Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
mynnna
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3156
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:46:00 -
[61] - Quote
AutumnWind1983 wrote:mynnna wrote:Realistically, while I'm not actually a wormhole resident myself, I can't help but wonder how enjoyable it will be to get wrecked simply because you had zero indication attackers were incoming. I'm thinking, even to people who do enjoy a good fight and aren't just farming away to their heart's content, that the answer would be "not very". And that just re-emphasizes how "you can't get this intel no matter what you do" is a problem. If you were spamming dscan while site running, which you should be, you'd have just as much warning as you did pre-odyssey.
Am I mistaken in my belief that by spamming scan on your probes you could see when new signatures appeared which in turn served as extra warning?
Regardless of whether I am or not, let's not forget that neither "spamming dscan" nor "spamming probe scan" are exactly what you'd call "fun and engaging" gameplay and having some other more interesting means of remaining vigilant would be fantastic. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal |
Klarion Sythis
Sky Fighters Sky Syndicate
243
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:46:00 -
[62] - Quote
Arkon Olacar wrote:Seriouspoast: Go for the middle ground. Right now the K hole with appear as soon as someone activates the static/whatever wh grid by initiating warp to it. This gives the 'defenders' a good 20 seconds minimum notice before the scanner has a chance to arrive on grid with the wh, let alone jump through and make an impact. On the other hand under the new proposed mechanic a skilled dscanner will have been able to identify the location of a potential site running fleet before the K hole becomes visible (given that most occupied holes will have a handful of anoms max - an expo fleet would be harder to find). A much better change would be that K holes only appear once someone has jumped through from the other side. This gives both 'sides' an equal chance to find targets/gtfo without introducing hilariously broken situations where a gank could be taking place before the sig appears. This seems like a better idea. |
AutumnWind1983
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
82
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:46:00 -
[63] - Quote
Deeone wrote:AutumnWind1983 wrote:mynnna wrote:Realistically, while I'm not actually a wormhole resident myself, I can't help but wonder how enjoyable it will be to get wrecked simply because you had zero indication attackers were incoming. I'm thinking, even to people who do enjoy a good fight and aren't just farming away to their heart's content, that the answer would be "not very". And that just re-emphasizes how "you can't get this intel no matter what you do" is a problem. If you were spamming dscan while site running, which you should be, you'd have just as much warning as you did pre-odyssey. live in a wh much? tackle in wh is cloaky t3s u will have no warning unless u get lucky and the probe hits him b4 he cloaks.....dscan is useless in a wh vs ppl that know what they are doing probes and hole control is the only way to mitigate risk. These actions require things to be done by the player that makes it balanced. when u make it so u cant see an incoming static for minutes you are pretty much ensuring the death of the defenders. esp the poor miners lol
Yes, I've lived in one for a while. If the attacking fleet is all cloakies, they're gimping their fits and you should have a good chance in a fight. If you're mining in a wh you're doing it wrong. Get a venture, suck gas, and accept you'll die some times. James Arget for CSM 8! http://csm.fcftw.org |
Anhenka
Daktaklakpak. Red Coat Conspiracy
423
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:47:00 -
[64] - Quote
Seelen Jager wrote: If you want to tackle my farming fleet in a cloaky t3 go ahead, I'd love to watch it melt under 90% webs and dread guns.
Do remember that the people farming escalations with dreads/carriers/loki are only a relatively small portion of the time spent PVEing in WH's.
The proposed changes would have a far far greater effect on the C1-4 crowd than the 5/6 crowd, simply because of the size of fleet needed to attack a escalation fleet with good results.
But a few t3's can nuke the smaller crowd PvE ships no problem. |
Seelen Jager
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
4
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:54:00 -
[65] - Quote
Anhenka wrote:Seelen Jager wrote: If you want to tackle my farming fleet in a cloaky t3 go ahead, I'd love to watch it melt under 90% webs and dread guns.
Do remember that the people farming escalations with dreads/carriers/loki are only a relatively small portion of the time spent PVEing in WH's. The proposed changes would have a far far greater effect on the C1-4 crowd than the 5/6 crowd, simply because of the size of fleet needed to attack a escalation fleet with good results. But a few t3's can nuke the smaller crowd PvE ships no problem.
Sorry, no intent to snub the c1-4 crowd. Just dont regularly see cloaky t3's used as initial tackle on anything larger than a group of 2-3. |
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
151
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:55:00 -
[66] - Quote
So far it's roughly falling out as follows:
If you normally roam / roll holes in a 20+ t3 fleet then you are for it. If you don't normally roam / roll holes in a 20+ t3 fleet then you are against it.
