These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Distance that you're being ejected out of a wormhole depends on mass

First post First post First post
Author
Mcpate
Unknown Means Unknown Consequenses
#61 - 2014-08-03 16:33:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Mcpate
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Good afternoon everyone.

We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time.
The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).

We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.

Hope you all have a great weekend.


Mcpate wrote:
If you ask me, it's time for CCP to go back to working on Walking-In-Stations full time, every developer, everybody that can hold a pencil or click a mouse button! Every cotton-picking one of them.

I never did give anybody hell. I just told the truth and they thought it was hell. Harry S. Truman

Finarfin
Cerulean Void
#62 - 2014-08-03 16:33:04 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Good afternoon everyone.

We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time.
The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).

We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.

Hope you all have a great weekend.



Thanks and ignore the raging basement trolls in here. I belong to one of these small groups which would supposedly be driven out of WH space within days of this change and I am not thinking about canceling my sccounts. I don't think the current iteration is the best idea but any change to freshen up WH space is welcome. To be honest, I live in a WH with a 3bn static and always found it a bit strange how easy it is to roll it by myself with 2 Orcas and a scout.

Looking forward to the dev blog.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#63 - 2014-08-03 16:33:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Altrue
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Good afternoon everyone.

We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time.
The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).

We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.

Hope you all have a great weekend.


Still sounds bad.

But I kind of like the idea of CCP taking a look at wormholes.

Mizhir wrote:
Would be hilarious if the same things happened to everything that jumps to a cyno. Nullsec would burn when their precious supers suddenly lands over 50km away from the cyno.


On the other hand, this... :o

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Chesterfield Fancypantz
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#64 - 2014-08-03 16:34:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Chesterfield Fancypantz
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Good afternoon everyone.

We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time.
The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).

We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.

Hope you all have a great weekend.


Ill just quote you fozzie to give you my input.

My corporation is relatively new to WH space, and I think I can offer a viewpoint of a reasonably experienced PVP corporation making the move to WH space.

Its already ******* hard. You need to have good numbers, good skillpoints, and a good combined shipclasses to even start to make a dent in WH space. You need to have decent numbers online to accomplish anything, and even then it is risky as hell.

I love this part about WH space, and the only thing that even comes close to making it manageable is the ability for me to quickly and easily close holes. Either rolling for new PvE, closing hostile holes, or rolling for kspace connections.

With lower numbers, making my dread spawn up to 40km away from the wormhole means that I now have a very expensive asset that I am unable to protect. You are basically making it so my time to roll a hole is 10x as long, where someone like hard knocks who has numbers is able to endlessly roll with impunity because of their access to numbers. I need to use battleships and hics to close, when they can just roll with dreads knowing the can support it if it gets tackled. Others have commented on fleet stuff so I wont bother. This also eliminates one of the few defensive actions I can make by bubbling the opposite side of the hole. I cant even do the 150km jump out if I bubble as well.

Not only is this a bad design idea in the first place, but it HEAVILY favors established and numerous corporations. Its basically making it impossible for smaller corps/alliances from putting their foot in the door in wormhole space which is exactly the opposite direction you should be making. We need MORE bodies and groups into WH space, not more super large groups.

This is absolute madness, and I think when all of WH space is absolutely 100% against it.. you need to re-evaluate the decision to change it.

Chester
Necharo Rackham
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#65 - 2014-08-03 16:35:01 UTC
Kynric wrote:

The current spawning at zero is a significant disadvantage to nano fleets, sniper fleets, Frig fleets and such. It would be more fun to see more of those than the current universal-t3-meta. As I said perhaps it needs to be inverted with smaller spawning further or a fixed distance for all or maybe even make spawn distance proportional to remaining wormhole mass. But the mere idea of the change doesn't sound like the end of the world.


Sniper attacking fleets would still be at a disadvantage. You still only have limited mass - so everything on the other side will just stay in a single ball within rep range of each other and you won't be able to kill anything.
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#66 - 2014-08-03 16:35:28 UTC
I'll hold further judgement until I see the actual plans, and the full list of other proposed changes. I hope we'll be listened to at that point if we disagree with some or all of them.
Axloth Okiah
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#67 - 2014-08-03 16:38:00 UTC
I'm gonna play a bit of a devil's advocate here. I kinda like the purpose of the whole thing, but the implementation could use "some tweaking":
- I totally approve of trying to make rolling more risky. It should not be as easy and as risk free as it is now to sever connections to someone who might threaten you.

