These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Phoebe] Long Distance Travel Changes - updates!

First post First post First post
Author
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1541 - 2014-10-19 21:59:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Celly S wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:

It appears that your point is that the changes are intended to make it much more dangerous to take capital ships out of the station garage for either assault or evac. Now we have to evac our capitals before the change so that they won't be stranded during emergency evac operations later on. Null sec becomes safer for sub-capital ships and even safer for the greatly buffed Black Ops. I guess the point is to create a safer null sec for low skill pilots.

So the point is then to punish those who dedicated massive training time to capital ships and to discourage the use of capital ships for anything. The point is to turn null sec into easy mode for subcaps. I am not interested in easy mode null sec for subcaps! I have lost interest already and I blame CCP for threatening to nullify the value of my cap ship skills training time.

That's not my point at all...

you basically asked for them to be turned into a ceptor, which would nullify almost every single thing CCP wants to achieve with these changes....

With that, comes the risk of gate travel. (something else that CCP and players want... small conflicts instead of server melting battles every -so -often)..

Whether it was your point or not, CCP is poised to crush years of training with a bad solution to a legitimate problem. I don't appreciate that at all and I will not stand for it. I have proposed that CCP lengthen the jump time according to the jump distance much (like an intersystem warp lasting hours) in order to prevent everyone in Eve (from different systems) from landing simultaneously and instantaneously on a single grid. Or prevent ship locking and drone deployment for hours after a jump in order to prevent everyone in Eve engaging simultaneously on a single grid. People won't jump because they know that they will miss the fight unless they are close enough and take the gates.

Carriers will never have the align time, warp time, lock time, etc of a ceptor, so enough with the correlation. CCP's stated goal is to prevent half of Eve from landing on the same grid instantly and at the same time so that local battles remain local battles and the worst case scenario for a fleet commander is not that they will have to fight half of Eve. With a delay of many hours for travel, the battle can come and go with the field completely cleared and single targets can be taken out easily as they land on grid from distant systems.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1542 - 2014-10-19 22:07:38 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Whether it was your point or not, CCP is poised to crush years of training with a bad solution to a legitimate problem. I don't appreciate that at all and I will not stand for it. Lengthen the jump time like an intersystem warp lasting hours in order to prevent everyone in Eve from landing simultaneously on a single grid. Or prevent ship locking and drone deployment for hours after a jump in order to prevent everyone in Eve engaging simultaneously on a single grid. People won't jump because they know that they will miss the fight unless they are close enough and take the gates.

So CCP is giving you a choice to jump instantly into a system and start dealing damage, with the caveat that you can't jump back out of it instantly (kind of like the cap requirement does now, except that's easily circumventable), and instead you're advocating a system where you're either stuck for 30 minutes (f.ex) watching the ass-end of eve (literally a gastroscopy online simulator) or an inability to do anything offensive for the same 30 minutes (or hours), which would mean that caps are definitely NOT usable for anything offensive at all unless you're buddy enough with the opposing FC to ask him to hold still for a few hours while your drone maintenance crew reboot all the drones and toss them out the airlock.

Amazing.
Dwissi
Miners Delight Reborn
#1543 - 2014-10-19 22:20:22 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Celly S wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:

It appears that your point is that the changes are intended to make it much more dangerous to take capital ships out of the station garage for either assault or evac. Now we have to evac our capitals before the change so that they won't be stranded during emergency evac operations later on. Null sec becomes safer for sub-capital ships and even safer for the greatly buffed Black Ops. I guess the point is to create a safer null sec for low skill pilots.

So the point is then to punish those who dedicated massive training time to capital ships and to discourage the use of capital ships for anything. The point is to turn null sec into easy mode for subcaps. I am not interested in easy mode null sec for subcaps! I have lost interest already and I blame CCP for threatening to nullify the value of my cap ship skills training time.

That's not my point at all...

you basically asked for them to be turned into a ceptor, which would nullify almost every single thing CCP wants to achieve with these changes....

With that, comes the risk of gate travel. (something else that CCP and players want... small conflicts instead of server melting battles every -so -often)..

