Wormholes

Problem is higher class WHs require a far commitment in high value ships as it is a lot of people wouldn't be too keen on it.

I don't see the harm in having some higher value sites that are a bit more difficult/unpredictable tho for people who like to push the risk/reward ratio further and/or are bored with current sites.

In class 5 wormholes you can get the site Quarantine Area which has random triggers and can be quite interesting if you pull the trigger a few times in a row :D tho nothing a carrier can't handle.

Came here to say, Survival mode in every other game rehash.

Lest we forget that the end of survival mode involves the player dying, how would you end your sites?

Here's my idea:

Sleeper boss complexes with a capital class sleeper drone showing up every once in awhile. Only applicable to c5 space and higher, with c5 and lower getting a few sleepless guardians instead. Or something. Just something a bit more challenging.

I would like to see some kind of sleepers that roam and jump systems, maybe attack POSs or camp wormholes. Ones with rare-ish or extra loot that you have to actively hunt down and they need to be pointed otherwise they try to warp away if they are losing. Some kind of randomness that sites currently lack.

Maybe some form of rare random storms that shut down wormhole generation for a random number of hours so there is the chance of getting stranded temporarily. Or perhaps the storm could saturate the system with extra sites and signatures for a short time.

Sites could have a random chance of extra sleepers jumping in after a random amount of time so not based on any ship trigger. These could be anything from a frigate group to extra battleships and could either mean more loot for you or cold mean you having to escape from the site.

Basically Id like to see more random events that would be a little bit similar to pvp encounters where there is an element of unpredictability to break up the monotony.

^ did you know there is a subsystem that turns a t3 into a salvager?

I think it would be cool if we could get over this sense of entitlement to farm whatever sites we want. I am not proposing that all sites be changed in this way, I want CCP to add new sites that are highly challenging but also, highly rewarding.

The whole random trigger thing is a nice idea but at the end of the day, it's no more challenging than current mechanics because it is easily dealt with by bringing sufficient logistical ships.

Yeah, or perhaps when a certain number of sleeper sites start to build up in a system they try to 'control' the system by camping WHs and begin attacks on your POS (perhaps with increasing numbers- enough to threaten your POS eventually)

This would mean that you have to actively battle for control over the system otherwise the Sleepers take it back.

Something I think needs to be said at this point, though, is that EVE is not for PvE. It is intended to be PvP in nearly every aspect of the game, not just combat. I suspect PvE is there to give people something to do when they can't find anything else to do. That being said, I would still like to see the PvE in wormhole space be a bit more in line with the idea that the Sleepers don't want us there.

I vote sleeper dreads randomly spawn at the moons. I don't see why not. There's much less protection in low sec against enemies, but it's much harder to start sending dreads into far reaching wormholes. Give the wh corps something they have to try a litle to kill off.

Imho,

If you think farming/escalating(**) sleeper sites is monotonous, then just don't run them 24/7. They are profitable enough for you to chillax once in a while and go pvp'ing or whatever else you'd like to do. Challenge enough in W-space.

However, I do like the idea of sleepers showing up, bashing your pos modules. In higher class wormholes, a sleeper dread with two or three support frigs (C4), cruisers (C5) or battleships (C6) might provide a challenge for the ill-prepared. In lower class wormholes, I'd say a good number of cruisers and battleships might be menacing enough. Of course, this would be chance based. I imagine the following number of variables to be a part in those chances (i will refer to the sleeper pos bashing crew as 'moonspawn'):

- (t) Threat: The higher the amount of towers in system, the higher the chance of moonspawn. (number of towers / 100)
- (a) Activity: The higher the amount of anomalies and/or sites in system, the higher the chance of moonspawn. (number of sites+anoms / 10 )(***)
- (c) Class: The higher the w-system class, the bigger the numbers or shipsizes of the moonspawn. (class / 10)
- (s) Size: The smaller the system, (either in AU or planets/moons or both) the higher the chance of moonspawn. (the inverse of the system size is used)
- (m) Modifier: a modifier (in this case, 5) for balancing purposes
- (b) Base: A base chance of the moonspawn appearing. As noone should be able to eradicate the sleepers entirely. In this case, 0.5% (0.005).

