These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Jump Fatigue Feedback

First post First post First post
Author
Peastrel Leporidae
Doomheim
#421 - 2015-10-17 11:42:00 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Go on, do it. make CCP reverse the Pheobe changes, I dare you

I double ******* dog dare you. Do it you chickens.

Because here's what will happen if you do, based on the following facts:

(i) There's one superpower in EVE: The Imperium. (I'll define superpower as "able to contest any other group while defending its territory against other other single group")

(ii) Nowhere in 0.0 will be safe from any group anywhere willing to deploy.

Result:

(1) The Imperium will own 0.0. Everyone else in sov 0.0 will have to either kiss the ring or get burned out of their space at the whim of the Imperium leadership.

(2) The Imperium will react to any attempt to coalesce a group that could remotely challenge it.

(3) That's it. Goons own null until they get bored. The end.

So go on, do it. Go ahead I don't even care any more. I worked my fat white arse off for you people to try and get a game state that would allow diversity and independence in 0.0, and people such as myself, Marlona Sky, Manfred Sideous and many others made that case to CCP. Well I haven't got the energy to do it again, nor has anyone else who was at the front of that campaign.

So fine, go right the **** ahead: I'm in the Imperium now and I will take vindictive pleasure in actively burning out every last small independent group from 0.0 and, that done, you'd better believe I will be campaigning like hell to see the same happen to empire too.


buk buk




good point ,so capping the amount of members in alliances and removing the standings will reduce this.why should all of those trying to start up in 0.0 suffer fatigue and crap jump range because you (ccp) are really not trying to solve the problem of power projection ....so NO STANDINGS .CAP ALLIANCE AND CORP NUMBERS 5000 per alliance and 300 per corp.(maybe less,you have all the numbers )
this i feel will put 0.0 back into shape.if you want 0.0 player to be at war and have plenty of content

ISD Decoy
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#422 - 2015-10-17 15:20:22 UTC
I have removed a troll post.

Quote:
5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive, and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.

ISD Decoy

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Monasucks
BLACK SQUADRON.
The Bastion
#423 - 2015-10-17 17:02:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Monasucks
Dear CCP our most valuable good we have in life is time. You already noticed this and now want to introduce pay2win - I'm strongly against this. But just keep this in mind, if you want to take more of our time, for the fatigue...
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hi Space Friends,

Thanks for those that attended the Q&A session today, we appreciate those who took the time. We'd like to use this thread as a method of discussing Jump Fatigue ideas.

Some of the interesting suggestions that we'd heard and would like to see player opinions on -
  • Altering jump ranges
  • Altering jump fatigue curves
  • Moving jump fatigue from character based to ship based
  • Alternative FTL systems (Hyperdrive anyone?)
  • Sovereignty effects on Jump Fatigue (e.g. jumping out of/back into capitals reducing jump fatigue)
  • Balance of Jump projection v's Gate projection v's Wormhole projection
  • Jump Fatigue effecting combat effectiveness instead of limiting movement
  • Move-Mode for Capitals for move ops (e.g. Transforming into move mode (24 hour process) reduces combat capacity to near 0)
  • Active methods of reducing jump fatigue (Modules, Skills, Drugs)
  • What does local-content mean to you?



1) Give us old jumprange back - make them again diffrent from every shiptype (for example with JDC5: BO 14.6 ly, JF 13.5 ly, carrier 12 .1ly, rorqual 11.5 ly, super 11.3 ly, dread 10.8 ly, titan 9.7 ly - those numbers are just random examples - they should be diffrent - and at least 10 ly)
2) Remove the fatigue or make it "real" - If I travel a long distance by plane I'm less stress and have less fatigue to wait for. If I do the same distance in a care it tage ages - read my first post in this thread please.
3) Don't move it to the ships - cause then everyone who can afford it will have spare titans/supers everywhere to change.. This will favor the wrong people - this is even worser than removing it in all - as it only helps the alliances with the most ISK and put's everybody else in bad positions
4)
5) Yes it should to, if you keep the fatigue. you own that space - it should be your advantage - and a huge one.
6) Wormholes are total overpowered compared to the fatigue. Gates as well - but gates will not do an affect at the moment - as TiDi does the "fatigue" for you CCP. If there is no TiDi you can move a super/titan by gates in less than 1 1/2h across the map. But with the small hardware in your servers and TiDi kicks in every jump by a fleet of those they will need 4+ h. so here you have already implement a kind of fatigue, which still is totally annoying and should be removed.
7) Never not - this only favors the large groups
8) No - we spend time on this game - don't make it more, many players are playing for years - and they have less time to play, if you are asking them for more you will lose again more
9) Still no
10) There is no local content at all. There is only global content in EVE, and that content made people happy and eve famous. Stop creating my little fair cruiser farm online. Keep the your choices have meaning till it ends. Keep eve a game where people actually have to think and deal with the consequences.
Malcanis wrote:
Go on, do it. make CCP reverse the Pheobe changes, I dare you
I double ******* dog dare you. Do it you chickens.
Because here's what will happen if you do, based on the following facts:
(i) There's one superpower in EVE: The Imperium. (I'll define superpower as "able to contest any other group while defending its territory against other other single group")
(ii) Nowhere in 0.0 will be safe from any group anywhere willing to deploy.