Whether it was your point or not, CCP is poised to crush years of training with a bad solution to a legitimate problem. I don't appreciate that at all and I will not stand for it. I have proposed that CCP lengthen the jump time according to the jump distance much (like an intersystem warp lasting hours) in order to prevent everyone in Eve (from different systems) from landing simultaneously and instantaneously on a single grid. Or prevent ship locking and drone deployment for hours after a jump in order to prevent everyone in Eve engaging simultaneously on a single grid. People won't jump because they know that they will miss the fight unless they are close enough and take the gates.

Carriers will never have the align time, warp time, lock time, etc of a ceptor, so enough with the correlation. CCP's stated goal is to prevent half of Eve from landing on the same grid instantly and at the same time so that local battles remain local battles and the worst case scenario for a fleet commander is not that they will have to fight half of Eve. With a delay of many hours for travel, the battle can come and go with the field completely cleared and single targets can be taken out easily as they land on grid from distant systems.


There are no such things as 'bad solutions' unless they have been actually introduced. Dont mix up between facts and assumptions - because as of right now its the latter you are stating.

Proud designer of glasses for geeky dovakins

Before someone complains again: grr everyone

Greed is the death of loyalty

Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1544 - 2014-10-19 23:05:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Lord TGR wrote:
So CCP is giving you a choice to jump instantly into a system and start dealing damage, with the caveat that you can't jump back out of it instantly (kind of like the cap requirement does now, except that's easily circumventable), and instead you're advocating a system where you're either stuck for 30 minutes (f.ex) watching the ass-end of eve (literally a gastroscopy online simulator) or an inability to do anything offensive for the same 30 minutes (or hours), which would mean that caps are definitely NOT usable for anything offensive at all unless you're buddy enough with the opposing FC to ask him to hold still for a few hours while your drone maintenance crew reboot all the drones and toss them out the airlock.

Amazing.

That is correct. Certain gates could take light years off of the distance and therefore manually jumping through a few stargates may save hours of travel. I wouldn't take stargates (very much) but others might.

OR ... manually jump the capital ships through the gates all the way there; at which time you can start applying dps instantly. Local battles remain local and logistics ops and general mobility remain essentially untouched.

And if you dislike the "warp" view that much then you can always turn off the monitor, lol.

And if something comes up in real life during those hours of travel, you can always drop out of "hyperspace" in between constellations and log off in the middle of nowhere (or perhaps in the middle of a wormhole system.. aaahhh!).

Added: "No such thing as a bad solution"? Really?!!

Bad Solution?: CCP deletes all accounts and turns off all servers.
Yes. Bad, for sure.

Bad Solution?: CCP does something to completly undermine the veterans' skills and ships, and therefore drives mass unsubs and mass lost profit.
Yes. bad for sure.

There are many many bad solutions. It takes real intelligence to discover good solutions. And they will need to find them this time, because my mind is practically set, barring any major change in the plans.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1545 - 2014-10-19 23:18:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord TGR
So you don't like the system CCP has provided because you've got to wait a few minutes before you can jump again, so instead you'd prefer a system where you're utterly useless for hours on end after a jump, or a system where you take hours to actually arrive, and in the meantime you do absolutely nothing. Oh, and if you log off, you're dropped in the middle of nowhere and have to spend a few hours more just to get back to where you started, let alone arrive where you were heading in the first place.

And this is supposed to be a "better solution"? Interesting definition of "better", I'd say.

Andy Landen wrote:
Bad Solution?: CCP does something to completly undermine the veterans' skills and ships, and therefore drives mass unsubs and mass lost profit.
Yes. bad for sure.

And your "solution" doesn't "completely undermine the veterans' skills and ships even further than CCP's solution?

You're also assuming this'll drive "mass unsubs". I think you're vastly overestimating the gravity of the change and vastly underestimating the players' ability to adapt.

Andy Landen wrote:
There are many many bad solutions. It takes real intelligence to discover good solutions. And they will need to find them this time, because my mind is practically set, barring any major change in the plans.

Bye, then.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#1546 - 2014-10-19 23:36:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Andy Landen wrote:


And if something comes up in real life during those hours of travel, you can always drop out of "hyperspace" in between constellations and log off in the middle of nowhere (or perhaps in the middle of a wormhole system.. aaahhh!).



m8 i don't got hours to play

and safe spots aren't meant to be that safe....
Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#1547 - 2014-10-20 00:03:15 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Black Ops fatigue is a value we're happy to tune, within a reasonable range. Make a case for a number and we'll listen :)

Your mission, should you choose to accept it: Procure or create an eye-wateringly eloquent treatise on the innate beauty and excellence of the number 0.05

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1548 - 2014-10-20 00:21:57 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:


There are many many bad solutions. It takes real intelligence to discover good solutions. And they will need to find them this time, because my mind is practically set, barring any major change in the plans.


