These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[PETITION] Don't mess with OUR WH's - Two Step, We are counting on You

First post
Author
D'Tell Annoh
Machiavellian Empire
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#21 - 2012-01-20 23:29:11 UTC
Yeah, I'm with you on most of this stuff.

Keep WH's for the small corps.

+1
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#22 - 2012-01-20 23:43:16 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Mars Theran wrote:
Agree with you on everything but the last bit, which I have supported elsewhere. I can see a use for limited mass stabilization of Wormholes using player anchored gates/structures. These would require fuel of course, and function like a POS in that fashion, and also be capable of being destroyed. No reinforcement timer.

I have to disagree with the poster above me (with all due respect sir!).

Remember, Two-Step isn't the only CSM with a familiarity with WH's:
Meissa Anunthiel's Blog - Ahhhh, just to stir the pot a bit, and maybe get WH'ers stirred up and involved in the process. From the Blog the interesting bit to WHers here:

Meissa Anunthiel wrote:
This would be a long post, and I'm not sure this is the place to handle it because it's going to be long-winded argument. The short version of it is I am in favour of a mechanic, no matter what it is, that removes the invulnerability that some people well entrenched in their wormhole enjoy. Obviously that position is not one shared by AHARM.


That said, the difficulty with which one can reach a wormhole (logistics wise and all that) is what makes it interesting and viable too, something that makes it unique and interesting.


Balanced mechanics can be found, and the wormhole stabilizer idea is but one that has already been discussed (we actually had a discussion with Two Step from AHARM and CCP Soundwave on that very subject during the emergency meeting), but I do not shy away from stating that I was the one advocating for a mechanism to get rid of the invulnerability some groups enjoy in wormholes while keeping the overwhelming majority of the wormhole dwellers in no worse a position than they are now. Which is a bit not mentioned in the minutes.


I don't care if it's a stabilizer, a destabilizer, an undectectable wormhole entrance, or a divine intervention. I'll make a longer post as soon as humanly possible on the subject because, as shortly described, this would be a negative game-changer for everyone living in a wormhole. So if you can hold your judgement on my position until you heard it in full, that'd be great. And if you want to bash me then, by all means. :-)


"Some CSMs suggested that Sleepers should attack POSes, and/or pod people.". Pod people, why not, attack POSes I objected to that idea.


I have my own opinion of these statements, however, for the moment i prefer to think it through, rather than post before I have considered everything, which is a bit of change for me... Oops


Lastly, I don't know if I'm remembering this correctly, but there was some speculation that the mechanic/module whatever that Sansha was using to form incursion wormholes was something that was going to/might be put into play generally in Eve. Can't remember where I read that, so it might just have been uninformed rambling.



Yeah, I've read the blog. I know she has SOME experience, since she is from RnK, and some RnK corps tag along when Guilotine Therapy roams wormholes. But she is still Null-sec representative and not WH representative.

However, until she will show us her (well, his) magnificent great idea I'm going to assume the end result will cause larger blobs in WH's - and WH's are all about SMALL SCALE PVP.

I, of course, can imagine that there is a solution that will be acceptable for both sides.

Apart from main subject I dont agree with rest of what she wrote regarding WH's (so in other words: NO for podding, YES for sleepers atacking players/poses/etc in space)
Memoocan
Adhocracy Incorporated
Adhocracy
#23 - 2012-01-21 02:10:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Memoocan
Before I rant, I support most of OP.

The continuing persistence of the CSM to meddle with mechanics that they do not already have much or any regard for continues to astound me. I realize that there may be some experience for some, but they show their ignorance of how wormholes are meant to be played. That way is the way inhabitants have been living for years now. Personally, I've lived in wormholes for over a year.

In regards to the proposal of a mechanic (stabilization, destab., etcetc) to make wormholes "less invulnerable for the residents" is insulting. That immediately shows true or willful ignorace, perhaps even arrogance, in my eyes. No system is invulnerable, no inhabitant is safe. Not even AHARM. They persist because they fight for it. To live in wspace, you must survive and for a corp to thrive takes more than nullsec players seem to realize. It's not a carebear haven and it's not a minigame. It is the endgame for many and to trod heavily into "our" territory in such a manner is irresponsible of a CSM representative.

I'll end the rant there, I know plenty of similar words have been and will be exchanged. Now what I think should happen for real progress.

Talk to wormhole dwellers. Simple as that. Go straight to the horse's mouth and you will find that things can be better for all involved. If interweb spcshps iz srs bsnz, which as the CSM it would be so for reps, then do it right the first time.

Wormhole mechanics as they stand now are solid. Ideas like Sleepers attacking POSes, at least in higher class whs imo, is a good direction and can fit into the existing lore. I'd rather not see a wormhole control mechanic appear, but if it somehow does it better at least fit the lore, again imo.

There's many things that can be done for all sec space and those that live there should be consulted in each case. As I live in wspace, this got to me. No super blobs, no assurances, no mercy.

Take it or leave it.
Sarina Rhoda
Doomheim
#24 - 2012-01-21 10:31:23 UTC
I would like to point out though that it was Meissa who raised and suggested the wormhole stabiliser at the most recent csm meeting.

