These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Casirio
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#101 - 2013-08-11 04:15:53 UTC
if we are talking about multiple statics or "hub" wh then leave the undesirable effects and/or no moons. has to have a trade off.
Kel hound
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#102 - 2013-08-11 05:14:27 UTC
Casirio wrote:
if we are talking about multiple statics or "hub" wh then leave the undesirable effects and/or no moons. has to have a trade off.



Actually were supposed to be talking about a change to the wormhole effects. A drastic change to black hole systems such as the removal of moons or the addition of one or more static connections would fall outside the purview of the original topic.

Nix Anteris wrote:
BLACK HOLES DO NOT NEED TO BE CHANGED

IT IS OK TO HAVE UNDESIRABLE EFFECTS

IF PEOPLE WANT DESIRABLE WORMHOLES THEY SHOULD HAVE TO FIGHT FOR THEM


Sushi Nardieu wrote:
It would be a failure to W-space if no one was interested in this system effect.


Blackholes, even lower end wormholes, are abandoned. People -do- fight for desirable wormholes, but nobody fights for undesirable wormholes. Any beneficial change to wormholes will inevitably result in more content for all of us.

Trinkets friend wrote:
It has its merits, but it is also open to wild, wild exploitation by crystals, drugs, boosters, the new m odules, the oncoming buff to repairer boost amounts, etc etc etc. It would, in short, result in ridicutanked everything, all the time.


All the wormhole effects are open to some level of abuse, I believe that is kind of the point. Wormhole effects are there to promote lateral thinking, they are there to give a unique home field advantage. In the case of a polar opposite cataclysmic variable this would relatively balanced. Yes, you could possibly run an epic perma tank, but you would also leave yourself wide open to capacitor warfare. Guess what Sleepers specialise in...
Kalel Nimrott
Caldari Provisions
#103 - 2013-08-11 05:23:05 UTC
I would change to they having an effect over the Wormholes themselve. For example a H296 having up to an x% in their duration or jumpable mass o maximun/minimun total mass.

Bob Artis, you will be missed.

O7

Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#104 - 2013-08-11 05:35:20 UTC
Kel hound wrote:

All the wormhole effects are open to some level of abuse, I believe that is kind of the point. Wormhole effects are there to promote lateral thinking, they are there to give a unique home field advantage. In the case of a polar opposite cataclysmic variable this would relatively balanced. Yes, you could possibly run an epic perma tank, but you would also leave yourself wide open to capacitor warfare. Guess what Sleepers specialise in...


Guess what ASB's specialise in: total immunity to capacitor warfare. I accept your point, but we are talking about taking a Maelstrom from a 1200 DPS tank to a 2400 DPS tank in a C6. Without really going overboard on the pimp.

This would be quite similar for every other possible thing, ever. Instead of Guardians RRing you, they'd turn back into pre-Retribution Augorors; energy creation engines feeding capacitor into beastly local tanks. Guardians would become the anti cap warfare to fight the cap warfare.

You can also fit geno's or capacitor implants and/or a cap booster, if the sleeper neuting is a problem.

Kel Hound wrote:

Blackholes, even lower end wormholes, are abandoned. People -do- fight for desirable wormholes, but nobody fights for undesirable wormholes. Any beneficial change to wormholes will inevitably result in more content for all of us.


This is not true. I am sure CCP knows the truth of this (or someone can search out the black holes and do stats on which have been ratted consistently in the last month) but most black holes I encounter are inhabited in C1 to C4. C5's, it's 50/50. haven't visited one of the C6 black holes in over a year, so cannot say.

That they aren't being fought over doesn't mean no one is living in them.

Like I said to Windstalker, people need to adapt. it is possible and indeed beneficial to adapt to Black Hole life up to C4's; if someone like Windstalker comes for a visit and tried their 13km/s Dramiel on for fun you deal with them easily enough with a Maulus or two.

In C5's the drawbacks are so extreme that even the resident will find life ridiculous. Its not actually worth mutating your fit enough to gain an edge because it just ends up as munted as a normal fit which struggles with the targeting range.


