These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Potential Idea for Discussion: Delaying signature appearance for K162s

First post First post First post
Author
Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
#681 - 2014-03-27 18:21:59 UTC
MadbaM wrote:


Show me your history of losses of PVE ships in W-Space! according to the info i can find your total PVE losses in W-Space amounts to 1 noctice. Now please tell me how long you have been in W-Space and how much ISK you have made here, confirm this information then resubmit your premise that W-Space is risky enough.

In fact i make that challenge to every PVE entity that has voiced an opinion in this thread, how often do you indeed loose ships to ganks in sites! remove all losses where you get caught on WH's running away. Purely your looses with sleepers on the kill mail, iv lived in W-Space from almost day 1 and i have never lost a ship inside a site to a gank not once.


This change doesn't just effect pve though. People can essentially seed into your system without a wormhole ever appearing. Three dreads in and poof. Hell, an invasion can be in full swing and the defenders roll into you. You have no chance of stopping them from entering the system on the wormhole, as they can warp off before you even know what happened.

Balance is my issue with this.

No trolling please

MadbaM
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#682 - 2014-03-27 18:26:48 UTC
Bjurn Akely wrote:
MadbaM wrote:

I feel i may have explained myself poorly but i can't think of a better way to describe it, simply put if i find you the Class of WH has no affect on the danger i present to you.


You're intel is flawed. Smile I've been living in W-space since early 2011. But that is neither here or there.

The reason you feel you may have explained yourself poorly is that there is no clear and concise definition of 'safety'. Look for instance at http://www.thefreedictionary.com/safety where even they struggle. Hence we are back to square 1. It would really help me and I suspect others if CCO Fozzie elaborated quite a bit. More charts! P


1. The condition of being safe; freedom from danger, risk, or injury. (from your link)

Seems clear to me. and there you go again asking Fozzy to clarify something you have just argued cant be clarified WTF do you want?
MadbaM
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#683 - 2014-03-27 18:29:39 UTC  |  Edited by: MadbaM
Bane Nucleus wrote:
MadbaM wrote:


Show me your history of losses of PVE ships in W-Space! according to the info i can find your total PVE losses in W-Space amounts to 1 noctice. Now please tell me how long you have been in W-Space and how much ISK you have made here, confirm this information then resubmit your premise that W-Space is risky enough.

In fact i make that challenge to every PVE entity that has voiced an opinion in this thread, how often do you indeed loose ships to ganks in sites! remove all losses where you get caught on WH's running away. Purely your looses with sleepers on the kill mail, iv lived in W-Space from almost day 1 and i have never lost a ship inside a site to a gank not once.


This change doesn't just effect pve though. People can essentially seed into your system without a wormhole ever appearing. Three dreads in and poof. Hell, an invasion can be in full swing and the defenders roll into you. You have no chance of stopping them from entering the system on the wormhole, as they can warp off before you even know what happened.

Balance is my issue with this.



The defenders already have the advantage of living in that system for how long? and with a prepared defense in place they need more advantage of a few seconds? but regardless i have already stated in this thread that the K162 being un scanable is probably not balanced and should show and be scanable on the K162 side when you jump from the spawning side (changed from spawning when warp initiated)
Ian Praetorius
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#684 - 2014-03-27 19:08:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Ian Praetorius
Read the first 5 pages--have neither the time nor the inclination to read the remaining 30 pages, but as a wormhole resident, I'll briefly add my voice to the chorus.

As was stated several times in the first few pages (and I'm sure ad nauseam throughout this topic), wormhole residents who are being vigilant should have a way of knowing what's coming--a flat delay on the appearance of K162s is a lazy "solution" that doesn't actually fix anything and makes no logical sense. It's already "delayed" due to whatever esoteric method is used to update the scanner. I've gone several minutes unable to see a signature on one character that I could see with the other.

CCP has stated in the past that it was "never our intention for w-space to have permanent residents" (or something extremely close to that). This proposal indicates a complete lack of awareness that pilots do, in fact, live in w-space, a complete lack of caring about the same, or the first steps in an effort to make your initial intentions a reality--I'm not sure which option Mr. Occam would choose.

tl;dr: All of my no. This is an incomprehensibly stupid idea, Mr. Fozzie. You were rather entertaining during NEO II, why you gotta go and be like this? Just tell us you were trolling us this whole time and all will be forgiven.

