These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[AEGIS] Fleet Warp Changes - Please see devblog!

First post First post First post
Author
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1601 - 2015-06-18 17:35:48 UTC
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
So bring more than one.


I suspect people won't do much of that for the same reason they don't use covops as tackle in a gate camp, or roaming fleet.


They dont currently because they dont need to. We used them in the past, we will use them in the furture when this lands. In terms of adapting to change this is an easy one.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#1602 - 2015-06-18 17:37:17 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Arrendis wrote:

*** - HIDDEN STEALTH TRICK QUESTION: Baltec's actually flying his HARPYFLEET fit, so his Megathron Navy Issue warps at the same 5.5 au/s as an assault frigate, with similar velocity/agility numbers. (really, Baltec, I love those insane fits of yours.)


Fun fact, I have a commandthron that can double up as a scout prober :getin:


This surprises me not even a little.
Naglerr
235MeV
#1603 - 2015-06-18 17:47:30 UTC
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/

This discussion(linked) makes a few things very clear to me:

  • The currently proposed removal of game functionality seems destined to occur.
  • There will be future changes to the game intended to remove additional functionality from the game for some reason.
  • The end result product will not in any way resemble the EVE game that I currently enjoy playing.


I don't know why I'm surprised at all, when CCP messed with the spawn distances to wormholes and the majority response was "do not want" they did it anyway. Why would 80 pages of mostly negative feedback from their customers alter their plans now? I guess it just rubs me the wrong way that they refuse to even compromise when confronted with such voluminous opposition. This situation applied to real business would be something like a major car manufacturer issuing a mandatory recall where they disable all cruise control because that feature causes people to use their cars in a way the manufacturer doesn't like.

Could I adapt? Yes, I suppose I could find a way to have content in this new game, but what it boils down to for me is this: I do not like the game CCP is changing EVE to be and I don't want to.
Sierra Payne
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1604 - 2015-06-18 17:49:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Sierra Payne wrote:
Idea:

Let's assume for a second that this all goes through.

Please allow players to manually set their warp-speed in order to be able to warp at similar speed as the rest of your fleet.
That way we can control our arrival time somewhat acceptably, and not have the Guardians land 20 seconds before the DPS (or other way around).

Please?


Just use a cloaky scout and fleet warp to it. Works the say way it currently does.


I am a wormhole player, which means I need to be able to warp to my bookmarks at 0. A cloaky scout will never be at 0 on the hole when a hostile fleet is present, which means you need insane amounts of effort to get warp-ins behind/around the wormhole even if that wormhole has no other celestials in the direction where your bookmark is.

If we would purely follow your suggestion, it would be extremely cumbersome for anything to be done and really kill the fun.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1605 - 2015-06-18 17:57:02 UTC
Sierra Payne wrote:


I am a wormhole player, which means I need to be able to warp to my bookmarks at 0. A cloaky scout will never be at 0 on the hole when a hostile fleet is present, which means you need insane amounts of effort to get warp-ins behind/around the wormhole even if that wormhole has no other celestials in the direction where your bookmark is.

If we would purely follow your suggestion, it would be extremely cumbersome for anything to be done and really kill the fun.


You can warp to 0 on a cloaky.

Simply tell it when you enter warp so it can move out of the way.
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1606 - 2015-06-18 18:06:43 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
They dont currently because they dont need to. We used them in the past, we will use them in the furture when this lands. In terms of adapting to change this is an easy one.


I don't think there's any doubt we can adapt.

Question is why we should adapt to something that:
- makes the FC do more and tedious work, often at the cost of getting additional alts,
- reduces the quality of life for the average pilot by making them sit around longer,
- cause balance issues with kiting setups by making them even more un-catchable,
- forces WH groups to relegate a previously useful and engaged pilot to the position of a mobile bookmarks, and slow travel down by about 2x,
- etc. etc.

When it's not even clear that this change will achieve what it has set out to.
Sierra Payne
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1607 - 2015-06-18 18:11:51 UTC
Awkward Pi Duolus wrote:

- forces WH groups to relegate a previously useful and engaged pilot to the position of a mobile bookmarks, and slow travel down by about 2x,


I can't agree more.

As wormhole group you're already limited to the mass you can bring, along with the lack of people that play w-space outside the major groups. It's pretty challenging to recruit people now, and it'll be only worse if they keep pushing things like this. It forces me to triple box instead of dualbox, simply because it's insanely more tedious.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#1608 - 2015-06-18 18:19:12 UTC
Naglerr wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/

This discussion(linked) makes a few things very clear to me:

  • The currently proposed removal of game functionality seems destined to occur.
  • There will be future changes to the game intended to remove additional functionality from the game for some reason.
  • The end result product will not in any way resemble the EVE game that I currently enjoy playing.


I don't know why I'm surprised at all, when CCP messed with the spawn distances to wormholes and the majority response was "do not want" they did it anyway. Why would 80 pages of mostly negative feedback from their customers alter their plans now? I guess it just rubs me the wrong way that they refuse to even compromise when confronted with such voluminous opposition. This situation applied to real business would be something like a major car manufacturer issuing a mandatory recall where they disable all cruise control because that feature causes people to use their cars in a way the manufacturer doesn't like.

