These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Megan DeMonet
Direct Action.
The Lounge Lizards
#741 - 2014-03-30 22:53:00 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


further encourage the best parts of the wormhole experience.



would that depend on what one considers the "best part"

A Priest, a Rabbi, and an Imam walk into a bar......

Megan DeMonet
Direct Action.
The Lounge Lizards
#742 - 2014-03-30 23:17:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Megan DeMonet
i think we should do away with all pve entirely. who the f*** wants to mine and fight rats anyway. we all know all we all want is mass genocide. It don't matter what race is left standing, as long as all the others are gone. Put everything in the game on NPC market, set prices for it. and lets do this game rt.


I have no idea where we will get our ISk from to but the stuff on market. But Who The F*** cares. long as there is no PvE.


for all you clowns that want to pick this apart. look up the word sarcasm before you do.

if we do this. then we need to set the clock back a bit more and reintroduce the System scanning array.

A Priest, a Rabbi, and an Imam walk into a bar......

Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#743 - 2014-03-31 02:43:05 UTC
having thought about it some more, I don't think this type of delay will make a noticeable difference, in terms of gameplay or in the books.

I'm thinking of the surprisingly frequent occasions when I will scan a sig and have eyes on the k162 in time to see a scout jump in from the originating end and pop probes to scout.

There's no telling what takes them so long to jump through a hole they should know they opened... maybe it's admin stuff, like udpating siggy and creating bookmarks according to a naming convention. they might be passing through, and have no knowledge of what holes are new. but it happens a lot, and most of the time it is a resident of the originating system.

there's also the fact that bigger ships warp slow. things will reduce the benefit of a delay.

There are ways to maximize the benefit of a delay, like pinging as close as possible to an unopened static, with all the things that mean to use the hole (and not just the scout)..

that leaves a handful of situations that I can think of, in which a signature delay would make a difference, even if only under some very specific circumstances...

but I think that over time, in practice, the majority of those cases will yield no noticeable difference in their average outcome... not that you could determine such a thing.

so yeah, I've had some time to put my rabble aside and take another look at what it would really do. ...and I don't see a delay yielding your desired result, or even a result that you will see in the numbers.

I hope you do something like add depth to the game by improving signature mechanics, instead of a band-aid like a delay on one specific signature.
Luc'Nab
World Curling Team
#744 - 2014-03-31 08:53:29 UTC
bad idea. There are so many way to kill on farm. and thats one to kill without loses from atackers.

all problem form mushrooms TS?
Jane Cumberwaffle
World Curling Team
#745 - 2014-03-31 08:58:59 UTC
Lol, rly? No 162? Can some one tell me, for what? I think it's not rly good idea =) Do something thats rly need ingame, or dont do anything plz
Emika Neosignal
Inner Hell
#746 - 2014-03-31 11:23:19 UTC
It's bad idea. Don't touch WH mechanic pzl, w-space have awesome atmosphere. All moves with K-162, local chat and etc. can destroy philosophy of wormholes. Make your experiments at lolsec's and lullsec's.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#747 - 2014-03-31 11:59:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
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).


Good deal Fozzie. I am a bit surprised with the suggestion even being floated, though to have an open discussion, you have to talk about everything, good or bad.

Rain6637 wrote:
having thought about it some more, I don't think this type of delay will make a noticeable difference, in terms of gameplay or in the books.

I'm thinking of the surprisingly frequent occasions when I will scan a sig and have eyes on the k162 in time to see a scout jump in from the originating end and pop probes to scout.

There's no telling what takes them so long to jump through a hole they should know they opened... maybe it's admin stuff, like udpating siggy and creating bookmarks according to a naming convention. they might be passing through, and have no knowledge of what holes are new. but it happens a lot, and most of the time it is a resident of the originating system.

there's also the fact that bigger ships warp slow. things will reduce the benefit of a delay.

There are ways to maximize the benefit of a delay, like pinging as close as possible to an unopened static, with all the things that mean to use the hole (and not just the scout)..

that leaves a handful of situations that I can think of, in which a signature delay would make a difference, even if only under some very specific circumstances...

but I think that over time, in practice, the majority of those cases will yield no noticeable difference in their average outcome... not that you could determine such a thing.

so yeah, I've had some time to put my rabble aside and take another look at what it would really do. ...and I don't see a delay yielding your desired result, or even a result that you will see in the numbers.