EDIT: Oh, and give wormholes more than one 30 second clip for a soundtrack. At least give us two--then all will be forgiven.
MD74
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#685 - 2014-03-27 19:16:14 UTC  |  Edited by: MD74
No more stupid ideas, please.
Bjurn Akely
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#686 - 2014-03-27 19:16:38 UTC
MadbaM wrote:
Bjurn Akely wrote:
MadbaM wrote:

I feel i may have explained myself poorly but i can't think of a better way to describe it, simply put if i find you the Class of WH has no affect on the danger i present to you.


You're intel is flawed. Smile I've been living in W-space since early 2011. But that is neither here or there.

The reason you feel you may have explained yourself poorly is that there is no clear and concise definition of 'safety'. Look for instance at http://www.thefreedictionary.com/safety where even they struggle. Hence we are back to square 1. It would really help me and I suspect others if CCO Fozzie elaborated quite a bit. More charts! P


1. The condition of being safe; freedom from danger, risk, or injury. (from your link)

Seems clear to me. and there you go again asking Fozzy to clarify something you have just argued cant be clarified WTF do you want?


There is no need for cursing. Calm down. I initially made it clear what I wanted. I would like to get answers to the following questions. I'll separate them and even add one. And remember, these questions are NOT FOR YOU. They are for Fozzie. As I said before, with all respect I do not think you or I know enough to really make good suggestions.

What problem is it you are trying to fix?
Too little PvP?
In what class of holes (any, C5-6)?
Should mining be culled specifically?
Do you want some parts to be saver for PvE runners?
Or is it a brainstorm thing with no clear objectives and no clear problem statement?
The timers: If there are different timers, are they based on where the hole come from or lead to, or type (ie A239)?

MadbaM
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#687 - 2014-03-27 19:47:30 UTC
Bjurn Akely wrote:


What problem is it you are trying to fix?
Too little PvP?
In what class of holes (any, C5-6)?
Should mining be culled specifically?
Do you want some parts to be saver for PvE runners?
Or is it a brainstorm thing with no clear objectives and no clear problem statement?
The timers: If there are different timers, are they based on where the hole come from or lead to, or type (ie A239)?



Every question has been answered in the OP if you care to look, another person i have to point **** out to.......

CCP Fozzie wrote:
the ease with which players can now observe new wormhole signatures appearing

CCP Fozzie wrote:
actively hunting for pvp in wormholes should present more targets

CCP Fozzie wrote:
very good opportunity to shake up wormhole life and further encourage the best parts of the wormhole experience.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
signature beacon when K162 dungeons spawn.
The change is to K162 that spawn EVERYWHERE


Bane Nucleus
Dark Venture Corporation
#688 - 2014-03-27 19:53:16 UTC
I am stealing your list MadbaM P

CCP Fozzie wrote:
the ease with which players can now observe new wormhole signatures appearing


Correct, which is why it should go back to pre Odyssey settings

CCP Fozzie wrote:
actively hunting for pvp in wormholes should present more targets


The only corps that don't find active targets are inactive corps. Speaking only for myself and my corp, we have seen no shortage of targets, whether they are PVEing or PvPing.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
very good opportunity to shake up wormhole life and further encourage the best parts of the wormhole experience.


Ganking is a big part of wormhole life, but I think it's easy enough already

No trolling please

Bjurn Akely
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#689 - 2014-03-27 20:04:10 UTC
MadbaM wrote:


Every question has been answered in the OP if you care to look, another person i have to point **** out to.......

CCP Fozzie wrote:
the ease with which players can now observe new wormhole signatures appearing

CCP Fozzie wrote:
actively hunting for pvp in wormholes should present more targets

CCP Fozzie wrote:
very good opportunity to shake up wormhole life and further encourage the best parts of the wormhole experience.

CCP Fozzie wrote:
signature beacon when K162 dungeons spawn.
The change is to K162 that spawn EVERYWHERE




Sigh. You don't get it do you? The questions are not for you. But since you think you know the answer to them: Answer them one by one, without cutting and pasting what others have written. As specifically as possible please.