Like I said I lived in a C4 black hole for 18 months. This is more than any of the rest of you have admitted to. its not easy, it takes some adjustment, but you can do it.

Windstalker wrote:

Said more stuff that illuminates his ignorance


As for Windstalker....dude, you really have no idea about either black hole effects, or C5/C6 escalation. A dread, as mentioned by the other guy, will take a lot of DPS. But already they tank 4K DPS quite well. Since you'd be, well, you to drop a dread in C1-C4, we are talking traditionally about either an 85% boost to tank (C50 or 100% boost to local tank. So you'd be pulling 8K DPS tanks without sweating.

If this cannot be sustained permanently, you'd geno and implant up, toss a T2 CCC or a Charge Economiser rig on, and be able to run your 8K DPS tank for the few minutes necessary to tank while you spank the escalation over.

Not a problem for a Dread. For a triage carrier, your boost to local rep amount would assist you to tank plenty fine while you RR. Even a half-strength triage Archon will RR 1000 raw hitpoints a second.

in all honesty, you need to stop speaking from a position of ignorance either on wormholes in general, and with black holes in particular.

Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#105 - 2013-08-11 06:18:40 UTC
The effect is crap, but changing it will only affect those living in it right now, and most likely in a bad way. Those two to three corps who decided to live there will have to redo everything.

This seems like a pointless venture. Address the issue of what makes a hole valuable, therefore a reason to take it over. Right now if someone gets evicted (or even just threatened), they move ship to a new hole. Wormholes themselves need to be more valuable.

The effect... Eh.

Yaay!!!!

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#106 - 2013-08-11 12:23:38 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
The effect is crap, but changing it will only affect those living in it right now, and most likely in a bad way. Those two to three corps who decided to live there will have to redo everything.

This seems like a pointless venture. Address the issue of what makes a hole valuable, therefore a reason to take it over. Right now if someone gets evicted (or even just threatened), they move ship to a new hole. Wormholes themselves need to be more valuable.

The effect... Eh.


You know what, i agree with you. There is nothing wrong with having a system that some people find "less desirable".

Someone will use blackhole systems when we have enough people in W-space.
Winthorp
#107 - 2013-08-11 12:25:20 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
The effect is crap, but changing it will only affect those living in it right now, and most likely in a bad way. Those two to three corps who decided to live there will have to redo everything.

This seems like a pointless venture. Address the issue of what makes a hole valuable, therefore a reason to take it over. Right now if someone gets evicted (or even just threatened), they move ship to a new hole. Wormholes themselves need to be more valuable.

The effect... Eh.


You know what, i agree with you. There is nothing wrong with having a system that some people find "less desirable".

Someone will use blackhole systems when we have enough people in W-space.


A full w-space coming to eve in 2036.
Vassal Zeren
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#108 - 2013-08-11 12:28:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Vassal Zeren
Phoenix Jones wrote:
The effect is crap, but changing it will only affect those living in it right now, and most likely in a bad way. Those two to three corps who decided to live there will have to redo everything.

This seems like a pointless venture. Address the issue of what makes a hole valuable, therefore a reason to take it over. Right now if someone gets evicted (or even just threatened), they move ship to a new hole. Wormholes themselves need to be more valuable.

The effect... Eh.


I got it! Each wormhole in the game should have the chance to spawn its own J### sleeper. This special sleeper drops some sort of item (a gun, a tanky thing, something) but the item is unique to your wh! Perhaps you get parts that need to be combined with some salvaged components also unique to your wh or maybe a small group of whs, giving you the module. In any case, that defiantly makes you want to hold a specific whs and gives you more of a sense of ownership for that hole.

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.

Nix Anteris
The Dark Space Initiative
Scary Wormhole People
#109 - 2013-08-11 15:39:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Nix Anteris
I said previously that I think it's fine to keep BHs the way they are. However since this thread is about changes, not about not-changes, lets have a stab at this.


Black holes have their effects due to that giant environmental anomaly - the black hole. Lets keep this in mind with our changes.


Inertia, ship speed and weapon accuracy being screwed make sense, you have a bit o' extra gravity tugging on your ship and your projectiles.