BUT any change trying to fix that should not screw up existing "healthy" activities, such as rolling for content or pvp, so:

- Quite apparently, the distance is waaay too extreme. To a degree that rolling holes would need rewarping caps on the other side, which even with webs would take quite some time.
- WH pvp is distinct by its close range WH brawling and the distinctivness should remain. This 40km scattering would just make everyone fly kitey ishtars. Depending on distances for subs, this would seriously upset hole control as so that catching scouts would be impossible. Jumping brawling fleet into a brawling fleet on the other side would be suicide. But also without bubbles, it would be hard to prevent much of the fleet to simply jump in and warp/burn off. The fights would become much more like fighting on kspace gates, which is imho bad.

I could see it however tuned down. I think sub-BS hull should be barely affected, if at all. They should all spawn pretty much as they do now with about the same risk of being so close they cant cloak and so far they cannot jump, I think thats a good balance. BS and caps could spawn farther out so they wouldnt be able to jump right back, but it should be a "slowboatable" distance... like 10km at most? Its kinda hard to think of a way to make rolling riskier but not more time consuming...

Or do it the other way around and increase the deviation on a warpin to the hole. So more massive ships would land farther away from their target when theres a WH on grid?

So basically it is a bad step in the right direction.
Neu Bastian
Duty.
Stay Feral
#68 - 2014-08-03 16:38:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Neu Bastian
I could maybe be convinced that spawning a cap between 8k and 6k from a hole would be a good idea (would prevent them from immediately jumping back, but keeps them within what could already happen). Any further than that is just ridiculous and would make it far more difficult to use caps in w-space than it already is.
Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#69 - 2014-08-03 16:41:50 UTC
Traiori wrote:
Kynric wrote:
Instead of rolling with caps try nano - phoons or panthers or cloak-tricking a battleship or preparing advance and making some pings to cloak trick a warp to and then cloak trick a warp back down. I regularly roll 3 bil mass holes with only subcaps and it is not a big deal.


3 bil hole needs 5 consecutive round trips with an orca (give or take). That's 10-20 minutes longer than it takes at the minute with capitals. It's fine if you have the pilots to bring tons of battleships. If you don't, then you're going to have problems. Nano-phoons would require even more jumps (15 round trips). I'm fairly sure it would take at least 30 minutes to collapse using 3 pilots.


A battleship with prop mod on is 150 mil or so (ignoring nestor which is lighter and blops which are heavier. ) That's 300 a round trip so 10 round trips plus however you deal with the variation. So 5 pilots and it's done inside of 5 minutes which is not exactly a tragedy. 10 man gangs can go a bit faster and 3 man gangs would need a few extra minutes both of which are still not a tragedy. Oh the horror of needing a dozen pilots to rage roll (do people honestly rage roll with a gang smaller than that?)
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#70 - 2014-08-03 16:48:36 UTC
People roll with a gang larger than that, except they're in the correct ships for the fight they're looking for instead of all being in rolling battleships. Having to wait for half your fleet to go back to their poses and change ships is going to lead to losing fights.
Dorijan
W-Space IT Department
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#71 - 2014-08-03 16:48:58 UTC
Beffah wrote:
(I checked, I didn't see it, so don't crucify me if I'm wrong on this, but...)

It would be nice if the Features and Ideas subforum was used for... you know, new features and ideas. You'd think that feedback before the work into putting these changes onto Sisi would make some sense.


You've been playing this game for how long and still expect logic and reason from CCP? ;-)
HerrBert
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#72 - 2014-08-03 16:52:51 UTC
Well you know whats silly? People complain about "logic" and ccp...

Meanwhile on reddit?

What are you thinking with this change? 38 Points (74 % liked this)


Guys you are sending mixed signals

Community-Challenge: Make Jack Miton sing a Duett with me. http://www.youtube.com/user/HerrBertism Jibbychiggawooooow - CSM 9 Corbexx

Traiori
Going Critical
#73 - 2014-08-03 16:53:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Traiori
Kynric wrote:
Oh the horror of needing a dozen pilots to rage roll (do people honestly rage roll with a gang smaller than that?)


I wouldn't say rage roll so much as refreshing the chain to find new content. I've rolled chains with only a couple of people online to find gas sites to harvest, or nice null/shopping links to use whilst there's no one online to do gang PvP/sites.

