These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Black Hole Systems

First post First post First post
Author
Henry Cummings
Daktaklakpak.
Mince n Tatties
#261 - 2014-03-15 00:49:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Henry Cummings
Proclus Diadochu wrote:


So, you mean like a Wolf-Rayet that provides bonus to small weaponry, therefore shows bias to Frigs and Destroyers?



Again, I think a distinction must be made; this time between the synergy between a wolf-rayet's bonuses and those of your suggested black hole bonuses.

Wolf-Rayets have one (1) bonus specific to only certain ship classes. This bonus is relatively small; a 50% to small weapons is, in absolute (non-percentage) terms, a small increase in dps and has little to no effect on the viability of small-hardpointed ships in a wolf-rayet. It is, more or less, a 'flavour enhancer' that takes advantage of the sig size bonus, which happens to be granted to all of the ships in that wormhole. It has little effect on the overall viability of fleet comps in wolf-rayet systems, but instead allows for more, fun options, like destroyers and assault frigates to be used very successfully againt ABC fleets. It gives them an extra little 'flavour boost'.

Your suggestion, on the other hand, has three (3) gigantic, across-the-board bonuses to only one class of ship, out of (5) bonuses, with one (1) other added, as you say, to make another type of t2 ship viable, bringing us to 4 out of 5 bonuses for a specific type of ship, with one 'flavour' bonus added in. In this way I do not think wolf-rayet bonuses and your suggested black hole bonuses are comparable, and should not be treated as such.

Proclus Diadochu wrote:

I am not saying that I disagree that T3's need rebalancing, but to suggest that a wormhole effect providing bonuses to a particular class would break anything, I'm going to say that I don't agree with you.


I shall reiterate; it is only in the worst possible scenario your suggested effects will 'break' anything.

Henry Cummings wrote:

My example was intended to display the worst possible outcome of your suggestion.


It is in the principle of your proposal in which I disagree; t2 ships must be allowed to stand on their own two feet and be viable in all of w-space, not just in black holes. I personally do enjoy flying t2 ships, but often don't get such a chance when t3s are the way to go. I appreciate your sentiment of making t2 compositions a viable alternative to t3 compositions, but this is not the way it should be done. Black holes should have other, more general effects that will have a tangible effect on all ships, which almost all current wormholes have (red giants don't really have much effect).

Trust me, proc. I want to mess around in eagle fleets as much as the next guy, but this is not the way to do it. nerf t3s(correctly, but I don't want to get into this) and allow the glorious beagle to roam free in any wormhole by its own merit,
rather than because of 3 arbitrary buffs that will apply only occasionally.

Proclus Diadochu wrote:

If anything, I still think that my idea is oodles better than an industrial wormhole...


Looks like we're in agreement, then.
Leah-Ayrn
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#262 - 2014-03-15 13:18:56 UTC
Just a thought, but how about this:
Black Holes keep the current effects regarding ship mobility, but give an positive bonus to drone usage (optimal, tracking, damage. pick one)

Currently only 2 effects specifically target drones, and both do so negatively. So how about a positive? While it might encourage PvE more than PvP, targets are targets. At least it would encourage people to get into the systems. Plus it could add a neat little layer into the meta; roll into a BlackHole and already know what weapon system you face, and know at the same time you'll be at a disadvantage.

Of course it may need refined, and figure out how to deal with carriers/fighters. But its an idea.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#263 - 2014-03-15 14:47:18 UTC
I've been looking into Black holes from a purely cap escalation point of view and have noticed a few interesting things with the effects as they currently are.

To run cap escalations the most efficiently requires Moroses. Naglfars are no slouches but at all 5 skills they just can't compete with the close range dps of a moros.

An interesting thing happens in a Black hole though.

Naglfars, because they rely more heavily on Falloff and because they have so many more mids they can nearly ignore one of the negative effect of these wormholes. Suddenly Naglfars are far superior to Moroses when running these sites.

