These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kalissis
#4421 - 2014-10-02 22:43:31 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
The tears in this thread are glorious.


Confirm, liking it. One of the best gifts CCP gave us so far this year.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#4422 - 2014-10-02 22:43:50 UTC
The more I think about it the more i want the Rorqual to be boosted

https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Rorqual

Step 1: remove the ship resitctions from the SMA

Step 2: figure out a way to enhance the clone vat bay...

if ccp did this it would greatly help small guys like me stay nomadic.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Narcil Starwind
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4423 - 2014-10-02 22:45:03 UTC
The idea of Jump Fatigue is fine, but I don't like the exponential timer and binary choice of this implementation. It seems arbitrary and inelegant. With this system you will end up with people being left out or left behind when using jump portals or bridges. "Hey guys I would love to join the fleet but my timer won't cool down for a week, see you later :-(".

Why not make fatigue affect how far you can jump safely. As your fatigue increases the range you can jump without consequences decreases. You could still have a minimum timer until the next jump, but that should be fixed at some reasonably small time (3m or so from the 3m/LY thing).

The consequences of jumping outside of your safe jump range could be tuned to how far outside the range you jump. If it's just outside, then you have a small chance of taking HP damage, or a debuff to Cap/Shield regen, etc. If you jump way out side of your safe range then you could have dire issues, Major HP damage, no cap/shield regen for some time, or you could burn out your jump drive stranding you for some cooldown period the duration of which could vary according to the severity of the damage.

You could tune this to have the same general principles of the timer based approach, but with the added tactical and strategic decision of jumping into the danger zone.

If you make small jumps to nearby places doing logistics within a small area, this type of system would allow you to do that with out dealing with an exponentially growing timer after each jump.

The increase to your fatigue level could scale as well, if you jump well inside your safe range the fatigue grows slowly, If you are pushing the boundaries of your safe range then it grows more quickly, and if you jump into the danger zone it could grow even faster.

From the player standpoint this could be displayed very easily in the map view showing your jump range.

From the given example provided at the beginning the player would come to the same decision since jumping continuously to their max safe range without letting the fatigue decrease would reduce their safe range rather quickly. You'd reach a point where your next jump could burn out your ability to jump, so might as well take the gates. But instead of making that choice for them, they still have the option of jumping.

All of the other mechanics of allowing some ships to have reduced fatigue work here as well.

Using fatigue in this way would achieve the same stated goals, but instead of taking away the players ability to jump you're giving them more choices, with tactical consequences.
Grookshank
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#4424 - 2014-10-02 22:47:51 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Aright, just read 100 pages, have some replies.

Grookshank wrote:
As I wrote above, it will be a horror moving subcap fleets *in your own sov* around.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5070585#post5070585

CCP: You want us to live all in one system?

We want you to think about exactly which system you live in.

How does forcing players to stack up in a select few systems fit to the idea of occupancy based sov mechanics you aim for?
bp920091
Black Aces
Goonswarm Federation
#4425 - 2014-10-02 22:48:43 UTC
Well, we've got to expect that these changes are going to happen. CCP is blindly rushing into the future with a goal in mind, and doesnt care about the collateral damage that it'll cause in the process (collateral damage = anyone in 0.0 that's not in a major coalition, and anyone involved with the T2 market (including consumers)), Never mind that the real issue wont be dealt with (major coalitions and supercaps) without obliterating every other group that could be affected by their changes first.

These changes go through, my JF and 2 cyno accounts are going unsubbed, as there's no point for them anymore. They'll resub once CCP stares at the shambles of the T2 market, upon realization that the workaround pre-JF was to use carriers with industrials, and that most of the supply of R8/32 minerals will vanish (not all, most).

-$45/month for you CCP, great job.

