These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[118.7] Warp Bubble Dragging Change

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#181 - 2016-07-05 03:33:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Cade Windstalker wrote:

What's the point in doing this though? The larger are already strictly better in almost every circumstance, so this really just adds inconsistency and opens up the potential for further bubble shenanigans, like setting up a Large out at 500m flanked by Mediums so you land inside the Mediums (since you weren't within their drag distance) at the edge of the Large.

Sure, it also opens the possibility of missing people because they warped to 100 from something, and your bubble was 150 past it so outside it's 200km range.
And if bubbles expire, then cost of the bubbles will become a lot more significant.
Since you can already do this with large bubbles regardless..... it's actually less damaging to have it being a large dragging you to the middle of a medium than a small dragging you into the middle of a large.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#182 - 2016-07-05 04:15:28 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Hate to break it to you mate, but Drag bubbles are absolutely an intended mechanic, and this shows in the range limitation for the effect. Whether they were originally or not is besides the point, they're a core part of Eve Online and generally make for a very interesting mechanical tool.


I don't doubt that the tactic is a valuable and interesting tool. Old titans were too. So were neutral non-suspect reps. And "Calvary Ravens". Now, I'm *not* saying this is on the same level as any one of those. I'm just saying that things change, no matter how coveted a tool or technique is. Just because something is, doesn't mean it should be.

Cade Windstalker wrote:

That said I can totally get behind adding a one line description of the effect. Something along the lines of(after this change):

"Pulls ships out of warp, and into the bubble, if their warp vector intersects the bubble and is within 500km of the bubble edge in either direction."

I think that's satisfactory, if they're going to leave the glitch in the game. It's still counter-intuitive that a brick wall also acts like Scorpion's grappling hook (GET OVER HERE!), and I still think that it needs to be fixed and removed from the game. But if it is going to be left in place, an acknowledgement that warp disruption bubbles both stop and catapult ships around is the least the devs should do.

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#183 - 2016-07-05 12:03:53 UTC
Querns wrote:
gr33nCO wrote:
you could also make anchored bubbles in space time out after downtime. That would resolve a lot of the issues.


I'd probably say "after a time period" rather than "after downtime;" otherwise, if you anchor a bunch of bubbles in USTZ or before downtime, you get shafted out of many hours of potential life. But yeah, expiration on bubbles is something that would be good.

What if drag bubbles just went down after X amount of hours (4 hours for example) but the bubble remained as an anchored item (that could still be destroyed but not stolen) . All that would be required was for whoever owned it to relaunch, poof, you have your bubbles back up.

If a bubble camp is active, they keep the bubbles up, if it is not actively camped the bubble is not going to drag others out of warp.

Could also work as a trap, keep bubbles anchored but not active, until your target is on the way. Not unlike using hics or dictors.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#184 - 2016-07-05 12:42:23 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
IWhat if drag bubbles just went down after X amount of hours (4 hours for example) but the bubble remained as an anchored item (that could still be destroyed but not stolen) . All that would be required was for whoever owned it to relaunch, poof, you have your bubbles back up.

If a bubble camp is active, they keep the bubbles up, if it is not actively camped the bubble is not going to drag others out of warp.

Could also work as a trap, keep bubbles anchored but not active, until your target is on the way. Not unlike using hics or dictors.

I like the proposal overall, but I'm also a bit mixed on it. How can something be anchored, but need to be relaunched? Are you saying it needs to be unanchored, scooped, and relaunched? Because if so, that's a bit much to do for every bubble you want to re-place. Part of me would rather it be a simple, get within 2500m and right-click to reactivate. But, on the other hand, if you did have to unanchor, scoop, and relaunch every single bubble, it would cut down on needless clusters of bubbles on every single gate, which would be a good thing.

Or we could be really radical and just remove anchorable bubbles from the game, remove interdiction immunity from interceptors and T3C's, and really open up nullsec that way. <---Yeah I won't hold my breath.

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Arkazian
Heda Shipyards
#185 - 2016-07-05 12:48:20 UTC
Ok, so from what I am reading here the real issue is with the citadel bubble camp trick, which frankly I think is a good mechanic but that it does need some work, so:

Leave bubble mechanics as they are, make the following (maybe not all but some) changes to citadels:

Anchorable bubbles cannot be within say 300km of a citadel, HIC and Dictor bubbles can be but using the module breaks your tether for the duration of the bubble.
- This would mean that the bubble ships can be engaged and killed, meaning that the invulnerability of the citadel camp is lessened severely.

