These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes - updates!

First post First post First post
Author
Masao Kurata
Perkone
Caldari State
#1341 - 2014-10-16 18:06:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Masao Kurata
EDIT: Just forget all this. It's apparently changed.
Balder Verdandi
Wormhole Sterilization Crew
#1342 - 2014-10-16 18:21:01 UTC
Yun Kuai wrote:

You clearly don't get that at a certain point, there will be people who move it; i.e. compressed ore loaded into a DST and manually flown to jita. An occator can get roughly 85k m3 cargo fit. That's a pretty decent amount of compressed ore to be moving around.

Also, is it just me or people really not know how to move between systems without a scout or a massive fleet behind them in nullsec? I've seen way to many people complaining about the instant death of jumping a capital through a gate in nullsec...last time I checked, the changes aren't forcing the CFC or N3 to reset all of their blues, so pretty sure you'll still be just fine...



You've never run the gauntlet from Wicked Creek, the Drone Regions, Venal, Tribute, etc., where you're 25 or 30 (or more) jumps to empire. For the record, it's 27 jumps from WC to empire.

Please .... if you haven't done null logistics, don't speak on it.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1343 - 2014-10-16 18:59:56 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Wouldn't it be more effective to start off with the sov system, which is the reason we're seeing the stagnation we're seeing? It is, after all, the reason why the SOP of wars is "he who can stuff the most people/big things into one system on the final timer, wins". If it hadn't been this way, i.e. if we had gone back to something akin to the old POS system, or an occupancy-based system (I don't really care which, as long as it encourages/requires lots of smaller fleets engaging more constantly than today's once a day/once a week), then I'm pretty certain we would not be seeing the current 2 coalition nullsec we're seeing now.

Don't get me wrong, I'm positive to the cap distance changes, but I just would've thought the sov system would've given more bang for your dev hour.


So there's two factors here: one is that we place somewhat more of the blame for the current equilibrium on jump travel than you're doing here; and the other more important one is that we felt some change was needed ASAP, and that travel changes both needed less further design work and needed less time to implement than a sov rework. They both need doing, but in this order there's a chance of something interesting happening ingame over the christmas holiday, rather than not having any changes hit before probably January.

The reason I'm putting more on the blame for the current equilibrium on the sov system than on jump travel is because every war I've been in the last 4 years has had one, maybe two fronts, and I strongly doubt that the jump travel changes would've had any appreciable impact on the outcompe.

I'm still convinced that the sov system's going to have the biggest bang for the buck, and I'm thinking you could've limited the changes to caps to just the LY they can jump in one go if the sov system had been done first. Having said that I understand why the caps changes are done first, and I'd never thought you guys would go so far as to allow caps to actually take gates.

I can only hope that this is an indication that you guys are prepared to be just as willing to go to extreme measures with the sov system, and come up with something which does make nullsec non-stagnant. I've only been waiting for this day for 3, probably 4 years, since it just became more and more obvious with every war I participated in that we were heading in the direction we were heading in, i.e. a stagnant null where nobody wanted to actually start the next war because it would just mean grinding with bombers and a few large fights where the outcome of 1-2 fights broke the resolution of one of the sides, and the remainder of the region was just swept up by the victor.
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#1344 - 2014-10-16 19:41:11 UTC
I think CCP played it right, dealing with cap mobility first. It was very likely the easiest task for coding also. The playerbase demanded action from CCP, and they have obliged us.
Before Phoebe, a war on two fronts was never very successful. The same caps always showed up at both objectives.
Now, the cap fleet will have to pick its engagements carefully, and is extremely unlikely they'll be able to pick more than one. That or they'll be splitting up their fleets, making them quite a bit easier to counter.
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#1345 - 2014-10-16 19:42:19 UTC
I can only think of one word to describe this change:

Ham-handed.

Not today spaghetti.

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1346 - 2014-10-16 19:42:48 UTC
Can you reimburse the sp for jump drive calibration please? I remapped early to train for this then two weeks in, the nerf was announced :(

I have been hit by nerfs in the past and i accept them but this one in particular makes this long skill useless for me. So please, when you make this change, reimburse the sp for jump calibration.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#1347 - 2014-10-16 19:53:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Altrue
I, for one, would like to show my full support to the 0.1 fatigue per minut decay that you have planned, CCP Greyscale.


