These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#8101 - 2014-10-22 22:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Lord TGR wrote:
You say that, but the thing is that this is phase 1 in a series of changes which I, for one, hope'll improve the game dramatically, and make the act of dropping caps/supers a more localized thing instead of a red light for the rest of the eve universe to converge on, say, B-R #2.j

If losing bitter vets who think caps and up are the only ships worth playing is what's needed to shake nullsec up properly, then I'm all for it, and it sounds like CCP are all for it too.


That is absolutely no way to develop a game though - you don't just throw players away because how they've been (legitimately) playing the game has become a problem.

Preventing super "helicoptering" around the galaxy in itself can be done far more elegantly using a variation of the pylon system* used in many games to enforce tactical deployment of super weapons but the answer to regular capitals sadly isn't so simple as they are used so widely that forcing those mechanics on them would have a huge negative incidental impact.



* Simplest way would be to tie supercapitals to the requirement of operating in range (say 7.5ly) of a "maintenance depot" - requiring the building of such depots in nullsec to be able to deploy supercapitals into a region - with the limitation of only being able to change which depot was supporting you say every few days (just as an example figure) - and you have to be in range of that depot to change to it. And some scattering of public ones around lowsec.

EDIT: As an aside depots should allow supers to dock but not for the pilot to leave ship (as they'd have no medical/clone facilities) and from a "storyline" perspective purely serve as a support/repair/refuelling facility.
ner00n
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#8102 - 2014-10-22 22:22:19 UTC
i compleatly agree that these changes are Terrible and that CCP should scrap these ideas and think of something else thats more sensible to make small gangs war fair more common. all that's going to happen when this goes through is all the people in null sec will start blowing up all four main trading hubs in high again like last time CCP did something really stupid.
Sienna Toth
Pulsar Phisics Shipyards
#8103 - 2014-10-22 22:36:51 UTC
The Dev's appear to be trying to address something they see is a problem in null in the big alliances. Their proposed fix impacts far too many others. I worked for years on skills so I could jump my carriers to support any of my towers and this build will nerf jump range such that only 1 of my locations can be serviced by my triage carriers. I don't operate big combat ops, but when attacked I need to be able to repair. I don't have a problem with the jump cooloff period, but I do have a problem with the nerf on the ranges.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8104 - 2014-10-22 22:41:40 UTC
Sienna Toth wrote:
The Dev's appear to be trying to address something they see is a problem in null in the big alliances. Their proposed fix impacts far too many others. I worked for years on skills so I could jump my carriers to support any of my towers and this build will nerf jump range such that only 1 of my locations can be serviced by my triage carriers. I don't operate big combat ops, but when attacked I need to be able to repair. I don't have a problem with the jump cooloff period, but I do have a problem with the nerf on the ranges.

The problem isn't that they're nerfing the range, but that the range was, when first implemented, not limited enough to begin with.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#8105 - 2014-10-23 02:26:54 UTC
Rroff wrote:
^^ Generally out of those who say they will quit in protest to changes only about 20% actually quit.

Given the noise coming out of many nullsec entities I think this idea is bordering on spectacularly backfiring - a lot of smaller entities are pulling out of their space and/or pulling out of their outlying systems and consolidating closer to home, a lot of big blocs are shuffling to consolidate their space with smaller groups about to be squeezed out as they can no longer reach out to entities that would previously help them.

Sorry, smaller entities? What smaller entities, they all got absorbed into one of the two power blocks. Oh, I guess there is Provi still.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#8106 - 2014-10-23 06:51:51 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:

Sorry, smaller entities? What smaller entities, they all got absorbed into one of the two power blocks. Oh, I guess there is Provi still.


Lol.

Funnily enough the example I was going to give on checking dotlan had given up their space to provi holders by the end of July anyhow.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8107 - 2014-10-23 07:01:47 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Rroff wrote:
^^ Generally out of those who say they will quit in protest to changes only about 20% actually quit.

