Wormholes

^^ You will get some people using it to protect their precious +5s but for most people who are for this idea it will be about using their higher end clones at the appropriate place and time and can you really call someone who at some point is going to stick 2-3bn worth of implants and the appropriate ship (pimp bhaal, moros, etc.) on the line and in harms way risk averse?

(funnily enough this thing about people being risk averse often comes from people who sure might be prolific PVPers but fly around in blank clones and 20-30m ISK max ships and probably won't put that amount of ISK on the line in their entire time spent in eve).

Subsystem swapping was a programming issue with in-space fitting code/SMAs and had nothing to do with wormhole game design itself. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=292816

The main beef I have with clone swapping is that all these little things detoriate the uniqueness of wormhole space. Take corp bookmarks as an example- did they improve QOL in w-space? Certainly, no question. However, at the same time they completely changed another aspect, removing a chunk of the original risk of wormholes by reducing the risk of getting trapped. They also changed a tactical dimension, earlier it was possible to deny the enemy from getting a wormhole bookmark by killing their scout before he delivered it to others. This did play a role in many WH sieges I participated in.

Minor things? Well yes, game still rolls on, and clone swapping is arguably not as significant change on the grand scale of things. However, these little details all add up, each taking w-space closer to k-space, which I simply don't like on a subjective level. I'd personally prefer taking things to the opposite direction.

Furthermore, one thing that makes EVE unique are choices and consequences. Plugging in implants gives you concrete advantages, which are balanced by drawbacks. One is them getting destroyed on unplugging, another is that their benefits are very specialized. In essence you commit to something to reap the benefits. Clone swapping circumvents these drawbacks, leaving only the benefits, and makes EVE "softer".

Can't really agree with this bit as:

-Any implementation that allowed clone swapping in w-space should have the same cool down period at a minimum as k-space.

-Unlike k-space any clones you had available to you wouldn't be safe in an indestructible station when you'd swapped to another clone.

Which personally I think the 2nd point if properly done satisfies any possible imbalance that could make w-space too much like k-space.



I think part of the problem is you get 2 very different play styles in this game (and variations of) and a lot of people are happy to fly around in a basic clone and don't really fully understand where some of us are coming from.

this is the only part you got right.
people need to stop making WH space less challenging.
turning wspace into kspace with WHs rather than gates is something I will always, ALWAYS, oppose. as should anyone else who loves wspace.
we should not be able to do all the things you can in kspace.
it should be harder to live in wspace.
making things easier is NOT making them better.

PS: I guarantee that most veteran WH dwellers live and breathe in clones worth far more than 100mil.

Notice that I didn't mention wormholes in that chapter. Yes, I'd like to see clone swapping go in k-space too.



What are the "two very different playstyles" in regards to implants? I don't think nobody misunderstands these clone swapping dreamers, they want to make their lifes less risky and more comfortable, and bring k-space features to wormholes. How you dress that dream is irrelevant.

I can understand this stance on the topic o7.

Had a feeling that was the case but this is a thread about the implications in w-space.



The fact that you jump immediatly to less risky and more comfortable shows you belong to one of those 2 schools of thought (not saying this in a negative way) and don't understand the other for what it is (this is often the case) - also I was talking in regards to wider play style with implants being a factor of that rather than in regards to different approaches to implants specifically.

I can't really agree with your perspective given that there are entirely different setups of implants and completely different ship setups and scenarios that you can and often have to swap between - if there were groups of implants that had application to both but with different balances where you had to choose your level of compromise I might be more inclined to agree.

As like Rek's post above I don't think we should be afraid of iteration to w-space - we should be concerned that it fits the theme however - anything that does make it from k-space to w-space should involve a level of risk and never be entirely out of harms way.

I should risk to lose the clone in the situation I can asses hence when I decide to fly the clone. It's a bit unfair that you want to project risk management outside my control. For that matter I won't fly a very expensive clone in situations that the risk of losing it isn't manageable (not to say that the benefits of the implants may be non-existent in some situation). That does impact the ways I can participate. And if you want to call me risk averse see my above post with statistics, you can easily verify, that proves that most people judge risk VS reward same way I do. In fact, sorry if I'm wrong, it seems like you are advocating , even if indirectly, that everyone should use implants in a very basic way.
I'm a bit underwhelmed that we are willing to call a challenge the difficulty of clone switching .

Dunno about mandatory but depending on what your flying i.e. bhaal, vindi, dreads, carriers, etc. people like to have cap and armor implants including i.e. slaves, I know some even have ogdin's eye and 6% rate of fire implants for dreads. Then you've got faction mindlinks on leadership trained characters, etc. and so on.