I just wonder if it wouldn't be better to change the role of supers to a 100% non-agressive one.

Currently, the barrier of entry to sov nullsec is to have a large enough supercarrier force... The mere fact of having to already be in sov null, to be able to build what allows you to be in sov null is, pardon me, dumb, dumb, dumbUgh.

Yes this change diminishes the godlike influence of supers, but it doesn't prevent PL and the like to go after every small entity in null, one at a time, every day.

Maybe this change will allow for smaller conflicts to emerge, but they will also recede just as fast, when people understand that its not worth grinding a system and putting assets in it, to risk loosing it to a massive PL supercap fleet in 1 month without being able to do anything to stop it. (Sorry PL if I take you as an example :D)

So yeah... I understand the need for this change, but I believe that it will actually make things worse. Currently, one super fleet is indeed able to project across all of Eve, but if it does that too much, it will attract the attention of the opposed nullsec coalition. After Phoebe, one super fleet will move more slowly, but it will be left absolutely uncontested wherever it goes.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1348 - 2014-10-16 19:59:45 UTC
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
I think CCP played it right, dealing with cap mobility first. It was very likely the easiest task for coding also. The playerbase demanded action from CCP, and they have obliged us.
Before Phoebe, a war on two fronts was never very successful. The same caps always showed up at both objectives.
Now, the cap fleet will have to pick its engagements carefully, and is extremely unlikely they'll be able to pick more than one. That or they'll be splitting up their fleets, making them quite a bit easier to counter.

This wouldn't be true if the sov system meant that the defender didn't have a full week to get their fleet moved from one side of their space to the other.

If you have 2 fronts, and a sov system which meant that slacking off on defending one side for 2 days meant that you lost space, then the caps could be as mobile as they want, it wouldn't help because they wouldn't be able to defend with full force in two places at once, which means they would have to split their forces.

I suspect that what we'll see is that sov won't be the main thing that'll start to be affected after Phoebe hits. There'll probably be the occasional attack, but unless there's tons of fronts at the same time, I doubt it'll make much of an impact. Time'll tell, though, and for all I know I'll be proven wrong. Nothing'll please me more if the changes Greyscale is spearheading actually does shake things up a bit, but I think the floodgates'll hit when the sov system's changed.
xttz
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#1349 - 2014-10-16 20:01:51 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
rather than not having any changes hit before probably January.


Your initial blog mentioned a rebalance of starbase weapons, but there's been no word on them since then. Is it still planned for the next update?
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1350 - 2014-10-16 20:16:26 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:

"I put x isk on field, that means I should win, or at least take down my equivalent in isk!" is the worst possible train of thought you could come up with. Stop doing that.

You haven't been a Goon long and never participated in one of their wars have you..
Either that or you are simply a hypocrite.

Goons have been ruling their part of nulsec with "most isk on field" for years

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#1351 - 2014-10-16 20:25:26 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:

"I put x isk on field, that means I should win, or at least take down my equivalent in isk!" is the worst possible train of thought you could come up with. Stop doing that.

You haven't been a Goon long and never participated in one of their wars have you..
Either that or you are simply a hypocrite.

Goons have been ruling their part of nulsec with "most isk on field" for years

Actually I was thinking of the PL isk on field theory of supercap dominance

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 ?

Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1352 - 2014-10-16 20:27:06 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:

"I put x isk on field, that means I should win, or at least take down my equivalent in isk!" is the worst possible train of thought you could come up with. Stop doing that.

You haven't been a Goon long and never participated in one of their wars have you..

Nah, I've only been in goons, and participated in each and every war goons have been in since late 2009, what do I know?

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Either that or you are simply a hypocrite.

Please, do tell me more.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Goons have been ruling their part of nulsec with "most isk on field" for years

Oh, really? Please, do elucidate.
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#1353 - 2014-10-16 20:50:41 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Vincent Athena wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
.......