Given the noise coming out of many nullsec entities I think this idea is bordering on spectacularly backfiring - a lot of smaller entities are pulling out of their space and/or pulling out of their outlying systems and consolidating closer to home, a lot of big blocs are shuffling to consolidate their space with smaller groups about to be squeezed out as they can no longer reach out to entities that would previously help them.

Sorry, smaller entities? What smaller entities, they all got absorbed into one of the two power blocks. Oh, I guess there is Provi still.

A year or less after both the jumpdrive nerfs and the sov system update hits, chances are you'll see tons of smaller entities in null again, since the bigger players will have consolidated their space and are busy defending it.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8108 - 2014-10-23 07:16:38 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
You say that, but the thing is that this is phase 1 in a series of changes which I, for one, hope'll improve the game dramatically, and make the act of dropping caps/supers a more localized thing instead of a red light for the rest of the eve universe to converge on, say, B-R #2.j

If losing bitter vets who think caps and up are the only ships worth playing is what's needed to shake nullsec up properly, then I'm all for it, and it sounds like CCP are all for it too.


That is absolutely no way to develop a game though - you don't just throw players away because how they've been (legitimately) playing the game has become a problem.

You say that, but I think you'll find that there's a lot more people resubbing (or going to be resubbing) once EVE starts having wars in nullsec again, even if it isn't the same old style of "dump all the caps into a single system, sit in sub-10% tidi for 5 hours and win/lose based on who brings the most people".

You can't develop a game to please everyone, you develop the game to please the majority, because that's the way you get the most money. It's also the way you get free advertizing, through word of mouth. And I don't want a game where you have to be in a capital or be useless.

Rroff wrote:
Preventing super "helicoptering" around the galaxy in itself can be done far more elegantly using a variation of the pylon system* used in many games to enforce tactical deployment of super weapons but the answer to regular capitals sadly isn't so simple as they are used so widely that forcing those mechanics on them would have a huge negative incidental impact.



* Simplest way would be to tie supercapitals to the requirement of operating in range (say 7.5ly) of a "maintenance depot" - requiring the building of such depots in nullsec to be able to deploy supercapitals into a region - with the limitation of only being able to change which depot was supporting you say every few days (just as an example figure) - and you have to be in range of that depot to change to it. And some scattering of public ones around lowsec.

EDIT: As an aside depots should allow supers to dock but not for the pilot to leave ship (as they'd have no medical/clone facilities) and from a "storyline" perspective purely serve as a support/repair/refuelling facility.

Interesting idea, but it won't deal with the main problem for subcaps, which is normal caps making them more or less obsolete when caps are deployed in the right configuration, and it would also make for a sucky return for someone who's been unsubscribed for a year for reasons, only to come back to an EVE where the sov map looks radically different to when he left. So he's now left in hostile space, and maybe his old corp/alliance doesn't even exist.

I guess that could be argued as being an incentive for people to stay subscribed and active, but yeah, no.
Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#8109 - 2014-10-23 10:33:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Spc One
These changes are "interesting" although it will not be good if you wanna do logistics with carrier Cry

And about jump clones...
http://thekiller8.deviantart.com/art/Eve-Online-RMR-42347848


And titans can now jump through this tiny star gate ?
http://tinyurl.com/pfz65ab

CCP maybe you should resize stargates so titans look smaller Cool
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#8110 - 2014-10-23 11:46:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Lord TGR wrote:

You say that, but I think you'll find that there's a lot more people resubbing (or going to be resubbing) once EVE starts having wars in nullsec again, even if it isn't the same old style of "dump all the caps into a single system, sit in sub-10% tidi for 5 hours and win/lose based on who brings the most people".

You can't develop a game to please everyone, you develop the game to please the majority, because that's the way you get the most money. It's also the way you get free advertizing, through word of mouth. And I don't want a game where you have to be in a capital or be useless.


