These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[March] Mobile Warp Disruptor changes

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Pete Kring
Brute Force Solutions.
#241 - 2017-02-25 03:23:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Pete Kring
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Your whole argument is about you spending time and isk to remain (somewhat) protected while doing whatever it is you claim to be doing.

Trust me, if some large group or blok wanted you gone from your space no amount of bubbles is going to stop them.
This is a good change aside from the decay duration being too long on all bubbles.

Reasoning; Small and medium bubbles are generally used for strategic reasons (gate camps, drag or stop bubbles) and once the camp has broken up they are no longer needed.
Large bubbles are mainly used for player protection, if the group using them can't afford the time to re-anchor them within the time decay period they don't deserve the protection offered by them.




Idk why you are quoting my post has it has nothing to do with spending time or isk to remain protected. It has to do with the discrepancy between the m3 of the bubbles compared to the m3 of mobile depots and the purposed decay of the bubbles. If a mobile depot is 100m3 and lasts 30 days in space why would CCP purpose something that is 585m3 only last 2 days to me that don't make any sense even if it is a video game.
Orca Platypus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#242 - 2017-02-25 13:57:25 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Large bubbles are mainly used for player protection, if the group using them can't afford the time to re-anchor them within the time decay period they don't deserve the protection offered by them.


We can afford REASONABLE TIME.
60 manhours per month per 1 bubble on each gate in one constellation is UNREASONABLE.
That's more attention and manhours than any structure in the game requires, and costs like a new fortizar every month. This is unacceptable.
Agfro Er
Secret Wormhole Authority Group
#243 - 2017-02-25 16:44:16 UTC
Could stand to see longer decay timers, and a larger scale in decay times with size and tech level. The killmails are great :)
Cade Windstalker
#244 - 2017-02-25 17:43:18 UTC
Pete Kring wrote:
Idk why you are quoting my post has it has nothing to do with spending time or isk to remain protected. It has to do with the discrepancy between the m3 of the bubbles compared to the m3 of mobile depots and the purposed decay of the bubbles. If a mobile depot is 100m3 and lasts 30 days in space why would CCP purpose something that is 585m3 only last 2 days to me that don't make any sense even if it is a video game.


This isn't a realism thing it's a game balance thing.

If you need a lore reason then lets say it's because if a bubble runs for too long continuously it rips itself apart or something. They are basically causing a local gravity distortion, so they're designed with something like 'breakers' so instead of exploding, potentially messily, they just go pop quietly once their safety tolerance is passed.

You could also say it's something about batteries. Messing with the fabric of space-time takes a lot of AAs. Scooping them hooks them up to the ship's reactor and recharges them.

There's any number of possible explanations here, but the size of them does not factor in here.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#245 - 2017-02-26 05:49:32 UTC
Orca Platypus wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Large bubbles are mainly used for player protection, if the group using them can't afford the time to re-anchor them within the time decay period they don't deserve the protection offered by them.


We can afford REASONABLE TIME.
60 manhours per month per 1 bubble on each gate in one constellation is UNREASONABLE.
That's more attention and manhours than any structure in the game requires, and costs like a new fortizar every month. This is unacceptable.
Where on earth do you get 60 hrs per month per bubble? With the current proposal and T2 large bubbles it is 16 minutes per month per bubble. That works out at around 1.5 hours per week for a gate with 20 T2 bubbles (not uncommon and should require more than set and forget) - A long way from 60 hours.

Even with my proposal of 4 days decay for a T2 large it is only 30 minutes per bubble per month. (give or take un-anchoring time)

NB; making up random numbers doesn't help your cause, do the math.

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.
Cade Windstalker
#246 - 2017-02-26 06:11:10 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Orca Platypus wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Large bubbles are mainly used for player protection, if the group using them can't afford the time to re-anchor them within the time decay period they don't deserve the protection offered by them.


We can afford REASONABLE TIME.
60 manhours per month per 1 bubble on each gate in one constellation is UNREASONABLE.
That's more attention and manhours than any structure in the game requires, and costs like a new fortizar every month. This is unacceptable.
Where on earth do you get 60 hrs per month per bubble? With the current proposal and T2 large bubbles it is 16 minutes per month per bubble. That works out at around 1.5 hours per week for a gate with 20 T2 bubbles (not uncommon and should require more than set and forget) - A long way from 60 hours.