If you have a 20 man plexing fleet you are for it. If you don't have a 20 man plexing fleet you are against it.
So Fozzie, I guess it's about wether you are pro big corp/alliance or pro small guys eeking out a living in wh space.
Feel free to let us know where you stand.
|
Sylvanium Orlenard
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
39
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:56:00 -
[67] - Quote
Anhenka wrote:Seelen Jager wrote: If you want to tackle my farming fleet in a cloaky t3 go ahead, I'd love to watch it melt under 90% webs and dread guns.
Do remember that the people farming escalations with dreads/carriers/loki are only a relatively small portion of the time spent PVEing in WH's. The proposed changes would have a far far greater effect on the C1-4 crowd than the 5/6 crowd, simply because of the size of fleet needed to attack a escalation fleet with good results. But a few t3's can nuke the smaller crowd PvE ships no problem.
Risk vs. Reward. the bigger the farming fleet the less risk you are taking. But if you are farming that C3 with a self rep T3 that is all blinged out you are taking a significant risk. I know I lived in a C2 with a C3 static for almost a year and a half while I was running the E-UNI Wormhole Campus. A 6 or 8 man C3 site running fleet can handle cloacky T3s and run away with few scratches, assuming they are on the ball. On the other hand an all blinged out self rep T3 has little to no chance of surviving a gank. This is true of any area of the game, (you can run c5 sites in a single maurauder and the same thing is true) As long as you are combat probing for new ships, even after this change goes through a decent sized C3 fleet still stands a good chance of survival. |
Exo Skel
EyEs.FR Dominatus Atrum Mortis
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 21:57:00 -
[68] - Quote
While I agree the new Sensor Overlay made the wh life more accessible (understand 'easier') and should be rolled back, the change proposed here is not a good idea at all. Make it back as it was, ie someone is needed to actively check for new sigs instead of just looking the scanner window...
I doubt this kind of game mechanic adjustment will help repopulate wormholes :x
|
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1317
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:00:00 -
[69] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:So far it's roughly falling out as follows:
If you normally roam / roll holes in a 20+ t3 fleet then you are for it. If you don't normally roam / roll holes in a 20+ t3 fleet then you are against it.
If you have a 20 man plexing fleet you are for it. If you don't have a 20 man plexing fleet you are against it.
So Fozzie, I guess it's about wether you are pro big corp/alliance or pro small guys eeking out a living in wh space.
Feel free to let us know where you stand.
There are quite a few who gank, are from large alliances, and/or have large "plexing" fleets that are not for this proposal in it's current form. Let's not turn this into a small v. large or high class v. low class, because I'm a C6 resident, as well as others here, and we aren't advocating for this idea. CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 My Blog: http://casualcapsuleer.wordpress.com | No-Local News Writer/Editor |
StarConquer212
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
196
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:02:00 -
[70] - Quote
Darren Fox wrote:Thank you for considering this. Today it is too easy to passively catch K162s. I am not sure I'd like the K162 being too delayed from probes though. How about 2 minute delay before it can be scanned down and 4 minutes before overlay shows it?
Spot on Darren, i approve.
In practice its far too safe to bear in wormholes for the amount of isk you get. And the chances of rolling into some one bearing is very very low. this would only give you a slight edge to catch there fleet. As getting organized on the fly is time consuming.
-Star |
|
MrBrookes
Umbrella C0rp Dominatus Atrum Mortis
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:08:00 -
[71] - Quote
theres veteran players then theres new players and a balance to satisfy both is a hard but complicated one.
I say keep the balance we currently have. We want new players to come to wh space and if your going to put time into anything its to bring in more not scare off. I say more people in wh space means more things to shoot at. GET THA THING!!!
Yes u did away with us having to probe all the time to catch new sigs but we still have to probe them IF we catch them. It would appear you want to give the aggressors the advantage ie the ones probing creating the k162 and leaving the ones on the other end with no clue a new sig is in system for a short time. I say leave the current balances the way they are because you wanna keep what you have so take what you have then build on it. I wanna pull up next to the miner thats mining and not paying any attention and remind him theres a new overlay he should have been paying attention too.
Lets do the things that brings more people to wh space....like more dynamic spawning into wh space.