That said you still lose over 2k dps at the 36km orbiting range but that's nothing compared to the nearly 5k a Moros loses, not to mention the horrible projection at further ranges. The difference between a Nag and Moros just grows after that.

This has actually got me thinking, why do people REALLY hate black holes so much? With this new information I would like to put forward that the real reason is pretty simple.

Because people are unable or too lazy to adapt.

Regardless, from what we've seen there are enough unoccupied normal C5s out there that I have not heard a single valid argument against BHs existing considering you can cap escalate at 80-85% efficiency.

In fact, with how many sites are clogged up in BHs at the moment I can't understand why people aren't flooding them as we speak.

Granted this IS only from a cap escalation POV but we have run enough C3-C4 BHs to see that they are also easily adapted to and in fact with certain tactics can even run them FASTER than normal because of the increase in ship speed. (Think blasters)

I wouldn't advocate for a boost in drone or missiles to help boost lower class BH wormholes simply because all other sub C5 WHs are currently already run most efficiently with these two weapon systems (RR Tengus and Domis)

Perhaps BHs shouldn't be changed at all, rather the people living in wormholes should be the ones that should get off their fat, lazy asses and change.

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3

Traba Regina
Serene Vendetta
#264 - 2014-03-16 00:25:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Traba Regina
Why not make the so called Black hole have more chance of a wondering K-space connection? it might link the various classes (chains) up a little bit more than atm.

Or a bonus all be it reduced similar to Wolf Rayat and cataclysmic so shield and armo are a little boosted. maybe 50% of a rayat?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5171792#post5171792

Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#265 - 2014-03-16 09:21:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Ab'del Abu
I'd prefer something like this:

Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%

- I like the speed/inertia changes in black holes, as of right now they are simply too strong
- there is no effect that promotes active boosting in pvp in particular
- to counter local-rep-boost for pve-activities (cap escalations especially) capacitor needs to be nerfed

Edit: Yes, marauders would be even more overpowered in such a hole. But there is counters to everything, amirite ...
Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#266 - 2014-03-16 13:13:46 UTC
This is a slightly out there idea, but give wormholes natural tidi, with level of tidi going up with system class. This adds some really interesting pvp dynamic, since things are slowed down so much. Could even like, if the second stellar body was ever added as a physical place in the systems instead of just being background, make tidi more and more intense as you get closer to the black hole (dunno how technically feasible this is)

I like the maneuvering changes that black holes generate, I just think they need something more.
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#267 - 2014-03-16 14:31:28 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
This is a slightly out there idea, but give wormholes natural tidi, with level of tidi going up with system class. This adds some really interesting pvp dynamic, since things are slowed down so much. Could even like, if the second stellar body was ever added as a physical place in the systems instead of just being background, make tidi more and more intense as you get closer to the black hole (dunno how technically feasible this is)

I like the maneuvering changes that black holes generate, I just think they need something more.


excellent trolling!
Henry Cummings
Daktaklakpak.
Mince n Tatties
#268 - 2014-03-16 22:50:56 UTC
Ab'del Abu wrote:
I'd prefer something like this:

Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%

- I like the speed/inertia changes in black holes, as of right now they are simply too strong
- there is no effect that promotes active boosting in pvp in particular
- to counter local-rep-boost for pve-activities (cap escalations especially) capacitor needs to be nerfed

Edit: Yes, marauders would be even more overpowered in such a hole. But there is counters to everything, amirite ...


I'm liking this idea. CC's have no opposite hole. It would also make pve much easier for very small groups, and encourage daytripping.
The Cue
Violence is the Answer
#269 - 2014-03-16 23:34:05 UTC
Henry Cummings wrote:
Ab'del Abu wrote:
I'd prefer something like this:

Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%

- I like the speed/inertia changes in black holes, as of right now they are simply too strong
- there is no effect that promotes active boosting in pvp in particular
- to counter local-rep-boost for pve-activities (cap escalations especially) capacitor needs to be nerfed

Edit: Yes, marauders would be even more overpowered in such a hole. But there is counters to everything, amirite ...


