These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Jump Fatigue Feedback

First post First post First post
Author
SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#241 - 2015-08-14 19:28:13 UTC
So according to the graphs, capitals are being used a lot more than prior to Aegia and Phoebe. But how is this possible? According to certain groups of players, they are almost never used now. Even as far as saying the game is dying because of the changes in Aegia and Phoebe.

How is this possible?
Vic Jefferson
ElitistOps
WE FORM V0LTA
#242 - 2015-08-14 19:57:58 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
My aim was to give people back the ability to do multiply jumps per night in search of a fight, as apposed to logging of because fatigue stops you from playing.


This is a good thing, but I think we can agree that a proposed fix being sov-exclusive is bad for the three other play styles that use caps, as well as entrenching existing sov vs potential new sov.


Rek Seven wrote:

B) I didn't consider wormholes... I agree wormholes should have access to the 'gas station' structure because their power projection is limited by wormhole mass mechanics... As for the low sec - they already don't have to worry about interdiction bubble so, meh.

Why can't the attackers just use a combination of wormholes, gates and cynos to get where they need to be? If you are looking for a return to the days where you could jump across the map in one night, I don't think that is going to happen.


Wormhole null-null travel was just severely nerfed. No one wants to return to the chaos of distance not meaning anything, where all fight possibilities are quickly exhausted and stagnation sets in, nor do people want to rot in the stagnation of capitals not being able to move. Maybe the WH force projection changes were good, maybe they weren't.

If I was going to do the gas station concept, it would be a permanent (until it is destroyed) structure which is owned by an alliance. It could be anchored in Low, Null, or NPC Null. While it is up, once per week the alliance executor can pick (one/two) regions (T1,T2) where capitals do not accrue fatigue of any kind. Hyperspatial Telemetry Array. Let's look what this does:

A)Conflict Flash Point. Tired of incessant hot drops? Want to be able to attack something that is meaningful? Well now can strike at an enemies mobility directly.

B)Allows attack and defence, but requires commitment. If you go on the attack, you get two regions where you get a get out of fatigue card, but this can only be changed so often, and not with enough frequency to respond to everything. If you want to do an invasion or deployment, you have some mobility now, as long as you broadcast this and stay committed.

C)Pressures coalitions. All alliances in a coalition could all set the same regions, but then they become less able to respond to things as they develop. If they set different regions to deal with defence as well as attack, then you have essentially split up the great cap herds. Suddenly the potential for chess, rather than checkers, dawns on capital warfare.

D)A system like this is not tied to sov. People could have fun with these in low or NPC null, where they could spark fights and extend spheres of influence and capital threats just far enough for fun, but not so far that it is wildly excessive. Changing it once per week really slows down how far you can go quickly.

SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
So according to the graphs, capitals are being used a lot more than prior to Aegia and Phoebe. But how is this possible? According to certain groups of players, they are almost never used now. Even as far as saying the game is dying because of the changes in Aegia and Phoebe.

How is this possible?


These metrics aren't actually detailed enough to form educated hypothesis about it. Think about what BL self destructing 50 dreads does to these numbers, or people just blowing up their caps due to insurance or inability to move them now. You would need really detailed numbers to be able to say anything with confidence.

It's very similar to the damage graphs they released a bit ago, showing Battleships with the lion's share of the PVP damage dealt over a period of time. Looking at that graph, one would believe everyone is flying a battleship or BC, but we all know this is hilariously erroneous. Just providing a shallow figure alone without real data doesn't tell you anything - You can make graphs display whatever you want.

That being said, there are a few hotspots where capital ranges overlap and do have more potential for capital content than they used to, but that doesn't solve the issue of these being a select few locations, and almost all of them Lowsec, or very accessible sov space.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#243 - 2015-08-14 21:20:30 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
So according to the graphs, capitals are being used a lot more than prior to Aegia and Phoebe. But how is this possible? According to certain groups of players, they are almost never used now. Even as far as saying the game is dying because of the changes in Aegia and Phoebe.

How is this possible?


These metrics aren't actually detailed enough to form educated hypothesis about it. Think about what BL self destructing 50 dreads does to these numbers, or people just blowing up their caps due to insurance or inability to move them now. You would need really detailed numbers to be able to say anything with confidence.

