EVE Information Portal

Confirm, liking it. One of the best gifts CCP gave us so far this year.

The idea of Jump Fatigue is fine, but I don't like the exponential timer and binary choice of this implementation. It seems arbitrary and inelegant. With this system you will end up with people being left out or left behind when using jump portals or bridges. "Hey guys I would love to join the fleet but my timer won't cool down for a week, see you later :-(".

Why not make fatigue affect how far you can jump safely. As your fatigue increases the range you can jump without consequences decreases. You could still have a minimum timer until the next jump, but that should be fixed at some reasonably small time (3m or so from the 3m/LY thing).

The consequences of jumping outside of your safe jump range could be tuned to how far outside the range you jump. If it's just outside, then you have a small chance of taking HP damage, or a debuff to Cap/Shield regen, etc. If you jump way out side of your safe range then you could have dire issues, Major HP damage, no cap/shield regen for some time, or you could burn out your jump drive stranding you for some cooldown period the duration of which could vary according to the severity of the damage.

You could tune this to have the same general principles of the timer based approach, but with the added tactical and strategic decision of jumping into the danger zone.

If you make small jumps to nearby places doing logistics within a small area, this type of system would allow you to do that with out dealing with an exponentially growing timer after each jump.

The increase to your fatigue level could scale as well, if you jump well inside your safe range the fatigue grows slowly, If you are pushing the boundaries of your safe range then it grows more quickly, and if you jump into the danger zone it could grow even faster.

From the player standpoint this could be displayed very easily in the map view showing your jump range.

From the given example provided at the beginning the player would come to the same decision since jumping continuously to their max safe range without letting the fatigue decrease would reduce their safe range rather quickly. You'd reach a point where your next jump could burn out your ability to jump, so might as well take the gates. But instead of making that choice for them, they still have the option of jumping.

All of the other mechanics of allowing some ships to have reduced fatigue work here as well.

Using fatigue in this way would achieve the same stated goals, but instead of taking away the players ability to jump you're giving them more choices, with tactical consequences.

Well, we've got to expect that these changes are going to happen. CCP is blindly rushing into the future with a goal in mind, and doesnt care about the collateral damage that it'll cause in the process (collateral damage = anyone in 0.0 that's not in a major coalition, and anyone involved with the T2 market (including consumers)), Never mind that the real issue wont be dealt with (major coalitions and supercaps) without obliterating every other group that could be affected by their changes first.

These changes go through, my JF and 2 cyno accounts are going unsubbed, as there's no point for them anymore. They'll resub once CCP stares at the shambles of the T2 market, upon realization that the workaround pre-JF was to use carriers with industrials, and that most of the supply of R8/32 minerals will vanish (not all, most).

-$45/month for you CCP, great job.

How'd that anomaly nerf go for for greyscale? work out as intended? how about the refusal to listen to community feedback, saying that "we know what we're doing, it'll be fine," turning 95% of 0.0 into a wasteland.

- You just killed Eve online - Worst idea ever

- Fix Null sec because its stagnant, we're all getting bored and nothing is worth the risk anymore. You have made things too accessible to high sec pilots and now everything that made null sec worth while is gone. Rare mods, moon goo, faction NPC etc. If people can't be bothered now then they won't even bother to log in if you made this change.

I think this is a much better more stable Idea

How does forcing players to stack up in a select few systems fit to the idea of occupancy based sov mechanics you aim for?
[/quote]
Well... a small bit of thinking gives me...

1. If you're living and playing and working and killing in a small space, that's kinda defacto occupancy based sov.

2. You don't have to stack up in one system.

3. Spreading out has costs.

4. Balancing defensibility with accessibility and mobility and sustainability is interesting gameplay.

I dont see officer mods dropping in high sec. I dont see moon goo in high sec. You did this to yourselves with coalitions and super cap blobs. Most high and low sec people dont want to be pets or slaves to n3 or cfc. But no one can compete with the big alliances amd take territory because the smaller groups cand field 70 titans and 300 moms like coalitons.

lets just move these sandbox walls in a bit.

Well every game is based on math. Players of EVE just happen to know how to use decimal points, scientific notation, and imaginary numbers.

Oh wah. You're so wrapped in in your groups b.s. you can't see a foot past your own nose.

Frog's business just became that much more lucrative.

They have the pilots in place to make the moves, and the time costs (time=money) can easily be passed on to the still willing consumer.

They now have the added business selling point of using THEIR pilot's jump timers so you don't have to use the one on your character.

This is what I was talking about in the other thread. You are literally so inside-the-box you can't even conceive of better gameplay. It's that or what Sinclair said, you won't see the truth because you're own interests are against it.

And this is why you are and always will be wrong about everything, always.