I'm liking this idea. CC's have no opposite hole. It would also make pve much easier for very small groups, and encourage daytripping.

I don't know that they need the velocity inertial numbers, since Cataclysmics don't have anything else, but I agree, I'd love for this to be implemented. I know I've suggested that black holes become the opposite of a Cataclysmic, and I doubt I was the first either, so there's a lot of support behind this idea I suspect.
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#270 - 2014-03-17 15:05:09 UTC
The Cue wrote:

Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
.


So if you want to run cap escalations in these black holes your going to use mauraders? Local tanked T3s?

Current effects may limit people's willingness to live in these holes - but who's going to move into a hole where the bonuses actively discourage teamwork?
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#271 - 2014-03-17 17:27:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Ab'del Abu
Noxisia Arkana wrote:
The Cue wrote:

Ship velocity +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Inertia +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
Repair amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield boost amount +25% +44% +55% +68% +85% +100%
Shield transfer amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Remote repair amount -10% -19% -27% -34% -41% -50%
Capacitor recharge +10% +18% +22% +27% +34% +50%
.


So if you want to run cap escalations in these black holes your going to use mauraders? Local tanked T3s?

Current effects may limit people's willingness to live in these holes - but who's going to move into a hole where the bonuses actively discourage teamwork?


You can still run capital escalations, but you'd need to adapt fittings and fleet setups indeed (e.g. less local reps, more cap ...). Remote reps are ~only~ halved in C6s, that is something that could be compensated ;) marauders would probably die though ...

I do see your point, but: as I see it, all effects promote certain flavors of gameplay while discouraging others. Above proposal is something that both current AND future black-hole-systen inhabitants could appreciate - at least, I believe so.
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
#272 - 2014-03-17 20:57:16 UTC
It promotes different playstyles.

I have to say: Living in W-space already means you are kinda a hermit. Having a C4 where you could easily solo (relatively) sites.. how's that promoting group play and pew (which are the main points we tend to make on the forum).

This effect would create the ultra hermit. The quintessential WH hermit crab. One guy, alts (for PI of course), and the ability to run sites solo with (more) ease.

Everything it does for daytrippers it doubles up on for the exact type of player the WH masses hate. The one guy that farms his hole all day long.

Of all the discussions (including those with black holes having an extra static) this is my least favorite suggestion. While it rewards day-trippers, it shines at making the best group content in eve drastically more difficult.

If ANY significant changes get made to black hole systems, corps that have invested heavily in those systems should get an option to have their junk pushed to a lowsec station. Some of these options will completely screw the playstyle of people already in blackholes. It would at least make that bitter pill a little easier to swallow.
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#273 - 2014-03-18 10:19:06 UTC
Noxisia Arkana wrote:
It promotes different playstyles.

I have to say: Living in W-space already means you are kinda a hermit. Having a C4 where you could easily solo (relatively) sites.. how's that promoting group play and pew (which are the main points we tend to make on the forum).

This effect would create the ultra hermit. The quintessential WH hermit crab. One guy, alts (for PI of course), and the ability to run sites solo with (more) ease.

Everything it does for daytrippers it doubles up on for the exact type of player the WH masses hate. The one guy that farms his hole all day long.

Of all the discussions (including those with black holes having an extra static) this is my least favorite suggestion. While it rewards day-trippers, it shines at making the best group content in eve drastically more difficult.

If ANY significant changes get made to black hole systems, corps that have invested heavily in those systems should get an option to have their junk pushed to a lowsec station. Some of these options will completely screw the playstyle of people already in blackholes. It would at least make that bitter pill a little easier to swallow.