It's very similar to the damage graphs they released a bit ago, showing Battleships with the lion's share of the PVP damage dealt over a period of time. Looking at that graph, one would believe everyone is flying a battleship or BC, but we all know this is hilariously erroneous. Just providing a shallow figure alone without real data doesn't tell you anything - You can make graphs display whatever you want.

That being said, there are a few hotspots where capital ranges overlap and do have more potential for capital content than they used to, but that doesn't solve the issue of these being a select few locations, and almost all of them Lowsec, or very accessible sov space.


So your saying we should ignore the graph?
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#244 - 2015-08-14 21:26:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Sentamon
Arsine Mayhem wrote:
Ignore the goon sh1tposting and everything will be normal again.


The propaganda to generate views and sell ads is pretty easy to see.

Still amazing that Goons think it's 2008 again and they're actually doing anything but boring the crap out of everyone.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Vic Jefferson
ElitistOps
WE FORM V0LTA
#245 - 2015-08-14 22:20:13 UTC
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:
So your saying we should ignore the graph?


Absolutely. Everyone is going to see what they want to see in it unless we are presented with the hard data behind it, with which we can make testable hypothesis. Me thinks it is like a weasel.

I'm shocked EvE players are so easily bamboozled.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#246 - 2015-08-14 22:36:53 UTC
Tau Phoenix wrote:
Have a bonus reduction to jump fatigue for jumping within your own sov area. If you own the sov you should have this benefit awarded to you as the sov owner. This could also be indexed in some way to the sov index.

I still don't see what problem this is a solution to
Philip Ogtaulmolfi
We are not bad. Just unlucky
#247 - 2015-08-14 22:52:58 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:

I think its an interesting concept. One of my concerns about it is the additional complexity, 5 timers instead of one for players to keep track of?


I don't exactly know what you are talking about, but reading expressions of this kind makes me think that the smartest, most dedicated crowd on-line players have suddenly became a bunch of idiots. I manage several hundreds of market orders and my brain still works.

Why this desire to simplify, even to the point that you consider that managing FIVE whatever is to much for the average player? Children are not coming to play EVE whatever you do. Let us have some complexity so we have a rich and varied game, with several options for everything.

That's all.
Equto
Imperium Technologies
#248 - 2015-08-14 23:25:20 UTC
Vic Jefferson wrote:


Wormhole null-null travel was just severely nerfed. No one wants to return to the chaos of distance not meaning anything, where all fight possibilities are quickly exhausted and stagnation sets in, nor do people want to rot in the stagnation of capitals not being able to move. Maybe the WH force projection changes were good, maybe they weren't.

If I was going to do the gas station concept, it would be a permanent (until it is destroyed) structure which is owned by an alliance. It could be anchored in Low, Null, or NPC Null. While it is up, once per week the alliance executor can pick (one/two) regions (T1,T2) where capitals do not accrue fatigue of any kind. Hyperspatial Telemetry Array. Let's look what this does:

A)Conflict Flash Point. Tired of incessant hot drops? Want to be able to attack something that is meaningful? Well now can strike at an enemies mobility directly.

B)Allows attack and defence, but requires commitment. If you go on the attack, you get two regions where you get a get out of fatigue card, but this can only be changed so often, and not with enough frequency to respond to everything. If you want to do an invasion or deployment, you have some mobility now, as long as you broadcast this and stay committed.

C)Pressures coalitions. All alliances in a coalition could all set the same regions, but then they become less able to respond to things as they develop. If they set different regions to deal with defence as well as attack, then you have essentially split up the great cap herds. Suddenly the potential for chess, rather than checkers, dawns on capital warfare.

D)A system like this is not tied to sov. People could have fun with these in low or NPC null, where they could spark fights and extend spheres of influence and capital threats just far enough for fun, but not so far that it is wildly excessive. Changing it once per week really slows down how far you can go quickly.



The problem with this is that it allows the same exact problem that caused the change in the first place, Large null-sec groups with massive super and capital fleets dropping on low-sec and small groups and offers no way for them to really fight back. Not only that, it favors people who are already setup far more than attacking groups because their capitals will have no fatigue and all of yours will have fatigue. So you take the already fortress sov by the fact that fatigue exist and all caps have limited range and make it stronger by saying "we give you this structure to remove your fatigue, now you can helicopter all around your space without worry".
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#249 - 2015-08-15 00:09:04 UTC
afkalt wrote:
I'm at work, can't test it. I have a nasty feeling docking will overrule it, but perhaps not.