How'd that anomaly nerf go for for greyscale? work out as intended? how about the refusal to listen to community feedback, saying that "we know what we're doing, it'll be fine," turning 95% of 0.0 into a wasteland.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#4426 - 2014-10-02 22:50:09 UTC
flakeys wrote:
JC Anderson wrote:
Lady Spank wrote:
Just a few more pages and this will be a bigger threadnaught than the nano-nerf.


Once it hits page 209, then it will also have bypassed the removal of ghost training 208 page threadnaught.

Come to think of it, a lot of people unsubbed over that as well. But CCP didn't back down from it.



And yet both got pushed through ... Lol


If you mean shoved down our throats, yeah.

s73v3n2k
UK Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#4427 - 2014-10-02 22:50:35 UTC
- You just killed Eve online - Worst idea ever

- Fix Null sec because its stagnant, we're all getting bored and nothing is worth the risk anymore. You have made things too accessible to high sec pilots and now everything that made null sec worth while is gone. Rare mods, moon goo, faction NPC etc. If people can't be bothered now then they won't even bother to log in if you made this change.

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#4428 - 2014-10-02 22:54:12 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Planned new feature to address new player movement:

For players less than thirty days old, once per player corporation joined, and
For all players, once a year

You may push a button in your corp interface (while a member of a player corp and docked) that:
- Moves your medical clone to a station designated by your corporation, and
- Automatically moves you to your medical clone

Exact method of corporations designating target station still being ironed out, but it will involve at the very least being able to designate a default station for all corp members, and will likely be allowed for *any* station with a corp office, regardless of system sec status.


This seems to us like it solves the "I want to recruit people to nullsec" concern, and also gives non-nullsec recruiters an easier way to get genuinely new players to the right location easily.



Thoughts? Pasting this into the FAQ and also trying to get it into the blog proper.

An entire year's cooldown on something that you might definitely need more often than that in a big war. Not cool IMO.

What about: if you've been stuck in a station (i.e. haven't docked anywhere else or left the system) for some number of days, perhaps 5 or 7, you have the option to move your medical clone to your highsec NPC station of origin from whence you first entered the game.



NEed that explanation? Then lets go. Jump cloen go to another station where you are in safe place. Set medical clone there. Now jump cloen back.. killyourself

EASY

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

Tempelman N
Biomass Transit
Seven Four Five
#4429 - 2014-10-02 22:54:35 UTC
TimeDrawsNigh wrote:
Counter proposal for the jump delay timer.

Link below is a google excel doc. of cumulative delay timer that incrementally gets longer with each jump.

http://bit.ly/1rOpzTs

It’s a logarithmic scale.

So when you jump you get two timers.

First timer is the jump drive timer; the second timer is jump drive activation delay.

The jump drive timer is a base 30 minutes and every time you make a jump it will record the amount and add +1 to the "Jumps Made Since Timer Began" value. The jump drive timer will reset back to 30 min every time you make a new jump.
The jump drive activation delay is the timer you get once you have jumped. It’s the time you have to wait till the next jump can be made.

The equation for this is below.

http://i.imgur.com/EQpv4Cv.png

The principal of what happens here is that your delay timer gets bigger with each jump. The increment between each subsequent timer gets smaller, causing the graph to plateau out into a logarithmic curve. Eventually after so many jumps the delay timer will reach the same value as the jump drive timer, at which point it’s better with it out entirely and then start the process over.

Initially we found a problem with the function where doing three really short distance jumps would make the times later overall shorter but that has been fixed with the “Jump Amount Modifier.”

So e.g.
Jump 1 > 4.19 LY > delay timer of 6.42min > cumulative time 6.42min
Jump 2 > 4.7 LY > delay timer of 9.72 min > cumulative time 16.14min
Jump 3 > 4.206 LY > delay timer of 11.73 min > cumulative time 27.86min
Jump 5 > 4.564 LY > delay timer of 13.28 min > cumulative time 41.14min
Jump 6 > 1.855 LY > delay timer of 14.15 min > cumulative time 55.29min

Notice the increase in time getting smaller but the time overall still get longer. Bit like the diminishing returns of stacking nerf.