The idea was that it would support solo pilots and micro-gangs that can't afford to bring extra logistics to pewpew, not running higher-class sites solo. My reasoning was further that the capacitor-nerf would limit pve-applicability... not sure how well that would work in light of cap boosters, I have to admit.
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#274 - 2014-03-25 15:31:29 UTC
Moving Black Holes to a missile-based bonus set would allow CCP to test the viability of increased damage application on the Phoenix in a much more controlled setting.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

DetKhord Saisio
Seniors Clan
#275 - 2014-03-26 02:36:20 UTC
Chitsa Jason wrote:
The effects have to be easy to understand and not require much dev time. Removing moons or adding drag might be a bit complicated.
For those not familiar with the movie The Final Countdown (1980), a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier enters a "storm-like vortex" that sends the carrier back in time to Dec 6, 1942 (1 day prior to Pearl Harbor).

A RNG-warp tunnel at the center of a Black Hole wormhole sends you on a 1-way trip to a distant location. Aside from allowing a capital-class ship to enter highsec, basically you warp to the sun. Once you land on grid with the black hole 'sun', randomly you may find a 1-way hole has spawned on grid with you. Enter and it spits you out the other side and closes behind you.

Black Hole Systems having different bonuses (missiles, ecm, etc) would also be good. Just like a bit of run-down real estate in your neighborhood, 'flip this house' by sending in some contractors with granite countertops, hardwood/stone flooring, you get the idea. Ice was shot down, but essentially black holes need something to attract residents. Otherwise, empty space just for moving through is what black holes will remain.

There are no mining barges/exhumers with armor bonuses, but if that is coming down the pike any time soon (TM), adding something for attracting armor-bonused mining ships would be a start.

Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#276 - 2014-03-26 15:51:10 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Moving Black Holes to a missile-based bonus set would allow CCP to test the viability of increased damage application on the Phoenix in a much more controlled setting.



What?? So the only way they could test pheonix stuff is to change black holes on the live server?

You sir are either deviously brilliant... or whatever the opposite of that is.
Tombomb13
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#277 - 2014-03-27 12:48:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Tombomb13
TL/DR: I think the problem relates to the effects on velocity and inertia. Every other effect in wormhole space affects ship performance, but the affect both of these effects have in this wormhole, with the exception of affecting a ships tracking performance because the target is moving faster, are related to pilot skill.


Chitsa Jason wrote:

The effects have to be easy to understand and not require much dev time. Removing moons or adding drag might be a bit complicated.


A blackhole is what?

Since you want to mimic a blackhole you would probably want to do something with ship movement. The current effects see ships accelerate, which suggests they would be heading towards a black hole. Generally we don't want to get torn up by a black hole, so we would try to get away from it. You could reduce the velocity and inertia in the hole by the same amounts that you have increased it. Maybe you should be creating the entirely opposite effect.

What currently happens, correct me if I am wrong:
Every fight occurs at a closer range but a faster pace. Damage is harder to apply to the faster moving targets regardless of tracking.


Here are some situations I could see occurring with the current effects, please correct me if they are wrong:

1- The dwellers of a black hole should have the opportunity to use the effects of the hole to their advantage. Let me give you an example of the problem I can see with the current set up. If I am in a sniping naga living in a C6 blackhole, my optimal range and fall off is bad so I need to be twice as close. I can move faster which you would think is an advantage. However, since everything else can move faster, I get chased by an interceptor, who catches me as fast as he would in known space since we both have the bonus to speed and velocity and inertia, everything evens out in the end so it technically makes no difference - apart from pilot skill utilising their manoeuvrability and mobility. However, effects are supposed to affect the ships performance and not the pilots, right?. Going back to the example, it also becomes twice as hard for me to hit the interceptor because he's moving twice as fast.

2- I'm living in a C6 in a superbly armour tanked legion with an AB and close range blasters. I can't catch anything and I am a brawler. My situation doesn't change outside of the wormhole because everyone gets the same velocity and inertia bonus. The exception once again is that I will find it harder to hit my target. It just all happens at a faster rate so it's again down to pilot skill. The effects should affect the ships performance, not the pilots skill, right? Someone can kite me in known space just as well as they can in the wormhole and it's harder for me to hit them.


