These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Retar Aveymone
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#3561 - 2014-10-02 16:42:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Retar Aveymone
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
Retar Aveymone wrote:
Riddari Prowler wrote:
Does CCP think most of the people saying they like this change in this thread are serious? Or do they understand that majority of them are just trolling?

well no, they're not trolling, they do like the change

they just like it for the sole reason they think it hurts us and they want that not that they understand anything about it


No, we like them because they're good mechanics.

Your delusions of persecution and grandeur are the product of your egos, not everyone else's 'grrr goons'.

The best (and only, imo) joy at your expense to be had here is the schadenfreude watching your alliance's shock and disappointment in thinking it's CMS reps had locked in the changes YOU wanted, (which would have been utterly terrible for the game without THIS change.)

Oh how could they do this without your approval? And without telling you about it before hand? It's a regular Greek tragedy I tell ya. Lol

I don't mean to be insulting, but there's really no way to say this without it being insulting: you and your cohorts have not demonstrated you have the knowledge or intelligence to understand the changes, and you certainly haven't shown that you're aware of even what parts we have issues with and which we're fine with (and, importantly, where we agree with the goal but disagree the mechanics get you there, versus disagreeing with the goal).

Here though, give proving yourself a shot: try separating the changes out that we agree vs disagree with, and where the disagreement is 'goal good, mechanics don't work to get you there' vs 'this is a bad goal' vs. 'the mechanics work towards the goal but have downsides too large compared to alternatives that should be implemented instead'
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3562 - 2014-10-02 16:42:33 UTC
Isha Subula wrote:



and having industrialists in null is a bad thing? Being able to move large quantities of ships, mods whatever from high to null is a part of the problem. Now null pvp'ers will have to stop treating miners like crap and actually accept that they need them to survive.


Problem here is that there are things that null cannot get locally and stuff that high sec cannot get locally. Trade still needs to happen, neither can be totally self sufficient.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#3563 - 2014-10-02 16:42:36 UTC
OMG I just realized. People are thinking this will bring back convoys.

It will.

FAST IN WARP NANO REMOTE REP CARRIER Convoys. Convoys chocked full of supplies yet unbreakable except for with super caps that the 'little alliances' don't have., WAY safer than the freighter convoys of the past (freighters can't remote rep each others or refit off each other(. Who needs an escort when you can have one guy triage and the rest drop fighter after fighter, sentry after sentry?

We gonna emergent all over your gameplay :)
Lazarann
Ideal Machine
#3564 - 2014-10-02 16:43:37 UTC
Between the distance from everything else, the incoming nightmare logistics, and the already sub-par PVE content compared to the other null sec regions, I really hope drone regions get some love from this so there's some incentive to put up with it.

Want to start a local market? Too bad you have to import all your meta modules still since drones don't drop anything.

What about allowing JF's to jump to covert cynos so if I have to dead drop into a system at least they'll need a half-skilled probe alt to find me before I can jump out?

I'm all for reducing power projection but I don't see why logistics need to become so awful as a result. Really looking forward to this route though.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3565 - 2014-10-02 16:44:18 UTC
Sally Hermoine wrote:
CCp i implore you to remove the restriction on Jump freighter range , this is not a whine post but listen to the clever arguments against it there is no justification for removing nullsec logistics. If you have ever lived in nullsec and took part in freighting ops you would know what it means to do this. We NEED high sec access to survive , I can handle trying to defend our own turf and will give it up gladly too but being cut off from eves market will make it impossible to exist out here. Don't listen to the high sec ppl egging you on they have no idea what it means to keep a market in nullsec well stocked with all the modules/guns/ammo neccessary just to survive.

And then we are expected to earn isk? Not possible anymore no where to sell goods noway to move it , minerals are dying in price and will only get worse, for high sec also as noone will buy caps off the market now. They will be just be made locally (which i dont mind too) but the market is gonna go way down, also losing lots of subscribers will just make matters worse. So yeah im not happy :(



The JF ragne nerf is the ONLY good part on all this. Will make supply routes be PIRATED again.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#3566 - 2014-10-02 16:46:12 UTC
baltec1 wrote:


Problem here is that there are things that null cannot get locally and stuff that high sec cannot get locally. Trade still needs to happen, neither can be totally self sufficient.


I'm sure no solutions will be found and the game will die then.

Oh no wait... this game has survived (and thrived) without these mechanics the way they were, and it will post-changes as well.

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."

Dreiden Kisada
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3567 - 2014-10-02 16:46:15 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:

- Yup, Masterplan is doing some fine-tuning of warp logic to make this sort of thing smoother. There's no good way to warp 20 titans to a gate at once without bumping, though.



So, you just said that you know your plan won't work, but you're going through with it anyway.