If you have a moros I will give it a new home and a much more action packed life.
K'rysteena Mocking'Jay
Doomheim
#1549 - 2014-10-20 01:45:15 UTC  |  Edited by: K'rysteena Mocking'Jay
Do you even hear yourselves here. Little Bobby "I was an idiot and left my crap at the bottom of Geminate after this stupid patch!"

"After waiting for 23.5 minutes at the convenient local station, his fatigue is down to 119.79. He jumps again, to 2R-CRW – 4.9 LY. At this point his cooldown timer is 2 hours 2 minutes 8 seconds, and his fatigue is 706.74. At this point his total distance travelled is 17.51 LY, leaving him with 37.04 LY to go. He looks at his map, and finds a 40-route jump through nullsec to get to the same destination, and figuring two minutes per system, his warp travel time for the whole journey is a bit over half the cooldown for his next jump. He decides to fly there directly rather than trying to jump any further."

No, he decides to sell his freaking Archon in place because he neither has all FREAKING day to gate it back to Deklin and he is pissed at himself for not getting it back before this stupid feature was implemented. Because he is not stupid enough to even try to gate it after he has read CCP fozzies crap regarding Heavy interdictors. Now that you have made it even more time consuming in a game that already eats up our time as it is. He probably thinks about playing something else until the next jabber ping hoping that his Archon sells fast at the ridiculously low price he has set it.
Celly S
Neutin Local LLC
#1550 - 2014-10-20 01:53:10 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:
So you don't like the system CCP has provided because you've got to wait a few minutes before you can jump again, so instead you'd prefer a system where you're utterly useless for hours on end after a jump, or a system where you take hours to actually arrive, and in the meantime you do absolutely nothing. Oh, and if you log off, you're dropped in the middle of nowhere and have to spend a few hours more just to get back to where you started, let alone arrive where you were heading in the first place.

And this is supposed to be a "better solution"? Interesting definition of "better", I'd say.

Andy Landen wrote:
Bad Solution?: CCP does something to completly undermine the veterans' skills and ships, and therefore drives mass unsubs and mass lost profit.
Yes. bad for sure.

And your "solution" doesn't "completely undermine the veterans' skills and ships even further than CCP's solution?

You're also assuming this'll drive "mass unsubs". I think you're vastly overestimating the gravity of the change and vastly underestimating the players' ability to adapt.

Andy Landen wrote:
There are many many bad solutions. It takes real intelligence to discover good solutions. And they will need to find them this time, because my mind is practically set, barring any major change in the plans.

Bye, then.



Actually, we should stop trying to convince him differently as he has found out the secret...
CCP hates him and we are all CCP alts trying to make HIS game suck so he'll leave...

and dammit, I thought we were hiding that fact pretty well...

I guess I have failed..

:(
Celly Smunt

Don't mistake fact for arrogance, supposition for fact, or disagreement for dismissal. Perception is unique in that it can be shared or singular. Run with the pack if you wish, but think for yourself. A sandwich can be a great motivator.

Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1551 - 2014-10-20 02:20:31 UTC
Lord TGR wrote:
So you don't like the system CCP has provided because you've got to wait a few minutes before you can jump again, so instead you'd prefer a system where you're utterly useless for hours on end after a jump, or a system where you take hours to actually arrive, and in the meantime you do absolutely nothing. Oh, and if you log off, you're dropped in the middle of nowhere and have to spend a few hours more just to get back to where you started, let alone arrive where you were heading in the first place.

And this is supposed to be a "better solution"? Interesting definition of "better", I'd say.

Andy Landen wrote:
Bad Solution?: CCP does something to completly undermine the veterans' skills and ships, and therefore drives mass unsubs and mass lost profit.
Yes. bad for sure.

And your "solution" doesn't "completely undermine the veterans' skills and ships even further than CCP's solution?

You're also assuming this'll drive "mass unsubs". I think you're vastly overestimating the gravity of the change and vastly underestimating the players' ability to adapt.