Result:
(1) The Imperium will own 0.0. Everyone else in sov 0.0 will have to either kiss the ring or get burned out of their space at the whim of the Imperium leadership.
(2) The Imperium will react to any attempt to coalesce a group that could remotely challenge it.
(3) That's it. Goons own null until they get bored. The end.

So go on, do it. Go ahead I don't even care any more. I worked my fat white arse off for you people to try and get a game state that would allow diversity and independence in 0.0, and people such as myself, Marlona Sky, Manfred Sideous and many others made that case to CCP. Well I haven't got the energy to do it again, nor has anyone else who was at the front of that campaign.
So fine, go right the **** ahead: I'm in the Imperium now and I will take vindictive pleasure in actively burning out every last small independent group from 0.0 and, that done, you'd better believe I will be campaigning like hell to see the same happen to empire too.

buk buk

Maybe get back to the old things plus remove alliance and corp standing or reduce them to max 3 standings per alliance and 3 per corp. Set a limit of 3000-5000 players per alliance ( how many players are in the corp doesn't matters really ( e.g. a corp with 4999player + a corp with 1 player is fine - but once you reached those 5k players no corp can be joined until you are back at 4999)). My Personal limit I would like is something like 2500 to 3000. This still means the biggest coalition will be 7500-9000 players. And don't forget even with the new sov - the imperum can still expand and take as well as defend. I think the Imperium as already worked out how with the PB Deployment. It's now more boring then ever and the chances of fights reduced to 0.. but you can take and hold it.
Personal conclusion:
-Give us back old jumpranges
-Remove fatigue
-Remove standing or limit it to 1-3 standings - or just remove it at all
-Limit alliance sizes to 2500-3000 players if you keep the limited standing
-If you remove standings at all maybe limit alliance sizes to max 5000
-introduce a mix of Dominion and Fozzi Sov
-Make the game more unfair e.g. moon locations etc. so you get your "local" content
-Get rid of TiDi - we should not have that worse TiDi if gate jumping with 100 ships

Monasucks Tumblr

Twitter

"A good worker is a live worker. Free to live - and work! A bad worker is a dead worker; and vice versa. Don't be a bad worker; bad workers are slaves, and dead."

Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#424 - 2015-10-17 17:32:03 UTC
As said approximately infinity times already, that's trivially worked around with out of game tools. You cant stop people talking to each other and if they can talk to each other, you can't stop them working together if it's clearly to their advantage to do so.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Vexara
Mentat Assassins
#425 - 2015-10-18 01:40:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Vexara
Please delete.
Peastrel Leporidae
Doomheim
#426 - 2015-10-18 05:43:14 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
As said approximately infinity times already, that's trivially worked around with out of game tools. You cant stop people talking to each other and if they can talk to each other, you can't stop them working together if it's clearly to their advantage to do so.


not really,imagine for a moment (if you can get passed the bitterness)you're in a 40 man fleet on a gate,on the other side of the gate is 30 players fighting,10 are so-called friendlies others are not,when you jump in to engage who do you shoot? how can you tell in game? standings are neutral for both.how is talking to someone in another fleet going to help?

ii think without the aid of in game standings it will be much more of a chore to fleet with people not in your alliance.also if fleet standings(pretty pink color) should also be removed,also aiding in separating alliances,

if the jump range Nerf and fatigue are truly in existence due to power projection and so many are against it then taking away the ability to ally your alliance with others is a better method.
marly cortez
Mercurialis Inc.
The Bastion
#427 - 2015-10-21 01:43:33 UTC
Looked over the thread since it's inception, lot of good points, lot of the old stuff still there.