This Post and Equation was worked on by Sieonigh and myself.

Edit: We made this formula under the assumption that Jump Freighters and Rorquals do NOT have the 90% reduction, rather we think Black Ops should have this reduction (which we're implementing).




I think this is a much better more stable Idea
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#4430 - 2014-10-02 22:55:29 UTC
bp920091 wrote:
Well, we've got to expect that these changes are going to happen. CCP is blindly rushing into the future with a goal in mind, and doesnt care about the collateral damage that it'll cause in the process (collateral damage = anyone in 0.0 that's not in a major coalition, and anyone involved with the T2 market (including consumers)), Never mind that the real issue wont be dealt with (major coalitions and supercaps) without obliterating every other group that could be affected by their changes first.

These changes go through, my JF and 2 cyno accounts are going unsubbed, as there's no point for them anymore. They'll resub once CCP stares at the shambles of the T2 market, upon realization that the workaround pre-JF was to use carriers with industrials, and that most of the supply of R8/32 minerals will vanish (not all, most).

-$45/month for you CCP, great job.

How'd that anomaly nerf go for for greyscale? work out as intended? how about the refusal to listen to community feedback, saying that "we know what we're doing, it'll be fine," turning 95% of 0.0 into a wasteland.


you now it would not be so bad if at the same time CCP added missions to outposts... that would help with the density problem faced with the current pve meta of 0.0

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4431 - 2014-10-02 22:55:53 UTC
Grookshank wrote:
We want you to think about exactly which system you live in.

How does forcing players to stack up in a select few systems fit to the idea of occupancy based sov mechanics you aim for?
[/quote]
Well... a small bit of thinking gives me...

1. If you're living and playing and working and killing in a small space, that's kinda defacto occupancy based sov.

2. You don't have to stack up in one system.

3. Spreading out has costs.

4. Balancing defensibility with accessibility and mobility and sustainability is interesting gameplay.

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."

Komi Toran
Perkone
Caldari State
#4432 - 2014-10-02 22:56:41 UTC
DaReaper wrote:
Wait... wait... you don't have a scout or an alt... so how the **** do you cyno? And what do you so while you are waititng for yoru friend to get in position so you can cyno? You do understand that it will be pretty much the same except whoever is your damn cyno can scout for you as you move a bit closer while waititng for your next cyno to be lite right?

Good lord.

Cynos can scout if they are trained for it. Not all cynos are. And yes, skills matter; a cyno noobship is dead if it runs into anything remotely threatening.

Furthermore, a cyno alt has a commitment of 10 minutes for a third party, and as little as a few seconds if the player doesn't care if it lives or dies; it's an afterthought. A scout for a freighter can require an hour or more and needs constant attention. So don't pretend they are the same things.
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Midgard Academy
#4433 - 2014-10-02 22:57:17 UTC
s73v3n2k wrote:
- You just killed Eve online - Worst idea ever

- Fix Null sec because its stagnant, we're all getting bored and nothing is worth the risk anymore. You have made things too accessible to high sec pilots and now everything that made null sec worth while is gone. Rare mods, moon goo, faction NPC etc. If people can't be bothered now then they won't even bother to log in if you made this change.




I dont see officer mods dropping in high sec. I dont see moon goo in high sec. You did this to yourselves with coalitions and super cap blobs. Most high and low sec people dont want to be pets or slaves to n3 or cfc. But no one can compete with the big alliances amd take territory because the smaller groups cand field 70 titans and 300 moms like coalitons.

Why Can't I have a picture signature.

Also please support graphical immersion, bring back the art that brought people to EvE online originaly.