Sure the net effect might work out positive for the game and player numbers and there is no denying its impossible to keep everyone happy but you (in general) should never be treating customers as disposable commodities (atleast that is my opinion) I acknowledge sometimes there is no option but to make sweeping and controversial changes (not to say I consider this one of those times).

Lord TGR wrote:

Interesting idea, but it won't deal with the main problem for subcaps, which is normal caps making them more or less obsolete when caps are deployed in the right configuration, and it would also make for a sucky return for someone who's been unsubscribed for a year for reasons, only to come back to an EVE where the sov map looks radically different to when he left. So he's now left in hostile space, and maybe his old corp/alliance doesn't even exist.

I guess that could be argued as being an incentive for people to stay subscribed and active, but yeah, no.


Obviously going to be quite a few things to iron out with the idea (as far as null goes I only dabble on a couple of alts and have a generalised idea of how things work there at best) none the least handling player who've been away from the game for along period but I wasn't going to spend too long writing it up when its very unlikely to be utilised. Handling regular capitals is a far trickier matter due to the much wider useage of them outside the sphere of null and while I have some rough ideas again not really worth spending too much time on when CCP seem dead set on a different mechanism.

EDIT: One idea I was floating in another thread though it has several factors I don't have working knowledge on as to know how it would work out in reality was to make it so that carrier drones are essentially bonused to become "capital" class weapons - increase dps output by 50% but reduce rate of fire massively (and increase the alpha to get the dps) but apply titan style signature weapon scaling so that for instance with heavy drones and sentries they could only apply full damage to another capital (I can see some hate from people who PVE with sentries). Its a little arbitrary and might not go far enough it doesn't really solve the n+1 problem.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8111 - 2014-10-23 13:07:33 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:

You say that, but I think you'll find that there's a lot more people resubbing (or going to be resubbing) once EVE starts having wars in nullsec again, even if it isn't the same old style of "dump all the caps into a single system, sit in sub-10% tidi for 5 hours and win/lose based on who brings the most people".

You can't develop a game to please everyone, you develop the game to please the majority, because that's the way you get the most money. It's also the way you get free advertizing, through word of mouth. And I don't want a game where you have to be in a capital or be useless.


Sure the net effect might work out positive for the game and player numbers and there is no denying its impossible to keep everyone happy but you (in general) should never be treating customers as disposable commodities (atleast that is my opinion) I acknowledge sometimes there is no option but to make sweeping and controversial changes (not to say I consider this one of those times).

I didn't advocate treating customers as disposable commodities, and I don't think you can say CCP are doing that in this case either. Yes, they're making drastic changes, but they're changes which add depth to the game and will generally improve things. It's kind of when they did the whole hisec security system revamp, with the whole suspect and killright deal (except I still don't think they handled killrights properly, and I still don't think you should become suspect and shootable by everyone for stealing something, but meh, can't be arsed to deal with it anymore): it's a direct nerf to some players' playstyle, but the good players adapt and evolve, the **** players do not, or quit.

CCP won't be doing anyone any favors by catering to those who do not adapt and evolve, or quit, because the changes are needed, and they make everything better.

Rroff wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Interesting idea, but it won't deal with the main problem for subcaps, which is normal caps making them more or less obsolete when caps are deployed in the right configuration, and it would also make for a sucky return for someone who's been unsubscribed for a year for reasons, only to come back to an EVE where the sov map looks radically different to when he left. So he's now left in hostile space, and maybe his old corp/alliance doesn't even exist.

I guess that could be argued as being an incentive for people to stay subscribed and active, but yeah, no.


Obviously going to be quite a few things to iron out with the idea (as far as null goes I only dabble on a couple of alts and have a generalised idea of how things work there at best) none the least handling player who've been away from the game for along period but I wasn't going to spend too long writing it up when its very unlikely to be utilised. Handling regular capitals is a far trickier matter due to the much wider useage of them outside the sphere of null and while I have some rough ideas again not really worth spending too much time on when CCP seem dead set on a different mechanism.