They both need doing, but in this order there's a chance of something interesting happening in-game over the Christmas holiday, rather than not having any changes hit before probably January.

Sov changes incoming in January!


Developed in series rather than in parallel, sorry :)

Right. And January is a full two months after November.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction

Celly Smunt
Neutin Local LLC
#1354 - 2014-10-16 21:15:42 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:
Celly S wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Celly S wrote:
be that as it may in some areas, there are no npc stations that I know of within 5ly of where I live, so such blanket statements aren't as accurate as we might want them to be.

You do know what this "free trade zone" station would be used for, right?

I'll give you a hint, it won't be for trade, it'll be used to stage out of to **** with the locals.


which follows my reply to Edward, and further backs up my statement that until those 2 issues are dealt with, nothing is going to be where it could or should be.

Uh. Your point was that trading wouldn't happen until free trade zone stations were in the middle of regions, I point out that they wouldn't be used for trading but to **** with the locals, and that backs up your statement?

Uh. Okay.



yes it does if you go and read both of the statements you replied to, specifically the one that included the term "relative safety"

o/
Celly Smunt.

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.

Celly Smunt
Neutin Local LLC
#1355 - 2014-10-16 21:21:42 UTC
Edward Olmops wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Celly S wrote:
be that as it may in some areas, there are no npc stations that I know of within 5ly of where I live, so such blanket statements aren't as accurate as we might want them to be.

You do know what this "free trade zone" station would be used for, right?

I'll give you a hint, it won't be for trade, it'll be used to stage out of to **** with the locals.


I can understand the issues nullsec alliances have with this, but it's always the same:
On one hand everyone wants to rat and farm ISK in peace and on the other hand everyone wants targets to shoot.
Only you either get both or nothing.





this is true, hence the cutting their own throat analogy I used earlier.. people can't sit there and complain that their goods don't sell in their system when every time someone shows up to buy them they get shot...

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.

Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#1356 - 2014-10-16 21:30:04 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Can you reimburse the sp for jump drive calibration please? I remapped early to train for this then two weeks in, the nerf was announced :(

I have been hit by nerfs in the past and i accept them but this one in particular makes this long skill useless for me. So please, when you make this change, reimburse the sp for jump calibration.



Yeah, me too. I trained archon to 5. This is unfair. In lieu of a SP reimbursment I will settle for one original pink megthron skin or a pony. Yeah a pony would also be cool. Perhaps a pink megthron skin with some kind of pony accents on it. Do this or else....
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1357 - 2014-10-16 21:32:01 UTC
Celly S wrote:
this is true, hence the cutting their own throat analogy I used earlier.. people can't sit there and complain that their goods don't sell in their system when every time someone shows up to buy them they get shot...

Selling goods isn't a problem in nullsec. Hope this helps.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1358 - 2014-10-16 21:34:37 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Catching up on older stuff...
1; One of the pillars of a good sandbox is that you're presented with a lot of choices. Another is that those choices are real choices, each with pros and cons, rather than false choices with only one good option.

2; However in cases like this one, where a change we feel is needed to make the game better is working against player motivation, experience strongly suggests that the approach most likely to achieve our goals is to mandate the change needed in the most direct way possible, as attempts to be delicate or minimalist in the core change simply lead to circumvention.

3; If people use the Battle Rorqual every now and then, that's excellent, the same way that the Battle Helios is excellent. If either of those strategies become *dominant*, though, we will adjust them, because dominant strategies lead to stagnation and boredom, both of which are anathema to a healthy sandbox game.

4; Absolutely willing to revisit 5LY if there's a good reason for it. We kept it uniform because it's simpler, it breaks fleets up less and requires a somewhat smaller cyno network for optimal operations. We were throwing around 3LY and 5LY, and settled on 5 in part because it covered most of the "short" inter-region gaps. There will be some chokes, I would assume, but that's intentional.

5; Yes, if you continue your current behavior patterns, you will have less fun after these changes. That's intentional.

A common pattern we see when making major changes like this is that, prior to release, many people ask "what does this mean with my current behavior?", find that it's bad, and are unhappy about that.