I hope you do something like add depth to the game by improving signature mechanics, instead of a band-aid like a delay on one specific signature.



I get the concept, but basing a system on complete randomness, a mechanic that cannot be countered or defeated in anyway does not make compelling or good combat. This is still very one sided.

My issue is that this does not promote any good gameplay (just more paranoia with no way of adaptation (aka you cannot learn how to counter it, it just "happens"). Its a more advance play on cloaking, now you can be invisible AND your method of entry is completely unknown.

Its clunky, does not promote pvp, provides a bad mechanic for people to learn and/or counter.

There was someone that suggested preventing ships from self destructing in a POS. Nathan Anderson suggested this in his run for CSM last year, heck he announced it in the CSM wormhole podcast, and he was heckled, yelled at and basically called a complete moron for even suggesting it (this also was one of the many issues for his loss at CSM).

Now someone suggests it here? It was a bad idea, it is STILL a bad idea, but people want to back it because.. well at least I get a ship kill out of it?

I feel there are two factions here at work (3 actually).

Those who believe wormholes are fine as they are.
Those who believe wormholes are falling apart and want to return to the old system
Those who want to kill ships and people, and want the system to provide them every method of ganking them.

None of the above addresses the real issue. How to get people to fight, how to get good combat, and how to really see more wormhole pvp (both large gang and small gang).

People are mad that whenever they roll into a hole, the residence pos up.

" Lets change it so that if we siege them, they can't self destruct their ships.. that'll be fun!! " (NO)!

People are mad that whenever they roll a hole, the residence know immediately.

"Lets change it so that we get a special Super Cloak Mass Hole that nobody can detect, so we can see what they are doing and setup our gank!!!". (NO)

Nobody is addressing the problems. Either because they don't know what the problems are, or they don't want to acknowledge that there is a problem in the first place.

Yaay!!!!

Shyzandra
EyEs.FR
#748 - 2014-03-31 13:41:52 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:


None of the above addresses the real issue. How to get people to fight, how to get good combat, and how to really see more wormhole pvp (both large gang and small gang).

Nobody is addressing the problems. Either because they don't know what the problems are, or they don't want to acknowledge that there is a problem in the first place.


Please, dont talk without having read the complete topic... You're embarrassing yourself...
And if you did read, please, do it again... Lot of us already raised those problems and even came up with some possible solutions to make capsulers fight in W-space...
Billy Hix
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#749 - 2014-03-31 22:03:11 UTC
I just wanted to add my voice to the "Remove overlay, no delay and actively scanning with probes can see WH as they appear" side of the argument.
Gabhrael Lyrian
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#750 - 2014-03-31 23:11:06 UTC
The instant accessibility of this is an issue, but I LOVE the sensor overlay in known space. It's cool to kind of gaze at the spacehorizon, and then head there. Don't remove it!
A few ideas:
1-Bring back ship scanners, and have all ships automatically scan upon jump-in or undock. This should keep the "exploration" incentive while keeping the time-cost of information reasonable.
2-Place the ship scanner on a 10-30 second "loop" where it scans in a slow circle, adding to the "radar sweep" effect of the sensor sweep.
3-Remove K162s from the system scanner, but not other wormholes, or delay them by some factor. I'm not a huge fan of this but it solves the problem.
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#751 - 2014-04-01 02:01:18 UTC
Fozzie, about the fact that you're trying to balance something here. Forget the specifics of the change, the real problem is the code responsible for wormholes. it must be pretty unwieldy if applying just one change involves enough dev time that you are able to say with certainty it will not, couldn't possibly be launched until after summer.

What will you do the next time you want to balance something in here?

