Wormholes

I rather have devs developing and improving the game than responding to forums. I am rather content with the increase in dev appearances on the WH subforum lately. Don't get me wrong, getting updates and responses from CCP devs would be nice, but think we have to understand it's not their primary job.

On another note:
In the dev blog there was a graph on the relative activity per wormhole effect type. I was missing the 'no effect' whs. I am not sure whether I am reading the graph correctly: were no effect systems used as the control (normalized to 0%), or were no effect WHs forgotten?

While I agree that it's best that they develop, simply posting a "we're working on this" doesn't take much time.

Yeah it is possible to circument the nerf to cataclysmic by fitting 3 remote cap transmitters to basiliks and Guardian alike or in addition bring some Battery Osprey/Augoror (solely purpose to relay cap via large remote cap transmitter) with into the battle or sites or something similiar ...
but this doesn´t by no means change the fact that you have to either bring more ships to get the same out of them like before (Battery Osprey/Augoror) or to cripple the capapbilities of your Logistic ships in every other given enviroment – what is gonna put you at an great disadvantage whenever you are forced to pursue the enemy through a wormhole ...
But what you didn´t address was any form of Capital Ship use within a CV-hole.
It is safe to assume this will kill most uses of capitals within PVP -
in K-Space going into siege is already a do or die – but within a cataclysmic, where your self repair amount is greatly reduced and would force you to run an additional rep module just to get on same level or repair amount you would have had in k-space which is gonna require a flat 100% increase in used capacitor by this additional module the increased 33% cap recarge rate isn´t gonna change much since those setups aren´t even stable on a long shot. And here i didn´t even lay out the fact that an additional rep module requires a slot which now can´t be used to boost your resistances therefore hindering the effective rep further ...
But nonetheless let´s assume you would field a Dread and despite the odds this dread might survive a siege cycle under the heavy neut pressure normally used on dreads – he would need to end siege to be repped and recharged with cap – a now near impossible task since the remote cap amount is nerfed by up to 50% - not that it already took ages, compared to the fact how valuable time is in close engagments, to replenish this under normal circumstances, it now takes even longer.
And is practically impossible to do with sub capital modules ... what means it is required to field a carrier to do this job – a ship that is now practically the most useless ship, aside from escalating a site in high class , you could have inside a CV – hmm well aside from perhaps deal some damage it still has a great buffer and potentially decent dps ...
but let´s be honest that´s not the role those ships are meant to take -
they are ships meant to support the fleet, reapir them, recharge them and to keep them alive ...
a role this class might no longer be able to fulfill – the nerf to remote rep amount practically kills any pantheon setup, and the already existing nerf to local rep isn´t exactly helping to triage ... (most triage setups require 2 reps to be fitted to give you a chance to survice a cycle ... in CV you would need 4 to get the job done .... reducing the mods to fit resistance cap mods and the like ...)

It´s probably safe to assume that CV is gonna be an anti-capital environment and since my corp choose to live in one to make use of the home advantage carriers offered so far in defending your home, your assets – (then contrary to common believe Pantheon Carrier in CV can be brought down – but not with neut ... but there are other forms of e-war that can be utilized ...)
we will most likely vacate our CV home because this change is gonna inconvenience us far too much by offering little to no benefits ... we will need more Logistic ships, therefore pilots in PVE and PVP reducing our number of Pilots within other kinds of ships ... by offering us nothing in return ...
the fact this assesment is coming from us, a group of people who thought this is the best variable by a long shot, should be considered a substantial argument.
So you shouldn´t be suprised to find your future activity numbers of CV to be far behind the numbers of Black Holes of today.

And to emphassize my argument – if the CV variable would be considered to strong or even imbalanced by the players shouldn´t your graphs show an inverse activity behaviour, with CV being number 1 ? - i mean i´ve never played a game where people were this fast to figure out things that are gonna put them ahead. It´s a fact that CV is second last, so you would have needed to make it more attractive not the opposite of that.

