Player Features and Ideas Discussion

That ignores the fact that several months before this change was announced, one of PL's FC's called for a stronger nerf to cap travel than what we actually got. His name is Manfred Sideous and he asked for caps to be able to use gates and, wait for it, jump drives to be removed. Now I'm sure he doesn't speak for every member of PL, but as an FC he's not some fresh grunt with a shiny new corp tag and a dream. Interestingly enough his goal was for the changes to make the mercenary profession more viable. If PL becomes the new MC that would be awesome.

If someone's within hotdroppable range of a local gang, they should know they're in that range and take the appropriate precautions. Likewise should the locals be aware of the exact same thing in return if they know someone's moved into the neighbourhood with caps.


"Please, mister enemy FC/pilot, don't move, I'll be there in an hour with capitals to gank you. It's a date, k?"

There's nothing wrong with instant jumps, why are you micromanaging jumps? It was added by CCP as an instantaneous feature, you can't just come in here and micromanage that ****.


So let's pretend 2 fleets are fighting, and the locals decide to send in the caps, only to arrive an hour later. What happened to the fight? Well, that ended 55 minutes earlier, because one FC saw that his fleet was countered by the other FC's fleet, so he bailed. This despite the fact he knew he'd get "reinforcements" in an hour.

The caps turn around and spend the next hour travelling back to their home base, if they aren't told after 5 minutes to drop out of hyperspace and just return to port because they're too slow and useless, why don't they just reprocess the ships now and be done with it, who cares about the useless caps with their slowass hyperdrive?

My comments in bold.

Shame most of your bold comments are badly thought out and contain no good arguments.

You've mixed Capital abilities with Super abilities.
Carriers and Dreads have no defense against bubbles or even a rifter with a long point, you don't need a dictor with focus script. +2 warp core strength would at least allow them a chance against a gate camp. Although I believe the +2 WC should be a single lowslot module that gives bubble immunity, when fit it offlines offensive capabilities, combine that with a "capital micro jump drive" and gate travel for solo or small groups of capitals takes on a whole new twist.

And both of you have it wrong when it comes to "strategic" and "logistical" use of capitals. A carriers greatest ability is its ship maintenance bay. Although in the past they rarely got used for this attribute on the battlefield, changes to travel/movement should see this change.
A subcap fleet with carrier support for logistics and reshipping could be a new way to fight your enemies when they have "home field" advantage.. Problem is, if it becomes too popular CCP will nerf it.

Niskin is right. My analysis was more of a list of solutions and the problems that they solve with explanations on why they are problems. I probably should have called it root problem solving and justification.

Fatigue creates a bottleneck after the first engagement of the hour. And that assumes that the full 5 ly were jumped. Even less time if the jump is down to 1 ly. It is a limited bottleneck.


Would you say then that warp should be instant as well? If not, then why not? Given a jump to a hostile force or warp to the same hostile force, why should one be instant and the other take time? Are we not limiting the options of those who travel by warp? Is that bad? An interceptor appears in local and after a very brief align time, an instant warp brings the interceptor is right on top of its target? Can you argue that this is a good thing and if not, then why not? I'll let you argue my case on travel time with this example.


Are not structure shoots merely a bunch of waiting with an occasional target change? The military is 99% wait and 1% combat because most combat missions are about securing, transporting, guarding, shelling, etc. Wait is good if you are doing something for a mission or goal. Faction Warfare is mostly just waiting in sites. Gate camping is mostly waiting at gates. Waiting is a primary aspect of combat and pvp. Those who enjoy pvp understand that it can be boring.


PVE gets plenty of incentives to kill pirates, etc. There is no reason that pvp should not also get individual rewards. Faction warfare gives rewards to individuals all the time. Sure there are other reasons for doing stuff, but when ISK is put on the line, it only makes sense that there is a reward for doing it. Hans Solo charged premium rates for transporting stuff for people and he was willing to fight solo to do it.


CCP has explained that stargates, jump drives, portal generators and jump bridges all create man-made whs, so no, there is no difference between them. No, the HIC was not invented because the cap was bigger than the BS which was bigger than the BC, etc etc. The focused script was invented to balance the problem created by making supercaps immune to ewar and normal points.