CCP Greyscale wrote:

Jump length distance has almost no impact on travel time, number of midpoints is largely irrelevant to travel time when fatigue is a factor.


This is wildly incorrect.

Say I have a trip that is made up of 3 legs currently, to go 30ly. 13ly, 14ly, 7ly.

Under current mechanics, it takes me a few minutes to cap up between jumps and light my cynos.

If we ONLY add fatigue, the total trip takes me a little under 45 minutes, and I end up with about 8 days of fatigue to wait off. If we wait off the fatigue between each jump, it takes 4.8 hours.

If we make a route of 6 jumps, 5ly each as the 3rd example, then it would take 65 ish hours to make the trip if we don't wait off fatigue, and we would end up with like a year and a half of fatigue. If we wait off the fatigue between each jump, total trip time takes 5 hours.

So, yes. Jump distance has an impact on travel time. You have come up with an exponential growth system. Number of units has a direct and large impact on growth rate in that kind of a system. Especially on player choice.

In the 2nd example, I could make the first jump, wait off my fatigue, and sprint to the end. Trip takes me about 3 hours and I end with about an 18 hour fatigue decay time frame.

In the 3rd example, if I try to make a trip that takes the same length of time, my trip takes 3.5 hours and I end up with 21 hours of fatigue decay at best rate.

I've said it before in this thread, but i'll restate it. You are doing this ass backwards. You're taking away tools used to play the game in it's current state, and then telling us to wait and it'll be better later. You should be making your other changes first, make us WANT to live in a smaller number of systems first, THEN adjust the toolset to deal with the game as it stands then.

Because right now, it just looks like you guys don't algebra. Saying that the number of steps is "largely irrelevant" in an exponential growth system just makes me think you don't understand what those words mean.
Lyron-Baktos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3568 - 2014-10-02 16:46:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Lyron-Baktos
Am I reading it correctly in that I could jump a carrier 5ly, wait 6 minutes or so, and then be completely reset? Then jump again, wait another 6 minutes or so and be reset again. Rinse and repeat?
Summer VonSturm
Serenity Shipyards
The Glory Holers
#3569 - 2014-10-02 16:48:07 UTC
Raelaem Eudain wrote:



See you in N-d and M-M =)


Yes sir, yes you will :)


Reading through several pages today, it appears that a lot of the big groups wanted power and force projection nerfs, as long as it didn't effect their ability to project force, or power.

Those saying that a lot of the smaller groups will get swallowed up by bigger groups, newsflash, that's already happened, there are only a tiny number of non-aligned groups left

Those complaining that big fights will never happen, they will, they will just need proper planning and support for movement, rather than the 'suddenly 250 Archons' on every little fight

Those saying that Nullsec will become unattackable, newsflash, its currently unattackable, either due to stagnation, NAP's, force projection, or people dropping every capital for 100 LY around at a moments notice. You want to take a region, or defend one, start planning for it.


There are downsides, and no doubt some change will happen, depending on those views that give constructive feedback, rather than the insta-kneejerk ragequit posts.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#3570 - 2014-10-02 16:48:18 UTC
Eigenvalue wrote:
Ashlore wrote:
Will be fun to change corp.
If caps not are going trou JB why add fatigue to that as well?



Presumably to nerf multi region coalitions that can move sub caps across new eden with a dozen or so jumps&gates.

Seems a bit of a sledge hammer though, punishing the innocent to slightly change the behavior of the guilty.


The only innocents that are harmed are the ones following the guilty. If you're an innocent paying rent..... you're guilty.
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#3571 - 2014-10-02 16:48:47 UTC
Lyron-Baktos wrote:
Am I reading it correctly in that I could jump a carrier 5ly, wait 6 minutes or so, and then be completely reset? Then jump again, wait another 6 minutes or so and be reset again. Rinse and repeat?


If you wait out your timers for each jump, no big deal and no big wait.

If you're trying to move far, quickly. Things will start to add up.

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3572 - 2014-10-02 16:48:51 UTC
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:
baltec1 wrote:


Problem here is that there are things that null cannot get locally and stuff that high sec cannot get locally. Trade still needs to happen, neither can be totally self sufficient.


I'm sure no solutions will be found and the game will die then.

Oh no wait... this game has survived (and thrived) without these mechanics the way they were, and it will post-changes as well.


Sure it will continue, but it will mean that t2 prices will rise sharply and the outer reaches of null will be all but abandoned.
Brigadine Ferathine
Presumed Dead Enterprises
Against ALL Authorities.
#3573 - 2014-10-02 16:48:58 UTC
Ormarr Kai wrote:
Does CCP even think about their next patch or just randomly guess changes? This will stagnate nullsec even more. The real target should be sov mechanics. Half of these changes also bite into eve's lore.

Eve is all about big fights and coalitions. Maybe add more systems to spread things out.

