These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#7861 - 2014-10-08 21:11:01 UTC
you're all idiots if you think mynnna's formula can ever REDUCE your fatigue by jumping

the constants are there specifically to prevent that from happening
Panther X
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#7862 - 2014-10-08 21:14:45 UTC
memes incoming in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1....

Vader on jump drives


jump drive meme

Just a quick giggle

My Titan smells of rich Corinthian Leather...

Gwailar
Doomheim
#7863 - 2014-10-08 21:16:06 UTC
Promiscuous Female wrote:
you're all idiots if you think mynnna's formula can ever REDUCE your fatigue by jumping

the constants are there specifically to prevent that from happening


PFffffff

Maths or GTFO.

"Mmmmm. PoonWaffles."   --Mittens the Cat

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#7864 - 2014-10-08 21:16:28 UTC
kxdan wrote:
Anyone else selling their capitals?
These changes seem ridiculous, and its just going to make it so that huge alliances just keep blobs in different places or get bigger to have blobs more spread out.

I happen to know some huge alliances that might be interested in buying your capitals.

Send me an evemail, I'll hook you up.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#7865 - 2014-10-08 21:22:12 UTC
Gwailar wrote:
Promiscuous Female wrote:
you're all idiots if you think mynnna's formula can ever REDUCE your fatigue by jumping

the constants are there specifically to prevent that from happening


PFffffff

Maths or GTFO.

FORMULA: Fatigue = (Fatigue Before Jump + Distance of Jump)^(Destination Distance from Origin * A + B)

just set B to > 1

blammeaux
Gwailar
Doomheim
#7866 - 2014-10-08 21:29:43 UTC
Been there already.

Gwailar wrote:
The only way this would work if B were always equal to or greater than 1.


But the original suggestion was for .3.

"Mmmmm. PoonWaffles."   --Mittens the Cat

Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#7867 - 2014-10-08 21:31:10 UTC
Gwailar wrote:

But the original suggestion was for .3.


We have established that Mynnna's .3 was just an example (unforseen consequence of Dist_from_origin being 0). Obviously the ability to negate jump fatigue would not be possible in an implemented system. But then again, this is CCP we're talking about here...
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#7868 - 2014-10-08 21:33:25 UTC
Gwailar wrote:
Been there already.

Gwailar wrote:
The only way this would work if B were always equal to or greater than 1.


But the original suggestion was for .3.

i said the formula was sound, not his constants
Promiscuous Female
GBS Logistics and Fives Support
#7869 - 2014-10-08 21:34:51 UTC
but if that ain't good enough for y'all then we can do this

MAX(1, (distance from origin * A + B))
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#7870 - 2014-10-08 21:37:41 UTC
Thinking about it, it would make sense to just have (1==B; then your fatigue would not increase for jumping back to your origin.
Gwailar
Doomheim
#7871 - 2014-10-08 21:47:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Gwailar
Just as a thought experiment, I would say it would be better to make the Distance from Origin evaluate as 1 on your jump back to the origin. That way you can still use A and B as tuning knobs, without allowing for multiplication by zero.

EDIT:
Having said that, I personally find the multiplicative nature of the CCP proposal more interesting, and challenging. I also think having your fatigue generate differently depending on which direction you're traveling difficult to justify from a narrative point of view.

"Mmmmm. PoonWaffles."   --Mittens the Cat

Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#7872 - 2014-10-08 21:52:17 UTC
mynnna wrote:
I've been playing with this for a couple days, and here's the adjustment I propose:

Fatigue = (Fatigue Before Jump + Distance of Jump)^(Destination Distance from Origin * A + B)

Distance from origin is just the straight-line distance in light years. Origin is set when you make a jump with 0 fatigue and can be reset when you are back to 0 fatigue (it could also be available to reset after a period of time of several hours regardless of fatigue, which is also interesting). A and B are just constants to tweak for balance. A sets how far from your origin you can go before fatigue really starts ramping up quickly; that distance is 1/A light years. B is just a tuning knob, especially handy for tweaking the effect on short range travel. Individual ships could get bonuses to one or the other, as well. All the other mechanics about fatigue work identically. A = 0.05 and B = .3 generate interesting results, for sure.

The effect of this is that short range travel, such as within your own region, isn't punished as though it's exactly like long distance travel. It's important to note that that isn't the same as "not punished at all" but rather that it imposes interesting choice on that movement. The industry player might ask himself whether he wants to take a gate to the expensive factory next door (three minute round trip, for example) or the bridge to the factory in the next constellation, which is cheaper but has a six minute round trip. The pilot PvPing and defending his home from roamers might decide whether taking that third bridge in two hours is worth the ten minute wait, worth not being able to get back around in that time. As proposed by the blog, neither player can make more than a few jumps before effectively losing the ability for the entire play session. Heck, even the force seeking to cross a long distance in EVE can decide whether they want to get there faster or avoid obstacles but impair their mobility upon arrival, or take it slow but have more full mobility. And in an invasion, both the invaders and defenders would have the benefit of their cyno movement being local and so somewhat less restricted, allowing for a nice balance between the current paradigm where the target region plus three regions surrounding it are the battlefield, and the paradigm of this blog. where lack of mobility restricts the battlefield to just one or two systems.

It also nicely addresses some complaints of the thread. Blackops battleships don't get rendered completely ineffectual, because most of their movement takes place within a limited distance from a staging location. Jump Freighters would get hit far less hard, because half of their movement would be back towards their origin.