Who knows, perhaps you have it all together and I will feel really dumb. Don't worry, I have no problem admitting it when I'm wrong.
MadbaM
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#690 - 2014-03-27 20:12:59 UTC  |  Edited by: MadbaM
Your addressing your questions to Fozzie and i quoted Fozzie from his OP, your asking question of which Fozzie has already given you answers i am merely pointing them out to you not answering them personally.

I'm seriously starting to question my own sanity here, honestly not sure who the crazy one is but im fairly sure its not me.

Bob please give me strength
Deliver me from care bares
Spawn me holes to the unworthy
And i will burn them in your name
Amen
Ian Praetorius
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#691 - 2014-03-27 20:26:13 UTC
I just remembered that I can apply spraypaint to my hull so I retract my previous statements in their entirety. Do whatever you want to w-space, I'll be content just spinning my ship inside the POS force field.

Speaking of which, when I say do whatever you want, I mean anything besides revamping POS code--that would just ruin everything.
Min Mar
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#692 - 2014-03-27 21:28:42 UTC
As others have already asked, I would like to ask what you are trying to fix exactly?

1) If you are trying to make it more risky to run PVE in WHs, I understand. You're trying to limit the ISK faucet, especially in C5/6 situations. Fair enough but please label it as such. In higher class WHs, the advantage already lies with the attackers since they will usually catch you with your dreads in siege. A quick stroll to Quantum Explosion's KB shows they are doing quite well without this "delay".
2) If you're trying to encourage more PvP in WHs, I don't think this is going to get you there. You're telling us an unknown number of ships may have jumped into our WH and we need to fight them off. How many people are going to take that on? It's like jumping into a gate camp without a scout, not a very smart move.
3) If you're trying to move more people to null space where any visitors are immediately visible, this is an impetus. I don't know anything about population distributions in WHs and null, I'll let others speak to that but I'm guessing if you drive people away from WHs, then you will not address the lack of PvP in WHs, you're going to make it worse.
4) Finally, I have to agree with some of my fellow posters: you dumbed down exploration by making sigs/anoms visible upon entry and making scanning so much easier for noobs. You are now getting complaints from folks about the lack of good fights. Being able to gank a PvE running fleet imho is not a good fight and if you think this will force folks to prepare defense fleets to guard against a "delayed" attack, I think you're mistaken.

My suggestion is to put things back to how they were before: Make WHs a battle of the scanners: If I can scan your K162 before you can get your own scanner in and find my ship, I should have a chance to get out. I may not see you in local like I can in null but I should know you could be there, the same time you know I'm here Blink


Jack Miton
Dark Venture Corporation
#693 - 2014-03-27 21:35:03 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey guys, thanks for the feedback so far.

One thing I want to clarify so that people don't panic, this proposal and any potential change on this scale would not be in the cards for the Summer expansion. We want to get the discussion going early with the intent of continuing it over time (especially at Fanfest).

no one is complaining about WHEN you implement this change, theyre complaining about you implementing it at all, ever.

to reiterate, sigs should not auto pop up on scanner but they should always be probable.

There is no Bob.

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

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

Winthorp
#694 - 2014-03-27 21:48:00 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey guys, thanks for the feedback so far.

One thing I want to clarify so that people don't panic, this proposal and any potential change on this scale would not be in the cards for the Summer expansion. We want to get the discussion going early with the intent of continuing it over time (especially at Fanfest).


Thanks for posting to ensure this thread gets another 30 pages of the same argument. /rolls eyes

Perhaps it could have been better if you could provide some feedback on your design goals for your idea. Do your statistics indicate there isn't enough PVP going on or is there too much PVE going on, more then CCP would like?

Any chance you could give us some statistics as to what your going on with your idea flipping the board game to a side of a very dangerous WH space? Please don't stick the hard line that releasing statistics breaks immersion of gameplay, we would like to argue against your current iteration of your ideas with the figures you are working on that lead you to your idea.

Also you mentioned in your OP that the design team is looking at several ideas, if the only one idea you have mentioned is this bad (And its no longer just my opinion it is bad anymore, its 30 pages of whats looking like 90% of people agree its a bad idea) can we please hear your other ideas or concepts you are looking into?

If you want to get our community involvement please do it with us in a more meaningful way and less token piece please.