EDIT: One idea I was floating in another thread though it has several factors I don't have working knowledge on as to know how it would work out in reality was to make it so that carrier drones are essentially bonused to become "capital" class weapons - increase dps output by 50% but reduce rate of fire massively (and increase the alpha to get the dps) but apply titan style signature weapon scaling so that for instance with heavy drones and sentries they could only apply full damage to another capital (I can see some hate from people who PVE with sentries). Its a little arbitrary and might not go far enough it doesn't really solve the n+1 problem.

Last I checked, the problem with sentries wasn't so much the fact they're used, but that they're assigned to a single person who coordinates locking and firing. I know this was supposed to be nerfed in rubicon, but I haven't paid attention much the last 6 months, so I've no idea how heavily used sentry doctrines are these days.

For all I know it's a non-issue anymore, only used occasionally and even then it's used by individual people actually firing their own drones as opposed to 1 guy firing for everybody.
Siren Dot
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#8112 - 2014-10-31 10:12:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Siren Dot
Is Eve becoming a turn-based game? I mean I have a limited free time and I want to play the game not wait spinning the ships in a station till fatigue is gone. Also not letting the noobs jump clone to their corp is a stupid idea. How many times do you think will they try to breach the "big bad scary" gate camp before giving up their subscription?. Anyway I understand the reasons behind, for both cases, but I think is a pure implementation of ideas.
Spear N'hand
The RedNeck Posse
#8113 - 2014-11-04 01:58:41 UTC
it seems a big part of the point of this change, and the ones to come. Is to open up Null to small groups.

So instead of most of null being owned by only a few corps. you will have to work to actually keep what you [put your name on. Not just drop a sov unit and move on.

I can see a few small skirmishes to get ppl forced into a several day jump timer. then an invading force can enter a system w/ caps. and the only thing the defenders can do is

a. watch the incoming mails about their stuff being destroied or
b. try to get reinforcement there through heavily defended stargates.

again if you ead all the literature it says they are trying to open null to more people than just the ones who hold sov now.
OldWolf69
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#8114 - 2014-11-04 10:28:19 UTC
Spear N'hand wrote:
it seems a big part of the point of this change, and the ones to come. Is to open up Null to small groups.

So instead of most of null being owned by only a few corps. you will have to work to actually keep what you [put your name on. Not just drop a sov unit and move on.

I can see a few small skirmishes to get ppl forced into a several day jump timer. then an invading force can enter a system w/ caps. and the only thing the defenders can do is

a. watch the incoming mails about their stuff being destroied or
b. try to get reinforcement there through heavily defended stargates.

again if you ead all the literature it says they are trying to open null to more people than just the ones who hold sov now.

Oh, you have litteraly no ideea HOW MUCH will big Dogs love their small neighbours.LolLolLol
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#8115 - 2014-11-04 12:27:26 UTC
Rroff wrote:




* Simplest way would be to tie supercapitals to the requirement of operating in range (say 7.5ly) of a "maintenance depot" - requiring the building of such depots in nullsec to be able to deploy supercapitals into a region - with the limitation of only being able to change which depot was supporting you say every few days (just as an example figure) - and you have to be in range of that depot to change to it. And some scattering of public ones around lowsec.

EDIT: As an aside depots should allow supers to dock but not for the pilot to leave ship (as they'd have no medical/clone facilities) and from a "storyline" perspective purely serve as a support/repair/refuelling facility.





Wow, what you claim to be an elegant solution sounds to me like a horrible way to limit supers moving. Like, for 'a few days' all your supers are locked on that thing and it's range.
With Fatigue, jumping is possible, jumping into systems that was earlier impossible is now possible, and moving your supers around the universe is possible in a kinda short timeframe given some preparation.

