These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Kronos] More lowsec K-K wormholes

First post First post
Author
Blodhgarm Dethahal
Moist Towelettes.
#21 - 2014-05-13 18:07:24 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
FOOLS! Are ye that blind?!?

CCP: We need to nerf force projection.
CSM (aka Goonsquad): Eeeeeeeeeeek! I mean, okay...
Goonsquad + Goonleaderwaffles: *whisper*whisper*
CSM (aka Goonsquad): We need more wormholes in low-sec.


tl;dr- More wormholes == an end run around the Force Projection Nerf!


/taking away the tinfoil doesn't make it any less true


WTS Tinfoil caps, 50 mill.
Eshnala
TURN LEFT
HYDRA RELOADED
#22 - 2014-05-13 18:07:56 UTC
Great change, one of the best things you guys did to small gang pvp in a long time!

(and everyone who is worried about force projection: those WHs wont have enough mass to transport a big fleet through it, especialy not if they are BCs or bigger.)
Querns
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#23 - 2014-05-13 18:08:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Querns
Gabriel Luis wrote:
EDIT: For someone who has lived in lowsec for ~2 years, I think that would be an awesome improvement.

Querns wrote:
Regarding the "small fleet" angle of these holes, is it possible to mass-limit these types of holes so that they are primarily used for pvp, instead of as logistics shortcuts for freighters?


How do you pretend to shortcut freighters within low > low connections? Or are you talking about null > low?

Primarily, but low -> low connections can be useful for logistics as well. Think, like, a connection from Hothomou (southeast) to Pakkonen (4j from Jita.)

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

Dirk MacGirk
STK Scientific
The Initiative.
#24 - 2014-05-13 18:10:42 UTC
Klarion Sythis wrote:
Dirk MacGirk wrote:
Interesting. What is low --> null and low --> low % now?

That was stated in the post.

9% and 20% chance per lowsec system (approximately) respectively from what I interpreted.


That's is the proposed level, is it not?
Pliskkenn
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#25 - 2014-05-13 18:10:45 UTC
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
FOOLS! Are ye that blind?!?

CCP: We need to nerf force projection.
CSM (aka Goonsquad): Eeeeeeeeeeek! I mean, okay...
Goonsquad + Goonleaderwaffles: *whisper*whisper*
CSM (aka Goonsquad): We need more wormholes in low-sec.


tl;dr- More wormholes == an end run around the Force Projection Nerf!


/taking away the tinfoil doesn't make it any less true


WTS Tinfoil caps, 50 mill.


Selling Tinfoil Hats 49,999,999.99 Mill.

Also, I for one love the idea.
Blodhgarm Dethahal
Moist Towelettes.
#26 - 2014-05-13 18:11:43 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

After some further discussion, internally and with the CSM, we decided it seemed like a good idea to increase the number of k-k (ie within known space - to high, low and null) wormholes in lowsec, aimed primarily at adding opportunities for small roaming fleets.

Small roaming fleets of super-cap ships? Were there also any talks about fiddling with wormhole mass limits? Or maybe new wormhole types (i.e. ones that accept "infinite" mass, but launch your ship/fleet to a random exit point in K space? (Where random isn't the random you're thinking of.)


Supers are a Null Only thing and should stay a Null only thing.

No wormhole currently in existence allows for passage of a Super Capital and those that allow capitals only allow at a max 3 to pass through before it collapses. Oh yeah, and destination is uncontrollable more or less. Have fun with your 'force projection.'
Nimrod vanHall
Van Mij Belastingvrij
#27 - 2014-05-13 18:12:09 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:

After some further discussion, internally and with the CSM, we decided it seemed like a good idea to increase the number of k-k (ie within known space - to high, low and null) wormholes in lowsec, aimed primarily at adding opportunities for small roaming fleets.

Small roaming fleets of super-cap ships? Were there also any talks about fiddling with wormhole mass limits? Or maybe new wormhole types (i.e. ones that accept "infinite" mass, but launch your ship/fleet to a random exit point in K space? (Where random isn't the random you're thinking of.)

super caps dont fit thrue the biggest wormholes (c9)( nulsec to nulsec) carriers, jumpfrieghters dreads and rorquals fit true anything from C5-C5 connections and up
Rann Skir
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2014-05-13 18:14:24 UTC
is this gonna mean even more wormholes to ignore for explorers? or are you going to reduce the other wormhole spawns accordingly?
Nimrod vanHall
Van Mij Belastingvrij
#29 - 2014-05-13 18:15:29 UTC
A suggestion, allow the currently underused Ihub upgrade that increases wormhole possibility to create a "lowsec static" that is a wormhole to lowsec that when it times out or its mass limit causes it to collapse to immediately respawn a new wormhole to a random lowsec system.
stoicfaux
#30 - 2014-05-13 18:17:43 UTC
Pliskkenn wrote:
Blodhgarm Dethahal wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
FOOLS! Are ye that blind?!?

