These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev Blog: Long-Distance Travel Changes Inbound

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Prince Kobol
#2921 - 2014-10-02 09:42:01 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Ferrocerium Spark wrote:
Someone probably mentioned this before...

CCP please don't make new jump drive changes nightmare for logistic/industiral operations. EvE is already feels like second job so please don't make it more time consuming when it comes to using jump freighters and rorquals.

because Eve didnt exist before jump freighters and rorquals right?

talk about entitlement issues...


Before JF and Rorquals existed did Eve have thousands of Captial Ships and Interceptors with bubble immunity?
Inquisitor Kitchner
The Executives
#2922 - 2014-10-02 09:42:08 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:


But the blob will still exist.

One of the biggest reason why we have the Capital Blob was because it is only counter we have to the subcap blob.

Of course with these changes there will now be no counter to the subcap blobs.


This is one of those irregular verbs isn't you?

They are dirty blobbers, you are a dirty blobber, I am countering the blob.

The logic (or rather, the lack of) in these sorts of statements always amuses me because it always goes like this:


  1. You guys have more subcapital ships (i.e. more pilots) than we do
  2. When two subcapital fleets fight, the one with the most subcapitals wins
  3. This is N+1 gameplay and therefore bad for the game
  4. We have more capital ships than you
  5. When two capital fleets fight, the side with the most capitals wins
  6. Capital fleets can slaughter subcapital fleets without taking any/much damage
  7. This is good gameplay that rewards experience and skill


The problem is that NCdot and PL etc have their strength due to the fact that capital blobs and mince subcapital blobs (despite the difference in fleet sizes) and that they have more capitals then anyone else.

For some reason, this is NOT seen as N+1 gameplay, this is seen as good gameplay. Whereas when the CFC has more subcapital ships than anyone else, this is N+1 gameplay and therefore bad.

I don't want a game where groups of players can only be successful if they are in a group of players that all have 60mil skillpoints each with multiple accounts so they can use their capital ships.

Yes there are 36,000 players who like being in the CFC. I think you should question why the CFC has 36,000 players willing to side with it and you don't before you start complaining about it.

"If an injury has to be done to a man it should be so severe that his vengeance need not be feared." - Niccolo Machiavelli
Kaely Tanniss
Black Lotus Society.
#2923 - 2014-10-02 09:42:09 UTC
knobber Jobbler wrote:
Valleria Darkmoon wrote:
I'm very much afraid that if these changes go through as presented here the game will stagnate because it will be too slow. .


This. Some people like the larger scale battles, in fact the only times EVE has hit the headlines and brought in more subcribers than CCP's marketing department ever has is the big fights. With these changes, these sorts of battles will likely never happen again. Those with local supercap dominance will always have a trump card and no one will be able to escalate.

It begs the question of why can't CCP see what the real problem here is: Supercaps and not Carriers, Dreads, JF's or anything else with a jump drive.


Agreed. All this will do is insure a corp/alliance can dig into a region, pack in the supercaps, and make it so no other force will be able to effectively fight or attempt to take the system/region. Force projection has been an issues yes, but this is not the solution. I do not fly caps, nor have I ever had any interest to, but I can see both sides of the fence on this one. The bottom line is CCP is going to lose no matter what they chose. Their best bet is to try for a middle ground that compromises to both sides. Limits are a good idea, but based on their preliminary examples of what they want to do...well...try again CCP. I fear Eve will become "moving pretty spaceships around" online. What?

If I had a nickel for every time someone said women don't play eve, I'd have a bag of nickels to whack the next person who said it..
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#2924 - 2014-10-02 09:42:14 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Selexid wrote:


Well if someone is attacking a cap defended system with caps of their own, they might have subcap support and even scouts on the other side....... Gezuz man.