This is from her own blog she sent to evenews 24

Meissa's blog

Quote:
That said, the difficulty with which one can reach a wormhole (logistics wise and all that) is what makes it interesting and viable too, something that makes it unique and interesting. Balanced mechanics can be found, and the wormhole stabilizer idea is but one that has already been discussed (we actually had a discussion with Two Step from AHARM and CCP Soundwave on that very subject during the emergency meeting), but I do not shy away from stating that I was the one advocating for a mechanism to get rid of the invulnerabilitysome groups enjoy in wormholes while keeping the overwhelming majority of the wormhole dwellers in no worse a position than they are now.


I used to have faith in what she was saying until this :( I'm definitely going to be voting for Two Step to represent us wh folk in the next csm to make sure no idea as bad as this ever sees the light!
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-01-22 02:34:29 UTC
Honestly can't wait to see the blog about how badly Worm Holes need Jump Gates (i.e.: Stabilizers) to be *better*...




Roll

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.

Borg Stoneson
SWARTA
#26 - 2012-01-22 10:00:41 UTC
I agree with pretty much everything the OP stated.
I'd like some sort of nullsec claiming system, but entirely seperate from nullsec mechanics.
As for WH stabilisation. I have to admit I can see a use for it, though not in the way intended. I see it as more of a way to link up groups that are spread across several WH's, acting more like a logistical jumpbridge between them. If it has to be placed in a deadspace location away from POS's then all the better as it would give something else for roaming gangs to camp. Thats just what I think it should be like though, and I'll admit there's potential gamebreaking issues involved so I'm not clinging to it as "teh best thing ev4r!".
The only people that think it's needed forlarge scale invasions are those that know fuckall about WH invasion mechanics and logistics.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#27 - 2012-01-22 15:30:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Honestly can't wait to see the blog about how badly Worm Holes need Jump Gates (i.e.: Stabilizers) to be *better*...

Roll



Borg Stoneson wrote:
I agree with pretty much everything the OP stated.
I'd like some sort of nullsec claiming system, but entirely seperate from nullsec mechanics.
As for WH stabilisation. I have to admit I can see a use for it, though not in the way intended. I see it as more of a way to link up groups that are spread across several WH's, acting more like a logistical jumpbridge between them. If it has to be placed in a deadspace location away from POS's then all the better as it would give something else for roaming gangs to camp. Thats just what I think it should be like though, and I'll admit there's potential gamebreaking issues involved so I'm not clinging to it as "teh best thing ev4r!".
The only people that think it's needed forlarge scale invasions are those that know fuckall about WH invasion mechanics and logistics.



Only one post Asuri :) Maybe not a blog, but still :)

Borg, thanks for support, but I dont like JB idea at all.
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2012-01-22 21:06:36 UTC
Basically, Meissa's clan couldn't rest nova from our control so, they want a game that would let them do it while we all sleep using one connection only.

Most corrupt politicians at least try to conceal their motives. 2/10 for lack of subtlety Meissa.
Max Kolonko
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#29 - 2012-01-22 22:53:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:
Basically, Meissa's clan couldn't rest nova from our control so, they want a game that would let them do it while we all sleep using one connection only.

Most corrupt politicians at least try to conceal their motives. 2/10 for lack of subtlety Meissa.


High five :)
L Salander
All Web Investigations
#30 - 2012-01-23 14:05:00 UTC
Memoocan wrote:
Before I rant, I support most of OP.

The continuing persistence of the CSM to meddle with mechanics that they do not already have much or any regard for continues to astound me. I realize that there may be some experience for some, but they show their ignorance of how wormholes are meant to be played. That way is the way inhabitants have been living for years now. Personally, I've lived in wormholes for over a year.

In regards to the proposal of a mechanic (stabilization, destab., etcetc) to make wormholes "less invulnerable for the residents" is insulting. That immediately shows true or willful ignorace, perhaps even arrogance, in my eyes. No system is invulnerable, no inhabitant is safe. Not even AHARM. They persist because they fight for it. To live in wspace, you must survive and for a corp to thrive takes more than nullsec players seem to realize. It's not a carebear haven and it's not a minigame. It is the endgame for many and to trod heavily into "our" territory in such a manner is irresponsible of a CSM representative.

I'll end the rant there, I know plenty of similar words have been and will be exchanged. Now what I think should happen for real progress.

Talk to wormhole dwellers. Simple as that. Go straight to the horse's mouth and you will find that things can be better for all involved. If interweb spcshps iz srs bsnz, which as the CSM it would be so for reps, then do it right the first time.

Wormhole mechanics as they stand now are solid. Ideas like Sleepers attacking POSes, at least in higher class whs imo, is a good direction and can fit into the existing lore. I'd rather not see a wormhole control mechanic appear, but if it somehow does it better at least fit the lore, again imo.

There's many things that can be done for all sec space and those that live there should be consulted in each case. As I live in wspace, this got to me. No super blobs, no assurances, no mercy.

Take it or leave it.