Carriers deploying fighters breaks tether
- Again, this would make the camp less effectively immune, if you want the fighters to be pre launched from the carrier you pay the price with being vulnerable, if you want the safety of being tethered unless you choose to engage, you have a longer time between being able to engage (I am pretty sure these bubble changes won't effect this style camp in any way but still is worth a mention)

Make it so using a weapon on a citadel makes that weapon vulnerable without making the whole citadel vulnerable, much like station services, or a POS weapon system. that way small gangs can fight back to a degree, naturally this would be scalar, so capital missile launchers and the keepstar doomsday would have vastly more health than subcap launchers etc.


These changes, either some or all, would lead to the citadel camp being less OP, while still allowing for some emergent gameplay with them, the changes they bring to defending your space are welcome, but should still need more activity that "1 man and his 20bn ISK mostly invulnerable castle"
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#186 - 2016-07-05 13:08:22 UTC
Khan Wrenth wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
IWhat if drag bubbles just went down after X amount of hours (4 hours for example) but the bubble remained as an anchored item (that could still be destroyed but not stolen) . All that would be required was for whoever owned it to relaunch, poof, you have your bubbles back up.

If a bubble camp is active, they keep the bubbles up, if it is not actively camped the bubble is not going to drag others out of warp.

Could also work as a trap, keep bubbles anchored but not active, until your target is on the way. Not unlike using hics or dictors.

I like the proposal overall, but I'm also a bit mixed on it. How can something be anchored, but need to be relaunched? Are you saying it needs to be unanchored, scooped, and relaunched? Because if so, that's a bit much to do for every bubble you want to re-place. Part of me would rather it be a simple, get within 2500m and right-click to reactivate. But, on the other hand, if you did have to unanchor, scoop, and relaunch every single bubble, it would cut down on needless clusters of bubbles on every single gate, which would be a good thing.

Or we could be really radical and just remove anchorable bubbles from the game, remove interdiction immunity from interceptors and T3C's, and really open up nullsec that way. <---Yeah I won't hold my breath.

Right click "Launch" was my thinking on how it would work..

Even if they had to be scooped and relaunched there would still be nightmare bubbled gates, those who use the tactic would still put in the effort to make them. Good thing is though, they would need to be actively working to keep their bubbles active, otherwise travelers get a free pass and save minutes of slowboating through masses of bubbles. No more place 40 or 50 bubbles over and around a gate and just forget them.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Scuzzy Logic
Space Spuds
#187 - 2016-07-05 13:26:42 UTC
This gets my platinum seal of approval.
Cade Windstalker
#188 - 2016-07-05 14:36:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Sure, it also opens the possibility of missing people because they warped to 100 from something, and your bubble was 150 past it so outside it's 200km range.
And if bubbles expire, then cost of the bubbles will become a lot more significant.
Since you can already do this with large bubbles regardless..... it's actually less damaging to have it being a large dragging you to the middle of a medium than a small dragging you into the middle of a large.


I don't feel like this answers my question here. If you anchor the wrong sized bubble at the wrong distance then that's just a player not understanding the mechanics and doing a stupid because of it, it's not actually adding anything interesting except more exceptions to what has previously been a universal rule.

Also regarding bubbles, expiration, and what size drags to what. There's still nothing preventing you from simple dragging someone with a Large into a Large. Cost won't be a major factor to Null and WH groups, who are the primary users of bubbles like this, and if they expire then there will likely be a way for the user to simply unanchor them or otherwise prolong their lifetime unless someone comes along and steals/destroys them.

Bubble expiry would mostly be a tool to make bubble spam involving unnecessarily large numbers of bubbles impractical or at least unappealing, not something that's going to seriously impact anyone's finances.

Khan Wrenth wrote:
I don't doubt that the tactic is a valuable and interesting tool. Old titans were too. So were neutral non-suspect reps. And "Calvary Ravens". Now, I'm *not* saying this is on the same level as any one of those. I'm just saying that things change, no matter how coveted a tool or technique is. Just because something is, doesn't mean it should be.

I think that's satisfactory, if they're going to leave the glitch in the game. It's still counter-intuitive that a brick wall also acts like Scorpion's grappling hook (GET OVER HERE!), and I still think that it needs to be fixed and removed from the game. But if it is going to be left in place, an acknowledgement that warp disruption bubbles both stop and catapult ships around is the least the devs should do.


I'm just not really seeing a strong reason to remove it in any of this. All of those examples you give here are things that were, in some way, breaking the risk/reward curve or creating a toxic environment. Drag bubbles are, at worst, slightly confusing and unintuitive to some players, they don't actually break gameplay that I can see. If you have an example where you think Drag Bubbles are causing a serious issue this would seem to be the thread to post it in.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#189 - 2016-07-05 15:07:40 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
I'm just not really seeing a strong reason to remove it in any of this. All of those examples you give here are things that were, in some way, breaking the risk/reward curve or creating a toxic environment. Drag bubbles are, at worst, slightly confusing and unintuitive to some players, they don't actually break gameplay that I can see. If you have an example where you think Drag Bubbles are causing a serious issue this would seem to be the thread to post it in.