Tell you what.. after this change go and attack Deklein and tell me how it s goes :)

Go and attack Deklein before this change and tell me how it goes :)
Prince Kobol
#2925 - 2014-10-02 09:42:50 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
lmao.. yeah like to see a fleet of capitals jumping into a **** load of bubbled and then getting popped...

Well, considering the fact that we're hopefully going towards a sov system where multiple daily fights are in order, not one huge fight every week like we're seeing now, this scenario's not going to be that big of a problem. If you've got enough force, go through, if not, go back to harassing them some more or see if you can't get down that jammer so you can set things up more to your liking.


lmao

Let me guess, you're one of those who actually either want 4k fights, or you want to be able to hotdrop everyone from across the map whenever there's a chance of getting anything even remotely juicy. Right?


Me or TGR?
Selexid
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#2926 - 2014-10-02 09:43:04 UTC
Forum: You've nerfed rapidly deploying over vast distances to a complete impossibility.

CCP Greyscale: Hopefully, yes.

This is a very good one. In other others stick to your damn turf or plan like a madman if you want to be in someone's else mess.
rezell
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#2927 - 2014-10-02 09:43:39 UTC
Very nice CCP . This will help low sec . No more uber MOM fleets or so many people you have no chance to win . As soon as the patch comes out its time to attack every SC POCO you see . Lets see how many they can rep up nowTwisted
Prince Kobol
#2928 - 2014-10-02 09:43:46 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Selexid wrote:


Well if someone is attacking a cap defended system with caps of their own, they might have subcap support and even scouts on the other side....... Gezuz man.


Tell you what.. after this change go and attack Deklein and tell me how it s goes :)

Go and attack Deklein before this change and tell me how it goes :)


The same, the only difference is right now it that it wont days to get into position were as after it will
Michus Danether
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2929 - 2014-10-02 09:44:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Michus Danether
I love this thread, it is full of so many emotions :D!

A few thoughts, somewhat in order:

1. A purely linear jump fatigue cooldown of 1 per minute seems to be making a lot of people uneasy. Even if in practice people won't be trying to give themselves a massive timer it's still very, very likely to happen among the thousands of EVE players, and then there are the people who will do it on purpose. Either way cap pilots might end up with month long jump fatigue timers.

Why not just change the formula from reducing 1 fatigue/minute to reducing ([[0.1% of totalFatigue] + 1 fatigue]/minute) instead? Just tweak the percentage from 1% to 0.1% as needed to get the jump delay you want for your golden timer of 40 LYs made by jump instead of by gate.

2. This is going to make general logistics a pain in the friggin ass, thanks! :( I will HTFU of course but forgetting the awesome fact that massive capital blobfests will be evaporating with these changes (good thing) it does really nerf the little guy's ability to lug around assets. A Rorq or carrier full of small corp assets will take a very long time to transport stuff. So an already somewhat complex operation is going to get more tedious and complex. I am not saying it's necessarily that bad... but in order to compensate (and since we are making wild changes and slippery changes here!) I might suggest a few other tweaks:

2a. Make more wormholes that can fit 1-3 capitals worth of mass through them, but have these wormholes dedicated to linking up between null-null, null-lowsec and lowsec-lowsec. This will give the little corps a solid advantage in that they can locate these awesome wormholes and move to new areas, get 1 freighter worth of assets through from lowsec(empire) to wherever they live in nullsec... and so on. Large alliances can't use these wormholes for their massive cap ganks since the wormholes collapse after 3~ caps worth of mass. Yay! Solving design goals left and right here!

2b. Increase the ship hanger size for carriers (and maybe super carriers) and perhaps reconfigure a few other design elements here to encourage situations where a single carrier or supercarrier can jump in, and somehow (either by jumpclones to the C/SC, or riding the jump-field-wake or whatever) pod pilots can drag their ships out of the carrier and start fighting. If some part of that process prevents the dozens of subcap pilots from accruing jump fatigue, or has some other similar benefit it might encourage people to do what your design goals want them to do and start spreading out their cap ships to have response-ready fleets in the event of an incursion.

