Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nathan Jameson
Grumpy Bastards Mass Overload
1394
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 11:31:00 -
[1] - Quote
Well, since the Wormholes subforum seems to have turned into its own form of Features and Ideas, here's mine:
A new type of random/roaming/periodic wormhole connection, perhaps only connecting C6s to other C6s. It would list its type as a "violent" wormhole connection, similar to what the Sansha used to spawn. Upon creation in the database, it would have a secret random total allowable mass and lifespan--perhaps anywhere between 500,000 tons and 10 mil tons, and 2.4 hours to 24 hours.
However (and this is the important part), it would list no special information or change its animation at the destabilization or crit stage of either mass or time. In other words, that violent wormhole you're looking at may be able to take a fleet of capitals for the entire rest of the evening...or it might just close behind your Guardian.
These are not intended to replace static connections, as nobody wants to risk their dreadnoughts chain collapsing to look for pews or pve. But for those who want a little extra excitement in their life and find a violent wormhole connecting to SYJ's home system...why not?
You can either push as much of your fleet through it as you can and go for broke, or you can go back to hiding in your POS.
Thoughts? Suggestions? Ridicule? http://www.wormholes.info |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
768
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 11:41:00 -
[2] - Quote
Would you ever jump a fleet through such a hole? and how many times would it take half you fleet getting stuck in a random wormhole before you members say "**** that, i'm not jumping through violent holes anymore."? What now? |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
120
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:04:00 -
[3] - Quote
So the new opposite to risk-averse is no more risk-taking, but stupid... I only correct my own spelling. |
Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
88
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
Nathan Jameson wrote:Well, since the Wormholes subforum seems to have turned into its own form of Features and Ideas, here's mine: So instead of helping to rectify the problem, you contribute to it. Nice work Mr. CSM wannabe.
Nathan Jameson wrote:But for those who want a little extra excitement in their life and find a violent wormhole connecting to SYJ's home system...why not? Doesn't sound exciting to me.
More random wormholes. and wormholes with greater randomness of their attributes have both been suggested before. What is this specific iteration attempting to fix (?). What is the point of this idea? What problem is it designed to overcome?
C6s certainly don't need more interconnections. They're easy enough to find as it is.
|
Jay Joringer
Blackstar Privateer Consortium Enigma Project
146
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:10:00 -
[5] - Quote
I had a similar idea actually, but I think it's something that may look good on paper but will actually be counter productive in practice. More of a mechanic that make the wormhole connections similarly 'violent', but having a random chance to become so unstable that it prohibits jumps for a short time. How this would work is that each ship jumping through within a few minutes has a cumulative effect on this mechanic triggering, dependent on the ships mass.
This may stop fleets escaping engagements on connections and also have a chance of reducing the number of reinforcements jumping through. The problem I see with it is that I think overall there will be less people willing to play 'wormhole roulette', so less pew.
Of course, there a couple of variations that could be workable like applying damage to passing ships with the more that pass through in a given time, or even having variable polarizing effects with chances to buff/debuff ships passing through. The Enigma Blogject-á |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1504
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:11:00 -
[6] - Quote
Yay,
A wormhole that nobody will use. |
Nix Anteris
Bite Me inc Bitten.
88
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:15:00 -
[7] - Quote
Jay Joringer wrote:Of course, there a couple of variations that could be workable like applying damage to passing ships with the more that pass through in a given time, or even having variable polarizing effects with chances to buff/debuff ships passing through. Now that's an interesting idea. A violent wormhole that has a chance to ravage your shields/armor/capacitor as you pass through it.. fleeing at low structure could be the end of you. |
Nathan Jameson
Grumpy Bastards Mass Overload
1394
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:22:00 -
[8] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Would you ever jump a fleet through such a hole? and how many times do you think it would take half your fleet getting stuck in a random wormhole before your members say "**** that, i'm not jumping through violent holes anymore."?
I would certainly hope these people aren't the same people that are complaining that C6 space is boring and lacks incentives for PVP. One of the (many) problems they say this is that wormhole connections are too well-understood nowadays, with exact mass allowances, home field advantage, ease of rolling by defenders, etc.
As for the wormhole subforum now housing wormhole-related ideas, I personally see it as progress. I certainly don't go looking through the actual Ideas subforum for ideas for wormholes. http://www.wormholes.info |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise
143
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:22:00 -
[9] - Quote
A violent connection would work better if it only activated in systems if there was online pilots on both sides of the possible connections. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
768
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:39:00 -
[10] - Quote
Nathan Jameson wrote: I would certainly hope these people aren't the same people that are complaining that C6 space is boring and lacks incentives for PVP. One of the (many) problems they say this is that wormhole connections are too well-understood nowadays, with exact mass allowances, home field advantage, ease of rolling by defenders, etc.
