These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[AEGIS] Fleet Warp Changes - Please see devblog!

First post First post First post
Author
Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#441 - 2015-06-12 06:23:01 UTC
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Budrick3 wrote:


Poor attempt at saving face.

Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.

Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.


Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really.


Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible.

Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop....
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#442 - 2015-06-12 06:23:49 UTC
Sollana wrote:
so now the scanning ship has to warp in first for the rest of the fleet to warp to them........about bloody time...

heavy tackle time has returned, in a way this could be a recon buff.. hint hint

Except it isn't. Because recons have no bonus to probes of any sort, meaning to fit combat probes recons are so gimped in their fitting that they aren't going to be effective as heavy tackle.
The only viable probe ship now for this has become a T3 Cruiser. T3 destroyers not being covert cloakable.
NoobMan
Perkone
Caldari State
#443 - 2015-06-12 06:24:27 UTC
Quote:
Q: CCP, why you do this?
A: We want transfer more responsibility for the success of a fleet from its FC to its members.


Dark Razer Please!

So you realize the FC is just going to have to login another client to fly a specific ship to constantly make warp ins so he can fleet warp his fleet. If the actual outcome you were hoping for was to slow fleet movement down across the board then you have succeeded.

Wormhole standpoint: This a huge quality of life hit. This will affect us wormholes every single day in every fleet. What is the benefits to this game mechanic? What is the game design change or reason this is a good idea for wormholers?

A few activities in wormholes this is going to negatively affect.

  • Chain Static Collapsing (Rage Rolling) will be slower.
  • Jumping into a new wormhole that has capitals running sites, the prober is going to have to combat the caps then warp to them, then have the dictor wait and warp to the prober. Its unnecessary amount of extra time that the hostile caps have that they can escape.
  • Safe fleet movement through wormhole chains is going to be slower. You're going to need to have a worthless interceptor moving in front of you so the FC can fleet warp to that pilot to safely move and not leave straglers. That inty pilot could be in a useful ship. What is more likely going to happen is the FC is going to be dual boxing that second client himself to insure the validity of the warpin, and increase the speed of the warp in so he doesn't have to waste time confirming the warpin is ready

There are so many combat situations I can think of where this is just going to be annoying and slow down gameplay. Did you think about that? Increasing the time of doing boring things like waiting for a warpin?


If you want a useful "fleet warp" game design change I've got one for you: allow the fleet FC to flag a fleet member with the ability to fleet warp, so I don't have to drag my links out of Wing to move myself into Wing then warp, then move the pilots back.

Operations Director of Hard K(n)ocks Inc.

knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#444 - 2015-06-12 06:24:58 UTC
blue coeur wrote:


Seriously, I challenge you to live in a Wormhole for a month.


Wormholes are next for the chop. It's not part of Fozzie and Rise's plan to force everyone to pretend to be micro gang elite pvp jerkoffs.
Kendarr
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#445 - 2015-06-12 06:25:58 UTC
I do not mind the fleet warps changes to public items but not being able to fleet what to probe results is a nightmare for me. Its slowing fleets down to much. Its hard enough alot of the time to probe something down in system then to try and warp to it with one ship for the fleet to follow. You are never going to beable to catch that fleet rolling safes ever again. which means there's less pvp going on.

I understand the need to slow bomber wings down / get people more interactive in fleets but come on CCP you can do much better then this... like by restricting ship types fleet warping to probe results?

knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#446 - 2015-06-12 06:26:29 UTC
This whole problem could be solved easily if the person probing could broadcast their probe results and allow people to warp to those. Add that feature in and removing fleet warp to probes is moot.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#447 - 2015-06-12 06:27:33 UTC
Tara Read wrote:
Querns wrote:
You delegate the task of creating warp-ins to players in covops or interceptors. See the "I Was There" trailer for a fairly decent dramatization of this oddly foreign concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSxSyv4LC1c

The changes may be annoying to you and the crutches upon which you rely to play eve, but they're positive for the game as a whole. Adapt.


How exactly is a fleet warp a crutch? Are you saying I am incapable of right clicking a name on my watch list and warping to them at a designated range? Because people do this already. You fail to see the stupidity in these changes because you cannot see the context of the problems they create which are many.

Also, if I may I play Eve in many different ways and many different situations. The battlefield and the tactics and strategies therein are fluid and constantly in motion. That's what makes Eve unique and sadly maybe it's only redeeming quality if this trend continues. The unknown. The enigma. The what "if". Every action has a reaction in Eve.

Every command, target, fitting, ship, strategy, convo, every detail can have a shift in the outcome of everything from battles to Alliances and Coalitions. Your very own Coalition owes it's successes and rise to power by the actions of one person. So please as someone who has played this game since 2004 do not sit here and lecture me on the virtues and reasons to "adapt." I've been doing it in this game for a long time.