3. Intel is going to get super messy... and this whole jump fatigue system is going to make the aggressor of a territory-claiming war accrue a LOT!!!! of jump fatigue. Can you imagine the nightmare it will be for a large sprawling alliance to try to position their cap fleet within 1 or 2 jump range of an invading fleet? They have to know for certain where that enemy fleet will be attacking. The whole concept of war and territory taking is probably going to grind to a halt until the future SOV changes hinted at in the dev blog.

Going back to 2b... it would be really neat CCP if you could get it working so pod pilots can 'ride along' inside jump-clone capable capital ships, and if they could do so then maybe they don't accrue jump fatigue? That would allow a subcap fleet to move around fairly quickly and repeatedly but in the process risk the actual physical presence of a capital ship to do it... no more titans hiding inside bubbles back in starbase, now the supercarrier would have to land on grid to disgorge its pilot friends Pirate

---

Don't get me wrong, I'm actually largely in favour of these changes. It will definitely and dramatically change the game in a way that I haven't seen since titans first showed up. Change is good just for change sake sometimes, but this has a specific goal and a plan for changing the very nature of warfare in EVE. I actually adore this change, as anything that breaks the massive blobs down into smaller chunks is good for the game and the server hamsters who can run a little slower.

I wonder, if making rapid-reinforcements and the threat of titan-bridge hotdrops less likely... will people be more inclined to turn around and engage a pursuing force? I have been in lots of fleets where it is said "If we fight they will just drop on us."... removing that option might make those fleets turn around and slam into each other, which is what everybody wants anyway.

Either way... interesting times coming up in November!
Zhul Chembull
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2930 - 2014-10-02 09:44:58 UTC
DeadDuck wrote:
Nice to see, EVE starting to be back on his roots. It was really needed.

For all the doomdsday prophets, just a little reminder: NULL SEC used to be occupied before the JF or Capitals were around. Logistics were being made on a daily basis without JF, or JB's or Titans, the prices of ships were similar to what they are today...

Like a lot of the 0.0 scrubs/overlords like to say: adapt or die.

Yes, losing ground will hurt now. Evacing stuff will be a nightmare. Logistics will be a challenge. Who knows maybe you will start to see freighter convoys again in 0.0. But you know what ? It will be fun again. FUN. Remember that word when playing EVE ? FUN.



Yeah and the population on the server also use to top at 1k, if you were around that long. Logistics will not be a challenge, you have no idea what you are talking about. Redundent mechansims in place of solid game mechanics is not the way to go.
yogizh
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#2931 - 2014-10-02 09:45:34 UTC
Page 150 Shocked
Plukovnik
Dark Necesstity
#2932 - 2014-10-02 09:45:39 UTC
Needmore Longcat wrote:
Is today April 1? Capitals taking gates? Jump fatigue? These are some of the worst ideas.

How is a stagnant nullsec going to be fixed by making things take even longer than they do already? How does that make any sense at all?

Absolutely terrible.


This is proof that CCP should do absolutely opposite things than those that sov holders want. Things MUST take longer, because game mechanics must dicourage making coalition with someone who is based over three regions far. Current state of stagnation is because people from Outer Passage can easily reach Catch in less than one hour. Therefore it makes sense to have diplomatic relationships with them. New mechanic will make no sense to that, because no matter how long would take the battle in Catch, people from Outer Passage would arrive hours, maybe days after it ends.

I believe this will finally break the current state of stagnation. Coalition will fall apart, because reason of their existence will ceise. Well prepared attack will cause havoc and will require well prepared defence, not just jabber ping and voilá - hundreds of caps and supers arrive from regions 50 LY away. Today, there is no such thing like "surprise attack" because batphoning tens of alliances and their arrival requires almost no effort.

