unsubbed over that as well. But CCP didn't back down from it.
Josef Djugashvilis
#3835 - 2014-10-02 18:22:02 UTC
[quote=FatFreddy]I LIKE IT![/quote

I just couldn't resist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoRcpbsD-Vk

This is not a signature.

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#3836 - 2014-10-02 18:22:08 UTC
Heat-seeking Moisture Missile wrote:
@ CCP GreyScale

please remove the B-DBYQ <---> J5A-IX gate.

mwuahahhahaha

Agreed -- this would lock off Fountain extremely well and make it nigh-impregnable. Meanwhile, our logistics routes work without it.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

flakeys
Doomheim
#3837 - 2014-10-02 18:22:15 UTC
Pic'n dor wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

Coreemo wrote:
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.


Why? (Serious question.)




Because where it's hot, it's content.
When it's content, it's fun.
When it's fun, it is worth playing.
When it is worth playing, we, player, pay and have fun.

Remove from casual player the ability of quickly catch up is incentive... to play something else...


Remember this http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/eve-online-development-in-2013-and-beyond/
Don't let the enablers ant the instigators alone with followers that can't catch up.
No everyone is playing 24/7...



Take a ship , undock , fly there .... o// problem solved.

OW wait you're affraid you're gonna be too late to enjoy that content , wich will mean there is another side who VERRY much enjoyed their content as the reinforcements came way too late.Those guys also paid to have fun remember ...


You're convincing me even more that CCP is on the right track here ...

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.

Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#3838 - 2014-10-02 18:22:55 UTC
Terraniel Aurelius wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:


- Yes, persists after podding
- Yes, gate camps are hard. If they end up being too strong we'll likely add tools to redress the balance, but don't forget that jump drives allow you to switch entry gate very quickly.
- This is a thing we're considering
- Ditto


With the maximum jump range being 5 Lightyears, this will no longer be the case for several regions. With the proposed jump fatigue mechanic "very quickly" turns to painfully slowly. Gate camps will become the new standard for "Sov PvP".

I feel as though you have forgotten that we do not play this game in a vacuum. This will reduce the maneuverability of fleets and make them much more predictable. Spies will now eliminate any surprise factors that could have been had. If you think that spies are not a factor, then you have not played this game enough to understand how it works.


Spies, Scouts, Afk cloaky alts in transit systems... that is all intelligence, and regardless of whether using a gate or a jump drive, people will know when you are moving. You and your group will have to be more conscious of what you are doing when you decide to move. Defense fleets will matter again. Escorting will be a service to a group, and not an afterthought. Hot drops will be more about tactical advantage, for killing an amazing target, or for routing, escaping or bypassing a especially tough corridor.

They are adding content by removing the main way people used to bypass that content. It is work, it is slow. You will have to gaze out into the universe and admire the stars, note your route, scout out ahead, possibly break up a camp, and not worry so much about being hot dropped by every cloaky alt in a system every 20 seconds. Escalations will be tactical, logistic pilots and ewar pilots will be in greater demand, and learning how to fly again will cause some growing pains.

Yaay!!!!

Eigenvalue
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#3839 - 2014-10-02 18:22:57 UTC
Keegan Teutorix wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Planned new feature to address new player movement:

For players less than thirty days old, once per player corporation joined, and
For all players, once a year


as with fatigue and cooldowns, why have such a ridiculously high limit? what are you preventing people from doing by dropping this to, say, once a month? and if people really want to they'll just make a new corp, so the once per year limit is totally arbitrary.



Or why not just use the existing jump clone timer? Yes it's like having a free jump clone in every office your corp has rented/owns - but - isn't this the point of having corporate infrastructure?
Vhaine Vhindiscar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#3840 - 2014-10-02 18:23:48 UTC
Quote:
Mostlyharmlesss wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Vyktor Abyss wrote:

4. Lowsec cyno-jammers should be made system wide or grid wide at least. **As presumably you will get no exhaustion cynoing within the same system - lowsec will have more cap fleets cynoing within system much more regularly as part of a camp or w/e. Lowsec power projection will actually increase for the current '1 system overlords' as they warp caps to gate, jump and then cyno within the system to the fight.


** Edit: added a reason why ... Mystic Meg crystal ball opinion here but I'm normally not too far off.



4 Need to have a look at in-system jumps - I can't even remember if they're possible :/




ARE YOU ******* KIDDING ME??!?!!! HOLY **** ******* QUIT YOUR ******* JOB


Please can we get this guy off null sec. Put him to work on high sec since they seem to be ok with his work. We actually need someone out here who understands how to place this game. This guy obviously isn't it.