The one thing that has always bugged me about Fatigue is it's implications to player generated content and the negative effect it had overall on this aspect, hence why I still maintain that it should be removed from the game, However there are those that make good points regarding power projection from there perspective, I would not disagree with them as from there vantage point restricting power projection is a good thing.

I would ask if they feel that with the over all homogenization of the EVE universe such draconian measure are actually required, After all apart from minor skirmishing over towers at odd times Sov warfare has all but ceased to be a part of the EVE game scenario for the most part, Why attack someone who only has exactly what you already have anyway, makes little sense applying heavy restrictions of this nature if in reality they are hardly ever going to come in to play.

The problem for a lot of players however is not that of Cap Fatigue at all, it is the increased playtime they have to expend in simply getting around being as they are restricted in using Titan and jump bridges, This point alone has in the view of many been the main reason for a lot of players leaving EVE in recent months.

There are however deeper issues with the new direction CCP have taken EVE, The results which have not been in the games best interests and may have fatally damaged the community beyond repair, A process that began way back with the removal of multiple jump bridges resulting in the isolation of groups of players, and not as the stated intention was to force greater interaction, This process has continued through multiple iterations and again in the view of many locked EVE into the steady downward spiral we see today, It is hoped that CCP will take this position into consideration when they look at the problem of Fatigue and understand that while it is a serious issue, it is not the only one EVE currently suffers under.

Humanity is the thin veneer that remains after you remove the baffled chimp.

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#428 - 2015-10-21 02:56:49 UTC
Peastrel Leporidae wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
As said approximately infinity times already, that's trivially worked around with out of game tools. You cant stop people talking to each other and if they can talk to each other, you can't stop them working together if it's clearly to their advantage to do so.


not really,imagine for a moment (if you can get passed the bitterness)you're in a 40 man fleet on a gate,on the other side of the gate is 30 players fighting,10 are so-called friendlies others are not,when you jump in to engage who do you shoot? how can you tell in game? standings are neutral for both.how is talking to someone in another fleet going to help?

ii think without the aid of in game standings it will be much more of a chore to fleet with people not in your alliance.also if fleet standings(pretty pink color) should also be removed,also aiding in separating alliances,

if the jump range Nerf and fatigue are truly in existence due to power projection and so many are against it then taking away the ability to ally your alliance with others is a better method.

You can add alliance and Corp tags to the overview and also have them show up in space. Once you've confirmed that xxpenislandxx is blue, it's pretty easy to not shoot them. Then of course they can shout in local or pm and say "yo we're bloo" and that's that. Removing the tags won't fix the problem you're looking to fix. It makes it a slightly larger hassle, but it's easily worked around, and is already in current use by a certain providence bloc.
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#429 - 2015-10-21 20:29:16 UTC
Primary This Rifter wrote:
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hi Space Friends,

Thanks for those that attended the Q&A session today, we appreciate those who took the time. We'd like to use this thread as a method of discussing Jump Fatigue ideas.

Some of the interesting suggestions that we'd heard and would like to see player opinions on -
  • Altering jump ranges
  • Altering jump fatigue curves
  • Moving jump fatigue from character based to ship based
  • Alternative FTL systems (Hyperdrive anyone?)
  • Sovereignty effects on Jump Fatigue (e.g. jumping out of/back into capitals reducing jump fatigue)
  • Balance of Jump projection v's Gate projection v's Wormhole projection
  • Jump Fatigue effecting combat effectiveness instead of limiting movement
  • Move-Mode for Capitals for move ops (e.g. Transforming into move mode (24 hour process) reduces combat capacity to near 0)
  • Active methods of reducing jump fatigue (Modules, Skills, Drugs)
  • What does local-content mean to you?


We'd also love to hear your ideas, post away space friends.

Metrics Pron

Perhaps you should spend some time addressing the fact that your "Q&A session" didn't leave people with the feeling that you're actually listening to them.

Point blank. I thing Jump freighters should have longer ranges. Probably a 10% increase to Blops range as well.

Personally i would Look at fatigue a bit differently. The delay is a good Idea, but I think its a bit harsh as it stands.. still might be a bit harsh with the 5 day cap coming.

FTL (hyperdrive) Has the potential to do a lot to increase ranges.. but I think it would fill a better niche in subcaps, and possibly if you put it on a smaller ship (I'm thinking a new T2 Battlecruiser class with equal training time as command ships). It's a goal to work towards and help benefit subcap fleets.