Andy Landen wrote:
There are many many bad solutions. It takes real intelligence to discover good solutions. And they will need to find them this time, because my mind is practically set, barring any major change in the plans.

Bye, then.

Lord TGR, I am sure that you have already seen that CCP expects you to wait 30 min to an entire week, depending on the distances traveled, so what is a few hours when you don't even have to be at the computer? And if CCP wants the capitals to travel faster under my proposal, then that is easily adjusted. Perhaps 10 min per ly will allow FCs to consider the worst case scenario to be all enemies within a couple regions; enemies 10 ly away will take 100 min to arrive on the field at that rate and the battle may be completely over by that time with the victors ready to mop up inbound ships one at a time if they have not dropped out of jump by then.

I know that my proposal scraps the wh concept of the jump drive entirely and replaces it with a "hyperdrive" style jump. wh travel is instant but that is the very thing that CCP takes issue with when large fleets jump across vast distances instantly. Technically, their should be no limitation to the distance covered by a wormhole, so we really can't hold that strongly to jump drives being bound to the wh style. I far prefer the "hyperdrive" style jump drive because it introduces travel delay and it doesn't require cynos or destinations.

To CCP, if cynos required sov structures to enable them, then reds would have to drop at sov borders and push into enemy territory through *stargates* (YES!). That would directly address a lot of the issues that you have identified here, including people dropping across vast distances into the middle of their enemy in an instant. Sov structure would require using gates first and grinding. Push too deep and you could get a capital fleet trapped in enemy territory even with current jump ranges (strategy required by FCs before invasion).

And baltec1, if you want my stuff, just send me 100 mil. I might use the ISK a few years from now if CCP fixes it and catches my attention again.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#1552 - 2014-10-20 02:26:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Iam Widdershins
Greyscale, you are knocking it out of the park with these responses. These two posts in particular made me very happy.

More feedback, though: I'll admit that I don't really like how it can take up to 30 whole days to let your fatigue decay back to 1.0. The desire to keep the constant speed to a certain LY/min is good, and having a maximum cooldown of around 3 days is fine, but adding a decay factor is not inimical to either of these.

I did a bunch of research on this and made a pretty big spreadsheet to look at tweaking the numbers.

By changing the MAXIMUM fatigue possible to 5760 (4 days instead of 3) and adding a per-minute-per-fatigue decay of 0.00008, the system is almost identical:

* A minor advantage to the player, jumping as far as you can as early as you can gets you to maximum cooldown only 15-20 minutes faster, over the course of about 24 hours (that is, the last jump is that much earlier)
* As a disadvantage to the player, the worst cooldown you can get after a jump is a bit longer, but if you jump whenever possible you should still see approximately the same cooldowns (both right around 2d 17h) and very long cooldowns will be rare and actually hard to achieve.**

With these key points being essentially the same, it takes 14 days, 23 hours, and 2 minutes to decay to minimum fatigue instead of an entire subscription month of 30 days. This means that the player can jump about like a panicked rabbit TWICE a month instead of once, and the consequences for doing so won't be quite so bad -- but tactically, neither is particularly relevant.

Higher or lower decay factors primarily achieve different maximum fatigue decay times. Generally speaking, about 1 day is knocked off for every 0.00001 in the decay factor, and the other factors discussed (time to max out your fatigue and average panic-move cooldown) do not change significantly until the time for your fatigue to decay is rather less than 2 weeks.

Yes, it seems like a slightly more complicated system. However, it should be fairly easy to implement and should be to players' advantage, and probably better for the game. Most anything that happens in EVE in 30 days can happen in 15, and I don't know of any compelling argument to let the maximum penalty be as bad as currently described.

**The maximum achievable cooldown is about 3 days 15 hours, since it decays a bit from maximum while you are waiting for the last jump's cooldown

edit: here is my spreadsheet. if you save a copy it works but it's really slow; i recommend downloading as XLSX and using actual Excel

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

K'rysteena Mocking'Jay
Doomheim
#1553 - 2014-10-20 03:10:11 UTC  |  Edited by: K'rysteena Mocking'Jay
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Greyscale, you are knocking it out of the park with these responses. These two posts in particular made me very happy.

More feedback, though: I'll admit that I don't really like how it can take up to 30 whole days to let your fatigue decay back to 1.0. The desire to keep the constant speed to a certain LY/min is good, and having a maximum cooldown of around 3 days is fine, but adding a decay factor is not inimical to either of these.