Can you re-purpose cyno code to replace the existing wormhole code? they're system connections, after all. start with a cyno, and alter it one attribute at a time until you have a modular thing that looks and functions as a K162. do it again for a M273. again for a E175... and on until wormholes are individual things that you can work with.

want K162s invisible initially? too easy, they're covert cynos at heart.

tbqh i think it's a brilliant solution, you're welcome.

if I've suggested something that would work, being awesome is what I do... sometimes. if I'm wrong and wormhole code is enough of a spaghetti mess that it will always be clunky, I'm sorry and I expect you will be forced to nerf wormhole ISK in the future (since playing with the code is impractical).



about the delay... I think it's very optimistic of you to expect most players will make use of it. I think the kind of impact you're trying to make using this strategy of denying intel would require that K162 are simply not probe-able, and locating one would mean probe scanning something on grid with it.

yes, i'm serious, wormholes are supposed to be different and scary, correct?

and yeah, if someone warps away from this version of a K162 without making a bookmark, they've caused themselves a problem.

I just don't see 2, 5, 10 minutes making a difference. if you think it's a good idea to provide players with a new opening move (the choice of ship they decide to put through the hole, rather than entering warp to a virgin wormhole--often unknowningly)... why not be consistent about it and extend it to roamers?

what's beautiful about this scenario is you've balanced these ships for years; cloaky, not cloaky, big, small... they have the option to use the wormhole sneaky-like, or trade the intel benefit in scaled increments of big, heavy, in-the-face dps.

furthermore, if you're trying to drive conflict and make changes that matter, make the head of wormholes default-warpable. ie straight from overview. (I think wormholes could move closer to the concept of gates, and should/could be disassociated from signatures altogether)

it's fair; now that the tail of the hole is worth preserving, make the head easier to assault.

as it is, probing is a time sink in wormholes, and wormhole PVP. you know, the not-ISK side of the equation.

I think it's pretty significant that you're willing to preserve the ISK part. after all, throttling NPC buy orders would be the easier way to do this, so I take it you have your reasons.

One thing that is suspiciously absent from this thread is anyone thanking you for not nerfing the ISK. I'll break the ice: in exchange for not touching that part of the equation, I'm willing to see wormholes get pretty damn scary.
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#752 - 2014-04-01 02:32:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
the conspiracy theorist Rain wonders if this whole thing is contrived, and you've planted it to serve as a reason for making some very unpleasant changes in the future.

...I also think it's possible that you are trolling.

Phoenix Jones wrote:

I get the concept, but basing a system on complete randomness, a mechanic that cannot be countered or defeated in anyway does not make compelling or good combat. This is still very one sided.

My issue is that this does not promote any good gameplay (just more paranoia with no way of adaptation (aka you cannot learn how to counter it, it just "happens"). Its a more advance play on cloaking, now you can be invisible AND your method of entry is completely unknown.

Its clunky, does not promote pvp, provides a bad mechanic for people to learn and/or counter.

that's a popular sentiment, that things should have a counter, and it's also a very rock-paper-scissors view of things. Instead of asking "what's the counter?" and expecting that one exists, a more flexible approach would be to ask "what's the most effective response?" ...and in the case of wormholes, considering the ISK bait that is placed in them, and the absence of local intel, I think they have always been a clear, simple case of CCP asking if you would fancy a multi-billion ISK game of Marco Polo.
AssassinationsdoneWrong
Deep Core Mining Inc.
#753 - 2014-04-01 05:37:31 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:

that's a popular sentiment, that things should have a counter, and it's also a very rock-paper-scissors view of things. Instead of asking "what's the counter?" and expecting that one exists, a more flexible approach would be to ask "what's the most effective response?" ...and in the case of wormholes, considering the ISK bait that is placed in them, and the absence of local intel, I think they have always been a clear, simple case of CCP asking if you would fancy a multi-billion ISK game of Marco Polo.



This is very posh verbalization however it doesn't actually say anything at all.

There is such a thing as using too many methaphors.