Or another cool idea would be to allow FTL's, but also make it a beacon based thing (not cyno, fixed beacons, or celestials). making it be used by the Utility high slot to balance out the long ranges that are possible.

Also, FTL's should probably have a similar mechanic as Micro jump drives. But id like to see it start out longer and the reductions to V should make it about 15 mins to jump. ( I would seriously use one just to travel around New Eden.)

I don't do Capitols, so I am withholding comment on mechanics I have not been involved in.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#430 - 2015-10-21 20:39:24 UTC
Monasucks wrote:
snip


If you think the imperium has too many blue, do your part and leave RAZOR, it will be one less and you will no longer part of what YOU think is the problem.
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#431 - 2015-10-21 20:44:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
Peastrel Leporidae wrote:
good point ,so capping the amount of members in alliances and removing the standings will reduce this.

This is getting old.
No, it won't. People lived without standings and formal alliances, Provi still does that. So what exactly that will do?
I'm no nullsec warfare expert, but I'm pretty sure that having 8 times more bodies is well worth slightly more sluggish hierarchy.

Poranius Fisc wrote:
FTL (hyperdrive) Has the potential to do a lot to increase ranges.. but I think it would fill a better niche in subcaps, and possibly if you put it on a smaller ship (I'm thinking a new T2 Battlecruiser class with equal training time as command ships). It's a goal to work towards and help benefit subcap fleets.

Or another cool idea would be to allow FTL's, but also make it a beacon based thing (not cyno, fixed beacons, or celestials). making it be used by the Utility high slot to balance out the long ranges that are possible.

Also, FTL's should probably have a similar mechanic as Micro jump drives. But id like to see it start out longer and the reductions to V should make it about 15 mins to jump. ( I would seriously use one just to travel around New Eden.)

I don't do Capitols, so I am withholding comment on mechanics I have not been involved in.

Maybe you should explain what exact FTL mechanics you have in mind?
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#432 - 2015-10-21 22:17:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Poranius Fisc
Barrogh Habalu wrote:
Peastrel Leporidae wrote:
good point ,so capping the amount of members in alliances and removing the standings will reduce this.

This is getting old.
No, it won't. People lived without standings and formal alliances, Provi still does that. So what exactly that will do?
I'm no nullsec warfare expert, but I'm pretty sure that having 8 times more bodies is well worth slightly more sluggish hierarchy.

Poranius Fisc wrote:
FTL (hyperdrive) Has the potential to do a lot to increase ranges.. but I think it would fill a better niche in subcaps, and possibly if you put it on a smaller ship (I'm thinking a new T2 Battlecruiser class with equal training time as command ships). It's a goal to work towards and help benefit subcap fleets.

Or another cool idea would be to allow FTL's, but also make it a beacon based thing (not cyno, fixed beacons, or celestials). making it be used by the Utility high slot to balance out the long ranges that are possible.

Also, FTL's should probably have a similar mechanic as Micro jump drives. But id like to see it start out longer and the reductions to V should make it about 15 mins to jump. ( I would seriously use one just to travel around New Eden.)

I don't do Capitols, so I am withholding comment on mechanics I have not been involved in.

Maybe you should explain what exact FTL mechanics you have in mind?


My dream idea?

Celestial jumping based off the starmap ^.^

This would involve being at one celestial ( I.E. a star, maybe some sort or random spatial anomaly) to jump to another. Ranges of the jumps that are capable might vary on ship size and/or size/type of the anomaly or star , or maybe even using the Jove Observatories as a network, or perhaps a flat 13 LY limit or something like that. or perhaps have it as a module for the upcoming citadels, but also have some in low sec /high sec.

due to sizes, or fitting requirements I could easily understand the limitations of not having these on anything destroyer sized or smaller, or perhaps there could be small, medium, large, a capitol sized hyperdrives (emphasizing range limitations).

My idea by the new class of T2 Battleships that by inovation and modification of warefare technologies, it is only possible to form a hyperspace bubble (hyperdrive jump all ships within 2000m range) from Tactical battlecruisers.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#433 - 2015-10-24 11:57:29 UTC
Peastrel Leporidae wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
As said approximately infinity times already, that's trivially worked around with out of game tools. You cant stop people talking to each other and if they can talk to each other, you can't stop them working together if it's clearly to their advantage to do so.


not really,imagine for a moment (if you can get passed the bitterness)you're in a 40 man fleet on a gate,on the other side of the gate is 30 players fighting,10 are so-called friendlies others are not,when you jump in to engage who do you shoot? how can you tell in game? standings are neutral for both.how is talking to someone in another fleet going to help?

ii think without the aid of in game standings it will be much more of a chore to fleet with people not in your alliance.also if fleet standings(pretty pink color) should also be removed,also aiding in separating alliances,

if the jump range Nerf and fatigue are truly in existence due to power projection and so many are against it then taking away the ability to ally your alliance with others is a better method.