I did a bunch of research on this and made a pretty big spreadsheet to look at tweaking the numbers.

By changing the MAXIMUM fatigue possible to 5760 (4 days instead of 3) and adding a per-minute-per-fatigue decay of 0.00008, the system is almost identical:

* A minor advantage to the player, jumping as far as you can as early as you can gets you to maximum cooldown only 15-20 minutes faster, over the course of about 24 hours (that is, the last jump is that much earlier)
* As a disadvantage to the player, the worst cooldown you can get after a jump is a bit longer, but if you jump whenever possible you should still see approximately the same cooldowns (both right around 2d 17h) and very long cooldowns will be rare and actually hard to achieve.**

With these key points being essentially the same, it takes 14 days, 23 hours, and 2 minutes to decay to minimum fatigue instead of an entire subscription month of 30 days. This means that the player can jump about like a panicked rabbit TWICE a month instead of once, and the consequences for doing so won't be quite so bad -- but tactically, neither is particularly relevant.

Higher or lower decay factors primarily achieve different maximum fatigue decay times. Generally speaking, about 1 day is knocked off for every 0.00001 in the decay factor, and the other factors discussed (time to max out your fatigue and average panic-move cooldown) do not change significantly until the time for your fatigue to decay is rather less than 2 weeks.

Yes, it seems like a slightly more complicated system. However, it should be fairly easy to implement and should be to players' advantage, and probably better for the game. Most anything that happens in EVE in 30 days can happen in 15, and I don't know of any compelling argument to let the maximum penalty be as bad as currently described.

**The maximum achievable cooldown is about 3 days 15 hours, since it decays a bit from maximum while you are waiting for the last jump's cooldown

edit: here is my spreadsheet. if you save a copy it works but it's really slow; i recommend downloading as XLSX and using actual Excel


Wow excellent work in supporting a crap idea. Carriers are SUPPOSED to take ships into battle over distances, Super Carriers are SUPPOSED to do the same but bigger and better. This game already takes years to play well as it is, I don't think waiting 3 freaking days to move a ship is good return on investment for my time. Its almost like CCP wants you to have to sub more alts to combat stupidity (hmmmm there might be something in that) and you are merely taking ships people love to fly and punishing them for it.I feel like I am taking crazy pills, and all of EVE has lost their collective senses.
Byson1
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1554 - 2014-10-20 03:38:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Byson1
With these changes, is CCP adding tons of resources? Upping how fast they can be gathered and built, for null sec to compensate for the time lost in traveling? For a little while at leastQuestion

I can see how this will make space bigger if it takes longer to move force. the problem here is that the force will become sub caps so the time will not be an issue. And secondary cap fleets will be stored close enough to have 'force projection' when and if they want to take a major alliances sov. Otherwise subcaps will suffice, especially if sov HP is reduced.
Kesthely
Almost Dangerous
Wolves Amongst Strangers
#1555 - 2014-10-20 04:02:26 UTC
I'm actually quite excited about these changes. I for one do not like super alliances and coalitions spanning over multiple regions. What i'm hopeing, and i assume that this is the case for ccp as well, is that it will ignite a guerilla warfare where one or more smaller alliances / coalitions will continuesly harass the bigger alliances till there chunked up in smaller parts, due to the inability to travel to every sov attack with (nearly) full force.

I'm predicting a lot of quick reinforcements in multiple systems after phoebe to capitalize on the new mechanics. In any case with access to gate travel, full force projection will still be possible, although at a much slower rate. Also the fact to be able to go trough gates will allow new and hopefully intresting tactics to evolve.

In my vision what these changes COULD do for eve, is make the nessecity of super alliances / coalitions a lot less, and make a new kind of heavy battleship + carrier roam possible (at least within the jump range of reinforcements) All change is good, but not all change might be good for you
Iam Widdershins
Victory or Whatever
#1556 - 2014-10-20 04:49:43 UTC
K'rysteena Mocking'Jay wrote:

Wow excellent work in supporting a crap idea. Carriers are SUPPOSED to take ships into battle over distances, Super Carriers are SUPPOSED to do the same but bigger and better. This game already takes years to play well as it is, I don't think waiting 3 freaking days to move a ship is good return on investment for my time. Its almost like CCP wants you to have to sub more alts to combat stupidity (hmmmm there might be something in that) and you are merely taking ships people love to fly and punishing them for it.I feel like I am taking crazy pills, and all of EVE has lost their collective senses.