Asteroid VeIdspar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#4434 - 2014-10-02 22:57:41 UTC
I may be late with my input. I really hope all these lvl 4 mission runners, who praise this change, hop in their golems and invade nullsec for so much needed content after "the power projection nerf". Also on the side note I remember there was the CFC backed event of bringing highsec players into nullsec. Huge fleets were assembled, so much tidi and then... there was Vee with his gate camp and hundreds of wrecks around him. He said something like that "I'm amazed how these developers have so little idea about how their own game operates".
RasTrent
Boom.Roasted
#4435 - 2014-10-02 22:58:18 UTC
lets just move these sandbox walls in a bit.
DNSBLACK
Dirt Nap Squad
#4436 - 2014-10-02 22:58:43 UTC
bp920091 wrote:
Well, we've got to expect that these changes are going to happen. CCP is blindly rushing into the future with a goal in mind, and doesnt care about the collateral damage that it'll cause in the process (collateral damage = anyone in 0.0 that's not in a major coalition, and anyone involved with the T2 market (including consumers)), Never mind that the real issue wont be dealt with (major coalitions and supercaps) without obliterating every other group that could be affected by their changes first.

These changes go through, my JF and 2 cyno accounts are going unsubbed, as there's no point for them anymore. They'll resub once CCP stares at the shambles of the T2 market, upon realization that the workaround pre-JF was to use carriers with industrials, and that most of the supply of R8/32 minerals will vanish (not all, most).

-$45/month for you CCP, great job.

How'd that anomaly nerf go for for greyscale? work out as intended? how about the refusal to listen to community feedback, saying that "we know what we're doing, it'll be fine," turning 95% of 0.0 into a wasteland.


I will see your 2 un-subs and raise you 2 DNS members coming back. These to friends both have 4 accounts each. Adapt or die! Wait that was mean. Let me try this HTFU or better yet can I have your stuff. This is one eve player who is looking forward to the changes and they should go into the game as is.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#4437 - 2014-10-02 22:59:57 UTC
Sentinel Eeex wrote:
If any newer players ever wondered why EVE is alternatively called "spreadsheet online" - now you know :)


Well every game is based on math. Players of EVE just happen to know how to use decimal points, scientific notation, and imaginary numbers. Lol
Kirasten
Perkone
Caldari State
#4438 - 2014-10-02 23:00:09 UTC
Grookshank wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Aright, just read 100 pages, have some replies.

Grookshank wrote:
As I wrote above, it will be a horror moving subcap fleets *in your own sov* around.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5070585#post5070585

CCP: You want us to live all in one system?

We want you to think about exactly which system you live in.

How does forcing players to stack up in a select few systems fit to the idea of occupancy based sov mechanics you aim for?


I think that's exactly the point. They don't want an alliance to have sovereignty over half the map.
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#4439 - 2014-10-02 23:00:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Ninteen Seventy-Nine wrote:


Maybe in your eyes.

But then again, you're wrong about basically everything, always.


Feel free to ask red frog what they think of this change.


Oh wah. You're so wrapped in in your groups b.s. you can't see a foot past your own nose.

Frog's business just became that much more lucrative.

They have the pilots in place to make the moves, and the time costs (time=money) can easily be passed on to the still willing consumer.

They now have the added business selling point of using THEIR pilot's jump timers so you don't have to use the one on your character.

This is what I was talking about in the other thread. You are literally so inside-the-box you can't even conceive of better gameplay. It's that or what Sinclair said, you won't see the truth because you're own interests are against it.

And this is why you are and always will be wrong about everything, always.

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

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#4440 - 2014-10-02 23:01:12 UTC
Asteroid VeIdspar wrote:
I may be late with my input. I really hope all these lvl 4 mission runners, who praise this change, hop in their golems and invade nullsec for so much needed content after "the power projection nerf". Also on the side note I remember there was the CFC backed event of bringing highsec players into nullsec. Huge fleets were assembled, so much tidi and then... there was Vee with his gate camp and hundreds of wrecks around him. He said something like that "I'm amazed how these developers have so little idea about how their own game operates".


Ironic is that the o.o empires are built off the back of former lev IV mission runners doing annoms in thier carriers...

So i really do hope that come patch day the proletariat rise up against thier bourgeoisie masters.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.