Could I adapt? Yes, I suppose I could find a way to have content in this new game, but what it boils down to for me is this: I do not like the game CCP is changing EVE to be and I don't want to.


Those reddit comments are just about the most depressing thing I have read in a while.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
#1609 - 2015-06-18 18:19:55 UTC
Naglerr wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a8pss/recording_of_ccp_fleet_warp_meeting_with_wormhole/

This discussion(linked) makes a few things very clear to me:

  • The currently proposed removal of game functionality seems destined to occur.
  • There will be future changes to the game intended to remove additional functionality from the game for some reason.
  • The end result product will not in any way resemble the EVE game that I currently enjoy playing.


I don't know why I'm surprised at all, when CCP messed with the spawn distances to wormholes and the majority response was "do not want" they did it anyway. Why would 80 pages of mostly negative feedback from their customers alter their plans now? I guess it just rubs me the wrong way that they refuse to even compromise when confronted with such voluminous opposition. This situation applied to real business would be something like a major car manufacturer issuing a mandatory recall where they disable all cruise control because that feature causes people to use their cars in a way the manufacturer doesn't like.

Could I adapt? Yes, I suppose I could find a way to have content in this new game, but what it boils down to for me is this: I do not like the game CCP is changing EVE to be and I don't want to.



At this point, we'd be better off giving developers back the ability to spawn items at will. It's unfortunate that the industry learned so little from the mistakes of SOE with Star Wars Galaxies.
Brother Mercury
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1610 - 2015-06-18 18:30:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Brother Mercury
baltec1 wrote:
Sierra Payne wrote:


I am a wormhole player, which means I need to be able to warp to my bookmarks at 0. A cloaky scout will never be at 0 on the hole when a hostile fleet is present, which means you need insane amounts of effort to get warp-ins behind/around the wormhole even if that wormhole has no other celestials in the direction where your bookmark is.

If we would purely follow your suggestion, it would be extremely cumbersome for anything to be done and really kill the fun.


You can warp to 0 on a cloaky.

Simply tell it when you enter warp so it can move out of the way.


The question/problem is just this: how does making this a reality, that is, this added step of warping to cloaky fleet member instead of warping fleet directly, achieve the stated goal of CCP (i.e. more fleet member participation) when 95% of the time, the FC will be the one doing this cloaky role?

Most of us here, and I think correctly, have argued it doesn't. CCP is removing playability in return for a major inconvenience (and let's be honest, just another arbitrarily added step) which will only make fleet engagements THAT much more of a pain in the ass. And for what? One person (assuming it's not the FC -- which as we already know it will be) to have a slightly larger, albeit boring role?

I don't think most people are against increasing fleet member participation -- there have been MANY good suggestions posted that would accomplish this goal in a better way.

What scares people is the fact that CCP is clearly going to just go ahead with this change regardless of the other better ideas.

On a related note, I do believe that this change will significantly reduce new player subscriptions, unfortunately.
Rekatan
We Heart U
#1611 - 2015-06-18 18:30:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Rekatan
Larrikin and others @ CCP need to read http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/3a90hi/ccpls_root_cause_analysis_or_how_to_fix_what_you/ and then reread it as many times as it takes. There's way too much "can't see the forest for the trees" going on here. After listening to both of the recorded Q&As, it really boils down to this:

If you're having to explain away more "side effects" and "drawbacks" than the initial change would have provided in terms of benefits, then the entire premise for the change is flawed. The above post does an outstanding job of going into more detail on that.

Would Eve benefit from removal of fleet warp (what this in fact is for most practical applications)? Possibly. Is CCP prepared for the development time/cost associated with providing adequate replacements so as to enhance the player's experience rather than ruin it? After listening to these two Q&As, clearly not.

Adding more tedium to the game is NOT how you make players more involved... No one wants this change for next month because it doesn't add content, it just adds headache. Once it adds content, it will likely receive a very different reception.
Awkward Pi Duolus
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1612 - 2015-06-18 18:31:28 UTC
baltec1 wrote:

You can warp to 0 on a cloaky.

Simply tell it when you enter warp so it can move out of the way.


He's talking about being a warp in for the hole itself. You don't sit at 0 on the hole. Even at 3k, you can now land up to 5km away when you warp to said cloaky at 0. I suppose the slowdown multiplier is more than 2x..
Iowa Banshee
Fenrir Vangard
#1613 - 2015-06-18 18:35:57 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:



As always we adapt - So the new method will be

After scanning jump out of the Buzzard into the Domi
Wait 10mins for the bookmarks to update
Check that the 2 other fleet members have the bookmarks
Announce jump to XXX at 20km
Announce 3-2-1 Warp

It just seems like there's a lot more needless stuff than click "warp fleet"






Scan target, warp buzzard to it, warp the fleet to the buzzard.


Then warp Buzzard to POS jump in Domi to join in fleet. Warp back to tower jump in the Buzzard warp to sig ... rinse & repeat - or maybe jetcan the sigs?

Amazing -- In a civilization so advanced it has faster than light travel, stargates, A communication channel between players that allows everything from social chat, swapping fits & overviews to instant cash transfers AND the best way to get a spot in space to warp to is Flush it out & scoop it up

Arrendis
TK Corp
#1614 - 2015-06-18 18:43:10 UTC
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Amazing -- In a civilization so advanced it has faster than light travel, stargates, A communication channel between players that allows everything from social chat, swapping fits & overviews to instant cash transfers AND the best way to get a spot in space to warp to is Flush it out & scoop it up


That's right - superluminal communications completely unaffected by distances of thousands of light years, and my ship's computer can't give your ship's computer the 3 pairs of numbers that form coordinates when we're 1500m apart.
Domania
Must Be EOL Cuz Wormholes Dont Jiggle Like This
#1615 - 2015-06-18 18:54:07 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hi Gentle Space Foke,

As announced on the o7 show we are making some changes to fleet warp.


Nope.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1616 - 2015-06-18 19:45:36 UTC
Somehow I don't think subscription income works the way people think.

This type of change is bold, and it might seem to mean fewer vet subs, and then EVE will die. But consider the possibility that most of EVE's subscription / real money income is from baddies buying PLEX.

So the income reality might actually be the opposite of what you think--less pressure on PLEX means lower ISK value on market, which means baddies will buy more PLEX to have the same amount of ISK, assuming their ISK spending stays the same.

It's a nice thought that EVE is being revamped for the sake of pure gameplay, subscriptions be damned... but that's unrealistic.
A55 Burger
Weiland Yutani Corporation
#1617 - 2015-06-18 20:04:48 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Somehow I don't think subscription income works the way people think.

This type of change is bold, and it might seem to mean fewer vet subs, and then EVE will die. But consider the possibility that most of EVE's subscription / real money income is from baddies buying PLEX.

So the income reality might actually be the opposite of what you think--less pressure on PLEX means lower ISK value on market, which means baddies will buy more PLEX to have the same amount of ISK, assuming their ISK spending stays the same.

It's a nice thought that EVE is being revamped for the sake of pure gameplay, subscriptions be damned... but that's unrealistic.



An amusing, relevant quote.

Jayne: "Can't get paid if you crawl away like a little bitty bug, neither. I got a share in this job. Ten percent of nothing is—let me do the math here. Nothing into nothin'. Carry the nothin'..."
Dermeisen
#1618 - 2015-06-18 20:10:51 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Dermeisen wrote:
QuestionHow about squad warp, but no squad warp for cloaked ships.....

It is useful to use take a parsimonious approach to each goals and address each with the least invasive change.

Or maybe remove covert ops cloak from bombers? Tweak their warp deceleration constant and/or fiddle with their bomb release timings to balance them. (Instead of nerfing fleet warp.)



+1 for taking me at my word, and while this is appealing and bombers prevent a cool battleship meta this reply assumes that bombers are the only reason for nerfing fleet warp and we know that this isn't the case. Therefore in essence it's a straw man argument, i.e. an attempt to reframe CCPS concerns in a way that one can attack or ridicule.

I don't think bombers deserve to be complete disabled either, they are cool and the torp version is pretty effective for a low skill point player to have some pretty radical time.

On grid probing is the problem, and this change would be good for the game, if a little awkward. So for goodness sake if we want a positive change then lets not be too disingenuous.

"Not the Boreworms!"

stoicfaux
#1619 - 2015-06-18 20:17:32 UTC  |  Edited by: stoicfaux
Arrendis wrote:
Iowa Banshee wrote:
Amazing -- In a civilization so advanced it has faster than light travel, stargates, A communication channel between players that allows everything from social chat, swapping fits & overviews to instant cash transfers AND the best way to get a spot in space to warp to is Flush it out & scoop it up


That's right - superluminal communications completely unaffected by distances of thousands of light years, and my ship's computer can't give your ship's computer the 3 pairs of numbers that form coordinates when we're 1500m apart.

Meh. According to the lore, your ship's gravity capacitor (not computer) has to lock onto a gravity signal into order to warp to it. So in theory, random bookmarks shouldn't work. Nor should warping to most/all sub-caps work. Nor should any target smaller than a "cluster of asteroids..."

If CCP can completely ignore their lore, then appealing to logic is probably a sub-optimal debate tactic as well.

edit: Gravity capacitor, not computer, decides where you warp.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.

Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1620 - 2015-06-18 20:27:20 UTC
People just act as if this was a change to something absolutely unheard in EvE when all it really is is a sort of roll back to how things were a couple of years back when there was far less holding hands and catering to the aut****.

People managed back then, they actually manged just fine and people will manage again.

And as of 80 pages "negative" feedback, I see mostly alts and minor scrubs like myself posting against it except I am not against it, I am in favor still does not change that I am a minor scrub none the less while the guys from the major alliance and a lot of vets who actually still know how things used to be a couple of years back are very much in favor of the change.

It seems that the people against it are the newer ones and people who think that log in, join fleet, assign drones, watch furry smut, come back and admire your increased kill board stats is indeed leet peeveepee.