Maybe if you weren't a complete goddamn idiot you'd know how to avoid getting maximum fatigue all the time.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature

Josef Djugashvilis
#1557 - 2014-10-20 06:34:05 UTC
K'rysteena Mocking'Jay wrote:
Do you even hear yourselves here. Little Bobby "I was an idiot and left my crap at the bottom of Geminate after this stupid patch!"

"After waiting for 23.5 minutes at the convenient local station, his fatigue is down to 119.79. He jumps again, to 2R-CRW – 4.9 LY. At this point his cooldown timer is 2 hours 2 minutes 8 seconds, and his fatigue is 706.74. At this point his total distance travelled is 17.51 LY, leaving him with 37.04 LY to go. He looks at his map, and finds a 40-route jump through nullsec to get to the same destination, and figuring two minutes per system, his warp travel time for the whole journey is a bit over half the cooldown for his next jump. He decides to fly there directly rather than trying to jump any further."

No, he decides to sell his freaking Archon in place because he neither has all FREAKING day to gate it back to Deklin and he is pissed at himself for not getting it back before this stupid feature was implemented. Because he is not stupid enough to even try to gate it after he has read CCP fozzies crap regarding Heavy interdictors. Now that you have made it even more time consuming in a game that already eats up our time as it is. He probably thinks about playing something else until the next jabber ping hoping that his Archon sells fast at the ridiculously low price he has set it.


I feel for you my dear lady.

I also have better things to do than warp my slow as a three legged turtle Dominix through multiple gates to get to my destination.

Sarcasm intended.



This is not a signature.

Tikitina
Doomheim
#1558 - 2014-10-20 08:38:25 UTC
K'rysteena Mocking'Jay wrote:
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Greyscale, you are knocking it out of the park with these responses. These two posts in particular made me very happy.

More feedback, though: I'll admit that I don't really like how it can take up to 30 whole days to let your fatigue decay back to 1.0. The desire to keep the constant speed to a certain LY/min is good, and having a maximum cooldown of around 3 days is fine, but adding a decay factor is not inimical to either of these.

I did a bunch of research on this and made a pretty big spreadsheet to look at tweaking the numbers.

By changing the MAXIMUM fatigue possible to 5760 (4 days instead of 3) and adding a per-minute-per-fatigue decay of 0.00008, the system is almost identical:

* A minor advantage to the player, jumping as far as you can as early as you can gets you to maximum cooldown only 15-20 minutes faster, over the course of about 24 hours (that is, the last jump is that much earlier)
* As a disadvantage to the player, the worst cooldown you can get after a jump is a bit longer, but if you jump whenever possible you should still see approximately the same cooldowns (both right around 2d 17h) and very long cooldowns will be rare and actually hard to achieve.**

With these key points being essentially the same, it takes 14 days, 23 hours, and 2 minutes to decay to minimum fatigue instead of an entire subscription month of 30 days. This means that the player can jump about like a panicked rabbit TWICE a month instead of once, and the consequences for doing so won't be quite so bad -- but tactically, neither is particularly relevant.

Higher or lower decay factors primarily achieve different maximum fatigue decay times. Generally speaking, about 1 day is knocked off for every 0.00001 in the decay factor, and the other factors discussed (time to max out your fatigue and average panic-move cooldown) do not change significantly until the time for your fatigue to decay is rather less than 2 weeks.

Yes, it seems like a slightly more complicated system. However, it should be fairly easy to implement and should be to players' advantage, and probably better for the game. Most anything that happens in EVE in 30 days can happen in 15, and I don't know of any compelling argument to let the maximum penalty be as bad as currently described.

**The maximum achievable cooldown is about 3 days 15 hours, since it decays a bit from maximum while you are waiting for the last jump's cooldown

edit: here is my spreadsheet. if you save a copy it works but it's really slow; i recommend downloading as XLSX and using actual Excel


Wow excellent work in supporting a crap idea. Carriers are SUPPOSED to take ships into battle over distances, Super Carriers are SUPPOSED to do the same but bigger and better. This game already takes years to play well as it is, I don't think waiting 3 freaking days to move a ship is good return on investment for my time. Its almost like CCP wants you to have to sub more alts to combat stupidity (hmmmm there might be something in that) and you are merely taking ships people love to fly and punishing them for it.I feel like I am taking crazy pills, and all of EVE has lost their collective senses.