Do you have any idea how many empty systems there are? We don't need more systems...
J A Aloysiusz
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#3574 - 2014-10-02 16:49:18 UTC  |  Edited by: J A Aloysiusz
I believe that:

- Dreads and carriers, as lighter, less powerful ships, should not be subjected to the same level of penalty as the true behemoths of the game.
- Carriers have a unique and fairly well-balanced logistical capability, and should be allowed to maintain that capability as much as possible.
- Bridging through ships should not subject the same level of penalty as jumping - if bridging is penalized less harshly than jumping, then bridging can be used to project a light force forward, to bide time for the behemoths to get into position, and that's the way warfare should be.
- If the current iteration of the proposed changes is not tempered, the rorqual will be more useful in many combat situations than the chimera, and that's not the way EVE warfare should be.

Therefore, I propose that:
-Rather than a flat range limit for all capital ships, all (combat) capitals simply have their current maximum jump range halved.
-Mass is added as a factor in the accumulation of jump fatigue for (combat) capitals. This will affect regular capitals less than supercapitals, allowing them to be somewhat more mobile, but still significantly less so than their current state.
-Jump fatigue be greatly reduced for ships that are taking a bridge, allowing them to act as skirmish or fixing forces.

If you agree with some/all of my proposed changes, please +1, comment, etc.

o7
Belinda HwaFang
Cryptologix Inc.
#3575 - 2014-10-02 16:49:25 UTC
I honestly didn't think you would have the balls, CCP, and was thinking you would continue to bleed subs.

Instead you reward us with this. Thank you ! Big smile

Can't wait for Corp / Starbase code changes.

PS, any news on the Rorqual rebalance yet, or is the new Fatigue bonus all it's going to get changed?

--
Fang
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3576 - 2014-10-02 16:50:04 UTC
Heat-seeking Moisture Missile wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Sorry, lost a few from earlier when the forum ate a post

Schmell wrote:
Quote:
The length of this timer is a number of minutes equal to your jump fatigue (before being increased by that jump!), and you are unable to make another jump of any kind until this timer expires.


Can you clarify this please? Does that mean that if i take a jumpbridge with any ship, i will be unable to jump through gates, or this "jump of any kind" is only about jumpdrives/bridges?


Only about jump drives, jump bridges and jump portals. Gate jumps are never affected.



If CCP insists on keeping this "caps thru gates" idea, there are a few twists you can put in to encourage it.

variations on the theme are
- can't use a gate in a cap until fatigue is over ___
- using a gate in a cap, speeds the reduction of fatigue for a short period of time (60 secs?)

etc




the gates are ok for JF and create a nice mechanics were the JF will not instantly appear at destination but will ahve to travel and use the jump to avoid danger. But titans crossing gates soung and will look really dumb.

Imagine the day they allow one in high sec as they said they are THINKING still about.. how jita undock will look like.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3577 - 2014-10-02 16:50:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Frostys Virpio
Lyron-Baktos wrote:
Am I reading it correctly in that I could jump a carrier 5ly, wait 6 minutes or so, and then be completely reset? Then jump again, wait another 6 minutes or so and be reset again. Rinse and repeat?


DERP, he asked for a carrier...

Your fatigue will jump to much higher level than 6 minutes.
Skia Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#3578 - 2014-10-02 16:50:48 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
OMG I just realized. People are thinking this will bring back convoys.

It will.

FAST IN WARP NANO REMOTE REP CARRIER Convoys. Convoys chocked full of supplies yet unbreakable except for with super caps that the 'little alliances' don't have., WAY safer than the freighter convoys of the past (freighters can't remote rep each others or refit off each other(. Who needs an escort when you can have one guy triage and the rest drop fighter after fighter, sentry after sentry?

We gonna emergent all over your gameplay :)

+1, bravo!
BrundleMeth
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3579 - 2014-10-02 16:50:48 UTC
This whole thread is hilarious. All the whining makes me laugh and laugh...

I luv changes like this...
Gully Alex Foyle
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3580 - 2014-10-02 16:51:00 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
The JF ragne nerf is the ONLY good part on all this. Will make supply routes be PIRATED again.
Not really sure about that.

Competent logistic (transport) pilots tend to be very careful. Most of the time, I think they'll just take the longer (time) but zero-risk option.

Meaning that ultimately, we will be able to pirate just the usual morons. Not that much content, at the end of the day.


OTOH, supplies taking longer will likely mean that everybody in the game - no matter where they live - will have less ships to play with. That doesn't seem like a good trade-off to me.

I'd much rather have easier supply lines for 'combat' PVPers (combat ship vs. combat ship) than a few more JF kills for 'pirate' PVPers (combat ship vs. transport ship).

Make space glamorous! Is EVE dying or not? Ask the EVE-O Death-o-meter!