Here are four considerations, maybe some of this would be useful to think about:


1 - Right now we can be really fast, but our range is shot. So this would be really slow with poor range.
I don't know how complicated it would be to implement this idea:
You can vary this by ship mass. Greater masses result in greater velocity penalties. Lighter ships have a reduced effect. It would at least promote the idea of having to fit a particular type of ship, in this case a nano fitted ship stands to gain more here. I think the idea is to give the dwellers the opportunity to create unique fits that work well in their home.

2- If this is too complicated and you want something simpler then why not leave the velocity as it is and reverse the inertia entirely? You could try the opposite, leaving the inertia untouched and reverse the velocity effects.

3 - Could you increase the current effects as you get closer to the black hole in the centre of the wormhole, and decrease them further away?

4 - Apply a mass effect, but only for one of inertia or velocity. You can't do it by ship class because it would somewhat nullify ship race differences which is against the general mechanics. As with known space, if a ship is heavier it is slower and takes longer to turn. Your heavier ship is going to find it harder to manoeuvre.

5 - You double the number of goodies to exploit in a black hole. Capsuleers will go where there are riches to be made. Increase the reward for living in the worst environment inhabitable in EVE. If pilots can suck it up then they are rewarded. You could double the number of goodies for each class whilst keeping the same effects?.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#278 - 2014-03-27 13:03:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Serendipity Lost
Science is awesome. Black holes and the theories and all that stuff are also very interesting. For all you would be designers I'd just like to restate my high level objectives for any changes to black hole mechanics.

1) Most importantly that graphic has to be annimated and do something really special. quiver, pucker, contraction - it's got to have that 'must see' annimation.

2) It's a game and the whole crux of changing black hole systems is to make them more fun to play in. Keeping it toward the science of black holes is cool, but the fun to play in should be the over riding goal. I can't tell you what fun actually is, but I do know it when I see it.

My many thanks to you 'numbers guys' that are doing all this crunching - I'm just cautioning you to not be too geeky and forget the fun part while focusing on black hole theory and stuff.

For instance having an e-war randomizer effect would be fun, but have nothing to do with the science of black holes. Imagine activating your web and having it function like a radar ECM module or your tracking disruptor behaving like a sensor damp. Random e-war swappage would be great fun. A nightmare to deal with in real time, but hillarious in the post fight discussions.

Objective one must be accomplished for this to be a success and objective two needs the proper amount of consideration also.
Tombomb13
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#279 - 2014-03-27 13:09:21 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:

For instance having an e-war randomizer effect would be fun


It could be fun to test on the test server, however Pilots want to be rewarded for fitting their ship correctly. If an EFT warrior spends an hour fitting a ship only for the key EWAR related module to turn into something entirely differently, rendering their entire fit useless, then they would never go into that wormhole.
As you said it's about getting people to live there, this would probably discourage that.
I like your idea about make the black hold at the centre of the wormhole look nice :)
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#280 - 2014-03-27 15:48:58 UTC
1 - Your condescension is laughable - you speak so freely of what others want, don't want, would like and wouldn't - get over yourself

2 - Your comprehension is laughable - I was kidding, putting something that was over the top to highlight that fun effects are the order of the day for black holes - you taking it literally as an idea for changing the game is kind of scary - you can't discern my meaning and intent yet are comfortable espousing what others would like and dislike. That's a dangerous combination.

3 - (Phil Collins flashback here) You never really knew me at all - I don't have EFT (Bane will verify) AND I don't come up with actual constructive ideas on the forums (ideals for sure, but ideas to change the game.... too much work).

4 - I don't like EFT warriors, so if this effect would ruin their sterile pristine world... well now I'm all for it. It's a game, so more playing and less theory crafting on a third party program is what I say. "Who's with me!?!" (that's Bill Murray in any number of motivational moments in any number of films he's done)

Lighten up Mr. Tombomb... lighten up