An example of a good formula would be:
base + (( s^-1 * c ) * ( t * (a/m * 100)) = moonspawn chance

This formula comes with a heavy modifier on the amount of sites and the amount of towers in the system. An example of the hourly chance of sleepers spawning on 1 particular moon with a tower on it, in a ~50AU-ish class 5 system with 15 anomalies and 10 sites active in it would be: 1%. Now imagine a large alliance with 30 towers in that same system.

That would give them ,

0.005 + (( 0.02 * 0.5 ) * ( 0.3 * ( 2.5 / 5 * 100 )) = 15.5% chance of moonspawn per moon with tower on it. With 30 towers, that's often more than 4 spawns per hour.

So again, they would have a 15,5% chance of moonspawn on EACH of their towers if they didn't clear those 15anoms and 10sites. This would make sure that large alliances and corporations in w-space maintain their system properly. If you have 30 towers, you should be able to have a sizeable enough standing fleet for both pve and pvp. As soon as a site comes up, you'd be trying to clear it or face a few moonspawn. With 1 to 3 sites only in system, you would have a 1.1 - 2.3% chance of moonspawn on each tower, which is far less. 0 site would give the standard 0.5%. If you want to see what kind of chances I have in mind for any class wormhole and more, there's an excel file I made for you to check out: Spawnchances file.

The moonspawn would warp in and agress the POS modules first. If they are all down or the POS is reinforced, the rats would warp off/despawn. If players are on grid, they would agress all pilots outside the forcefield too. Basically, you would want decently fitted medium or large towers to be able to survive at least one of these waves, unless if they are offline of course. So the Sleeper dread might have to be something not too powerful vs ships, but good enough to get about 10-15 pos modules to offline before it dies in a relatively passive scenario. It should also be balanced out to die in a 2 to 4 minute fight with two carriers and two dreadnoughts, as that is what most people do their expeditions in. Moonspawn can be like beltrats actually, warping in from time to time and warping off if met with a force that is too great or if nothing is on grid. That way, you would have to get a DIC/HIC to keep the dread in place.

(**: Using two carriers and two dreadnoughts to escalate w-space sites, increasing profitability but also riskier if ill-prepared.)
(***: The number of anomalies in system are a good indicator of activity. This to reduce the number of systems appearing to have corporations in them whilst actually being very passive. Secondly, to force hardcore pvp corporations/alliances to maintain their home systems and infrastructure. As any POS can be attacked, growth in W-space becomes a bit more high maintenance. And thirdly, to remove dead structures from corporations not using them anymore, as structure grinds in W-space are even more boring than in K-space.)

Pro / Con

+ Less moons with unused POS's, as they would be shot if the forcefield isn't up.
+ A bigger initial investment (both in ISK, skillpoints and members able to fly caps or support) for corporations / alliances to step into a w-system, which in turn balances out w-space a bit more and gives a better picture of what w-space is like. w-space isn't for the meek.
+ More loot to be had from the moonspawn
+ More challenging w-space experience and something to do if the sites are all cleared and the pvp is a bit on the low side.
+ Less AFK gaming experience, less boring times in w-space, less cabin fever.
- The AI probably needs work to make this happen
- Probably not a bad point, since this works both ways, but: Your tower(s) can be more easily attacked when invading another system, since sleepers don't show up on directional. On the other hand, your tower can primary a sleeper frigate (which can get a different name from site sleepers) and kill it, which will show a moonspawn wreck on d-scan
- w-space carebears will surely whine about this
- As moonspawn would have a chance of spawning each hour, you'd make towers and anchoring/unanchoring/onlining them a bigger logistical nightmare.

The idea of sleepers bashing POSes is terrible. The fate of our home base shouldn't be determined by randomly generated NPCs but by other players.

The valid way to make sleeper sites (or any pve site) more fun is not to make their waves or composition random, but to give the individual NPCs something that resembles actual artificial intelligence. NPCs which not only switch aggro once in a while in predictable patterns, but really analyze what players are doing and go for the weak spot or the crucial ship in the fleet. They put all their neuts on the first RR Tengu while jamming the other and killing the third, that kind of thing. They do not fly in a fixed orbit but adjust their tactics when you start to smart-bomb them or apply webs. In short, they do what players in pvp do. Instead of warp-in, lock, shoot, we'd have to constantly react to the NPC's actions.

Then again, we don't really need this because EVE already has actual players who will do this to you.