I have lived in wh space now for 3 years and i love the changes and ive ganked my fair share as i have lost. You just gotta be in the right place at the right time. No matter how you change wh space i know that we as wh dwellers will adapt and evolve. My only concerns are keeping the new comers coming and not scaring them off. I wanna shoot something at the end of a hard days work.
GOONS IN WH SPACE??? who's fleet am i joining to kill these guys.
|
DoToo Foo
Weaponised FuGu
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:12:00 -
[72] - Quote
I am the hunted.
Passive information on the discovery scanner is bad, for any space.
I am in favour of a design that gives those actively paying attention an advantage, regardless of whether they hunt or are hunted.
Do not spawn k162's untill the the souce wh is used would give hunters an extra 10 seconds or so, bur would also give c2 dwellers the option of finding but rejecting one of their statics. It would also give those locking down wormholes an advantage. I am comfortable with this option and side effects,but others may not be.
Removing all sigs from the discovery scanner, or at least make it require manual spamming is also acceptable.
Allowing a mobile scan inhibitor to hide a sig would even be acceptable. We would still have something to find.
Actively preventing the at keyboard and aware pliot from being aware will prevent the risk averse from even being in wormhole space.
I will remain in wormhole space regardless. Requiring active participation to see signatures makes sence. Stacking the deck so far on either side does not.
|
Hiljah
Complex Systems
7
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:18:00 -
[73] - Quote
TLDR: dislike
It goes too far. If you wanted to go this far, you would need to switch all anoms to sigs, so the attacker would need to be a good prober, and might not have time to adjust their fleet comp to exactly counter you.
To me, what you are suggesting would be similar to waiting 20 minutes in a FW complex but not being able to d-scan out, even though the attacker can d-scan in.
In this case the attack will not only be able to see what ships you are flying, but also have a very good idea of fits. They will reship to as hard of a counter as they can field.
Currently, this is already what happens if you do not watch open holes or check new sigs.
I would ask that you either allow defenders to protect themselves with probes, or require a fast unprepared attacker ( a fast probing hunter, fast warping tackle, and combat ships that aren't fit to exactly counter the defender).
|
Ziirn
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:21:00 -
[74] - Quote
Listed items below should be applied with the current state wormholes function.
1. Remove Sensor Overlay system in WH space (The WH system effect causes disturbance that makes the overlay not work. or whatever reason you can think of)
2. Only update Cosmic Anomalies in the scanner window automatic (or use the old system where you could see them if you pressed scan without launching probes.)
3. Make ore mining sites (Gravimetric) Cosmic Anomalies again (Right now no one mines since the risk are stupid for the reward. Changing this will results in more ships to kill, bringing more action.)
I have been in hole rolling fleets on several occations and the most common result is that we find no one bearing or everyone is either POSed up or cloaked (spending hours on rolling holes). Changing the time of wich a K side can be seen or scanned wont increase wormhole pvp. If you are bearing in a dread you are most likely sieged and can't warp out anyway before a competent scout can find you.
The solution is to decrease time spent in POS or cloaked. By providing more content that will attract both residents, other wh people and k-space people. Theres so many null exits in high class wh's but do they go in solo/small gang to do PVE? No because they can't handle sites / to large risk. So we miss out on PvP there aswell since they wont do it. What kind of content? That would be an entire new topic that could be discussed.
Hugs and kisses XOXOXO and all that stuff //Ziirn |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
46
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:24:00 -
[75] - Quote
I am very much not in favour of this idea as currently proposed - this coming from someone who both tries to kill site running groups and runs sites. I don't think that the discovery scanner has had a positive effect on wormholes in general, for various reasons I'm not going to go into, but partly because it does make it too easy to passively spot new connections.
I agree with the suggestion that K162 sigs should be scannable but not added to the passive scanner for a few minutes - in fact, I'd go so far as to say that this should be applied to every signature, since it rewards someone who is actively using a module on their ship and scan probes.
I also kind of like the suggestion of having a new connection not spawn its K162 until it was jumped, rather than when warp was initiated, as it would allow a fleet to be poised before a scout jumped through without having a period of time when a cloaked scout could be getting warpins without the 'defending' side having the slightest clue.
Realistically, even if you're watching d-scan like a hawk, it is entirely possible to cloak a scout entering a wormhole during the time between the game allowing you to scan, depending on the position you arrive at relative to the hole.
I also think it would be entirely unfair to have a situation where a combat fleet had entered a wormhole and left the locals physically no way of locating the wormhole which they came through and getting their own eyes on it for a given amount of time, though you do address that with the idea of giving it a mass or jump number limit before it spawns in the sig.