Even with my proposal of 4 days decay for a T2 large it is only 30 minutes per bubble per month. (give or take un-anchoring time)

NB; making up random numbers doesn't help your cause, do the math.



I think he's talking about 60 hours to bubble every gate in his constellation, but that's still pretty amazingly unrealistic and assumes he's only using T1 bubbles everywhere among other things.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#247 - 2017-02-26 07:07:43 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Orca Platypus wrote:
Sgt Ocker wrote:
Large bubbles are mainly used for player protection, if the group using them can't afford the time to re-anchor them within the time decay period they don't deserve the protection offered by them.


We can afford REASONABLE TIME.
60 manhours per month per 1 bubble on each gate in one constellation is UNREASONABLE.
That's more attention and manhours than any structure in the game requires, and costs like a new fortizar every month. This is unacceptable.
Where on earth do you get 60 hrs per month per bubble? With the current proposal and T2 large bubbles it is 16 minutes per month per bubble. That works out at around 1.5 hours per week for a gate with 20 T2 bubbles (not uncommon and should require more than set and forget) - A long way from 60 hours.

Even with my proposal of 4 days decay for a T2 large it is only 30 minutes per bubble per month. (give or take un-anchoring time)

NB; making up random numbers doesn't help your cause, do the math.



I think he's talking about 60 hours to bubble every gate in his constellation, but that's still pretty amazingly unrealistic and assumes he's only using T1 bubbles everywhere among other things.

Well, cheap outlay gets a cheap, labor intensive return.
In the not too near future those who want the protection of bubbled gates will need to spend, a little more isk and man hours to maintain them.

Even if his 60 hours was close to realistic, if you split that work among 10 ratters it is only 6 hours per month per player (2.5 hours a week). Not too much to give for the added safety

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.
Elena Lyudmila
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#248 - 2017-02-26 16:19:12 UTC
Then restrict the properties of the ceptör and nullifier !!! We will change the bubble constantly.

I think it would be better to do it,

T2 Large 2 weeks, Syndicate Large 4 weeks

Cade Windstalker
#249 - 2017-02-26 16:22:08 UTC
I'm betting someone at CCP has a tally counter up on a whiteboard for this thread, counting the number of people who want a longer duration and the number who want a shorter one to see if they've hit a nice balance with the current values Lol
Lugh Crow-Slave
#250 - 2017-02-26 17:00:49 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
I'm betting someone at CCP has a tally counter up on a whiteboard for this thread, counting the number of people who want a longer duration and the number who want a shorter one to see if they've hit a nice balance with the current values Lol



lol please this isn't reddit at best the devs will skim it first 4 days then largely ignore it and respond to the Reddit threads on the topic..........




p.s.

**** you ccp

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Cade Windstalker
#251 - 2017-02-27 01:28:07 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
I'm betting someone at CCP has a tally counter up on a whiteboard for this thread, counting the number of people who want a longer duration and the number who want a shorter one to see if they've hit a nice balance with the current values Lol



lol please this isn't reddit at best the devs will skim it first 4 days then largely ignore it and respond to the Reddit threads on the topic..........




p.s.

**** you ccp


Nah, these threads they actually watch pretty closely.

IMO they respond more on Reddit because there are fewer bitter ****holes and people don't feel like the devs *have* to post there so they're generally more appreciative when they do. Where as whenever a blue tag shows up in a thread around here there's a small flood of people chiming in with "why haven't you X" and "**** you ccp"...
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#252 - 2017-02-28 14:34:16 UTC
Popped by this thread for some entertainment, did not disappoint.
Aka Evil
Localhost.LL.c..
#253 - 2017-02-28 18:21:28 UTC
The number 1 reason i see that EvE has continued to be a top notch game for ALL playstyles across the gamer universe, is this...

for every action there is a equal and possible counter measure.

that being said, nullification currently lacks a counter, and so do un-manned bubbles (if you eliminated nullified incterceptors... which needs to happen).

For unmanned bubbles, going to a timer seems to be the obvious fit. T3 cruisers with nullification is not horrible, insta lock, dead. For nullified interceptors , currently, there is little to nothing you can do short of setting up your computer with gold lined connections outside the building where ccp's servers are so you can get the perfect tick timer... much like some crooks on wallstreet and jita try make .001 isk on the fractions of information exchange rates.

