These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Neckbeard Nolyfe
Zero Fun Allowed
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#81 - 2014-08-03 16:59:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Neckbeard Nolyfe
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.


STOP DESTROYING EVE JESUS CHRIST

~lvl 60 paladin~

Chesterfield Fancypantz
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#82 - 2014-08-03 17:01:13 UTC
Lord Blacksmith wrote:
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.




Completely agree, the most important thing about the capital rolling is about speed!

If I roll into hard knocks or someone else and I dont want to fight or get locked down (for smaller corps etc), then I can quickly defensive bubble, throw 3 battleships, and a dread through and blap its closed.

This change obliterates that and I need to slowboat 10+ battleships through and then hic it?

Come on.
Xtrah
Outer Heaven Logistics
NoHo Citizen
#83 - 2014-08-03 17:02:45 UTC
Figured I'd take a look, as this is a serious dealbreaker on one of our main PVP activities in wormhole space - ragerolling.

Video of Archon, Thanatos and Nidhoggur jumping through a wormhole on sisi
Hatshepsut IV
Un.Reasonable
#84 - 2014-08-03 17:09:22 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...


Does that list of changes include making the Nestor the only ship to spawn in jump range now?

Yes I know its a comical statement that but sums up about how seriously I think this idea has been thought through and presented to its constituent community.

Public Channel | Un.Welcome

Alundil
Rolled Out
#85 - 2014-08-03 17:10:37 UTC
HerrBert wrote:
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

The upvotes are not always likes. It's not Facebook. If a post on reddit doesn't get upvoted it doesn't get seen. It's the way it works.

I'm right behind you

Apollo Eros
Percussive Diplomacy
No Forks Given
#86 - 2014-08-03 17:11:25 UTC
My Dear CCP,
Please keep up the good work!

See guys what is great about this new patch process is that it can kind of bring you back to the beginning of Wormholes? When CCP was all. "Hello internet space people here is this space. Go figure it out."

Being a predominant leader for the wormhole community. I would like to be on the forefront of this and express the communities gratitude of what you have been doing.


Further more I would like to take this step in letting you know. Hey I do not need a dev-blog or anything regarding changes to WH space. It would be much better if we just discover the changes to an dangerous and unstable environment on our own.

As the great Kirk use to say. "Toooooo INFINITY ANDDD BEYONDD!!!!"

[Triple OG LVL 5 Space Wizard]

Susitna
Negative Density
#87 - 2014-08-03 17:12:57 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.


A random spawning distance really looks like a very bad mechanic for any type of gate. Who would ever jump into an evenly matched fight when the jumping fleet will be all spread out? It would also probably kill any short range type of fit. Totally changes HIC mechanics too? Why for Worm Holes only? If you think it is good for worm holes - why not for all null gates or cynos?

Not sure what your intent is here. However, it certainly appears like you do not want players living in worm holes. I have heard you really want WH to be group exploration encounters. If that is the case, just fix it and do not allow POS in Worm holes and remove intra worm connections.

I hope you really listen to the feedback you get. This is a bad change please do not do it.

Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#88 - 2014-08-03 17:15:16 UTC
How much does this really effect ragerolling?

You keep a cloaked scout at a tac with a couple rapiers and bounce the caps. The effort is increased, no doubt, but I don't think the time is significantly increased compared to the current use. It does change how you collapse in the face of hostiles, how you commit, and basically everything else around how engagements happen in wormholes.

I guess I'm pretty interested in the devblog, but I don't think people should jump out the window just yet.
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#89 - 2014-08-03 17:15:20 UTC
don't even joke about removing poses, they'll probably do it.
WoAz
Criterion.
Pandemic Legion
#90 - 2014-08-03 17:16:09 UTC
A change of this type would be incredibly prohibitive to fights in wormholes. Rage-rolling c5/c6 statics becomes a time-intensive affair and handicaps fights that do happen. Dreads can't refit off their carriers that are 30km away, and all mobile depots will be quickly blapped before they online.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#91 - 2014-08-03 17:17:28 UTC
you could get CCP to delete 2/3 of wormhole systems if you want more fights?
and shouldn't there be an announcement about this on F&I, rather than just player discussion in this little irrelevant subforum I've never heard of?
Jess Tanner
Bangworks Systems Inc.
#92 - 2014-08-03 17:20:01 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.