CCP: We need to nerf force projection.
CSM (aka Goonsquad): Eeeeeeeeeeek! I mean, okay...
Goonsquad + Goonleaderwaffles: *whisper*whisper*
CSM (aka Goonsquad): We need more wormholes in low-sec.


tl;dr- More wormholes == an end run around the Force Projection Nerf!


/taking away the tinfoil doesn't make it any less true


WTS Tinfoil caps, 50 mill.


Selling Tinfoil Hats 49,999,999.99 Mill.

Also, I for one love the idea.

I, for one, would probably spend some of my free Aurum on a tin foil cap from the NeX store.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Deerin
East Trading Co Ltd
#31 - 2014-05-13 18:18:02 UTC
+1 That's a very nice idea!! Don't forget to limit the mass though.
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#32 - 2014-05-13 18:20:31 UTC
Enteron Anabente wrote:
What are the current numbers (i.e., how much of an increase is this)? And can you give the numbers for hisec and nullsec, for comparison? I don't think I've ever seen these published before.


Yeah, we generally don't talk about numbers for this sort of thing, I'm already out on a limb with what I've posted :)


WRT people concerned about mass limits, these are just more of the holes that are already there, so they take the same limits as current lowsec holes, and as far as freighters go, we're generally of the opinion that people trying to use lowsec wormholes for freighter logistics is a good thing for lowsec PvP :)
stoicfaux
#33 - 2014-05-13 18:22:55 UTC
Any chance of these wormholes having a means of identifying just how far away they go? E.g. a dark red wormhole's exit would be within ~X lightyear radius, whereas a bright blue/white wormhole would exit, far, far, far away.

I ask because jumping into random wormholes gets a bit tedious.

Or maybe a skill/module that provides some analysis of the wormhole's exit, on the grounds we've had enough experience with wormholes to tease out some of the science behind them?


Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Niart Gunn
Goryn Clade
#34 - 2014-05-13 18:26:58 UTC
I love everyone who was involved in this.

Also, a lot of people don't seem to understand that there's not gonna be new wormholes, all the K-K ones already exist, there's just gonna be more of them. Also you can already see where they lead to if you know your way with the background nebulae.
Bocephus Morgen
The Suicide Kings
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#35 - 2014-05-13 18:27:14 UTC
More null to null holes please!
Sven Viko VIkolander
Allemannsrett
#36 - 2014-05-13 18:33:01 UTC
This will help logistics in deep low sec. I lived in a low sec system many jumps from high sec for about a year and relied entirely on the rare k-k wormholes for logistics. This change will help considerably, because even though the low -> high wormholes are not becoming more common, I often used low -> low wormholes to transport goods if the wormhole led to a low sec system that bordered a HS system. The big increase of low -> null is also nice for exploring deep null areas.

I didn't think a lot of small gangs used k-k wormholes to roam, though. Is that common?

However, I question whether it is true that low sec is well-connected. That just seems false--e.g., half of Aridia is divided by some random high sec systems you have to pass through to get to one part of Aridia LS to another. Those sorts of HS divides are pretty common.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#37 - 2014-05-13 18:34:08 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
What we're proposing is to leave the number of low->high as is at a ~1% chance per system, kicking low->null up to ~9% per system, and low->low up to ~20% per system.

Anyone see any problems with this? :)

Just out of interest, and so I can provide a bit of feedback to this. Could you tell me the current chance of WHs spawning to make it more easy to compare that with the proposed changes?

Thanks.
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#38 - 2014-05-13 18:34:46 UTC
Does this come at the expense of Lowsec --> w-space WH spawn rate?

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.

Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
#39 - 2014-05-13 18:35:20 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Or maybe a skill/module that provides some analysis of the wormhole's exit, on the grounds we've had enough experience with wormholes to tease out some of the science behind them?

Jump probe. Volume 8m³. Launched at targeted Jump Gate or Wormhole from a Expanded Probe Launcher.

Approaches Gate/Hole and activates it. Once on the other side it does a 250km directional scan and registers the system identity. Then it putters back towards the Gate/Hole and jumps back. There it uncloacks and waits for retrieval or until the flight time expires. Once retrieved the scan data can be read out.

If it doesn't come out again, something must have shot it down. Or something else may come through in its stead.

Advantage: You know where you're going.

Disadvantage: Someone knows you're looking and it slows down travelling time.
Medalyn Isis
Doomheim
#40 - 2014-05-13 18:35:30 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Enteron Anabente wrote:
What are the current numbers (i.e., how much of an increase is this)? And can you give the numbers for hisec and nullsec, for comparison? I don't think I've ever seen these published before.


Yeah, we generally don't talk about numbers for this sort of thing, I'm already out on a limb with what I've posted :)


WRT people concerned about mass limits, these are just more of the holes that are already there, so they take the same limits as current lowsec holes, and as far as freighters go, we're generally of the opinion that people trying to use lowsec wormholes for freighter logistics is a good thing for lowsec PvP :)

Ah, ok see you have already replied to my question. Yes will be a little difficult to provide proper feedback then, but in principle I think this sounds good. Perhaps increase the rate to null sec a little higher.