Hey, i do feel wormholes need something to spice them up and attract new people but i don't think your suggestion would do that. Just giving feedback like you asked, Nathan. What now? |
|
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1504
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:57:00 -
[11] - Quote
Nathan Jameson wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Would you ever jump a fleet through such a hole? and how many times do you think it would take half your fleet getting stuck in a random wormhole before your members say "**** that, i'm not jumping through violent holes anymore."? I would certainly hope these people aren't the same people that are complaining that C6 space is boring and lacks incentives for PVP. One of the (many) problems they say this is that wormhole connections are too well-understood nowadays, with exact mass allowances, home field advantage, ease of rolling by defenders, etc. As for the wormhole subforum now housing wormhole-related ideas, I personally see it as progress. I certainly don't go looking through the actual Ideas subforum for ideas for wormholes.
Having a WH that is a complete unknown isn't a PVP incentive. It's just annoying.
Jumping your roaming gang through only to have half stuck on one side is a nice way to kill a roam and turn it into a "ok now let's find a F**King way back home" |
Winthorp
Van Diemen's Demise
143
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 12:59:00 -
[12] - Quote
my bad |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
200
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 13:05:00 -
[13] - Quote
I love the fact that after one thread every bad idea gets contribued to c6 WH'ers.
Stop crying Wormholes have the best accoustics. It's known. - Sing it for me - |
Nathan Jameson
Grumpy Bastards Mass Overload
1396
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 13:26:00 -
[14] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Hey, i do feel wormholes need something to spice them up and attract new people but i don't think your suggestion would do that. Just giving feedback like you asked, Nathan.
No problem! http://www.wormholes.info |
Evangelina Nolen
Sama Guild
26
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 13:34:00 -
[15] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:A violent connection would work better if it only activated in systems if there was online pilots on both sides of the possible connections.
Forget the special stats. Just a roaming connection that rolls into Active systems. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
1505
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 14:08:00 -
[16] - Quote
Evangelina Nolen wrote:Winthorp wrote:A violent connection would work better if it only activated in systems if there was online pilots on both sides of the possible connections. Forget the special stats. Just a roaming connection that rolls into Active systems.
Now see that would work.
Random WH. Only spawns into systems that have had activity within the last 30min. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Polarized.
769
|
Posted - 2013.07.08 14:10:00 -
[17] - Quote
^ Yeah i like that idea as long as it's not predictable e.g. do X 10 times and roaming WH spawns. What now? |
Xtrah
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
40
|
Posted - 2013.07.09 19:42:00 -
[18] - Quote
Sleeper kills in a WH increases chance of connecting to it! No Holes Barred - www.no-ho.com |
GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics K162
68
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 08:10:00 -
[19] - Quote
terrible idea is terrible.
otherwise seems legit way to get hostiles into a system, do there sites when they are not logged in and try to get more re-enforcements in.
need to get home? just do your sites.
also seems like nz/au tz people would be the only ones able to make any isk doing sites.. |
Job Valador
Super Moose Defence Force
80
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 11:34:00 -
[20] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Evangelina Nolen wrote:Winthorp wrote:A violent connection would work better if it only activated in systems if there was online pilots on both sides of the possible connections. Forget the special stats. Just a roaming connection that rolls into Active systems. Now see that would work. Random WH. Only spawns into systems that have had activity within the last 30min.
I can get behind this "The stone exhibited a profound lack of movement." |
|
Setsune Rin
Bite Me inc Bitten.
39
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:03:00 -
[21] - Quote
Derath Ellecon wrote:Evangelina Nolen wrote:Winthorp wrote:A violent connection would work better if it only activated in systems if there was online pilots on both sides of the possible connections. Forget the special stats. Just a roaming connection that rolls into Active systems. Now see that would work. Random WH. Only spawns into systems that have had activity within the last 30min.
Activity needs a programmable definition, but i like the idea
|
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1321
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:15:00 -
[22] - Quote
Nathan, I've seen the comments about wh masses being too well understood and those same people wanting it a bit more complicated. I know what you're talking about. But in the end, when their fleets are split, cut off, left in a world of hurt more than once, they'll never want it again.
As for your concept, yeah I could see something like that being desirable but the mass would have to be a bit more predictable or give some clue, something to give the discovering party an idea of what the hole can accommodate.
Instead what about a short life wandering massless hole for the c5/6 denizens? It can open only to c5/6 space and null. But you can get as much as you want though it. The short lifespan...say 15 minutes would precluded planned invasion fleets but allow for spur of the moment pvp fleets. HTFU!...for the children! |
Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
208
|
Posted - 2013.07.11 12:20:00 -
[23] - Quote
Not a bad Idea Kidd.
I'd also like it to be more dangerous to do sites in a home system or similar. Stuff like adding ekstra k162 when you start killing sleepers in system etc. Wormholes have the best accoustics. It's known. - Sing it for me - |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |