Wormholes

So how do you proposing to increase risk? By increasing the number of dreads needed thus giving safety against small hunting groups?



That didn't even make sense but good try mate.

I dont really see a problem with this. People like killin stuff.. it keeps them entertained. Entertained people dont get bored and quit EvE.

If your the prey, yeah it sucks but hey.. atleast it gives you something to do tomorrow..

Replace your lost capitals, maybe even plan some revenge.


I think one of the key problems is people are tired of all these little alt farm corps that run sites in a way that is essentialy risk free. WH should be risk = reward. It should be corp mates working together to farm sites or alternatively working together to hunt farmers.

WH space should not be 5 toon Alt corps doing risk free isk printing.

the post above yours sums up my thoughts beautifully.



what is your suggestion to increase risk?

a mix of caps and subcaps in site sounds nice and still traps caps on field which people can hunt but you could just use a drone carrier and clear off points and continue to use the single dread to kill escalation waves. i guess combine that with guardian changes and you have something that forces people to use subcap support which would be great.

did foxfour confirm they are "removing" or nerfing escalations? i would hope not removing completely because that would be a pretty horrid idea for everyone whether they are focused on pvp or pve.

most people i am talking to are saying that all he asked was a hypothetical question about escalations to gather opinions which is hardly confirmation that they're being removed. i agree that this is something ccp is serious about though, my money is on a change before the end of the year.

I've already echoed what many people have said; make farming your static the primary source of income and come up with a mechanic that increases the chance of incoming wormholes when you run sites.

I rarely post to the cesspit that commonly is eve-o, but this issue is dear to my heart, WH space and all.

The problem is not the ease of running the site or the ability to do it with few accounts.

The problem is the ease of rolling or crit'ing connections, nothing else. Fix that, and you solve the other problems automatically. If it wasn't so easy to lock a WH down, it isn't so safe to run sites. We need to start punishing people explicitly for collapsing connections. But we need to do it in a way that doesn't punish those who roll for pew.

So, there are a few things you could do:

- increase the frequency of incoming connections hugely whenever a WH is mass collapsed in a system
- prohibit capital escalation waves from spawning UNLESS the K162 side of your static is spawned, and is not reduced
- require capitals to remain on grid, for the entire site, and make those sleepers that are triggered by a capital invulnerable for a time (30 minutes?) if the capital that triggered them leaves the grid, unless another capital of the correct type returns (a dead capital shouldn't cause this invulnerability!)

Immediately, you have created game play disincentives to actually locking yourself up, as long as the frequency is properly balanced. I'd suggest that this frequency increase is so very high, such that the next K162 that spawns randomly chooses amongst those wh's that qualify. That could put this is as high as 100%. I would have this factor decay over time until 4-8 hours after the mass collapse, you are back to normal.

Its now safer to leave the chain up, than deal with the incoming connections.

It allows pvp groups to roll the connections, and increase the likelyhood that either someone else rolling will roll into them, or they will roll into someone who collapsed their static, increasing the chance that active meets active.

It allows groups to 'game' the mechanics. Holding WH control for an invasion now becomes very hard, as rolling makes it far more likely to get an incoming connection. Leaving it crit is good, but now the defenders have the option to roll it, and increase the roll-in chance. Attackers now cannot just collapse a chain the defender sends his scout out of without consequences.

The main thing with this here is it is working on making active meet active, which is a huge step forward for WH space. No more endless chains of dead systems. Defining 'active' as 'having mass collapsed a wh' maybe isn't ideal, but its a good starting point.

The direct nerf to capital escalations, requiring the K162 spawn and non-reduced, would simply disable the escalation waves themselves. You could still run sites, you can still do everything, but warping capitals to the site will not trigger spawns. This has intriguing game mechanics as well. If you can't attack the site runners because you are small, you can still ruin their session by massing their WH. You could intentionally mass the WH and run c5/c6 with capitals without escalation waves. You could save yourself when attacking an enemy siting fleet from the defensive 'drop another capital and trigger 8 more BS' plan.

The requirement to keep capitals on field limits the ability to shield/reduce the risk that popping caps in and out of grid can deliver for risk limitation. Forcing them to stay there, and imposing consequences if they don't, is fine. An attacker now needs to make sure they can bubble/hold all the capitals on grid, or a bunch of angry, invulnerable sleepers will wreak havoc.