Interceptors are BROKEN. PERIOD.

there needs to be a counter. be it a script in a heavy dictor buble or whatever. .

having a ship impossible to catch unless you have near perfect internet connection on a good day, while its laggy as hell for this guy running around un-catchable needs a counter, simple as that.

make bubbles timers, but make insta warp frigates lockable and killable ... its what 1-2 month training for an interceptor. should be simple skill chain to catch them, but something not common, and dedicated to catching them.


for anyone that says that breaks the game, and then i cant tackle things... you arent trying hard enough or skilled enough...

i have ran through bubbles in blockade runners that should have died to 20 man gate camps , only to set-up in their territory more times than i have ever been caught doing it..

Easy "i win" buttons, do not become the eve i have come to respect over the years.
FeistyOne
Inevitable Outcome
E.C.H.O
#254 - 2017-02-28 19:09:27 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
I'm betting someone at CCP has a tally counter up on a whiteboard for this thread, counting the number of people who want a longer duration and the number who want a shorter one to see if they've hit a nice balance with the current values Lol



I vote shorter duration
ISD Chanisa Nemes
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#255 - 2017-02-28 20:41:37 UTC
Removed some off-topic posts. Be respectful guys!

[img]http://i.giphy.com/3o6gb6qrSpLhI0rGko.gif[/img]

ISD Chanisa Nemes

Lieutenant

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#256 - 2017-03-01 20:49:49 UTC
Can someone explain to me why you could possibly need a bubbles for days if not weeks to be up? I really don't see the point.

Hell my vision of bubbles would be "be on grid or it's gone" but I'm open to hearing why a few hours is not enough for any bubbles.
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
Vote Steve Ronuken for CSM
#257 - 2017-03-01 21:08:42 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Can someone explain to me why you could possibly need a bubbles for days if not weeks to be up? I really don't see the point.

Hell my vision of bubbles would be "be on grid or it's gone" but I'm open to hearing why a few hours is not enough for any bubbles.



How else am I going to bubble all the gates in a constellation, to make sure no-one can use their thrasher to pop my ratting tengu?

That's a good argument, right?

Woo! CSM XI!

Fuzzwork Enterprises

Twitter: @fuzzysteve on Twitter
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#258 - 2017-03-01 22:22:49 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Can someone explain to me why you could possibly need a bubbles for days if not weeks to be up? I really don't see the point.

Hell my vision of bubbles would be "be on grid or it's gone" but I'm open to hearing why a few hours is not enough for any bubbles.

This is pretty much where I'm at with these. I honestly expected a max duration of half a day. For the ease of "drop one off for instant roadlbock", I figured they'd be changed to one-time use with an uptime inversely proportional to the area of effect they provide (candle that burns twice as bright...). It's entirely reasonable to set these down to roadblock a system you want to mine/rat in during your gametime. It's also entirely reasonable to assert that the protection and obstruction they provide should be in-line with the duration you expect to be in the system (or several systems down a branch).

Sov was changed to "if you aren't using the space, you lose it", and bringing bubbles down to 4-12 hours would be in line with that goal and line of thinking.

Giving bubbles days and weeks just means it'll be someone's job once a week to re-initialize all bubbles in in a given area; I don't foresee it actually doing that much to cut down on the spam. The only real change is people complaining that their roadblocks now suck up maintenance time. Instead, bringing the uptime down to hours shifts the line of thinking of what bubbles are there to do - from a semi-permanent roadblock you just erect everywhere you can, to something that is used for an real and pressing need (i.e. ratting in a system, setting up a gatecamp, or twice a day having to reaffirm a roadblock to cut off direct access to your territory because if it's that important yes you can devote some time to do it once or twice a day).

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#259 - 2017-03-02 00:10:10 UTC
In highly trafficked areas, the bubbles will die within hours, unless they are defended. Days or weeks won't matter there.

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

Davionia Vanshel
Open University of Celestial Hardship
Art of War Alliance
#260 - 2017-03-02 07:25:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Davionia Vanshel
Steve Ronuken wrote:

How else am I going to bubble all the gates in a constellation, to make sure no-one can use their thrasher to pop my ratting tengu?

That's a good argument, right?



Alternatively someone in their thrasher can just pop your bubble. I see it now - Thrasher bubble popping roams. It will be awesome. Bubble timers are almost irrelevant- The more significant changes that will change gameplay are killmails and shield rep.