Ian Praetorius
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#695 - 2014-03-27 21:55:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Ian Praetorius
Winthorp wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey guys, thanks for the feedback so far.

One thing I want to clarify so that people don't panic, this proposal and any potential change on this scale would not be in the cards for the Summer expansion. We want to get the discussion going early with the intent of continuing it over time (especially at Fanfest).


Thanks for posting to ensure this thread gets another 30 pages of the same argument. /rolls eyes

Perhaps it could have been better if you could provide some feedback on your design goals for your idea. Do your statistics indicate there isn't enough PVP going on or is there too much PVE going on, more then CCP would like?

Any chance you could give us some statistics as to what your going on with your idea flipping the board game to a side of a very dangerous WH space? Please don't stick the hard line that releasing statistics breaks immersion of gameplay, we would like to argue against your current iteration of your ideas with the figures you are working on that lead you to your idea.

Also you mentioned in your OP that the design team is looking at several ideas, if the only one idea you have mentioned is this bad (And its no longer just my opinion it is bad anymore, its 30 pages of whats looking like 90% of people agree its a bad idea) can we please hear your other ideas or concepts you are looking into?

If you want to get our community involvement please do it with us in a more meaningful way and less token piece please.



QFT.

Also, if the first 5 pages were any indication, many of the people in that 10% (by their own admission) don't even live in friggin' w-space and thus their opinions should be taken with 2-3 tablespoons of salt.
Winthorp
#696 - 2014-03-27 21:58:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Winthorp
Ian Praetorius wrote:

QFT.

Also, if the first 5 pages were any indication, many of the people in that 10% (by their own admission) don't even live in friggin' w-space and thus their opinions should be taken with 2-3 tablespoons of salt.


You should go on to read a few more pages after the people that came in the first few pages most likely came into this from a reddit link. And i agree those 10% that do like Fozzies idea prob don't live in Wh space to understand how bad this would be.

And i wasn't trolling at all, was a legit post.
Karen Galeo
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#697 - 2014-03-27 23:04:15 UTC
Mea culpa. I have had a few things brought to my attention, and I need to admit that cloaking the K162 for even 30 seconds after it spawns would be too long.

Author of the Karen 162 blog.

NinjaTurtle
THIGH GUYS
#698 - 2014-03-27 23:04:21 UTC  |  Edited by: NinjaTurtle
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey guys, thanks for the feedback so far.

One thing I want to clarify so that people don't panic, this proposal and any potential change on this scale would not be in the cards for the Summer expansion. We want to get the discussion going early with the intent of continuing it over time (especially at Fanfest).


That's cool cause I think a few of us there will have something to day about it lol
Thank you for having the grace to get the ball rolling early Fozzie, we do appreciate that.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#699 - 2014-03-28 06:04:29 UTC
Winthorp wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey guys, thanks for the feedback so far.

One thing I want to clarify so that people don't panic, this proposal and any potential change on this scale would not be in the cards for the Summer expansion. We want to get the discussion going early with the intent of continuing it over time (especially at Fanfest).


Thanks for posting to ensure this thread gets another 30 pages of the same argument. /rolls eyes

Perhaps it could have been better if you could provide some feedback on your design goals for your idea. Do your statistics indicate there isn't enough PVP going on or is there too much PVE going on, more then CCP would like?

Any chance you could give us some statistics as to what your going on with your idea flipping the board game to a side of a very dangerous WH space? Please don't stick the hard line that releasing statistics breaks immersion of gameplay, we would like to argue against your current iteration of your ideas with the figures you are working on that lead you to your idea.

Also you mentioned in your OP that the design team is looking at several ideas, if the only one idea you have mentioned is this bad (And its no longer just my opinion it is bad anymore, its 30 pages of whats looking like 90% of people agree its a bad idea) can we please hear your other ideas or concepts you are looking into?

If you want to get our community involvement please do it with us in a more meaningful way and less token piece please.



Oh Winnie - farming likes are you?

I'm right behind you

Janeway84
Insane's Asylum
#700 - 2014-03-28 12:07:09 UTC
Id prefer pre oddessey since the way the system is now its way to easy for any1 watching the signature window without any probes out to see that you gridded into their wh and for them to make a quick escape most of the time depending on factors.. P