While I'm not a big fan of the idea of having both wormholes spawn simultaneously, due to the huge implications on hole control this would have, it is better than having a signature that you can't see at all. However, this would heavily punish small groups operating in wormholes with multiple statics, as they'd have to put eyes on every one.
TL:DR; Disagree with this suggestion, however would not be opposed to a return to a system that required the active use of probes to spot signatures immediately. |
Kivena
EVE University Ivy League
37
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:25:00 -
[76] - Quote
Meytal wrote:- Sigs should be delayed by 5 minutes from appearing in the scanner window, but visible immediately via probes - Ore sites in W-space should be returned to signatures instead of anomalies I agree with this. I do not like the proposed timer, it swings too far in favour of the gankers.
Teaching Manager EVE University |
Hanna White
Budget Burials Inc
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:27:00 -
[77] - Quote
Not a good idea, what we need is more people in WH space, not less.
Also, this whole ting makes no sense. Let's see s.o. jumps in through that new K162, gets combat probed, people warp to it. Now, they are on a WH which has no signature yet? Or does the signature spawn, now that they are on grid? No, that whole thing is half-baked at most.
Anyway, if you are doing sites and 30 T3 roll into your WH, the sig popping up instantly doesnt really help you anyway. You are tackled by sleepers in the site, you either got the people online to defend or you dont. Giving attackers 2-3 mins more, is just helping unskilled people.
Thanks to site escalation mechanics, if you want to kill people doing sites, just seed in carrier+dread+cloaked ship into their WH. Wait until they warp their carrier/dread/lokis into a site, warp your 2 caps to 300km of that site -> Watch them die to like 50 sleeper BS.
If you want to change s.th. useful in WH space (or in space in general) make your ship stay in space when you log-off. Ships disappearing out of/into nothing is just crap.
|
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
47
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:30:00 -
[78] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote: further encourage the best parts of the wormhole experience.
I don't really think that one-sided ganks are the best parts of wormhole life. High-tension fights where both sides have a chance are best, though there is of course the saying "If you find yourself in an even fight, you both made a mistake". Clever positioning and use of holes create good fights, not situations where one side can repeatedly bring in reinforcements without the other side being able to see where they're coming from.
I should also probably point out that this will make it far, far harder to catch or prevent people from rolling wormholes, and that personally has generated a lot of interesting fights for me, from both sides of that particular type of engagement. |
Chitsa Jason
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
1229
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:31:00 -
[79] - Quote
I do agree with the idea as it would mean more htfu in wspace. Wspace people can make a lot of isk and the space does not have local. It should be mysterious and unknown. I do understand peoples position to farm in peace but i do not understand your spirit of wspace. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Sephira Galamore
Inner Beard Society Affirmative.
301
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:36:00 -
[80] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:I do agree with the idea as it would mean more htfu in wspace. Wspace people can make a lot of isk and the space does not have local. It should be mysterious and unknown. I do understand peoples position to farm in peace but i do not understand your spirit of wspace. It's not about wanting to farm in peace - the K162 appears either way. I want to be able to reship into a combat or bait ship when a K162 pops up, instead of beeing plain ganked which is less fun for either side. |
|
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
47
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:36:00 -
[81] - Quote
Generally, I don't see this change promoting good fights, I see it focusing attention on ganks, which we already have plenty of in highsec, rather than promoting other, more enjoyable kinds of combat.
I'd rather kill a site running fleet thanks to their own stupidity and my skill and speed rather than the game not allowing them a way of getting any kind of warning until my dread and neut ships were already in warp. |
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc.
118
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:36:00 -
[82] - Quote
This is absolutely the right direction for a change.
I'll leave the details up to others vis a vis minutes/overlay/scanners, but wanted to voice my support. Glad to see something came of that townhall. |
Faxanadu Phantasm
Decimus Corp
1
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:38:00 -
[83] - Quote
I understand whats being proposed here... Opening up opportunity for pvp...
I think this change isnt in the historical spirit of the game as I see it... Traditionally eve has many dynamics which have the earmarks of rewarding diligence and penalizing lazyness. In that regard, if you're diligent about watching probes or dscan or the sensor overlay for new sigs then you get the security that the vigilance affords you.
This proposed change seems to work against that. Now there's nothing I can do to know I'm about to get jumped if i conduct some activity in my wh that could put me at risk.