On the topic of micromanaging "changes" to solve problems created by other micromanaging changes/additions, I hope that you see there is no end to this cycle. A micromanaging changes will always create many more problems than it solves (if any). Also remember that what some call a problem, others call an advantage. So the question is not whether one group calls something a "problem", but instead it is whether a "change/new feature" in most cases favors some groups at the expense of other groups.

As an example: Fatigue favors groups with high cap density (PL) at the expense of groups with low cap density (NC.) High cap density means that there are a lot of caps in a small region of space, while low cap density means that the caps are spread out across the regions so much that there are fewer caps in each region. PL prefers to travel in a tight group (high cap density) and they fear the masses (Goons, NC., et all) gaining cap abilities across the regions and converging on top of them with increasingly superior numbers per engagement. My analysis from this example and CCP's firm commitment to Fatigue as the only solution is that CCP is still in PL's back pocket.

That's not what I said. In Phoebe the HIC focused script was changed to prevent capital gate jumps, since they can now use gates. It's an example of a specific change to control for a problem introduced by another mechanic that was changed. Capitals being able to jump gates created imbalanced situations, so this was done to control for those. If we allowed all warp disruptors to stop any type of jump, as you stated, that would create more imbalances. Balance is a tricky thing to achieve, the more sandboxy the game the more precise you have to be to get the desired effect and not break something else in the process.

WTH! HIC focused script prevents capitals from gate jumping, and capitals only at that?!!!! OMG! There is no difference what ship jumps through stargates. If the HIC script applies to caps, THEN IT SHOULD ALSO APPLY TO SUBCAPS!!!

And yes, I do think that the only difference between normal warp disruptors/scrams and the infinite point should be the number applied to the warp core. And yes, I do take issue with infinite here too. The script should be a number like minus 5. And supers should not be "immune" to any EW. If anything, their systems should be strong enough to make them resistant to some EW/warp disruption. Maybe +4 to warp core strength.

Balance is only tricky when you are trying to make players play the way you want them to play without them adapting and using your discriminations against you, instead of letting the sandbox decide how they want to play. This is a huge problem in American tax law, which tries to control the behavior of the population, but only generates tax loopholes which are frequently exploited. My message to anyone creating a sandbox is to STOP trying "to get the desired effect" because it only makes thing more complicated (think tax law and IRS) and people end up getting around it to do what they wanted in the first place (think tax loopholes). If there are reasons to fight, then people will fight. If you give them exploits to advantage one side or playstyle (desired ways), then both sides will use the exploits in undesired ways. If you give mechanics which are not intrinsically favoring one side or playstyle, then both sides will use those mechanics to their advantage in balanced ways. Fatigue favors the aggressor hotdropping locals.

A note to TGR: Previously, I only said that PL was considered a very well-known large capital fleet hotdrop force and that the jump nerf would hurt their cap projection. I never said that PL did not stand to benefit by limiting the force projection of others (more politics: aiming nerfs at specific groups for one's own advantage). Also, the politics of hurting one group at the expense of the other is only conspiracy theory if no one knows about the politics, but this all seems pretty obvious to me. If it was tough to trace who was in whose pocket, then there might be conspiracy theories.

I think that the first two quotes were the only accurate ones. The other quotes seemed to be good summations until you got to the conspiracy and goons/PL part, which was complete BS. What I said was that any effort to get caps to use gates withOUT (correction) any buffs to their travel bonuses/stats will simply make catching and killing caps at gates remarkably easy. And that PL had interests in capital force projection across all of Eve until their opponents developed substantial capital assets across large amounts of space through mega alliances. CCP had no issue with capital force projection across Eve until the mass brought substantial threat from across Eve onto capital dense (lots of caps in a small/local area) alliances like PL. Now I certainly do not support instant capital force projection across ANY DISTANCE, but I am certainly NOT of the mind that the solution needs to preserve PL's (or anyone's) instant and local capital force projection.

This update was meant to nerf CAPITALS hotdrop, so why does this apply the same maner to conventionnal ships which jump through jump bridges ? Even SHUTTLES are affected......

This update was meant to nerf CAPITALS hotdrop, so why does it apply to jump bridge, which were designed to travel through a region an alliance or a corp settle ?

I'm not a winner, but this update is really a pain for CONVENTIONNAL SHIPS using jump bridges.

CCP apply jump fatigue to CAPITAL SHIPS using JUMP DRIVE ONLY.

Otherwise it's nonsense.

That would make a great corp name...