You still have failed to give me a reason as to WHY these changes are positive. If you feel another role for a player to field is a potential good thing then come at it from that angle! And while the intention MAY be good. The execution so far has been terrible. IF anything this diminishes a players role: the FC. Or even worse creates an even greater difficulty for FC'a and content creators.

The negative implications out weight the good intentions these changes try to instill. That you cannot argue against and that is what over 20 pages of a majority of people here agree upon.

There we go with the "majority" thing again. Length of forum thread does not dictate popularity due to the low patronage of the forums. This argument cheapens the position of anyone using it. You've also used the "content" word again, which is another loaded phrase. Thinking of Eve in terms of "content" puts blinkers on your ability to converse.

I've given plenty of positive effects associated with this change -- the castration of the bomber meta, the potential revitalization of shield ships, increased effectiveness of travel interdiction, increased fleet roles for interceptors/covops, a higher skill ceiling for eve. If you don't like any of these, that's fine, but I find them to be overwhelmingly positive.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#448 - 2015-06-12 06:28:55 UTC
Tara Read wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Budrick3 wrote:


Poor attempt at saving face.

Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.

Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.


Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really.


Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible.

Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop....

Your mistake was assuming that the CSM is a widespread popularity contest. Virtually no-one in Eve likes Goonswarm Federation, yet we consistently elect 2 candidates to the CSM. A CSM member who owes his spot to his confederates has little incentive to represent the player base as a whole.

Don't like it? Vote next time.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
#449 - 2015-06-12 06:29:11 UTC
Joran Jackson wrote:
I think this is a fantastic change for wormholes. Anything that makes it harder for 50 man WH fleets to function gets a thumbs up from me.


You do realize this does nothing to those fleets but hurts the smaller ones way more? Starting with the fact that the almost all big groups are in one corp only and will have access to corpbookmarks from the initial scout.

What this change does is it kills NPSI fleets., esp in wormholespace. Have fun giving everyone in fleet the bookmarks beforehand. Multiple people from the same corp in fleet might help not a bit since they need to have corproles for bookmarks.
This is especially true in wormholespace where you need a ****-ton of bookmarks just of the holes.
Flying through a big system or even thera? "FC, call me in 5 minutes when you land so we can warp too"
Forgot to copy one of the bookmarks? well, sucks to be you.
Someone went the wrong way? You are stranded alone until someone comes back to get you. OFC that will polarize this person and force it to do nothing for 5 minutes and be left behind.
Corpbookmarks haven´t updated yet? Well, see you in 5 minutes.
You found someone in a sig you do not have a bookmark for? Combatprobe him down and hope he is still in there not just by the time you warp there, but everybody warps to you too. You better scanned in a tanky T3 and not came through one of these great only-the-smallest-of-ships wormholes. Also huge boost to WCS, everybody love those.

As enough people have stated it also really hurts group PvE that isn´t anomrunning. Bestcase it double the traveltime (superfun with the most popular PvE ships being BS sized), worstcase "have fun tanking the site alone for 30 sec until our RR gets here too".

For PvP this is a huge boost to kiting. You get a cloakyprober next to a kitingfleet, by the time your buddies land near you the kiters have made at least another 10km and are out of webrange. You use a noncloaky to keep up with them, free killmail thanks to the addition of RLMLs.

Things will never warp at the same speed, tackle lands and gets faceraped, logi lands and looks stupid, mainfleet lands and is in exactly the same position as pre-warp. And then land the capitals and ask themselves why te grid is empty. Unless you are flying ishtars, T3s or mordus´ ships, because all of those are so little used anyways compared to BCs and BS who get shafted again. Oh, and you better hope everybody has all lvl5 navigationskills, if you FC some new players you will be out of warp long before they are.

It takes away the homefield advantage of FCs with 20+ tacticals around every gate in the homeregion. Good and bad at the same time but again a huge boost to kiting.


Again, this change only supports blobbing and excessive use of multiboxing, like so many other changes we have seen lately.


CCP Larrikin wrote:
Both of these points are solid. Corbexx brought these up while we where talking to the CSM about the change.
Regarding slowing down the speed of sites, given the potential profitability of wormhole space, we don't consider this a major negative.
Regarding movement fleets though WH space, we have something we're working on for this. That said some of the feedback we've received is mixed. Reducing power projection though WH space (for both WH residence & passes though) not seen as all bad.