Like I said, and you quoted, I'm fine with adding it to the description. Your description line works for me. My problem with this entire thing, I thought I had made clear, was twofold: it felt like a sanctioned glitch, and was completely the opposite of the intended effect and description of the item. If CCP places that notice in the description, that's enough for me. I still feel that it's silly to have a brick wall also act like an oil slick, but as long as it's in the description then CCP can claim it's intentional all they want and the info is out there.

It would still bug me on a fundamental level, but I can deal with that. Like my earlier example, would you not find it odd that sometimes, when you land a scram on someone, it micro-jumps them 100km away? CCP can also easily program that into the game. "Warp scrambler II: shuts off a target's ship's warp drive with two points of disruption, shuts off MWD's and jump drives, but will fling the target 100km in the direction of travel if he happens to be facing +/- 5^ from directly away from you". That's how I view drag bubbles.

No, I'm not here to argue drag bubbles are game-breaking or anything silly like that. Just that as a function, they run completely counter to their apparent title and described purpose (to stop ships). But the description line you offered up is enough for me if CCP were to include it. You put forth a reasonable description line, and I accepted it as enough. I think that's as far as this conversation needs to go? If you feel more needs to be said, by all means...but it feels like we've reached a reasonable understanding now.

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Cade Windstalker
#190 - 2016-07-05 16:53:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Trimming for space.

Sorry, I misinterpreted something you said as more in disagreement than it actually was. Thanks for clarifying.

Khan Wrenth wrote:
If CCP places that notice in the description, that's enough for me. I still feel that it's silly to have a brick wall also act like an oil slick, but as long as it's in the description then CCP can claim it's intentional all they want and the info is out there.


As far as the Lore goes, based on how Warp Drives work according to the old Wiki entry (this wiki pulled entries off the old one before it shut down) it would seem that Warp Disruption Bubbles are simultaneously interfering with the navigation instruments on the target ship and projecting the disruption field that prevents warp. This would explain why bubbles deployed after the ship enters warp have no effect on it, they're not just disrupting warp they're spoofing the grav lockon signature, which is easiest to do along the precise align being warped on since you're spoofing one vector instead of three, which the ship could throw a fit about.

As for why they don't just hard-stop ships out of warp at any point, it's probably partly a safety feature, since I would imagine a ship's warp drive suddenly shutting down at post-light speeds would result in a small sun appearing, assuming there was any space for the sun to occupy after physics stopped excreting masonry.

Alternatively the "Bubbles" don't actually mess with active warp drives, they just prevent the bubble from establishing in the first place in addition to the above range spoofing causing the ship to come out of warp too early or too late.

Regardless of whether or not one accepts this as cannon or not I think it's fairly easy to come up with others that explain the game mechanics and don't require too many mental gymnastics. Big smile
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#191 - 2016-07-05 17:43:25 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
after physics stopped excreting masonry.

Oh man I just fell out of my chair. Thanks for that XD

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Nasar Vyron
S0utherN Comfort
#192 - 2016-07-05 17:46:14 UTC
Khan, bubbles were always intended to work this way. Description or not.

I want you to test something, I already know how this works but it seems you don't. And this level of detail should be more than enough to convince you it's not some bug that they overlooked.

Set up a bubble anywhere. Try to warp to something inline with it in a frigate. Note where you land (near the edge). Now do the same thing in a cruiser/BC/BB and note where you land again. You'll notice as the mass of your ship increases you will land further and further inside the bubble.

This is not some bug, it is an intended mechanic, and not one that needs "fixing" as you put it. What we need is for players to learn how to avoid a decade old mechanic. Can they add it to the description? Sure, I see no problem there. But remove it? Hell no.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#193 - 2016-07-05 17:56:22 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
...Regardless of whether or not one accepts this as cannon or not I think it's fairly easy to come up with others that explain the game mechanics and don't require too many mental gymnastics. Big smile


Here's one for you. The more or less loved "bubbles" can actually not exist in the first place.

When you "warp" space to "move" faster than the speed of light the gravimetric drag forces applied at your ship would reduce it to a sugar-cube of metal and while you temper with space time in a FTL scenario the speed reduction to a fraction lower than the speed of light would create a time-warp that would in theory - in case your ship did survive the gravimetric drag force - not "catch" your ship in that soap bubble when you are in system but up to a year later.

Bye, bye bubble camp.