Yes really. The colour tags for standings were introduced in the first place becuase screen overlay tools were created by players to do the same job. If CCP removed standings slots, those tools would reappear and be in general use within 96 hours.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Tairon Usaro
ZERO T0LERANCE
RAZOR Alliance
#434 - 2015-10-28 08:39:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tairon Usaro
JumpFatigue V3.0

What I like about Jump Fatigue ?

  • You can actually use your capitals again. Without the fear, that everybody and the kitchen sink jumps across the universe to interfere with your fight. That kind of force projection was bad thing.

  • Caps can use gates as a trade off for Jump Fatigue. Nice additional element, gives more gameplay depth. Could be optimized, like using the counter gate as sort of cyno beacon with selectable jump landing range such as 5, 10,20,50 km.


What I do not like about Jump Fatigue
Apologies, this list is going to be longer … Big smile

  • Waiting time. Time based penalties or plain waiting are the most game experience disturbing nerf tools in any game a dev could use. Pay to win games use it and it is bad, just bad, period. That the hilarious 30 days are shrinked to 5 days is a start, but nothing than a start.

  • jump distance reduction. While restricting force projection is OK for me, crippling logistics for your own player empire or strategic deployments is not. I do not believe in the vision of self-sustainable player empires as a dogma. If CCP tries to achieve that brute force, they will lose more customers. The whole existing universe is simply not constructed that way, it would work via distance related nerfs. Furthermore, I lost quite a few friends, casual players, because they could not participate in strategic deployments anymore, afraid of getting left behind, if they don’t make it to the official move ops.

  • castration of jump bridges. While I fully understand, that JBs should not be used as highways for coalitions racing across the universe, it is beyond me, why your very on alliance JBs are castrated. I want empire building !



So here is my proposal

Travel Mode On
I think of a new capital module, the JumpDriveNeuralConnector. It facilitates optimization of your Jump Drive capabilities for the cost of offensive capabilities. In detail it is the following:


  • low slot mod, so JF can use it too

  • only fittable on ships with a JD

  • triggers a character related timer upon JDNC module activation, say JumpBoost-Timer. Every time the module gets activated, the timer gets reset to 48 hours.

  • active module does increase your jump range to 10 LY.

  • active module does decrease Jump Fatigue to current modifiers for logistical ships.

  • active JumpBoost-Timer does decrease damage and range of any module to 10% of its normal value. On any ship you are using. So to conclude, your offensive capabilities on the char are crippled for 48 hours.

  • active JumpBoost-Timer prohibits you from refitting, packaging, leaving in space, putting in corp hanagars, selling, contacting or trading of any ship with JDNC module fitted. Thus there should be no alt-char tactics to mitigate the timer. The only way to get aride of the ship from your account is to pop it.



For Jump Bridges I propose the following

  • for your own alliance same modifiers as they have now for logistical ships. It abolishes the absurd situation that you use industrials as shuttles and gives back a nice empire building experience.

  • for others (with blue standing). Just as it is now, so no coalition highways.



My intensions are

  • keep the limitation of tactical force projection

  • reanimate strategic force projection. I do believe this is vital for the game and its branding as the ultimate PVP MMO sandbox. You don’t market skirmishes, you want to market epic wars.

  • bring back casual 0.0 players, buy making their personal logistics for deployments easier again. Burning through JumpFatigue is simply not an option. 30 days was hilarious, 5 days is still way too long.



With my proposal, there are still 2 days, where your offensive capabilities are crippled, but you can do what the campaign commanders asks you for, participate in move ops, do logistical stuff, even fly in fleet (but as a pure meat shield).
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#435 - 2015-10-28 19:41:25 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Monasucks wrote:
snip


If you think the imperium has too many blue, do your part and leave RAZOR, it will be one less and you will no longer part of what YOU think is the problem.


I totally agree with this.