And again, lowend residents get the shaft because C5/6s. "Potential profitability" with nanoribbons creeping around 2M a piece...
Warping to fleetmembers 0 on a hole needs them to be decloaked, let´s also anounce it in local, just in case they do not have a scout out. Sneaking up on someone in a site only works if it is not littered with asteroids, LCOs, huge gasclouds or just sleepers spawning and burning around.
This change effects 5 man escalationfarmers NOT AT ALL, it is even a boost for their security.
wazp1
The Tarzan Foundation
#450 - 2015-06-12 06:30:45 UTC
I have not seen the o7 show yet but:
I dont see any point doing this, must be one of the most stupid changes in Eve.
As if you are doing that change are you then doing:

Alliance Bookmarks
Increase corp bookmarks
Increase update freq on corp and now the New alliance bookmarks that make sure everyone in Corp/alliance have that bookmark as when in mostly whs not everyone can see the bookmark before its to late and therefor fleet /Winge / squad warp

#where is the Wh Csm on this?
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#451 - 2015-06-12 06:33:20 UTC
Shilalasar wrote:
And then land the capitals and ask themselves why te grid is empty.

Your capitals, maybe. Mine warp faster than cruisers.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Kendarr
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#452 - 2015-06-12 06:34:55 UTC
Also if you want to nerf the speed of bombers bombing, why not just put a huge timers on the bomb launchers or reload time? like 10 mins or something.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#453 - 2015-06-12 06:36:52 UTC
Kendarr wrote:
Also if you want to nerf the speed of bombers bombing, why not just put a huge timers on the bomb launchers or reload time? like 10 mins or something.

Bombers are too inexpensive for this to be viable. Use a bomber, then warp to a pos or a cloaked carrier to swap out your bomber for one lacking the reload/activation timer.

fake edit: CCP GREYSCALE PLEASE ADD BOMB FATIGUE

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#454 - 2015-06-12 06:37:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tara Read
Querns wrote:
Tara Read wrote:
Querns wrote:
You delegate the task of creating warp-ins to players in covops or interceptors. See the "I Was There" trailer for a fairly decent dramatization of this oddly foreign concept: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSxSyv4LC1c

The changes may be annoying to you and the crutches upon which you rely to play eve, but they're positive for the game as a whole. Adapt.


How exactly is a fleet warp a crutch? Are you saying I am incapable of right clicking a name on my watch list and warping to them at a designated range? Because people do this already. You fail to see the stupidity in these changes because you cannot see the context of the problems they create which are many.

Also, if I may I play Eve in many different ways and many different situations. The battlefield and the tactics and strategies therein are fluid and constantly in motion. That's what makes Eve unique and sadly maybe it's only redeeming quality if this trend continues. The unknown. The enigma. The what "if". Every action has a reaction in Eve.

Every command, target, fitting, ship, strategy, convo, every detail can have a shift in the outcome of everything from battles to Alliances and Coalitions. Your very own Coalition owes it's successes and rise to power by the actions of one person. So please as someone who has played this game since 2004 do not sit here and lecture me on the virtues and reasons to "adapt." I've been doing it in this game for a long time.

You still have failed to give me a reason as to WHY these changes are positive. If you feel another role for a player to field is a potential good thing then come at it from that angle! And while the intention MAY be good. The execution so far has been terrible. IF anything this diminishes a players role: the FC. Or even worse creates an even greater difficulty for FC'a and content creators.

The negative implications out weight the good intentions these changes try to instill. That you cannot argue against and that is what over 20 pages of a majority of people here agree upon.

There we go with the "majority" thing again. Length of forum thread does not dictate popularity due to the low patronage of the forums. This argument cheapens the position of anyone using it. You've also used the "content" word again, which is another loaded phrase. Thinking of Eve in terms of "content" puts blinkers on your ability to converse.

I've given plenty of positive effects associated with this change -- the castration of the bomber meta, the potential revitalization of shield ships, increased effectiveness of travel interdiction, increased fleet roles for interceptors/covops, a higher skill ceiling for eve. If you don't like any of these, that's fine, but I find them to be overwhelmingly positive.


So you hate bombers. Gotcha. Jesus Christ that's a lot of words for "I hate being bombed!" And please stop trying to circlejerk yourself with these convoluted paragraphs of buzz words like "content" and "meta". It's beginning to sound like another propaganda Jim Jones cool aid fest that I have no intention of drinking.

If you have issues with bombers why not fix them? Why instead of screwing the pooch with everyone else CCP perhaps place warping or grid restrictions on bombers? Maybe make flying them more niche than making us all suffer for half baked fleet mechanics?

Oh of course. Instead of building a fire to keep the house warm CCP just sets the whole house on fire instead. Typical.
Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#455 - 2015-06-12 06:38:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tara Read
Querns wrote:
Tara Read wrote:
Manfred Sideous wrote:
Budrick3 wrote:


Poor attempt at saving face.