However, once the change ships (and actually, this process starts way before that for some), people sit down and say "OK, so how *do* I have fun in the game now?". And - hopefully! - they realize that if they change their behavior, the game is fun again.



1; Eve hasn't really been a true sandbox for at least a couple of year now. Solo and small gang play has all but been removed and now, you are adding punitive measures to living in nulsec which will greatly effect the ability for those with limited play hours to actually play the game - Sandbox is dead.
No FC is going to time fleets or fleet movements based on those who still have fatigue because they can't be logged in 24/7 to get it down. Especially if you aren't in a mega alliance or corp where numbers on field actually matter, so for those with less time to play, the ability to play is about to be further reduced by Fatigue.
What you are saying is - If you can't be online for 12 to 14 hours a day, you can't use and form of jump ability other than gates.

2; Did you even look at average online time and how fatigue will effect players ability to play the game?

3; So the Rorqual rather than finding a niche role is, sometime in the future likely to be nerfed out of a possible role players choose for it.
What is considered "dominant" use. 10 kills a day, 50 kills a day - 3 rorquals forming a fleet 100 rorquals, maybe a gate camping rorqual that has a good run for a few months before being taken down. There are not that many rorquals around that exiting numbers would become dominant and as they have somewhat limited combat abilities and cost 3 times as much as a carrier. What would be the base line for "Dominant".
On ships performing well outside their suggested role - When will the battle venture and combat Skiff be re-balanced. Damn a few battle ventures, some combat Skiffs and a rorqual, you have a pretty good gate camp right there. Be careful not to get too many kills though, yours might be the one that proves to put the Rorqual into "Dominant" or "time to nerf" mode.

4; 5LY is not the problem - Fatigue is the problem due to "can't join fleet, too much fatigue".
Did you even bother to look at a viable slowdown mechanic that didn't involve punitive and restrictive measures on actual play time? Something that limited the ship rather than the pilot?
5LY will not break fleets up, players ability to sit in station at the same time as everyone else to reduce fatigue is what will break up fleets.

2 of 7 unsubbed, the rest over the next 2 months.

5; I've looked at how I would need to change my current style of play and it comes down to, not being able to use capital ships except for local ratting or on a gate camp close to my home system, unable to continue doing logistics and no jump bridge use at all with subcaps.
If what you consider "fun" is sitting in comms listening to others out looking for fights, then yeah eve is gonna be tons of fun for me in the future.
We are a small to medium sized blackops gang. Size depends on who is able to be online at any given time, so if you missed a couple of fleets due to time restraints on game play, you will get to sit and hear all about it, because everyone else is letting fatigue reduce so they can go do it again, so will have time to tell you about the last fleet while shooting npc's due to boredom.
- - - - - - - - - -
There was more I wanted to comment on but - I'm just 1 person and really don't matter in the scheme of things so why waste my time

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1359 - 2014-10-16 21:45:05 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:
Celly S wrote:
this is true, hence the cutting their own throat analogy I used earlier.. people can't sit there and complain that their goods don't sell in their system when every time someone shows up to buy them they get shot...

Selling goods isn't a problem in nullsec. Hope this helps.

I don't think he is referring to the relatively safe trade hubs scattered around CFC space.

Go do some shopping in a lowsec or npc nul station, try investing billions seeding a system, then say it is not a problem selling goods.

I am beginning to believe you are a Greyscale alt because like him, you seem to have no idea on how nulsec really is.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#1360 - 2014-10-16 21:48:40 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:

"I put x isk on field, that means I should win, or at least take down my equivalent in isk!" is the worst possible train of thought you could come up with. Stop doing that.

You haven't been a Goon long and never participated in one of their wars have you..

Nah, I've only been in goons, and participated in each and every war goons have been in since late 2009, what do I know?

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Either that or you are simply a hypocrite.

Please, do tell me more.

Sgt Ocker wrote:
Goons have been ruling their part of nulsec with "most isk on field" for years

Oh, really? Please, do elucidate.

Your responses show exactly where the problem lies.
Your either playing the naive fool or are one.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.