They did say there is an option of tying fatigue to a hull - if that is the case and an "event" can attach to a hull, I'd bet there is a way to tie a "do not repackage" flag to a hull.


edit: Or an active module which prevents docking (....) with a real long cycle time. I feel an agility kick would be required for survival though. Unclear how DT would handle this.

I also like the idea of something that makes the outbound trip take longer so that ambush using the method is impossible (i.e. the cap using them method cannot ambush, not the other way). Again, not thought enough about how to balance that.

I tested this tonight. If you have a MJD on cooldown you cannot unfit it, even at a station. However, repackaging your ship not only allows you to bypass this, it resets the cooldown on the MJD.

Obviously CCP could change this, but using current mechanics there is plenty of room for abuse.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

h4kun4
Gang Bang Pandas
#250 - 2015-08-15 00:15:02 UTC
Well, i can only repeat what i've said on page 5 or 6

- No jump fatigue for Carriers and Dreads, no matter the region of space
- No jump fatigue in your own Sov in the region your capitol is set for Jump Bridges, Black Ops and Titan Bridges, as long as they begin and end in your home region and your own sov.
- Normal jump fatigue for freighters, rorquals, supercapitals (incl. titans) and black ops BS
- reduced fuel bay/increased fuel consumption for all capitals to make max 10-15 LY.
- special fuel bay for strontium (1250 units seems fair)








SilentAsTheGrave
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#251 - 2015-08-15 00:41:17 UTC
h4kun4 wrote:
Well, i can only repeat what i've said on page 5 or 6

- No jump fatigue for Carriers and Dreads, no matter the region of space
- No jump fatigue in your own Sov in the region your capitol is set for Jump Bridges, Black Ops and Titan Bridges, as long as they begin and end in your home region and your own sov.
- Normal jump fatigue for freighters, rorquals, supercapitals (incl. titans) and black ops BS
- reduced fuel bay/increased fuel consumption for all capitals to make max 10-15 LY.
- special fuel bay for strontium (1250 units seems fair)

So like... all but the complete removal of jump fatigue.

That's ******* stupid.
Duffyman
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#252 - 2015-08-15 01:10:47 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
Hi Space Friends,

Thanks for those that attended the Q&A session today, we appreciate those who took the time. We'd like to use this thread as a method of discussing Jump Fatigue ideas.

Some of the interesting suggestions that we'd heard and would like to see player opinions on -
  • Altering jump ranges
  • Altering jump fatigue curves
  • Moving jump fatigue from character based to ship based
  • Alternative FTL systems (Hyperdrive anyone?)
  • Sovereignty effects on Jump Fatigue (e.g. jumping out of/back into capitals reducing jump fatigue)
  • Balance of Jump projection v's Gate projection v's Wormhole projection
  • Jump Fatigue effecting combat effectiveness instead of limiting movement
  • Move-Mode for Capitals for move ops (e.g. Transforming into move mode (24 hour process) reduces combat capacity to near 0)
  • Active methods of reducing jump fatigue (Modules, Skills, Drugs)
  • What does local-content mean to you?


We'd also love to hear your ideas, post away space friends.

Metrics Pron


1 - The curves are fine, I just don't see the point of having more than a couple of days. The goal is to stop having big guys teleporting around the map right? Just cap max fatigue at, let's say... 72 hours.
2 - No, character based makes more sense
3 - Dunno what you mean
4 - Jump Bridges are pretty much useless. Remove fatigue from JBs completely, but make JB's exclusive for alliances. That way, blocs can't use them to speed up deployments
5 - It was actually ok as it was before you nerfed WH's from null to null
6 - I'd rather face fatigue than being jumped with my pants down in a move op
7 - No methods for reducing fatigue. It adds unnecessary complexity
8 - Local content means you can fight in any of the adjacent regions. This is totally doable by gate and a couple of jumps

Other ideas:

- increase a couple of LY's range for capitals. It won't make people teleport all over the map but it'll make life easier
- Remove JDC skill and make the range a part of the hull. Either reimburse the SP or replace it with a Jump Fatigue reduction skill (less preferred option)
WhiteHalo117
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#253 - 2015-08-15 01:12:05 UTC
h4kun4 wrote:
Well, i can only repeat what i've said on page 5 or 6