If you feel that new CV effects is a huge nerf to basilisk/guardian for support, compare it to no effects. Diffrence is that in no effect you usualy go with 4-5 reppers and 1-2 cap transfers, but in CV you need 2-3 reppers and 2-4 cap transfer for the SAME effect.
So you either fly with 2 reppers + 4 cap transfers or 3/3 with eh same number of logi ships as no effect, with higher local cap regen 3/3 could be enought to run everything as no effect but with 6 effective reppers per ship in C6

Aaaaand that's the final nail in the coffin. We've just about completed vacating our C5 CV anyway, might as well finish the job.

Peak dps in a c5 site non escalated floats between 1586 (for the random trigger site so is actually a bit higher), 1920 at the least for the known triggers, and a max of 3214 for the hardest site. For cap esc 1st wave is 4164 and 2nd wave is 5552. It is NOT possible to fit that much solo reps to ships without blinging them out and even then it would require some pretty skill intensive/expensive hulls. Those fits would generally cost just as much as properly fitted carriers/dreads if not more. So your idea has merits in the lower class sites but in the upper it's simply not realistic/feasible to not use logi.

@CCP Fozzie
The fitting gurus have ALREADY weighed in and told you that it isn't possible to make the sub cap logi work unless you introduce a 3rd logi and even then you must run a (3 logi 3/3 setup) or (2 logi running 4/2 and 1 cap logi) to get the same benefits as current and that is WITH lv5 logi. A lv4 logi will have to devote both mids to cap recharge removing the ability to fit eccm or AB running a (3 logi 3/3 setup) or (2 logi running 4/2 and 1 cap logi). A lv3 logi wont be able to hack it no matter what you do (currently they can if the pilot staggers his modules with a setup designed just for them being lv3). Why are you not listening to what we are telling you? Maybe I should have gotten Loginus Spear on DTP to ask you that instead of the stations thing (which you completely ignored and started talking about starbases and deployables instead of stations). I'm beginning to think that that is the issue, you hear what you want from us not what we are actually saying.

Don't forget Fozzie was/is quite the fitting guru himself. I keep seeing these "you're not listening to us!" posts crop up, but that's simply not the case. A lot of people are passionately arguing against the End of Times changes yet are operating with obviously false perceptions of how things work now.

Example: worries that sleeper neuting will be game breaking in the new pulsar when wormhole effects have never applied to sleepers. What's he supposed to do, correct every single misinformed post? In a lot of cases, I bet he's tested viable set ups and just because the general player base hasn't figured out what's viable doesn't make these bad changes.

Anyway, I'm confused about your concern on the CV holes now. If you're worried about local tank on caps, that debuff is the same as it has been. What do you need the subcap ETs for, PVE or PVP? Try creating a doctrine that uses the cap regeneration bonus to make each ship cap independent.

Also, never tried it, but I'm sure shield tanked caps can still run CV escalations.

I can agree that the CV changes aren't as exciting as the BH changes such that I expect people to move into them, but they haven't been straight up nerfed like some seem to think.

The huge cap pools and overall increased cap regeneration creates a lot of really interesting dynamics. Most things that rely on an ET based set up in literally any other part of space can be fit in ways that see themselves freed of that shackle.

I think it's very interesting, just like black holes, but I'm still not planning to live in either one of them unless I have some kind of epiphany of how it can be more fun than a Pulsar, WR, Magnetar, etc.

If you had reason to live in one before, I don't see why you think you have to move out now though.

On the ET thing again, there are setups, both capital and subcapital that don't need ETs at all anymore thanks to these adjustments. That actually frees up the high slots and makes excellent use of the rep bonuses. I don't think people are realizing this.

The bigger cap pool provides a degree of resistance naturally, plus the extra regeneration for every ship. There are both tactics and fits that can combat neuting without ETs and you can still fit optional ETs for a degree of neut protection if you think it's worth it.

Examples: fully passive HAM Tengus with scimis skirting around the edges to avoid neuts. Or, just triage face tanking limited neuts with the massive cap pool and even higher than normal regen.

There are options, and they aren't bad ones.