Then don't do battle where it takes three days to get there.

You are actually justifying the changes to be honest. If it takes you three days to get there, you are probably a lot farther from your home base than you should be, or want to be.

That kind of shows how this change will actually reduce the power projection of big Alliances to some extent.

Lord TGR
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1559 - 2014-10-20 08:41:02 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Lord TGR, I am sure that you have already seen that CCP expects you to wait 30 min to an entire week, depending on the distances traveled, so what is a few hours when you don't even have to be at the computer? And if CCP wants the capitals to travel faster under my proposal, then that is easily adjusted. Perhaps 10 min per ly will allow FCs to consider the worst case scenario to be all enemies within a couple regions; enemies 10 ly away will take 100 min to arrive on the field at that rate and the battle may be completely over by that time with the victors ready to mop up inbound ships one at a time if they have not dropped out of jump by then.

See, the thing is that what you're doing is nerfing all travel which isn't done by gates, so using caps' jumping ability for anything other than a GTFO card means they're useless, or you have to use a ouija board to figure out where someone's going to be and when, so you can time the arrival precisely.

What CCP's solution does is nerf travel over long distances, while still allowing caps and supercaps to be used offensively AND allowing them to get the **** out in 5-6 minutes if need be, for a slight fatigue penalty after the fact. Or you can go 2 jumps over in 6 minutes and still get in on the action, but you're stuck in that system for a while longer (I can't be arsed to calculate the exact minimum time, but it's certainly not "hours") before you can jump out if you must.

Andy Landen wrote:
I know that my proposal scraps the wh concept of the jump drive entirely and replaces it with a "hyperdrive" style jump. wh travel is instant but that is the very thing that CCP takes issue with when large fleets jump across vast distances instantly. Technically, their should be no limitation to the distance covered by a wormhole, so we really can't hold that strongly to jump drives being bound to the wh style. I far prefer the "hyperdrive" style jump drive because it introduces travel delay and it doesn't require cynos or destinations.

Your proposal also scraps JBs and the use of cynos in any way, shape or form, even for local defense. Basically, you're annoyed with a broken toe (CCP's solution), so you're bringing out the 12 gauge and shooting your entire foot off.

Andy Landen wrote:
To CCP, if cynos required sov structures to enable them, then reds would have to drop at sov borders and push into enemy territory through *stargates* (YES!). That would directly address a lot of the issues that you have identified here, including people dropping across vast distances into the middle of their enemy in an instant. Sov structure would require using gates first and grinding. Push too deep and you could get a capital fleet trapped in enemy territory even with current jump ranges (strategy required by FCs before invasion).

So cynojammers by default, then. Or you would have to say "no, $alliance#2, this is $alliance#1's sov, so your carriers and dreads can't come here. Sorry.", which isn't what I'd call very sandboxy, nor is it allowing the attacker all that much possibility to hit much of anything inside someone's space (which, with CCP's solution is still the case now, but in their solution the reason is from strategic reasons, not because of the wrong sov).
Ren Keratta
Doomheim
#1560 - 2014-10-20 09:25:31 UTC
Saisin wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:


Vincent Athena wrote:

Alts allow the most valuable asset, the player, to move about very quickly, simply by logging into the right one on the right account.
Nerfing alts, or multiple accounts, will not happen.
....


Generally speaking, yes, I think we would prefer to limit that as well if it were possible without severely mangling other big-picture goals. There's no obvious way to do so that I can see, though.



I do not believe you have much to do to be able to significantly curve the use of alts for caps operations...

With the upcoming fatigue rules, just have the jump fatigue NOT wear away when the account is not paid for, and automatically give some amount of jump fatigue to any character in an account that has just been created or reactivated.

Newbie will not care having jump fatigue, as it will wear out before they are able to use a ship for which it matters.

And large coalitions with a ton of isk and plexes, that can fund these kind of alt teleporting will just not be able to use those at will, creating an isk sink if they want to keep their alts paid for all the time.


+1 for this!!!!!