- No jump fatigue for Carriers and Dreads, no matter the region of space
- No jump fatigue in your own Sov in the region your capitol is set for Jump Bridges, Black Ops and Titan Bridges, as long as they begin and end in your home region and your own sov.
- Normal jump fatigue for freighters, rorquals, supercapitals (incl. titans) and black ops BS
- reduced fuel bay/increased fuel consumption for all capitals to make max 10-15 LY.
- special fuel bay for strontium (1250 units seems fair)


This is an obvious troll, nice try 2/10 please never come back again.
Vic Jefferson
ElitistOps
WE FORM V0LTA
#254 - 2015-08-15 01:15:02 UTC
Equto wrote:


The problem with this is that it allows the same exact problem that caused the change in the first place, Large null-sec groups with massive super and capital fleets dropping on low-sec and small groups and offers no way for them to really fight back. Not only that, it favors people who are already setup far more than attacking groups because their capitals will have no fatigue and all of yours will have fatigue. So you take the already fortress sov by the fact that fatigue exist and all caps have limited range and make it stronger by saying "we give you this structure to remove your fatigue, now you can helicopter all around your space without worry".


Somewhat, but not really?

It would give them 2 regions without fatigue, rather than 40 null regions plus lowsec. That's less than 5% of the mobility they had before Phoebe. Plus they can't be everywhere at once like they used to be - you have a much smaller window of places you can be within a time frame. it also broadcasts the en-threatened zones: don't fly there and you won't get hotdropped.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?

Ripard Teg
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#255 - 2015-08-15 01:26:49 UTC
CCP Larrikin wrote:
  • Move-Mode for Capitals for move ops (e.g. Transforming into move mode (24 hour process) reduces combat capacity to near 0)
  • This one would undo a lot of the good work you guys have done so far. Large coalitions would respond to it by using their caches of carriers to load a few hundred ships into them, "move" them a long distance behind enemy lines, attack sov, then use the previous set of carriers left there to "move" back in the same day/few days. The pilots of those ships, meanwhile, would cross the intervening space in uncatchable inties.

    Think of it as a somewhat slower titan bridge. It would give the large coalitions permission to go back to growing their borders, since they could police those borders at longer distances.

    So yeah, please don't do that one. The problem you're trying to solve are literal one-time moves of assets. I'd rather see something analogous to the once-per-year clone jump that you currently allow to corp home systems. That'd be a hell of a lot harder to abuse.

    aka Jester, who apparently was once Deemed Worthy To Wield The Banhammer to good effect.

    Equto
    Imperium Technologies
    #256 - 2015-08-15 01:38:01 UTC
    Vic Jefferson wrote:
    Equto wrote:


    The problem with this is that it allows the same exact problem that caused the change in the first place, Large null-sec groups with massive super and capital fleets dropping on low-sec and small groups and offers no way for them to really fight back. Not only that, it favors people who are already setup far more than attacking groups because their capitals will have no fatigue and all of yours will have fatigue. So you take the already fortress sov by the fact that fatigue exist and all caps have limited range and make it stronger by saying "we give you this structure to remove your fatigue, now you can helicopter all around your space without worry".


    Somewhat, but not really?

    It would give them 2 regions without fatigue, rather than 40 null regions plus lowsec. That's less than 5% of the mobility they had before Phoebe. Plus they can't be everywhere at once like they used to be - you have a much smaller window of places you can be within a time frame. it also broadcasts the en-threatened zones: don't fly there and you won't get hotdropped.



    I live in null and didn't find it that big of a problem, but every low-sec group I talked to was telling me not of groups moving 5-6 regions to drop by literally 1-2 regions at most. Honestly I can't think of a good way of allowing capitals to be useful and not allowing dunking in lowsec. It almost seems you allow the ships to be useful and can be used as a movement method and dunking in one way or another, or you limit them so much they are useless but small groups are happy. I would much prefer the ability to have larger fights than what we currently have especially since moving ships, especially capitals, has become so painful I would rather quit than do an extended move op again.
    Suitonia
    V0LTA
    WE FORM V0LTA
    #257 - 2015-08-15 02:36:06 UTC
    What about heavily reduced Jump Fatigue, for jumping to a Cynosural Generator Array (The kind anchored at a POS), (but still giving the current jumping timer). It actually says in the description "Stationary Cynosural Generator, for rapid relocation of jump-capable vessels".