Keep +Ship velocity and +Inertia, tweak the values a bit perhaps, but definitely keep them. Could be as simple as C1 = 10% and C6 = 60%, makes it nice and easy to remember.

Now, would gravity affect Lock Range and Drone Control Range. No, it would not. Lose these bonuses.

Edit: I originally wrote about turning the missile velocity and falloff into positives, but after re-reading / re-thinking, I didn't really like it. While missiles would probably travel further with some gravity-assist (or maybe not if their guidance systems have to correct so much more often), there's no real stat to tweak to make them more likely to miss. Reducing falloff really does that very well. So I'm going to backpedal my suggestion, and suggest reducing the penalties on these instead.

So we need 2 more bonuses to cover the Lock Range + Drone Control Range we lost.

How about Bonus to Energy Transfer and Energy Neutraliser amount as arbitrary effects (whether this should also apply to sleepers up for debate - probably shouldn't).

This leaves us with:
+Ship Velocity (C1 = 10% -> C6 = 60%)
+Inertia (C1 = 10% -> C6 = 60%)
-Missile Velocity (C1 = 5% -> C6 = 30%)
-Falloff (C1 = 5% -> C6 = 30%)
+Energy Transfer Amount (C1 = 25% -> C6 = 100%)
+Energy Neutraliser Amount (C1 = 25% -> C6 = 100%)


An alternative could be some other "stuff" related to gravity, stuff you need the Graviton Physics skill for, stuff like bonuses to interdiction bubble sizes. (If you're travelling twice as fast, a double sized bubble would be like a normal bubble, right?!)

In reality you should never be able to stop your ship in a BH system, since you would always be pulled towards the black hole. (POS shields would need some special nanotech to counter this though)
Keith Planck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#110 - 2013-08-11 20:11:27 UTC
Time dilation if its possible, would be amazing. How much, who knows \o/

If not then how about you flip some of the effects.

Faster Missile Velocity
Slower Ship Velocity
Reduced Drone control Range
Decreased Inertia
Reduced Lock Range
Increased Falloff

So:
Missiles fly farther
Your ship moves slower
You have reduced drone control range
Your ship has less agility
You can't target as far
But you have increased falloff

Another Idea, make it the opposite of a magnetar:

Decreased Damage
Increased Tracking
Reduced ship speed
Increased Falloff
Reduced lock range
reduced drone control range
Oxandrolone
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#111 - 2013-08-11 20:42:43 UTC
Well hopefully amongst the shitposting and lists of terrible ideas (mine probably included) a GM can pull something semi-worthwhile from this thread.
Cade Windstalker
#112 - 2013-08-11 23:59:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Tesoni Daven wrote:
[quote=Cade Windstalker]I'm not sure you've done capital escalations. T3s are laughably easy too keep alive in cap escalations. A 2 TP, 3 web Loki can easily rock 120k+ armor EHP if properly pimped, and still cost less than what can be made back in 2 sites. Add slaves and maxed skills and it gets a bit outrageous. The sig tanking and resist make it so that none of the hits are more than a few hundred damage, against a double plated tank that's nothing. The capitals absolutely take more damage due too not sig tanking at all, and not being able too receive remote reps in siege. Also, they rock relatively low resists typically in order too maximize cap recharge and damage mods.


I was actually thinking of an Vigilant/Rapier or Loki setup a friend showed me that was pretty ridiculous. You're definitely right that T3s would be easier to keep alive.

On the subject of Sieged dreads and carriers, wouldn't a local rep bonus affecting them make dread-blap PvP all the more ridiculous since the dreads would be harder to deal with for a sub-cap only fleet?
Nimrod vanHall
Van Mij Belastingvrij
#113 - 2013-08-12 01:36:43 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
make it have 2x time dilation

IE everything happens at twice the speed





seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in...

Wouldn't that also mean 2x skill gain speed?
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#114 - 2013-08-12 03:06:03 UTC
Nimrod vanHall wrote:
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
make it have 2x time dilation
IE everything happens at twice the speed

seriously that would be a cool wormhole to live in...

Wouldn't that also mean 2x skill gain speed?

you don't really know what tidi is do you?

