These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

CCP/CSM Round Table: Jump Fatigue

First post
Author
GR455H0PPER
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#141 - 2015-08-08 20:00:58 UTC
Q: with the new sov system would it be possible to have no fatigue using jump bridges in alliance space,also to avoid exploits make it so your sov is based on the constellation and not an individual system,so there cant be random systems across the coalitions to make traveling outside the region you live in easier,
Q: would it be possible to have jump range restored to previous values and 10 min cool down on jump reactivation flat rate and not ship specific, no stacking.
Q: would it be possible to have 5ly range with a 5 min reactivation timer not ship specific.
Q: what did happen to ccp grayscale Lol
GR455H0PPER
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#142 - 2015-08-08 20:05:05 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Sugar Kyle wrote:
We've gathered all the questions posed so far and now we are putting them into subjects so that we can have some cohesive structure. Also, the discussions between questions are useful. Thank you for participating.


I forgot you were gathering questions. I have one:

What are CCP & The CSM's thoughts on refining the Phoebe travel restrictions with a view to changing the restrictive mechanism from a flat timer to a gameplay or chance-based mechanism?

eg: jump a carrier while your jump timer is still active being possible, but having a chance, which increases with the level of the timer of landing you elsewhere in the grid, the system or just in the whole map?

eg: when a capital ship is cyno jumped, instead of just *BOOSH* you appear, you have to navigate your ship through a warp tunnel to the destination - the further away the destination, the longer you have to spend in the tunnel; The higher your fatigue, the more twisty and obstacle-strewn the path is. Clipping the edge of the tunnel might damage your hull, offline modules or land you in an expected destination.

Since many of the objections I see to the travel changes are complaints about "weaponised boredom" &c from restrictive timers that can't be mitigated or altered, then changing the mechanism to one that allows the pilot to take a risk and/or affect the outcome with piloting skill, with unexpected outcomes offering unpredictable gameplay scenarios might allieviate these complaints.


unexpected i think you mean,also enough with the minigame ideas please
Samillian
Angry Mustellid
#143 - 2015-08-08 20:12:15 UTC
My question is:

Since the Phoebe changes went live LowSec has become a far more diverse and interesting environment in which to live, will CCP take these positive changes to LowSec into account when considering further changes to Jump Fatigue and Jump Range?



NBSI shall be the whole of the Law

Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#144 - 2015-08-08 20:21:08 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

I forgot you were gathering questions. I have one:

What are CCP & The CSM's thoughts on refining the Phoebe travel restrictions with a view to changing the restrictive mechanism from a flat timer to a gameplay or chance-based mechanism?

.


As always, I speak for myself, not the CSM as a whole. I think the jump changes did what they set out to do. Do I think all the numbers are perfect? No, there is always room for refinement and dial turning to tweak it here and there.

A complete shift in the mechanics is also worth looking at but not one that results in 'nerf everyone except 'us'' Sadly some of the questions are leading to that. I am not sure what you mean by a gameplay mechanic. Chance? Ooooh, so much room in that word. Do you mean a chance of the person missing the destination, even by systems or a constellation (fatigue replaced by 'accuracy' which diminishes unless you allow systems and pilot to re-align) or do you mean a chance of huge fatigue or none at all?

AS Sugar said above, we are collecting and collating the questions this weekend. If you have some the end is near.

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)

Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#145 - 2015-08-08 21:07:07 UTC
Samillian wrote:
My question is:

Since the Phoebe changes went live LowSec has become a far more diverse and interesting environment in which to live, will CCP take these positive changes to LowSec into account when considering further changes to Jump Fatigue and Jump Range?





They better! :P

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#146 - 2015-08-08 23:14:44 UTC
I'm sure plenty of people are going to beg for the removal or heavy nerf of the jump fatigue mechanic. That'll just take us back to the problems of force projection, so I'm going to be bold and suggest it needs to go in the other direction:

Would CCP consider implementing one of Manny's earlier suggestions for jump drives, by reducing jump range to 1 system away and removing fatigue altogether?(obviously warp speed would need increasing etc, but imho jump drives create so many issues in eve they're better off being removed)

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

Sakul Aubaris
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#147 - 2015-08-09 01:02:27 UTC
First of all - I think jumpfatigue was a great idea. All in all it worked ok with some problems to be solved but it achieved the main goal of reducing the forceprojection of big Powerblocks.