Not some artificial bullshit that adds another shackle to your character that is already in a space-casket.
Sudri Namian
Project Freeport Citadel
#8116 - 2014-11-04 16:06:50 UTC
Worst idea ccp came up with so far !
AK Phoenix
Shadow Legion X
Seriously Suspicious
#8117 - 2014-11-04 20:42:20 UTC
Yep, come back after a little break, get my ships/fittings in my carrier, find a corp to join, try setting up cyno chain for the 3 jumps to get out to corp have to log off due to work calling. log in today when home from work. 12 cyno jumps out to corp with who knows how much fatigue. and down time between the later jumps, seem a little over the top.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8118 - 2014-11-04 21:55:31 UTC
AK Phoenix wrote:
Yep, come back after a little break, get my ships/fittings in my carrier, find a corp to join, try setting up cyno chain for the 3 jumps to get out to corp have to log off due to work calling. log in today when home from work. 12 cyno jumps out to corp with who knows how much fatigue. and down time between the later jumps, seem a little over the top.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqUUlBwtKNs
Xartahez
Doomheim
#8119 - 2014-11-05 17:34:10 UTC
I may be throwing in the towel as well here..

I have a family at home. I play Eve on the short time I get to myself, living in 0.0 it suited me well. However, with these changes, I don't have enough time to play. The time I have spent waiting on jump timers since yesterday killed my game time and it wasn't worth even logging in.

As it stands now, it appears I will have to leave my 0.0 corp, sell off my capitols and live in NPC space, if I want to continue playing on Eve as a outlet to relax after a rough day..

Very disappointed today...
JimmieTwoTimes
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#8120 - 2014-11-05 22:15:53 UTC  |  Edited by: JimmieTwoTimes
Although I have no problem eliminating force projection in capitals with jump fatigue, the LY restrictions are ridiculous. 5LY's even for carriers which had the greatest distance of them all before this lame patch. Thats a joke. I had a 6.7LY jump to low-sec at the closest point from null-sec. I will now have to travel outside my region to get to another system in which to light a midpoint cyno. To limit all capitals to the same exact distance restrictions shows the complete lack of inspiration that CCP has been suffering from for many years now.

As for jump freighters, while I am happy they were only nerfed slightly...I have not seen a valid explanation with regards to the in-game storyline as to why they are not hampered to the same degree as other capitals. Of course i know why this was done realistically because of logistical needs and certain regions being so far from high-sec. Regardless, CCP is creating convoluted policies that cant even be explained by a fake storyline any longer. That is pretty sad really.

Might as well just remove jump bridges from the game completely now while they are at it too. If you cannot move around freely in a subcap through your own region using jump bridges to dodge hostiles or get ahead of them...there is no point in having thier presence in the game any longer. CCP has effectively taken away any home court advantage...which is somewhat unrealistic. If the point of this patch was to diminish SOV benefits as well, they are doing a fine job.

I am not sure why people keep paying CCP for their lack of innovation and creativity. These days they substitute constant nerfs and buffs for actual game content. Hell, even if they didnt come out with anything new for a long period of time but fixed all the bugs and other problems in the game such as POS mechanics I would be happy as a clam. Thanks CCP for wasting MILLIONS on another game that you couldn't even bring to market while still not bothering to fix all the problems for your existing bread and butter subscribers. Also, thank you CCP for hiring Dennis Nedry (This Guy) from Jurrasic Park to do all your POS mechanics coding. FIX YOUR MISTAKES.

Moving capitals and even subcapitals in this game via jump bridges has now become a second occupation. Time to unsub my 5 accounts and check back in six months to a year and see if CCP has gotten a clue ore not. They dont deserve my money at this point.

People who perform poorly in real jobs (this is the real world i am talking about for you nerds who think EVE and its employees are the real world), well lets just say they dont have jobs for long. OK OK, unless they work for the government. Anyway, CCP is need of a serious overhaul...time for a mass firing.

ADIOS, wish i could say its been fun but its been a downhill slide for too long now!