RIP WH's cap fights, jumping into someone's home system, WH Freighter Logistics, WH Orca Logistics and the corps that rely on people being able to find something to do without spending half an hour to roll one c5 black hole...
Moo Moocow
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#93 - 2014-08-03 17:20:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Moo Moocow
I like the idea of CCP getting around to looking at Wormholes, Its been far too long.

IMO you should be enhancing gameplay (or even income in lower class wh's if you have to.)

Something that will encourage more people to try wormholes and hopefully move into them full time.

This won't create content and is a pretty useless idea.

I'm looking forward to seeing this Dev blog though.

(people finding out on sisi isn't the way to go btw, I thought that would have been obvious by now)


btw how is the pos revamp coming :P
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox
#94 - 2014-08-03 17:20:48 UTC
This might make kiting viable in wspace. Whereas now you're forced to spawn within web/scram range and thus heavy armor fleets are favored, this might make faster nanoshield kiting setups more viable. I do agree that it will make it harder for smaller corps not interested in a fight to roll the hole, but give even the bears credit: they're still wormholers and can be clever adapters. As long as the profit incentive is still there, the farmers will find ways. All this really means for people on the hunt is that dictors and inties/Keres/Arazu will become more valuable for catching ships at longer ranges (30km bubble and extended longpoint range). We might even see a use for blops (FINALLY Twisted) in that they can cloak after spawning 40km away and MWD+cloak back.

I'm pretty indifferent to these changes. They're kinda scary, but I came to wormhole space to be paranoid and scared Lol We'll see how it goes?

I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.

Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#95 - 2014-08-03 17:22:06 UTC
Moo Moocow wrote:
I like the idea of CCP getting around to looking at Wormholes, Its been far too long.

IMO you should be enhancing gameplay (or even income in lower class wh's if you have to.)


hopefully they get around to removing capital escalations
Tritanium Amaranth
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#96 - 2014-08-03 17:22:14 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.



When you change things for ANY OTHER REGION OF SPACE, you post devblogs first, iterate on design, talk to CSM, and then implement a final design that's generally pretty good. THIS PROCESS WORKS. When you do anything at all to wormhole space, it seems to be okay to ninja change it on Sisi, and then only release a devblog at all if someone notices and calls you on it.

You don't want people to think that someone is out to get them? Really?

Un-screw your PR and you'll get a lot less rage, unless CCP already fired all the people who helped you not screw that up.


If you're not getting the point, how about this: I prefer not to be woken up in the morning on a Sunday by people who called me on the telephone, having seen this, asking if CCP is killing wormholes and it's still okay to live there, and would I please ask around on their behalf. There's lots of people who would rather be enjoying their weekend today who are now talking about / discussing / reacting to this instead: it's a big deal and pretty much the definition of a PR disaster.

Lemonades
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#97 - 2014-08-03 17:23:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Lemonades
Rest in peace W-Space
10/03/2009 - 08/03/2014

This has serious repercussions, meaning no more rolling, way less pvp (content) to be had.
Erasmus Phoenix
Avalanche.
#98 - 2014-08-03 17:24:43 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Moo Moocow wrote:
I like the idea of CCP getting around to looking at Wormholes, Its been far too long.

IMO you should be enhancing gameplay (or even income in lower class wh's if you have to.)


hopefully they get around to removing capital escalations


Sure. and make cynos work in wormholes. and make it so you can have titans there. And add gates and stations!
Freya Myst
Negative Density
#99 - 2014-08-03 17:26:58 UTC
My suggestion would be to INCREASE the statics to each WH system or DYNAMICS maybe give all 2 statics or 1 static and 2 dynamics.. but that would change the fact that we cant find pvp.. alot of people would agree that increasing static's would give any pvp corp an easier way to find others for a fight.. whether or not u change this 40km wh jump issue is up to you but alot of people will either quit or leave wh space due to major changes.. first we dont allow super caps into wh space.. thats one restriction.. now u want to make us move 40km away from the wh in caps?? wheres the nerf in Null sec??? at least do sumthing that is WORTH changing.. (would be decent if u only did this to battleship class and below and remove caps from this change.. i do not agree with the change and hope u guys realize the drastic hit wh'ers will have if this comes into fruition..
Sari Jasra
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#100 - 2014-08-03 17:27:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Sari Jasra
Where were you when wormholes was kill?