    Cynosural Generator Array requires Strategic Index at level 2 (Holding space for at least 21 days), so it's not something you can easily put up in an offensive, it also doesn't help large null-sec alliances drop into lowsec or across the map too easily, as it's not possible to anchor such arrays in empire or NPC space. Also jumping to a Generator Array is actually a lot more risky than usual for capitals, being 15km off a POS at a set point where potential hostiles know the point of entry can easily find themselves interdicted or killed by fishing fleets.

    Also, Unlike Jump-Bridges, which can be shared across multiple alliances, Cynosural Beacons can only be used by the owning alliance, and the way jump geometry usually works is that there are often chokepoints, so it's not like the Imperium can easily just have a constellation with 3-4 different systems owned by different member alliances with a Generator Array in each for example. Also, With Fozzie Sov, it's a lot easier to assault ihubs by roaming gangs than it was in the past, so 'long' "cyno generator highways" can easily be assaulted, you can also take the old-school method of reinforcing the POS and shoot the Cynosural Generator.

    It also gives meaning to holding certain systems (jump chokepoints), and means for opposition to assault them and try and take them for their own.

    Contributer to Eve is Easy:  https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos

    Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o

    Inslander Wessette
    Unleashed' Fury
    The Initiative.
    #258 - 2015-08-15 04:31:06 UTC
    I posted my suggestions here about a week ago . it prolly needs a few tweaks .

    My suggestion thread of Jump fatigue
    afkalt
    Republic Military School
    Minmatar Republic
    #259 - 2015-08-15 07:47:54 UTC
    Bronson Hughes wrote:
    afkalt wrote:
    I'm at work, can't test it. I have a nasty feeling docking will overrule it, but perhaps not.

    They did say there is an option of tying fatigue to a hull - if that is the case and an "event" can attach to a hull, I'd bet there is a way to tie a "do not repackage" flag to a hull.


    edit: Or an active module which prevents docking (....) with a real long cycle time. I feel an agility kick would be required for survival though. Unclear how DT would handle this.

    I also like the idea of something that makes the outbound trip take longer so that ambush using the method is impossible (i.e. the cap using them method cannot ambush, not the other way). Again, not thought enough about how to balance that.

    I tested this tonight. If you have a MJD on cooldown you cannot unfit it, even at a station. However, repackaging your ship not only allows you to bypass this, it resets the cooldown on the MJD.

    Obviously CCP could change this, but using current mechanics there is plenty of room for abuse.


    Well ain't that annoying X

    Thanks for testing and feedback though.
    Spugg Galdon
    Last Rites.
    Villore Accords
    #260 - 2015-08-15 09:03:15 UTC
    Okay. Jump fatigue. Power projection. Instant travel. Etc etc.

    Is jump fatigue necessary?
    Personally I think it is but should either be capped or reduced. It's a little too punishing at the minute.

    Power projection (as in jump range) is probably about right at he minute.

    Instant travel is where I feel there are problems.

    I don't like how you can instantly travel many light years very quickly.
    I would like a "Babylon 5" style jump method in which when you jump you enter hyperspace and have to travel to your "exit portal"
    If travel wasn't instantaneous jump fatigue could probably be greatly reduced.
    The way I would see it is that when a cyno is dropped and a portal generated a "wormhole like" link is created with a stretch of hyperspace between the two. When you jump into hyperspace there are two "celestial type" points and nothing else (a cool background like in the final part of the mission "recon").
    You would then have the option to warp to your exit portal which would be x au's away depending on how far you have jumped.
    Once you arrive at your exit portal you can jump through or warp back to your entrance portal.

    All the time this is happening anyone at he cyno fields location can use your portal to jump into hyperspace and attempt to interdict the incoming fleet. Or fight in hyperspace instead.
    Hyperspace would have hideous drawbacks to top speed but high agility modifiers to improve agility.


    Just imagine. A single interdict or could jump into hyperspace and prevent the incoming capital fleet reaching the exit portal before the cyno ship is destroyed.

    This kind of mechanic would remove instantaneous travel which means jump fatigue could be reduced or maybe even removed

    How does this sound?