When I listen to my alliance comms, I hear a lot of general dissatisfaction with being part of the Imperium. With no hard feelings towards anyone, there are a lot of folks who would love to shoot at CO2, The Bastion, RAZOR, Goons, LAWN, etc. (or the Russians we currently have NIP's, NAP's, and god-knows-what-else backroom deals with). I think there are a ton of people who are bored with the current situation, but the lack of anyone near as competently organized makes it almost impossible to convince individual players, corporations, or alliances to jump ship. That... and fear that you might actually lose a war or something if you left. Knowing that if you jump ship you will probably just get kill farmed by the Imperium or PL, plus have to do all the work of running a major alliance, is a huge incentive to stay bored.

Running an alliance or coalition is a ton of work. There are a limited number of calm, capable, and dedicated folks who have the time to do that. If someone put together a management team, without an overt Grr Goons agenda, but just "Hey, we are going to take space somewhere, fight like hell, and build an empire, please come join us," they could probably do pretty well. These projects have worked in the past, but generally dissolve in a Superfund-level toxic wasteland of internal drama or fall apart because someone gets married, divorced, gets kicked out of Mom's basement, or has a baby.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Leitharos Rosselem
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#436 - 2015-10-30 14:23:11 UTC
marly cortez wrote:


There are however deeper issues with the new direction CCP have taken EVE, The results which have not been in the games best interests and may have fatally damaged the community beyond repair, A process that began way back with the removal of multiple jump bridges resulting in the isolation of groups of players, and not as the stated intention was to force greater interaction, This process has continued through multiple iterations and again in the view of many locked EVE into the steady downward spiral we see today, It is hoped that CCP will take this position into consideration when they look at the problem of Fatigue and understand that while it is a serious issue, it is not the only one EVE currently suffers under.


Jump fatigue was a solution to a problem with how monkeys in a cage used a tool given to them by CCP. It's a solution designed to artificially influence behaviour because the animals in the cage were playing with toys in a way they didn't like. Rather than giving us new tools to counter or beat the other older tools, CCP opted to try and limit how the old tools get used.

Not only do these solutions rarely work as intended, you risk pissing everyone off because of a choice to limit or reduce or take away something from the animals. How is it that CCP used to brag about the innovation of the player base in evolving how tools get used, but has missed the point that the game is better served by adding new tools into the environment. CCP should go back to focusing on better tools to play with and stop trying to build artificial constraints.

Meanwhile: Citadels: nice, but still just structures ~ shiny and awesome bling but we had them already. Sure there will be a a new learning cliff as we figure out how to make those piles of things instead of the old ones, but they're still just piles of things we already had. Ship and module balancing: same tools used differently. Tech 3 destroyers, ice mining frigs, nice.

How about new places, new ways to travel, new ways to buff and bonus, new ways to counter the buffs and bonuses, new PVE...

I like the capital rebalance because it's bringing new ships. As the new mechanics are rock/paper/scissors, do we need to worry about fatigue anymore?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#437 - 2015-10-31 08:00:30 UTC
I think you misunderstood the problem that fatigue was intended to solve

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#438 - 2015-11-09 00:24:16 UTC
Jump fatigue is great but I think CCP needs to rethink the way larger ships are crippled by align time, time to warp and warp speed. Warp speed especially does not make sense. Larger ships have larger engines and should be capable of keeping up with a fleet which would make gate travel when fatigue hits less annoying.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
#439 - 2015-11-09 13:27:29 UTC
Some great ideas in this thread. I didn't read it all. But yea something had to be done with jumping. It was just plain silly there before JF came in. It didn't matter where a cap was as long as pilots were online, they could be literately anywhere on the map inside an hour. Any corp worth their salt had ready to run cyno chains from anywhere to anywhere.

So I will assume that most accept that unlimited power projection was a bad thing.

One idea i had (forgive me if it has been made already), is that fatigue is based on distance from the Origin. That is every ship has an origin. Which is where they are now. Then they jump, so a amount of fatigue is added. A small amount generally with fairly small cooldown. Now as fatigue goes down the origin slowly moves over to the current position. This does mean the origin can be place inbetween systems. But jumping closer to the origin gives you no penalty or a much smaller penalty. Only jumping further away than your current position from the origin would give additional fatigue. With some lower bound on cooldown if needed.

Personally i would be all for zero cooldown on all jumps that move closer to the orgin.

The idea is waiting is as boring as **** and unfun. And the idea is to restrict power projection while giving good projection *within* a space around the current location. But longer distance projection comes at a cost.

D.

AKA the scientist.

Death and Glory!

Well fun is also good.

Dograzor
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#440 - 2015-11-09 14:01:03 UTC
CCP it has been 3 months since the start of this thread, can you give an update on this?