I agree with the rant-y part, particularly how insulting it is to insinuate w-space dwellers are "invulnerable". That's a load of crap, and it seems to me that what people actually mean by "w-space is invulnerable" is "I cant roll in my big nullsec supercap fleet and wreck them". Mechanics that allow you to actually control wormholes, manage their mass, etc completely defeat the point of them in my opinion, and would shift wormhole space into being little more than a nullsec extension.
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2012-01-23 14:11:10 UTC
Wow, someone that realy knows how gameplay in a wormhole works!!! +1
Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#32 - 2012-01-23 16:17:17 UTC
Couldn't agree more with this thread if i tried.

+1

Post with your main, like a BOSS!

And no, i don't live in highsec.  As if that would make your opinion any less wrong.  

XXSketchxx
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#33 - 2012-01-23 16:36:42 UTC
Agree with most of what you're saying, but not a couple.

What need is there for this other than another income source? You can already make stupid amounts of isk in wh space. Until new game features are added like Tech 3 were, there is no need for another resource to be added. Sorry but the moons should remain unused aside from POS.

Upgrades? No. You want sov and upgrades you can go to k-space 0.0.

More wormholes? No. There are plenty out there. If people are sad because they came to the party late and they can't find a free one they want, they know how they can get it. The problem is people are lazy and ::effort::

I'm all for grav sites that are ice belts (but random as to the ice - thus who knows if it'll fuel your POS). This would introduce full self sufficiency as well as ice trading in wormholes, great additions to wormholes IMO.

As for harder, yeah Incursions and wh sites need to be harder. Triggers should be random. I really don't see how that's difficult. Every wave could simply have a random ship be chosen as the trigger for the next wave.

James1122
Perimeter Trade and Distribution Inc
#34 - 2012-01-25 00:40:01 UTC
I disagree with making triggers random. The only "risk" it adds is that you just need to bring enough logistics to support two waves worth of dps. Also it may combine to make sites un-runnable. If there is a high chance every time you run a site that an additional 4000dps is going to spawn at random a random moment and welp your fleet then its apparent very quickly that the sites are infeasible and not worth running.



I always saw the biggest risk for running wh sites as the risk to being caught and ganked by other people. If your sole intention is to raise risk of these sites then simply draw the site out longer be it either by more spawns or more ehp. That way people are held stuck inside anoms for longer periods of time making them more at risk to other players collapsing into them and ganking them in sites.


Ultimately though everything in eve is calculable. Most players in this game seek to max/min everything and will fnd work arounds for what ever pre-programmed environment you can throw at them. The only true way of raising "risk" is my making people more vulnerable to other players. (I still don't personally understand why the current mechanics around this need to be tweaked anyway)

....

Tallianna Avenkarde
Pyre of Gods
#35 - 2012-01-26 03:05:33 UTC
I'd just like to see modular Pos, and maybe a slight increase in number of sites. Gravimetric Ice sites would be nice, and I do like the dea of them being random, as someone said earlier, that might make for some sort of WH trade :)

As much as I loooove pewing people, having something to promote non hostile player interaction within WH space could be interesting. Has happened once in my 3 months of WH life when a neighbour invited us to come run c4 sites with them.

And a sudden plunge in the sullen swell. Ten fathoms deep on the road to hell.

Lyrrashae
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2012-01-26 06:40:17 UTC
WH mass stabilisers is one of the more pants-on-head idiotic ideas I've heard from this CSM--and you can probably guess which component of same proposed that, no?

TwoStep, you are needed!

Ni.

Lucius Arcturus
Hard Knocks Inc.
Hard Knocks Citizens
#37 - 2012-01-28 08:53:32 UTC
Agreed. CSM/CCP: Please do not try to fix what isn't broken. W-space is one of the few aspects of EVE that isn't seriously damaged. WHs could use a few coats of paint (random sleeper waves, better POS mechanics, granular corp roles) and a few fixes (being able to open containers inside of arrays would be nice), many of which are not unique to WHs, but anything that makes w-space more like k-space is going to dilute this part of the game.
A4521
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#38 - 2012-01-28 12:10:43 UTC
keep wh as they are, improve them but don't take it away from the little guy ! Cry

didn't stay there for more than a few h, BUT that's how I imagined eve was like when i signed up for this !! .. not super blobs.
Seleia O'Sinnor
Drop of Honey
#39 - 2012-02-01 20:52:33 UTC
I agree, not completely. It was one hell of a work to get that carrier into our hole, so we got some good way to rep broken POCOs and modules, and it's not a C4. Come on, they are not impossible to kill, very hard to get in, and are trapped in there forever(below c5).

I wonder if POS improvements will like the new Neocom if they ever come: More bling bling less functionality, many patches.

Odyssey: Repacking in POS hangars for modules +1,  but please for other stuff too, especially containers. Make containers openable in POS hangars.

Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#40 - 2012-02-01 21:18:38 UTC
If anything, update the nebulae in WH space so it looks all cool and shiny like the rest of EvE. We still have the old crappy nebulae with new cool pulsar, mag, etc effects and the contrast is rather odd.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821