But I would like to know some details.

1. What are your future plans to jump- and titanbridges? Should they be similar to each other or fulfill different roles/objectives?

2. Fatigue reduced the forceprojection of capitals a lot. Do you plan to introduce a counterpart to capblobs, because aggressors can't move their own cap fleet that easy? Remember that caps are quite common within the memberbase atm. And if you are not able to react to an enemy cap fleet could decide a war.

3. Do you plan to tweak the jumprange of jumpfreighter? And if yes, do you think local industries will be able to catch up?

4. After the introduction of jumpfatigue some players call caps useless, others still blame them op. What are your opinion about this ? Do you think caps are in place or a rebalance (maybe even a redesig) is needed?

5. Do you think about relocation of some regions to each other so that you can jump across their borders? This could remove some bottlenecks, where caps musst pass through to enter a region via gate?

6. What are your future plans for supercarriers and titans in eve? Should they become a more strategic weapon or be in line with the actual mass of scaps and the wish of their owners to use them in combat.

P.S. its late in Germany so please be patient with my bad english.
Pah Cova
Made in Portugal S.A.
#148 - 2015-08-09 04:18:30 UTC
Just one question

Jump fatigue are going to disapear and jump range are going back to what it was before Phoebe for capitals?

Alexandra Payne
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#149 - 2015-08-09 09:08:21 UTC

My question is:

For almost all mechanics a newbe can do a low power version of what a veteran can do. I think Jump Drives are fundamentally bad for the game because, at some point in your skill training, you get a new and incredible power which a newbe is totally unable to use. This adds to the feeling only veterans can play EVE and there's no room for new players. Do you agree with me that, in principle, all mechanics should be available to all players, right from day one?

Thanks
Lugh Crow-Slave
#150 - 2015-08-09 11:38:26 UTC
Are jump freighters and other industrial ships still going to lose their fatigue bonus (or get it reduced) and are jump freighters still planed to have their range reduced
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#151 - 2015-08-09 11:42:02 UTC
Mike Azariah wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

I forgot you were gathering questions. I have one:

What are CCP & The CSM's thoughts on refining the Phoebe travel restrictions with a view to changing the restrictive mechanism from a flat timer to a gameplay or chance-based mechanism?

.


As always, I speak for myself, not the CSM as a whole. I think the jump changes did what they set out to do. Do I think all the numbers are perfect? No, there is always room for refinement and dial turning to tweak it here and there.

A complete shift in the mechanics is also worth looking at but not one that results in 'nerf everyone except 'us'' Sadly some of the questions are leading to that. I am not sure what you mean by a gameplay mechanic. Chance? Ooooh, so much room in that word. Do you mean a chance of the person missing the destination, even by systems or a constellation (fatigue replaced by 'accuracy' which diminishes unless you allow systems and pilot to re-align) or do you mean a chance of huge fatigue or none at all?

AS Sugar said above, we are collecting and collating the questions this weekend. If you have some the end is near.

m


What I'm getting at here is that "Jump Fatigue" is a classic example of a CCP mechanic: in a narow mechanical sense, it change the parameters of what can and can't be done. But it doesn't add any game. Got a timer? No jumping for you, the end. Timer's up? OK you can jump now. As an EVE health and safety regulation, it's nicely constructed. As a gameplay mechanism it's a "to do" marker.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

SpaceyX
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#152 - 2015-08-09 12:04:47 UTC
Alexandra Payne wrote:

... all mechanics should be available to all players, right from day one?
Thanks


Do you even think about the players, who have spent years, hundrets of dollars and what ever in the game to get to a certain point , where they can use "advanced" mechanics? And you want all the good stuff available for the beginning? That is not the way EVE works. If you do not want to wait => buy a char.

The castration CCP brought with jump fatigue was basicly a big punch directly in the face of the "veteran" players.