The fatigue mechanic in general has plenty of promise and is an elegant solution to what most acknowledge as a problem in EVE, but crushing nullsec quality of life in the process isn't necessary - the method above addresses that.


And you wonder why CCP didn't even bother to give you a memo on these changes?
Lol

You and baltar1 should start a club.

I don't know what's more sad; that you posted this seriously or that you thought anyone would buy it.

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."

Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#7873 - 2014-10-08 21:53:36 UTC
Gwailar wrote:
Just as a thought experiment, I would say it would be better to make the Distance from Origin evaluate as 1 on your jump back to the origin. That way you can still use A and B as tuning knobs, without allowing for multiplication by zero.


Promiscuous Female wrote:

MAX(1, (distance from origin * A + B))



That's what the above is.
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#7874 - 2014-10-08 21:54:37 UTC
Regardless of the value of B you choose, you're still giving an arbitrary advantage to movement around or near a central point of your own choosing. Why the hell would you do that? Why would it be advantageous from a game design standpoint to make short range teleportation less costly for a defender than an attacker? What possible reason would you want that?

There should be no preference given to movement to / from an origin point over travel in a straight line. There is no balance reason that I can think of that would in any way be fair.

If you want to make corp / alliance logistics easier - and I see no reason to do so if your goal is to make nullsec life challenging again - then give JFs a slight range boost. But personally I want to see folks actually taking gates again, and for alliance level logistics to be handled by alliance level effort rather than 1 masochist with 80 accounts or something.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."

Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#7875 - 2014-10-08 21:55:51 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:

And you wonder why CCP didn't even bother to give you a memo on these changes?
Lol

You and baltar1 should start a club.

I don't know what's more sad; that you posted this seriously or that you thought anyone would buy it.


You caught us, our suggestion was really a hidden agenda trying to only benefit GoonWaffe Roll
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#7876 - 2014-10-08 21:59:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Omniblivion
Veskrashen wrote:
Regardless of the value of B you choose, you're still giving an arbitrary advantage to movement around or near a central point of your own choosing. Why the hell would you do that? Why would it be advantageous from a game design standpoint to make short range teleportation less costly for a defender than an attacker? What possible reason would you want that?


Since it's pretty clear that you don't have an idea how nullsec warfare works, let me explain.

When someone moves to attack a location, they move their fleets to what is known as a "Staging System". Both the attackers AND the defenders have such a system, which they base their fleets out of. By implementing a change such as [No increase for jumping back to origin], then this allows for meaningful combat at the alliance/coalition warfare level by either the attacker OR the defender- provided that they were able to successfully set up a staging system.

The intent for these changes is to inhibit people from being able to cross the entire map in under 30 minutes to join in to a cap fight. By enabling two forces to easily move in a 5 ly area around their origin, that will entice more, smaller, engagements rather than one large engagement.
Gwailar
Doomheim
#7877 - 2014-10-08 22:01:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Gwailar
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
Gwailar wrote:
Just as a thought experiment, I would say it would be better to make the Distance from Origin evaluate as 1 on your jump back to the origin. That way you can still use A and B as tuning knobs, without allowing for multiplication by zero.


Promiscuous Female wrote:

MAX(1, (distance from origin * A + B))



That's what the above is.


No it's not.
That returns the greater of 1 and (DfO*A+B).

I'm saying DfO itself should never evaluate less than 1.

"Mmmmm. PoonWaffles."   --Mittens the Cat

Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#7878 - 2014-10-08 22:06:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Omniblivion
I mean that using the MAX formula means that you can never get an exponental factor less than 1. You couldn't just have DfO >=1, because then you would also need to ensure that DfO*A+B >1. Otherwise, if A and B are too small and DfO was >=1, then you could still end up with a value less than 1, reducing fatigue.

Edit: even if DfO was always at least 1, then even in Mynnna's example of A=.05 and B = .3, the fatigue would be reduced jumping back to origin.
Gwailar
Doomheim
#7879 - 2014-10-08 22:12:27 UTC
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
I mean that using the MAX formula means that you can never get an exponental factor less than 1. You couldn't just have DfO >=1, because then you would also need to ensure that DfO*A+B >1. Otherwise, if A and B are too small and DfO was >=1, then you could still end up with a value less than 1, reducing fatigue.

Edit: even if DfO was always at least 1, then even in Mynnna's example of A=.05 and B = .3, the fatigue would be reduced jumping back to origin.

You are right.
I failed to account for the possibility of a small A value. I rescind my thought experiment.

"Mmmmm. PoonWaffles."   --Mittens the Cat

KayleInara
Perkone
Caldari State
#7880 - 2014-10-08 22:23:57 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:


And you wonder why CCP didn't even bother to give you a memo on these changes?
Lol

You and baltar1 should start a club.

I don't know what's more sad; that you posted this seriously or that you thought anyone would buy it.


What an amazingly well thought out and reasoned post in response to a long explanation of an alternative to the system proposed in the Dev blog.

I will admit though, that I am left somewhat confused as to what exactly you think is wrong with the proposal you are supposedly rebutting, or indeed what your preferred solution (other than Sh$t posting) might possibly be.

Some people actually think it might be nice to be able to move around their home region reasonably well, while allowing for the restriction of long-distance 'power projection', which is what I understood to be the entire point of this proposed change.

It seems that there are a large number of people in this thread who actually think that what should happen is that the lives of everyone in null should be made painful, yet I can't see how that particular course would benefit the game or CCP in the long term.