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

John Bishop
Forgot to repair
#115 - 2013-08-12 07:36:47 UTC  |  Edited by: John Bishop
have the black hole actually be in the system and not just a pretty back ground. the closer you get to it the worse effects you have. too close and you become trapped and eventually die....

you would have to pay attention to your line of sight so that you dont warp through the BH. warping towards the center of the system you would move faster. warping away you'd move slower. same as on the battlefield.

close to the even horizon youd start taking damage from radiation itself but sites in this area would be the most lucrative in system.

the more massive the ships the greater the effects too, lending smaller ships an edge, especially near the even horizon.
Cade Windstalker
#116 - 2013-08-12 11:04:28 UTC
John Bishop wrote:
have the black hole actually be in the system and not just a pretty back ground. the closer you get to it the worse effects you have. too close and you become trapped and eventually die....

you would have to pay attention to your line of sight so that you dont warp through the BH. warping towards the center of the system you would move faster. warping away you'd move slower. same as on the battlefield.

close to the even horizon youd start taking damage from radiation itself but sites in this area would be the most lucrative in system.

the more massive the ships the greater the effects too, lending smaller ships an edge, especially near the even horizon.


It was already said earlier that any changes would have to be relatively simple to implement, I don't think this qualifies >.>
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#117 - 2013-08-12 11:15:27 UTC
Oxandrolone wrote:
Well hopefully amongst the shitposting and lists of terrible ideas (mine probably included) a GM can pull something semi-worthwhile from this thread.



Hehe we've all have our good days and bad days :-) We do on occasion run into a black hole corporation (guys were running frigates at mega speeds).

I somehow don't think they minded the blackhole. If there hard-up at changing it though....

Yaay!!!!

Tesoni Daven
Collapsed Out
Pandemic Legion
#118 - 2013-08-13 01:42:44 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Tesoni Daven wrote:
[quote=Cade Windstalker]I'm not sure you've done capital escalations. T3s are laughably easy too keep alive in cap escalations. A 2 TP, 3 web Loki can easily rock 120k+ armor EHP if properly pimped, and still cost less than what can be made back in 2 sites. Add slaves and maxed skills and it gets a bit outrageous. The sig tanking and resist make it so that none of the hits are more than a few hundred damage, against a double plated tank that's nothing. The capitals absolutely take more damage due too not sig tanking at all, and not being able too receive remote reps in siege. Also, they rock relatively low resists typically in order too maximize cap recharge and damage mods.


I was actually thinking of an Vigilant/Rapier or Loki setup a friend showed me that was pretty ridiculous. You're definitely right that T3s would be easier to keep alive.

On the subject of Sieged dreads and carriers, wouldn't a local rep bonus affecting them make dread-blap PvP all the more ridiculous since the dreads would be harder to deal with for a sub-cap only fleet?




I have no idea why you would use a Vigi in sites to be honest. The web range is so terrible as too make it useless unless you are ABing around. Which I guess you can do, but seems like way more work than it is worth. Especially considering how much tank you lose compared too a Loki.

Rapier would work, but you would really need Recon V too make it worth it, and unless you are in a Pulsar, the tank is gonna be scary minimal.

And yah, any kind of local rep bonus that effects capital reps would make dreads even harder too kill. Which is probably not a good thing.
Keith Planck
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#119 - 2013-08-13 05:43:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Keith Planck
So there's a lot of talk about black hole being undesirable and a lot of players think that's ok.

While I totally agree that CCP could turn blackholes into an effect that benefits X while nerfing Y.

You could turn black holes into a deep dark abyss that nerfs everything. Not just making them "undesirable" but downright annoying.

Reduction in Scan Probe Strength*
Reduction in Range
Reduction in Speed
Reduction in Lock Range
Reduction in DPS


ect...

Even with these effects in place, it would still be beneficial to a corp that keeps to itself and doesn't want to be bothered, like a null corp using the hole for production ect...
Nero Pantera
Whale Girth
#120 - 2013-08-13 11:11:49 UTC
c6 600% mining yield. Show Love to the miners too!!!!!!