The things that shouldn't be done, and a quick hit on why:

Nerf capital escalations
- they are fine, just make them more risky by forcing connections to be open or more frequent
- could make changes to require more people, not multiboxing, hard to balance tho

Force people into their static
- this is pants on head ********, it will only deliver additional ganks, not fights
- groups who run pve in the static, when jumped, even if they wanted to reship, have already burnt a lot of mass sending a pve fleet in and out of their static, that is less mass for a pvp fleet, so less likely a fight will occur

Reduce the ISK of capital escalations
- increase the risk, dont reduce the ISK, otherwise you punish those not wealthy
- if it drives farmers to quit their farm holes and go to incursions or something, there is nothing wrong with that, if it has increased the chance that PVP groups will connect to each other

sure ill be more clear because i do think i was actually very unclear there and risk is pretty hard to define because there's a fair few factors.

i think it is significantly more risky to farm with 7 dreads when it's doable with one dread because if a group that hunts caps rolls in and notices that you do run with many dreads, they'll set up a logoff trap or use other means to kill your fleet. rebuy the caps and hunters will just come back and wipe it again. then you're out of pocket a huge amount of money which will take a lot of sites to recoup - in many cases this has just killed alliances, TLC being the most obvious example. the advantage to using that many dreads of course is if a small uncoordinated group rolls in, you might be able to defend yourself, and of course you can one cycle instead of 2 cycling so less time on field.

on the flipside, if you farm with one dread, you risk very little on the field (one day of sites enough to replace), but if you get caught, you're going to find it harder to defend yourself, especially if there are no corpmates around.

at the moment in w-space the chance of getting caught is quite low, whether it is from someone rolling in or from a logoff trap, so i think that it is safer to farm with just one dread, and there are so many alt corps doing exactly that.

i think tdsin are again a good example of this because they lost a lot of caps being targeted like this and then decided to go to the one-dread method when they realised it just wasn't sustainable to keep using such a large amount of caps in site.



farming in static is just so risk free, i'm not sure how you don't see this, mjd out and warp to your return, that's it. if you take a cap into static that might get caught, but it's only 1 cap. not sure where the 2 caps is coming from, do you really think people will bring 2 capitals into static and then lock one of them out if most of the money goes into static sites?

Any suggestion that breaks the ability to solo/duo farm anomalies implicitly hurts the 100 man wh corp. These big corps can only exist because their members run these farming systems. If they all had to live in the same wh and only use that wh (or their static) for income generation, the big blob corps would break apart quickly, as chunks of them would break off and form splinter groups. The big blob corps only survive because the key creators and pilots are self sufficient, isk-wise.

I've been a member the longest!

Your first paragraph is obviously a misunderstanding of the suggested mechanic. It is not requiring an incoming K162, it is requiring your outgoing statics 'otherside' K162 to be spawned. So, your static must be open, must be spawned (not hidden by the 4h grace window 'i haven't jumped through it yet') and must not be mass reduced. You must have an open door to your system, before you can generate capital escalation waves.

You don't actually explain why you feel connecting active with active is a BAD thing. Yes, it can be gamed, that is intentional, we all play a game. Yes, it will lead to active meeting active more often, with the more active, meeting the more active. Your line 'when people roll a hole they are more likely to connect to active holes' is precisely the objective. If there is a philosophical objection to this, outline it, because while you may like spending 5 nights a week rolling wh's, scanning chains, having bad luck and not finding a fight, the majority of players I know would pay for the ability to increase the likelyhood we run into other groups doing the same thing.

'Krabs get more isolated' is false because you aren't looking at the big picture. If they mass collapse their connection, for 4-8 hours or whatever, they are more likely to get actives roll into them, can't safely run sites now! If they don't roll the connection, more chance someone has already scanned/scouted a chain to them and has enough mass to dunk them, can't safely run sites now! They are only more isolated if they don't spawn the K162, in which case, no cap escalation waves.

The invul on sleepers is a big hammer that is probably badly phrased and maybe not even needed. The objective is to force people to leave capitals that trigger escalation waves on grid, or no more escalation waves will occur and to punish the group for evacuating the capitals. You could just stop additional escalation waves, but then you'd just pop all the capitals back onto grid. The thought here was to make the sleepers spawned by dread 2, unable to be killed UNLESS dread 2 is ongrid. And sleepers due to be spawned by Carrier 2 unable to be killed unless Carrier 1 AND Carrier 2 are on grid.

Finally.

This is the eve-o forums and personal attacks and what not are par for the course but the issue here is too important and requiring of discussion and input from many voices to let your bile and incompetence ruin the debate. So ease up.