After this change, lets say that INK, PL, NC and N3 will come to help HERO in Catch, when Providence and AAA attacks them. This situation will be used by TRI+BL to attack Cache. Coalition members will have to decide - help HERO and risk losing systems in Cache, or go home to save their own lands and abandon HERO. In any case, dedicated attack will require dedicated defense, planning and even sacrifices. The german emperor Frederick the Great said "who wants to defend everything, defends nothing" and EVE should go back to state where this works. Now it doesnt, because hundreds of capitals can move across the universe in matter of minutes and that is simply wrong.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2933 - 2014-10-02 09:46:18 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Ezio Dicostanzo wrote:
CCP I'm 100% with you on this one!
Don't backdown, DO IT!!

now we clearly understand what this "null deal" was all about, and why opposing blocks were all standing behind Mittani's "listen to us cause we're the boss" bullsh*t. Dont listen to them, and dont add more NPC systems/stations !!

btw after reading the null deal and now this dev blog, isn't it obvious that certain CSM members are breaking the NDA and letting Mittani &friends know what you are planning ahead?
Just FYI, the dev blog also states that the sov changes are likely to be occupancy based - exactly what the null deal calls for.

And if you were even remotely awake during fanfest you'd know that power projection changes were very much on the cards. I'm honestly surprised it's taken this long for them to come up. So your tinfoil hat theories that the CSM are breaching the NDA are unfounded.

Honestly I would've thought the sov system changes would suffice, and that the "force projection" change is shaking the stick from the wrong end, but I'm interested to see how the meta'll change to match the new rules, and just how punitive the rules WILL be.
Nah, force projection was always needed. It's too easy to go from one end of the universe to the other with a mass of ships. It's still going to be pretty easy to fly interceptors back and forth and leave ships dotted about all over, but at least it will require travelling rather than sitting on a titan. Occupancy sov without force projection changes would be a recipe for disaster, since it wouldn't stop larger group jumping half way across the map to nuke someone and jumping back at a moments notice. With these changes you'll have to at least partially commit to it.

I'm not completely in disagreement, I just would've throught the sov system would yield more bang for the developer buck, as it were. But I'm actually very much in favor of a majority of the changes, since I'm in agreement with capitals being too easy to fling from one end of the map to the other, but I never thought CCP would actually have the balls to make a change of this nature, and I definitely didn't think they had the balls to let caps/supers take gates.

I'm actually rather enthused about the strategic impact this'll have, I'm just not quite on board with the extent the fatigue'll go to, and I'm not sure about including JFs and other industrials in this (which is after all needed to keep a local economy going in null, still). I'm not sure null's self-sufficient enough yet for them to be affected as well, but we'll see.
Aiyshimin
Shiva Furnace
#2934 - 2014-10-02 09:46:41 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
TheFairyClinkerBell wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Aiyshimin wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:

Timers.. how are you going to attack somebodies system which is cyno jammed and defended with Capitals with your small subcap fleet?


With capitals

(read the devblog)



In other words you have no idea


I think they are referring to the changes which would allow capitals to use gates.

Cyno jammed system would be no issue, you just jump through both sub-capitals and capitals via your chosen gate to a next door system.


lmao.. yeah like to see a fleet of capitals jumping into a **** load of bubbled and then getting popped...


Using scouts is optional and you don't exactly have to, but in some cases they can be valuable.
yogizh
GSF Logistics and Posting Reserves
Goonswarm Federation
#2935 - 2014-10-02 09:48:02 UTC
Plukovnik wrote:
Needmore Longcat wrote:
Is today April 1? Capitals taking gates? Jump fatigue? These are some of the worst ideas.

How is a stagnant nullsec going to be fixed by making things take even longer than they do already? How does that make any sense at all?

Absolutely terrible.


Prayers


Where are you going to steal ESS then ?
Stoffl
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#2936 - 2014-10-02 09:48:14 UTC
Aivo Dresden wrote:
I hope all these people unsubbing bring the PLEX prices down a bit. xD
Sigras
Conglomo
#2937 - 2014-10-02 09:48:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigras
Prince Kobol wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Aiyshimin wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:

Timers.. how are you going to attack somebodies system which is cyno jammed and defended with Capitals with your small subcap fleet?