I wouldn't really want to roll six or seven holes in a row to find an appropriate chain for it if it took me 20 minutes, rather than 2 minutes, every time. It would mean that I AFK if there was anything less than half a dozen people online to roll the hole, which means that you're less likely to find me running C1-3s in my Tengu, or hunting nullsec denizens or doing any of those things that we all do when there aren't that many people around that opens me up to you killing me.
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#74 - 2014-08-03 16:55:13 UTC
Not a fan of this plan. I remember it coming up at Fanfest and there was a lot of interest in shaking things up a little, but I don't remember *anyone* liking the idea of things appearing further from the hole the heavier they are...
Kynric
Sky Fighters
Rote Kapelle
#75 - 2014-08-03 16:56:28 UTC
Erasmus Phoenix wrote:
People roll with a gang larger than that, except they're in the correct ships for the fight they're looking for instead of all being in rolling battleships. Having to wait for half your fleet to go back to their poses and change ships is going to lead to losing fights.


Lots of obvious solutions:
Use alts for the battleships or have the proper ships in a carrier and just leave the battleships floating in your hole (ghost riding for wormholers), or make a battleship doctrine or send some interdictors in to hold them down while you re-ship. Once again its not the end of your playstyle.
Lord Blacksmith
Midnight Conclave
#76 - 2014-08-03 16:57:06 UTC
One of the reasons this absolutely kills smaller groups is that (for those anywhere else than a C2) you only have one static.

If you can't roll your hole for content, rolling into a large group is the kiss of death for your entire corporation for a 24hr period or whenever the larger group decides it doesn't want to be able to camp you in with a single scout. (From personal experience, there are lots of folks that will do this all day until you go suicide enough isk to them that maybe they decide to be nice and roll your static for you).

This sort of meta is what stops smaller groups from either coming to w-space at all, or coming for a brief time and leaving in disgust before they have the time to get established, grow, and join the community. This specific change makes this meta much stronger, which is one reason I firmly believe that it's going to be a net negative for the health of w-space, regardless of whether it generates more ~content~ for large groups that have already become established.


Additionally, all of the discourse so far has revolved around PVP. I know that most of you aren't in corp leadership currently or haven't been in the past, but there's an awful lot of logistics that happens to keep your towers fueled and ships available for purchase, loot hauled out, etc. This change, as it currently stands, means that no one in their right mind would take a freighter or JF into w-space. As an example, we currently do things like "put enough mass on the hole that two JF passes will close it", bring the JF in, if it gets tackled, it instantly jumps out and back to the exit cyno. This is BASIC precautions for throwing around 6bil + contents in wormhole space... it's a giant pain in the ass to do things this way as is, but it's nice to not subject corp members to a fleet where everyone gets in iterons and ferries things up and down a decently-sized chain. For multiple hours.


tl;dr making rolling harder makes it easier to camp small groups, who will get bored and leave w-space. also makes large-scale logistics even more suicidal and subjects members to hauling fleets on a regular basis, which makes members get bored and leave w-space.

- Corbexx, I hope this is reasonable discussion enough for you. I tried hard not to rage.
- CCP Fozzie, please stop just randomly letting us find stuff on Sisi when you're changing w-space mechanics in major ways. The fact that all the CSM folks seemed to be just as surprised as we were is a incredibly large red-flag for players and says terrible things for the state of the relationship between the game designers and the CSM.


Simsung Padecain
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2014-08-03 16:58:00 UTC
Kynric wrote:
]battleship doctrine

we're talking wormholes Kynric
MD74
The New Eden Yacht Club
The New Eden Yacht Club.
#78 - 2014-08-03 16:58:40 UTC  |  Edited by: MD74
So, if you get jumped further away from the wh depending on shipclass, does this also mean that bigger ships can jump a wh from a bigger distance? Would make sense, wouldnt it.

Anyway, stop messing around, and fix our POS'es!
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#79 - 2014-08-03 16:58:53 UTC
Not everyone has alts or is happy to multibox. Saying "Just give CCP more money because they broke the game" isn't a helpful perspective.

HerrBert wrote:


Meanwhile on reddit?

What are you thinking with this change? 38 Points (74 % liked this)


Guys you are sending mixed signals


I don't really understand what you're trying to say here...
Lord Blacksmith
Midnight Conclave
#80 - 2014-08-03 16:59:39 UTC
Kynric wrote:

A battleship with prop mod on is 150 mil or so (ignoring nestor which is lighter and blops which are heavier. ) That's 300 a round trip so 10 round trips plus however you deal with the variation. So 5 pilots and it's done inside of 5 minutes which is not exactly a tragedy. 10 man gangs can go a bit faster and 3 man gangs would need a few extra minutes both of which are still not a tragedy. Oh the horror of needing a dozen pilots to rage roll (do people honestly rage roll with a gang smaller than that?)



Lots of people rageroll with gangs smaller than a dozen pilots. Actually, a good chunk of corps in low-class w-space would be ecstatic if they had a dozen pilots in fleet for an op scheduled weeks in advance. Not everyone is your size, far from it.