The Nexus 7's

What we fall short of in numbers we more than make up for in stupidity

Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#754 - 2014-04-01 14:52:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
"things aren't always perfect, and I think when it comes to wormholes, CCP wants players to get it in the ass"

kid gloves, though.

no local, and hitting D-scan is the equivalent of calling "Marco" out to 14 AU

every time I see the size of the rocks in belts, it reminds me of a story i heard about how monkeys are caught? basically an apple or some other fruit is placed in a container, and the opening is barely wide enough to fit the fruit. when a monkey tries to remove the fruit from the container, their hand won't fit through the opening while it's holding the fruit. but they want the fruit so badly that they will stay there/frantically trying to snatch the fruit while a person comes up and hits them over the head.

those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system, and I imagine CCP would like for there to be as much loss in wormholes as there is ISK, and then some. I'm pretty sure that's what this change is about.
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#755 - 2014-04-01 15:25:55 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:

those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system, and I imagine CCP would like for there to be as much loss in wormholes as there is ISK, and then some. I'm pretty sure that's what this change is about.


CCP is smarter than that. They may have made a bunch of really stupid decisions in the past but they are bright enough not to look at the most dangerous area, hardest to access, hardest logistics area of space and go "Hm, let's make it so that people lose more money than they are likely to make in this space"
AssassinationsdoneWrong
Deep Core Mining Inc.
#756 - 2014-04-01 15:39:34 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
"those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system,


Also.... science fiction game Shocked

The Nexus 7's

What we fall short of in numbers we more than make up for in stupidity

Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#757 - 2014-04-01 15:39:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
you know what i'm saying, though. the concept is the same. whether you're a miner or working the combat sites, in those moments you are the monkey

Anhenka wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:

those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system, and I imagine CCP would like for there to be as much loss in wormholes as there is ISK, and then some. I'm pretty sure that's what this change is about.


CCP is smarter than that. They may have made a bunch of really stupid decisions in the past but they are bright enough not to look at the most dangerous area, hardest to access, hardest logistics area of space and go "Hm, let's make it so that people lose more money than they are likely to make in this space"


actually, I... believe the exact opposite, but I don't think it's a matter of intelligence.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#758 - 2014-04-01 20:26:30 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:

those rocks were never meant to fit through the openings of the system, and I imagine CCP would like for there to be as much loss in wormholes as there is ISK, and then some. I'm pretty sure that's what this change is about.

CCP is smarter than that. They may have made a bunch of really stupid decisions in the past but they are bright enough not to look at the most dangerous area, hardest to access, hardest logistics area of space and go "Hm, let's make it so that people lose more money than they are likely to make in this space"

historically, there's very little to support this view. sadly.

There is no Bob.

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

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

Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
#759 - 2014-04-02 14:55:30 UTC
quick point,

It seems strange to me that d-scan allows me to see on sensors anything within 14.3 AU of my ship, yet when entering a system my survey scanner picks up all anomalies regardless of distance. A neat compromise on this issue may be have it set so that you can only see anomalies/wormholes on your survey scanner at the range of whatever d-scan criteria you've set to a maximum of 14.3 AU.

This would mean that on entering a wormhole system you wouldn't have full knowledge of everything that is out there in terms of anomalies as you could only see what is relatively near to you to a maximum of 14.3 au. Likewise defenders would have to do regular patrols around the system to build a map of where the anomalies are and check them out for intruders which may involve some prove scanning work and so on.

I wouldn't mind seeing this in empire space to, it might return some of the buzz of exploration I used to feel back when I started and had to warp around the place to detect complexes prior to odyssey.

I don't live in wormhole space and havent spent that much time there so forgive me if I am barking up the wrong tree here. I just had an idea and thought it might be worth sharing it.

Dumbing down of Eve Online will result in it's destruction...

Giorgos Rbs
Lead Head Inc
#760 - 2014-04-02 22:57:31 UTC
Even though i enjoy the controlled "safety" of the current situation, i don't mind this change. But as other people noted, please don't make it too easy for the invaders to catch everything. IMO only the appropriately prepared hunting fleet should be able to take advantage of this change.

a couple of thoughts of how it would work nicely:
-A timer after the wh spawn for the K162 to appear
-If a second (maybe third?) ship initiates warp to the WH (not jump) make the K162 sig immediately visible

With the second measure the hunters would have to make their tackling/scouting ships "matter" and be appropriately prepared to grab and hold until their fleet arrives, instead of just providing a warp-in with plenty of time for the whole fleet to jump through.

If i repeated someone else's idea my apologies, i didn't go through all 38 pages. Just my 0.02$

-Gio