With capitals

(read the devblog)

In other words you have no idea

No, capitals can still get in, they just can't cyno in (or back out in a panic if they suddenly decide (ackbar)IT'S A TRAP(/ackbar).


The FC is ever going to jump a fleet of capitals in a system that is heavily defended, gates bubbled and with no way of extracting.

GASP! you might actually need to use ships other than cap ships! What ever shall we do? Perhaps we may even need to resort to thinking!

Perhaps while your opponent has all of his eggs in one basket you may strike somewhere else...
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2938 - 2014-10-02 09:48:31 UTC
Kaely Tanniss wrote:
knobber Jobbler wrote:
Valleria Darkmoon wrote:
I'm very much afraid that if these changes go through as presented here the game will stagnate because it will be too slow. .


This. Some people like the larger scale battles, in fact the only times EVE has hit the headlines and brought in more subcribers than CCP's marketing department ever has is the big fights. With these changes, these sorts of battles will likely never happen again. Those with local supercap dominance will always have a trump card and no one will be able to escalate.

It begs the question of why can't CCP see what the real problem here is: Supercaps and not Carriers, Dreads, JF's or anything else with a jump drive.


Agreed. All this will do is insure a corp/alliance can dig into a region, pack in the supercaps, and make it so no other force will be able to effectively fight or attempt to take the system/region. Force projection has been an issues yes, but this is not the solution. I do not fly caps, nor have I ever had any interest to, but I can see both sides of the fence on this one. The bottom line is CCP is going to lose no matter what they chose. Their best bet is to try for a middle ground that compromises to both sides. Limits are a good idea, but based on their preliminary examples of what they want to do...well...try again CCP. I fear Eve will become "moving pretty spaceships around" online. What?

If CCP changes the sov system from a might makes right system to an occupancy-style system, then supers and caps etc won't matter as much as you think it will. I think you're still in the old style of thinking where large fights decided wars, as opposed to a lot of small fights.
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#2939 - 2014-10-02 09:49:56 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Selexid wrote:


Well if someone is attacking a cap defended system with caps of their own, they might have subcap support and even scouts on the other side....... Gezuz man.


Tell you what.. after this change go and attack Deklein and tell me how it s goes :)

Go and attack Deklein before this change and tell me how it goes :)


The same, the only difference is right now it that it wont days to get into position were as after it will

So....what your saying is nothing at all will change and your original statement about attacking deklein as an example really has no merit?

See, here's the thing: it's examples like these which illustrate why we need this change. You say no one will attack deklein after these changes. Well, guess what? No one's attacking deklein now either. So that argument doesn't have a leg to stand on.

As the dev blog said, this is the first part of a multi-step approach to fixing sov. I'm willing to see where it goes, simply because that path, the path where at least we have to adapt to something, is preferable to the utter stagnation we have now.
Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2940 - 2014-10-02 09:50:09 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Lord TGR wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
lmao.. yeah like to see a fleet of capitals jumping into a **** load of bubbled and then getting popped...

Well, considering the fact that we're hopefully going towards a sov system where multiple daily fights are in order, not one huge fight every week like we're seeing now, this scenario's not going to be that big of a problem. If you've got enough force, go through, if not, go back to harassing them some more or see if you can't get down that jammer so you can set things up more to your liking.


lmao

Let me guess, you're one of those who actually either want 4k fights, or you want to be able to hotdrop everyone from across the map whenever there's a chance of getting anything even remotely juicy. Right?


Me or TGR?

You. I'd much rather have wars be constant fights with a constant stream of smaller fleets, rather than one huge 4k fight which decides the fate of not just one but multiple regions at a time. And I have no problems with those fights not being cap on cap every time.