This in conjunction with the reality that many wormhole corps are small means the large preying on the small will be more effective at delivering a negative game-play experience for those folks just scraping by
I feel like whats trying to be done here is to make rolling for pvp more enjoyable by improving the odds at rewards... Because this activity is notorious for being boring. Could we consider that this activity isnt as ideal for enjoyment as some other techniques to provoke pvp?
You know... like invading to provoke a fight
I think really what this is, is opening up more opportunities for ganks, when what should be being considered is how to bring more balanced long-lasting good fights that I think most people would agree are more exciting and rewarding than catching some small group of scrubs with their pants down
|
Intana Kreis
The Red Circle Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:39:00 -
[84] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Hey everyone. Team Five O has been working on a few concepts for improvements to wormhole mechanics and we wanted to run one idea by you all to start some discussion in the community.
How many of Team Five O have lived in w-space? Just asking. |
Anhenka
Daktaklakpak. Red Coat Conspiracy
428
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:40:00 -
[85] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:I do agree with the idea as it would mean more htfu in wspace. Wspace people can make a lot of isk and the space does not have local. It should be mysterious and unknown. I do understand peoples position to farm in peace but i do not understand your spirit of wspace.
Oh wouldn't it be grand if everyone in W-space could drop a 30 man t3 fleet on a target? Everyone would roll around making mad dosh, flying superexpensive ships and not caring if they lose them. From the newest player in a WH to the oldest, easy isk, ships come easy and go easy, and nothing ever matters.
Well you can. And I can. And a lot of the largest c5 and c6 corps can.
But to blanket tell everyone that disagrees with the idea that they need to HTFU and accept their unforeseeable, uncounterable ganking as a product of what you believe is the "spirit of Wspace" is just silly.
People in lower level WH's that get repeatedly ganked without counterplay don't HTFU and magically become competent c5/c6 corps. They either quit, or they leave WH space, or they leave their corp to join one of said c5/c6 corp with enough firepower and a scary enough name to deter gankers with fewer numbers than their own blob group. Then their old corp withers because of a lack of competent players.
I'm really not seeing you as a great representative of the WH community if your only response to peoples concerns outside of c5/6 blobs is "HTFU noob, my playstyle, my way, only way" |
Arkon Olacar
Blue-Fire
323
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:40:00 -
[86] - Quote
Also; shoutout to CCP for coming to us with a proposition and allowing us to discuss it first, rather than announcing it as an addition and wait for us all to cry with one voice "I want some of whatever you've been smoking". It is appreciated. Warping to zero |
Skyleth Bergen
Jovian Labs Jovian Enterprises
2
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:41:00 -
[87] - Quote
This change doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I could see taking away sensor overlay in general, but there's no plausible explanation as to why your active probing wouldn't be able to detect a signature that's in active use. We are flying spaceships here, but I like to see a certain degree of realism maintained in my fantasy.
This change seems like it would only benefit aggressors who already have the advantage of piling into a new system on short notice. It simply stacks the odds increasingly in their favor by circumventing the active vigilance of people seeking to avoid a fight; something they are doing quite legitimately.
People pressing for this change are basically asking for handicap so they can gank. Want to drop on someone faster? Accept the risk of having less time to scout and weigh the odds of your success. I think that's really the balance answer here: a change in play style of the aggressive party. But nobody is doing it because they fear losing ships! |
Chitsa Jason
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
1229
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:42:00 -
[88] - Quote
I think what this change will do is not bigger praying on the weaker but rather stopping the log off gangs in favor of rolling gangs. CSM8 Member Twitter:-á@ChitsaJason Skype: Casparas
|
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
47
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:45:00 -
[89] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:I think what this change will do is not bigger praying on the weaker but rather stopping the log off gangs in favor of rolling gangs.
I don't really see that happening. Log off gangs are just better when you have a given target you have intel on and want to hit, particularly in C6 space due to the relative ease of finding a particular hole. Rolling gangs can still be very effective currently, and will be successful against people who aren't paying attention or are doing something wrong, which is exactly the kind of people who SHOULD be dying. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1320
|
Posted - 2014.03.23 22:46:00 -
[90] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:I think what this change will do is not bigger praying on the weaker but rather stopping the log off gangs in favor of rolling gangs.
I think that this change would favor rolling gangs, so I can agree with your stance in that regard, Chitsa.
However, the bigger picture is that this will also impact the lower class residents. This will harm their gameplay as it is proposed. CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 My Blog: http://casualcapsuleer.wordpress.com | No-Local News Writer/Editor |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 29 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |