These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

A change to c6 wormhole space

First post
Author
Jonn Duune
Biomass Party
Ronins
#1 - 2015-06-29 22:44:02 UTC
c6 wormhole space is very stagnant these days, so i propose the following changes:

the statics in c6 wormholes should be variable.

C6s should have 3 types of statics: connections to c5/c6, connections to c3/c4 and connections to c1/c2.

When you close your static, you get a 50% chance of spawning a high level or low level static connection. So if you're in a c6 and you currently have a c6 static, you have a 50% chance of spawning another c6 static when you close that, if not it spawns a c5 static. Same goes for the other two connection types.

In addition to this, I would alter the c6 to c2 connections to meet the same mass and jump restrictions as c6 to c1 WHs.

Any thoughts?

My name is Jonn Duune, and I wholeheartedly support the message posted above.

Jack Miton
Perkone
Caldari State
#2 - 2015-06-29 22:57:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Miton
The issue isn't the C6 class itself, it's the people who live there.
it was very deliberately turned into farmville and messing with the statics isn't going to change that.

The solution is removing/drastically changing cap escalations so that people actually need to leave their home system.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics
#3 - 2015-06-30 02:42:55 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
The issue isn't the C6 class itself, it's the people who live there.
it was very deliberately turned into farmville and messing with the statics isn't going to change that.

The solution is removing/drastically changing cap escalations so that people actually need to leave their home system.



Confirming, c6 space is dead because of the current player base, not the statics.
Under the guise of c5 space is for pvp! a few former noho groups have found c5 space to be the opposite, if anything its even more work than being in c6 space.

but sure farm the hell out of stuff while it lasts, ccp is noticing a lack of wh deaths and you guys are racking in to much isk with out losing enough ships, so I dont see how changes arnt going to happen. because of that risk reward thing.

Im totally fine with the removal of cap escalations completely. (c5 + c6)

Failing that because sigs dont change over dt any more, sites should remember there escalation state from previous day.
I.e you get only one set of full cap escalations per site.

Possibly detune c6 sites so a group of sub caps with 3-4 ships can clear them. one time we cleared some ones c6 sites in front of them in ishtars and the salt in local was dead sea worthy.
Neckbeard Nolyfe
Zero Fun Allowed
#4 - 2015-06-30 03:45:43 UTC
GizzyBoy wrote:
Jack Miton wrote:
The issue isn't the C6 class itself, it's the people who live there.
it was very deliberately turned into farmville and messing with the statics isn't going to change that.

The solution is removing/drastically changing cap escalations so that people actually need to leave their home system.



Confirming, c6 space is dead because of the current player base, not the statics.
Under the guise of c5 space is for pvp! a few former noho groups have found c5 space to be the opposite, if anything its even more work than being in c6 space.

but sure farm the hell out of stuff while it lasts, ccp is noticing a lack of wh deaths and you guys are racking in to much isk with out losing enough ships, so I dont see how changes arnt going to happen. because of that risk reward thing.

Im totally fine with the removal of cap escalations completely. (c5 + c6)

Failing that because sigs dont change over dt any more, sites should remember there escalation state from previous day.
I.e you get only one set of full cap escalations per site.

Possibly detune c6 sites so a group of sub caps with 3-4 ships can clear them. one time we cleared some ones c6 sites in front of them in ishtars and the salt in local was dead sea worthy.


That would not change c6 space, at most it would make more vacant wormholes, as people would leave for more lucrative ways of making isk. (less bears = less targets = less content = more dota)
Now adding an additional fun factor, so people actually have a reason to live in a c6 might do it, since we have already seen that nerfs only make people not want to play the game.
A c4 static for all c6s might be interesting, as you would most definitely find content in those, and it would allow easier access to any c6's for low class groups to venture & ravage in.

~lvl 60 paladin~

Jack Miton
Perkone
Caldari State
#5 - 2015-06-30 04:44:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Miton
Neckbeard Nolyfe wrote:
That would not change c6 space, at most it would make more vacant wormholes, as people would leave for more lucrative ways of making isk. (less bears = less targets = less content = more dota)

This is just blatantly incorrect.
Mechanics wise, C6 space is perfect for PVP since it's super easy to roll a C6 static and when you get the PVP entity density high enough in C6 space, you end up hitting other PVP groups to fight very often.
Few years ago this was somewhat the case where the vast majority of C6 groups were PVP focused and all the PVE groups being in C5 space since C5s are MUCH safer for farming.

PS: adding a 2nd static to C6s would be nice too. bringing them in line with the other even numbered classes. (Hell, all Whs should have 2 statics.)

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Winthorp
#6 - 2015-06-30 06:51:44 UTC
I had a good laugh reading this.

/thread.
Bleedingthrough
#7 - 2015-06-30 07:28:20 UTC
If you remove all the non krabs only the krabs will remain.
Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#8 - 2015-06-30 09:13:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Jack Miton wrote:
Neckbeard Nolyfe wrote:
That would not change c6 space, at most it would make more vacant wormholes, as people would leave for more lucrative ways of making isk. (less bears = less targets = less content = more dota)

This is just blatantly incorrect.
Mechanics wise, C6 space is perfect for PVP since it's super easy to roll a C6 static and when you get the PVP entity density high enough in C6 space, you end up hitting other PVP groups to fight very often.
Few years ago this was somewhat the case where the vast majority of C6 groups were PVP focused and all the PVE groups being in C5 space since C5s are MUCH safer for farming.

PS: adding a 2nd static to C6s would be nice too. bringing them in line with the other even numbered classes. (Hell, all Whs should have 2 statics.)


Actually he's right. If you reduce the isk making potential in C6 space then there will be no point to living in a C6 system.

Tactically C6's are the most dangerous system from a defensive standpoint, so there needs to be an incentive to live there. Endlessly rolling to fight the same people over and over again gets old fast and has caused many entities to break apart or leave C6 space (or wormholes all together).

That said, the time for a shakeup of wormhole mechanics has passed but i do agree that all wormholes should have to statics.
Digits Kho
Anarchist Dawn
U N K N O W N
#9 - 2015-06-30 09:54:37 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:

Tactically C6's are the most dangerous system from a defensive standpoint, so there needs to be an incentive to live there. Endlessly rolling to fight the same people over and over again gets old fast and has caused many entities to break apart or leave C6 space (or wormholes all together).

That said, the time for a shakeup of wormhole mechanics has passed but i do agree that all wormholes should have to statics.


Can you name some that quit for that reason? Im just very behind on news.
GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics
#10 - 2015-06-30 09:58:59 UTC
Neckbeard Nolyfe wrote:



That would not change c6 space, at most it would make more vacant wormholes, as people would leave for more lucrative ways of making isk. (less bears = less targets = less content = more dota)
Now adding an additional fun factor, so people actually have a reason to live in a c6 might do it, since we have already seen that nerfs only make people not want to play the game.
A c4 static for all c6s might be interesting, as you would most definitely find content in those, and it would allow easier access to any c6's for low class groups to venture & ravage in.


They are either there for pvp with some easy isk or they aren't, if there are other untapped ways to make easy isk, have at it seriously..
a group that logs in for 1 and a half hours a day should never be considered in any form of content type ratio, and if you do unless you like login traps should be treated as marginal content at best.



GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics
#11 - 2015-06-30 10:20:16 UTC
Digits Kho wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:

Tactically C6's are the most dangerous system from a defensive standpoint, so there needs to be an incentive to live there. Endlessly rolling to fight the same people over and over again gets old fast and has caused many entities to break apart or leave C6 space (or wormholes all together).

That said, the time for a shakeup of wormhole mechanics has passed but i do agree that all wormholes should have to statics.


Can you name some that quit for that reason? Im just very behind on news.


Not many quit for that reason(unless they where evicted), Just alot never moved up to even more dangerous space. and preferred to stay where they where instead of take the risk.

To roll into a c6 1/112 chance of finding the one you want
If there where 10 us tz corps who liked to pew you had a 1/12 chance of finding one of those groups.

There is 512 c5's

you now need 5 x 10 pvp groups of the same size tz to get any where near the same ratio or chance of making engagable contact, Last I checked we are no where near that in c5 space.

In regards to fighting the same people over again I dont know if you tried null space of late, but its exactly the same there.
(at least for small gang)
For the most part im happy to say we are pretty good friends with all the people we fought with alot. I wouldnt expect any one else to understand but at some point all you really want in the game is a place to call your own.

The t3 meta was getting a bit boring, I dont miss that at all.


Any way, I do the stuff I like in game now, a dash of pve, with a dosh of Pvp, and a sprinkle of salt mining.
but on the doctors orders I have to cut back on the salt though.

Rek Seven
The Persuaders
#12 - 2015-06-30 11:18:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Digits Kho wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:

Tactically C6's are the most dangerous system from a defensive standpoint, so there needs to be an incentive to live there. Endlessly rolling to fight the same people over and over again gets old fast and has caused many entities to break apart or leave C6 space (or wormholes all together).

That said, the time for a shakeup of wormhole mechanics has passed but i do agree that all wormholes should have to statics.


Can you name some that quit for that reason? Im just very behind on news.


My old group probe patrol (polarized) for one and i believe NOHO went to null... I don't have a list, sorry.

Most of the big groups that lived in C6 space a year ago have either downgraded to a lower class, fragmented to create separate groups or just moved out all together.
Phoenix Jones
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2015-06-30 11:29:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
SYJ left. Huge alliance at the time solely because they couldn't find pvp (generally outnumbered people). Few Years ago though. I think Pell declared Wspace dead and that he crowned himself winner of wormholes. Left soon after :-).

C6 space lost its appeal since it's all renters and farmers, with minimal reason to go get rid of them (there so farmed to death the price of everything tanked). It provides too much comfort for minimal work. Close/crit the hole, clear out all sigs on your probe mapper, farm sites. If something shows up on probe mapper, warp off.

Now this capability has been around for years, but its become more significant lately as people have pretty much expert knowledge on how to close/crit holes and run sites.

There is a lot that can be done, from removing escalations or moving escallations to shattered wormholes, to dual static c6, to downgrading c6 space to c5, to moving gas or assets out and into shattered space.

What's proper? What will CCP do? For the next year.. probably nothing as everything is focused on Sov ATM.

Yaay!!!!

Neckbeard Nolyfe
Zero Fun Allowed
#14 - 2015-06-30 13:00:54 UTC
GizzyBoy wrote:


They are either there for pvp with some easy isk or they aren't, if there are other untapped ways to make easy isk, have at it seriously..
a group that logs in for 1 and a half hours a day should never be considered in any form of content type ratio, and if you do unless you like login traps should be treated as marginal content at best.




While what you are saying is true, there is no reason to not just downgrade your static from a c6 to a c5, and ect. (Most if not all bigger groups that left had c6 static irc.)
While asking for changes and blaming renters, game mechanics, single static is a good/bad way to go about it (depends on your perspective), not doing anything in game to change/fix that stagnation makes you as much as part of the problem as the reasons stated.
C6's space right now, is what players made it, and other players let those players made it into.

~lvl 60 paladin~

Jack Miton
Perkone
Caldari State
#15 - 2015-06-30 13:30:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Miton
Rek Seven wrote:
Actually he's right. If you reduce the isk making potential in C6 space then there will be no point to living in a C6 system.

Tactically C6's are the most dangerous system from a defensive standpoint, so there needs to be an incentive to live there. Endlessly rolling to fight the same people over and over again gets old fast and has caused many entities to break apart or leave C6 space (or wormholes all together).

i know this might be a foreign concept to you but some people actually enjoy PVP.

since you brought it up, chain rolling is for muppets who are too lazy to scan their chains. that's entirely your own fault.
it also becomes a non issue if you add a second static.

Neckbeard Nolyfe wrote:
C6's space right now, is what players made it, and other players let those players made it into.

^this is exactly what I said in my first response. like i said, the issues you see in C6 space are not due to mechanics.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Phoenix Jones
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2015-06-30 13:37:18 UTC
Partially not due to mechanic.

We wouldn't be having this discussion if there were 500 C6 space wormholes vs the 100 that presently exist.

Or maybe we would.

Yaay!!!!

Jonn Duune
Biomass Party
Ronins
#17 - 2015-06-30 14:52:21 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Partially not due to mechanic.

We wouldn't be having this discussion if there were 500 C6 space wormholes vs the 100 that presently exist.

Or maybe we would.

it might be worse if there were 500 of them, you'd have the same amount of bears, just spread out over 5x the space.

My name is Jonn Duune, and I wholeheartedly support the message posted above.

Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#18 - 2015-06-30 15:14:14 UTC
Currently the only big corporations living in C6 that I know, are Dropbears and QEX. The rest are just farmers

Wormholer for life.

calaretu
Honestly We didnt know
Riddle us this
#19 - 2015-06-30 15:28:39 UTC
If c6 got a second static I (and others) would reconsider them.
Jonn Duune
Biomass Party
Ronins
#20 - 2015-06-30 15:35:09 UTC
calaretu wrote:
If c6 got a second static I (and others) would reconsider them.



what kind of static would you want? a second j-space? or say a permanent null static for all c6s that always opens when spawned...?

My name is Jonn Duune, and I wholeheartedly support the message posted above.

123Next pageLast page