Rule of all holes, stop digging when you are in one.

Your embarrassing your alliance, the people that put faith in voting for you, and most of all, your embarrassing yourself.


Does this mean I am not gonna win a popularity contest ? Aww shucks im gutted really.


Weren't you elected to instill positive changes for a majority of the Eve Community? Or am I just being fickle thinking the CSM is supposed to do that.... I mean honestly. Didn't you guys take into consideration the myriad of problems this creates for people? Even if the intentions were good, the execution is utterly terrible. I mean really terrible.

Can't you guys come up with something better than this? I mean besides terrible icons and super skins for only half the titans at 35 USD a pop....

Your mistake was assuming that the CSM is a widespread popularity contest. Virtually no-one in Eve likes Goonswarm Federation, yet we consistently elect 2 candidates to the CSM. A CSM member who owes his spot to his confederates has little incentive to represent the player base as a whole.

Don't like it? Vote next time.


Oh this is just too cute. If this is the fruits of the CSM's labour which is nothing but self posturing and positioning to bend CCP's ear then I have no interest. Period.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#456 - 2015-06-12 06:40:27 UTC
Tara Read wrote:

So you hate bombers. Gotcha. Jesus Christ that's a lot of words for "I hate being bombed!" And please stop trying to circlejerk yourself with these convoluted paragraphs of buzz words like "content" and "meta". It's beginning to sound like another propaganda Jim Jones cool aide fest that I have no intention of drinking.

If you have issues with bombers why not fix them? Why instead of screwing the pooch with everyone else CCP perhaps place warping or grid restrictions on bombers? Maybe make flying them more niche than making us all suffer for half baked fleet mechanics?

Oh of course. Instead of building a fire to keep the house warm CCP just sets the whole house on fire instead. Typical.

I mean, I'm not a game designer, nor do I work for CCP, so I don't actually fix things. I don't even have a backchannel, nor even reliable access to the ears of a CSM member (for all the good THAT does one.) I just post words in a forum.

Also, you're allowed to use terrible, nuance-destroying buzzwords like "content," but I can't use "meta?"

What you consider "half-baked" I consider "crutch."

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Kendarr
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#457 - 2015-06-12 06:42:01 UTC
Querns wrote:
Kendarr wrote:
Also if you want to nerf the speed of bombers bombing, why not just put a huge timers on the bomb launchers or reload time? like 10 mins or something.

Bombers are too inexpensive for this to be viable. Use a bomber, then warp to a pos or a cloaked carrier to swap out your bomber for one lacking the reload/activation timer.

fake edit: CCP GREYSCALE PLEASE ADD BOMB FATIGUE


+1 for BOMB FATIGUE
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#458 - 2015-06-12 06:42:17 UTC
Tara Read wrote:

Oh this is just too cute. If this is the fruits of the CSM's labour which is nothing but self posturing and positioning to bend CCP's ear then I have no interest. Period.

It's less that and more "having a group of confederates who will vote for you in excess of the amount of votes garnered by the disenfranchised masses of Eve."

If you don't like the way this works, I strongly encourage you to actually vote next time, as I said before. Otherwise, you lose your purchase towards complaining about it. The CSM does not warp to your whims because you refuse to put forth even a token amount of effort towards changing it.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Tara Read
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#459 - 2015-06-12 06:42:45 UTC
Querns wrote:
Tara Read wrote:

So you hate bombers. Gotcha. Jesus Christ that's a lot of words for "I hate being bombed!" And please stop trying to circlejerk yourself with these convoluted paragraphs of buzz words like "content" and "meta". It's beginning to sound like another propaganda Jim Jones cool aide fest that I have no intention of drinking.

If you have issues with bombers why not fix them? Why instead of screwing the pooch with everyone else CCP perhaps place warping or grid restrictions on bombers? Maybe make flying them more niche than making us all suffer for half baked fleet mechanics?

Oh of course. Instead of building a fire to keep the house warm CCP just sets the whole house on fire instead. Typical.

I mean, I'm not a game designer, nor do I work for CCP, so I don't actually fix things. I don't even have a backchannel, nor even reliable access to the ears of a CSM member (for all the good THAT does one.) I just post words in a forum.

Also, you're allowed to use terrible, nuance-destroying buzzwords like "content," but I can't use "meta?"

What you consider "half-baked" I consider "crutch."


You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#460 - 2015-06-12 06:44:54 UTC
Tara Read wrote:

You are the one constantly coming back and trying to twist a Tolkien like description of the meaning meta to say you don't like bombing runs. It's utterly hilarious.

Nah. I just think that with bombers castrated, the major detriments to fielding shield tanked ships are gone. In the current era of Ishtars and Tengus, it's a breath of fresh air.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.