And just to be very cruel, how about an out-of-phase drive that isn't even present in the regular sense of space-time and you cannot interfere with that boat even if you want to farm killmails with those.

Or a trans-phasic cloaking device like sleeper cruisers have?


Mind blown enough or may I continue?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#194 - 2016-07-06 14:16:38 UTC
I'm all for clarity. But reducing the range of anchored bubbles to some arbitrary distance doesn't really seem like the way to go about it. Can't we just update the in-game info to specify what their max range is? I was under the impression that they operated on a grid-wide basis.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Cade Windstalker
#195 - 2016-07-06 19:04:27 UTC
Khan Wrenth wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
after physics stopped excreting masonry.

Oh man I just fell out of my chair. Thanks for that XD


Ahahaha, happy to help! Big smile

Soldarius wrote:
I'm all for clarity. But reducing the range of anchored bubbles to some arbitrary distance doesn't really seem like the way to go about it. Can't we just update the in-game info to specify what their max range is? I was under the impression that they operated on a grid-wide basis.



This is incorrect, they used to before grids were expanded. Now they're 1km drag-side and any distance incoming-side. This change is pretty much just about standardizing mechanics.

I would imagine there are also a few potential exploits involving grid-warping that this removes as well.
Cade Windstalker
#196 - 2016-07-06 19:23:25 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
...Regardless of whether or not one accepts this as cannon or not I think it's fairly easy to come up with others that explain the game mechanics and don't require too many mental gymnastics. Big smile


Here's one for you. The more or less loved "bubbles" can actually not exist in the first place.

When you "warp" space to "move" faster than the speed of light the gravimetric drag forces applied at your ship would reduce it to a sugar-cube of metal and while you temper with space time in a FTL scenario the speed reduction to a fraction lower than the speed of light would create a time-warp that would in theory - in case your ship did survive the gravimetric drag force - not "catch" your ship in that soap bubble when you are in system but up to a year later.

Bye, bye bubble camp.

And just to be very cruel, how about an out-of-phase drive that isn't even present in the regular sense of space-time and you cannot interfere with that boat even if you want to farm killmails with those.

Or a trans-phasic cloaking device like sleeper cruisers have?


Mind blown enough or may I continue?


The explanation given for warp drive mechanics in that wiki entry I linked gets around more or less all of this, because the area of space time you're traveling "on" is flat, so no "gravimetric drag forces" or other nastiness. How does it do that? That's why this is Science Fiction Blink

Though if you have an FTL drive to test I'm sure CCP, Nasa, Cern, and any number of other people would *love* to hear about it! Big smile
Flyinghotpocket
Small Focused Memes
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#197 - 2016-07-06 22:04:18 UTC
this would be the best way to break immersion in 0.0.

just anchored a bubble to stop traffic? oh sorry, just rewarp that last 500km. sorry bruh.

and i hate 0.0

but even i can see that thiswould take alot of fun out for the small gangers out there

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro
Cade Windstalker
#198 - 2016-07-06 22:38:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Flyinghotpocket wrote:
this would be the best way to break immersion in 0.0.

just anchored a bubble to stop traffic? oh sorry, just rewarp that last 500km. sorry bruh.

and i hate 0.0

but even i can see that thiswould take alot of fun out for the small gangers out there


I feel like you're not really understanding how this change is going to work... or how bubbles work in general, one of the two.

Bubbles after this change is literally exactly how bubbles work now, but with the range at 500km either side of the warp, as opposed to the current 1k drag and edge of grid back along the warp path. In either case if you don't actually man your bubbles someone can just burn out, around or away from it and warp again.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#199 - 2016-07-06 23:46:12 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
...The explanation given for warp drive mechanics in that wiki entry I linked gets around more or less all of this, because the area of space time you're traveling "on" is flat, so no "gravimetric drag forces" or other nastiness. How does it do that? That's why this is Science Fiction Blink

Though if you have an FTL drive to test I'm sure CCP, Nasa, Cern, and any number of other people would *love* to hear about it! Big smile


You asked for mental gymnastics and I gave it. Not my fault you didn't understand most of it, it is fine. Same thing happens when I try to explain to my buddies how very exciting subatomic particles are or how to make quantum entanglement work for "long distance calls".
Would be easy enough to "read" a binary message of entangled up- and down-quarks but okay, I always get some angry looks when I talk about spins and quarks and... okay I stop..

I bet the JPL would be very interested but since I don't have a physics degree, they wouldn't even listen in the first place..

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#200 - 2016-07-06 23:54:57 UTC
...or perhaps since you don't have a physics degree you're just quoting stuff anyone can find on Youtube with no practical application, most certainly nothing dragbubble related?