As is started playing EVE my BIG GOAL was owning a Super or a Titan. There was nothing more i wanted to do than throw that thing into a big capital fight. As i reached my goal, guess what?

Jump fatigue and the castration of jump range is not the way to go. At least not as it is right now.
Svana Shaishi
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#153 - 2015-08-09 15:33:14 UTC
I will be able to stream this if no one else is already doing it.
Shirrar
Doomheim
#154 - 2015-08-09 16:05:18 UTC
What are your thoughts on having a timer be per ship and not per character? This would limit force projection but not prevent the player from changing ships and continuing to play the game.

Other ideas:

-Resource cost per jump which increases if jumps are done quickly after each other but doesn't prevent you from jumping. Perhaps ozone or some other resource.

-Much shorter timers
Rad1st
AirGuard
LowSechnaya Sholupen
#155 - 2015-08-09 16:10:04 UTC
Dont touch anything while it working
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#156 - 2015-08-09 16:10:57 UTC
is that fatigue reduction bonus on jump freighters going to get removed?

at the time they said not having it would kill nullsec or something. I look forward to hauling actually being a real part of the game, rather than just invincible teleport ships who never have to leave the dock radius of a station.
Darius Caliente
The Pinecone Squad
United Federation of Conifers
#157 - 2015-08-09 16:23:24 UTC
Do you have any plans to address the death of solo, nomadic game play? It used to be quite simple to take a carrier, load up a few ships, and move across the universe for new content. Now, that capability has been removed and a similar trip takes days.

Are there any plans to adjust the loss of BLOPS "quick attack" capabilities. The idea of BLOPS should be ninja attacks in and out, strike fast, eat cap boosters while you kill your target, and get out. Having fatigue after that first jump means finding a safe and sitting and waiting in hostile territory for up to 5 minutes. This seems counter-intuitive to the nature of BLOPS. Have you considered having jump fatigue kick in after every second jump or further reducing the jump fatigue reduction to say JF Levels

Many people play EVE for capital ships. It was the reason that I started playing EVE. Do you think a 30 day timer is a little excessive? Wouldn't capping fatigue at 12, 24, or even 48 hours be just as sufficient? At 24 hours, you still have a 32-minute cooldown. This seems sufficient to prevent force projection while still allowing those of us that love capital ships to use them regularly. Does it really make sense to have a game that limits a persons play time to once every 8 or 30 days? It seems like that's a lot less content for other people with players simply logging off to play other games to wait out timers.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#158 - 2015-08-09 16:47:47 UTC
Alexandra Payne wrote:
all mechanics should be available to all players, right from day one?

EVE was nerfed pretty hard in order to improve new player experience. Veterans said "WTF?" and canceled subscriptions. New players said "thank you, this game doesnt fit me" and left. The faster they try through all of the possible mechanics, the more chance they quit before realizing what EVE is _really_ about.
And btw, new players can jump, right from day one, in a rookie ship.

SpaceyX wrote:
As is started playing EVE my BIG GOAL was owning a Super or a Titan. There was nothing more i wanted to do than throw that thing into a big capital fightsafely use it dunking left and right while knowing that my butt will be saved anytime. As i reached my goal, guess what?

Fixed that for you.
That risk-averse behavior of you and the likes of your is the reason we all got that fatigue.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#159 - 2015-08-09 17:03:38 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
What I'm getting at here is that "Jump Fatigue" is a classic example of a CCP mechanic: in a narow mechanical sense, it change the parameters of what can and can't be done. But it doesn't add any game. Got a timer? No jumping for you, the end.

You can use gates.
Allowing capitals through the gates was a huge mistake imo, but they did it for the sake of the "game", so you should be thankful.

Allowing the gates turned cyno-jammers from strategic assets into carebears sentinels. With cyno-jammers, dominion sov could still work with a couple of tweaks. Without them, we were doomed to have fozzie-sov, where capitals are useless. And this nerf-cascade was triggered so that you can have that "game".
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#160 - 2015-08-09 17:11:59 UTC
And I do have a question for CCP.
Is my Rorqual really that fearsome, that you keep it tamed to 5 LY ?