Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
Zara Arran
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
97
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:54:00 -
[31] - Quote
Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it.
I am all for making things more risky, I don't mind change.. when its a good thing. But in my opinion, letting caps spawn 40k off the WH and two caps being 80k off etc I think will stagnate WHs more. Thats why I wonder if letting smaller ships spwn further and heavier ships spawn less far isnt that better. It iwll increase risk, but not to a point that people wont fight no more or stop rolling. Especially for smaller groups, this not a good change. |
Hatshepsut IV
Cascading Failure Un.Bound
176
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:55:00 -
[32] - Quote
corbexx wrote:Chitsa Jason wrote:Hey Corby,
I would like to pint out a few ideas. Some of those have been pointed out previously but I think it is important to mentions them. So here is my list of small things.
18. Make it so that the higher of the ship mass the further it spawns from the wormhole by jumping through. Would increase the ability to catch rolling ships, would make rage rolling slower.
This didn't make it on to my little things sheet btw.
This is the last thing I could ever think to want for w-space. I'm glad your against this then, I knew I voted for you for a reason. ;)
Rolling/closing holes would become almost impossibly dangerous for small groups with this change. Using orcas would be completely out of the question which is a double nut shot to smaller low class groups as that's basically your only option for rolling a hole in a efficient/speedy manner.
This would basically remove the ability to bring a triage carrier into a fight with null people(or wh for that matter). It's basically handing a free kill to put a carrier 40k off a hole if your going to get. 30 domi blob or other things bridged into you.
Part of what makes w-space so unique and fun is the polarity mechanic and ability to jump holes. It's not a simple game of bring more in reserve get them to aggress on gate.
Whoever CCP told you this change would make w-space more noob friendly is either outright lieing to you or just plain going trolling you. You too can start failing today! Reddit-áad | Cascading Failure Public Channel | Aspiring Failure
|
ExookiZ
The Dark Space Initiative Scary Wormhole People
267
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:56:00 -
[33] - Quote
Pros: This will make ganking people rolling WHs easier
Cons: Rolling a WH will take forever People ( especially farmers) may be less likely to just roll Whs given the difficulty and just log when scary K16s pop up The Wormhole Kid |
D3m0n sam
Negative Density No Response
46
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:57:00 -
[34] - Quote
http://i.imgur.com/nojWx.gif
All i have to say |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 15:59:00 -
[35] - Quote
corbexx wrote: What would really help is for people to discuss it and put feed back in a calm and meaning full way. Raging and calling people names won't help me at all.
For all of our sake's sanity, I'll summarise everything that I've seen mentioned about it:
- Ragerolling (one of the primary methods of finding content) will be slowed down - Capital rolling (one of the primary methods of smaller groups controlling fights against larger groups) will be completely removed - Commiting capitals to fights will be impossible, or at least highly stupid. Archons will spawn away from support groups. Dreads will spawn away from Archons (which they use to refit into combat fits) - Sub-C5 rolling will be ridiculous. Orcas/Battleships will be easier to point. Orcas are a big enough problem. - Rolling (at all) will be slowed down. You'll have to build up hole control outside of the immediate hole to prevent people from tackling your caps.
This isn't going to make wormholes any more attractive to new people, which is what we need. The problem with wormholes isn't the mechanics. The problem is the population density. We need more small-mid sized groups, and this doesn't favour them at all and removes one of the few things that they can do to balance out the 30-50 man gangs that are starting to appear in wormsec.
I don't understand the intent of this change. I can't see what this brings to the game. At the moment, when a new wormhole appears in our home system we have what is essentially a flowchart.
1. Establish where the wormhole is 2. Establish who lives in the wormhole 3. Check how many people they have online, compared to how many we have online 4. Decide if we can take a fight 5. If yes, form up and bait 6. If no, form up to roll their hole 7. Once fight is over, roll hole to find new content 8. Go back to sig watch
This change removes Step 6 from the chain, and replaces it with "If no, POS spin until they establish hole control to roll it". That isn't a healthy change. No game should be based around AFK'ing for four hours and doing nothing. Wormholes already have problems with content, and creating a situation in which corps can't get rid of blocks to content (people that they can't deal with because they're too big or because they don't have people online to deal with it) will make it even more tedious.
Fix the problems with wormholes first. The terrible POS mechanics, for instance, and the necessity on caps to make C5/C6 more profitable than C4 holes. Increase the number of random holes further: bigger chains means more availability of content. We've asked for short-duration holes to be a thing, and I'd love to see short-duration high-mass holes to do J->J links. But this isn't the thread to talk about solutions, it's a thread to talk about how bad this idea is.
Larger groups want to be able to rage roll, smaller groups want to be able to counter roll. Who does this benefit? |
Notmo
0ne Percent. Odin's Call
14
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:00:00 -
[36] - Quote
I could get behind this if it was applied to capital ships jumping to a cyno too.
Mostly because the null rage would be awesome.
Given that half the wormholes we spawn into are empty, I can't see the logic behind this change. It just means everyone has to take longer to rage roll anything.
Rolling capitals will be fit for align time, be webbed up to a perch and back down again instead of just jumping back through.
Forget about ever jumping into another group of hostiles. |
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:00:00 -
[37] - Quote
Zara Arran wrote:Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it. I am all for making things more risky, I don't mind change.. when its a good thing. But in my opinion, letting caps spawn 40k off the WH and two caps being 80k off etc I think will stagnate WHs more. Thats why I wonder if letting smaller ships spwn further and heavier ships spawn less far isnt that better. It iwll increase risk, but not to a point that people wont fight no more or stop rolling. Especially for smaller groups, this not a good change. Perhaps the numbers are off, perhaps smaller should spawn further instead or perhaps everyone should be in a fixed radius distance, but the mere idea of changing spawns to be further out does not sound terrible. In fact I can think of lots of interesting advantages. |
Beffah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:01:00 -
[38] - Quote
Dear CCP,
Are you seriously trying to make this game COMPLETELY unplayable? What was the reasoning behind this crackpot idea? Because seriously, that's what it is: literally pants-on-head-********. Do any of you spend any time in wormholes whatsoever, as a normal account/player? Its clear you don't, because this potentially breaks wormholes.
As the people before me have expressed (rather eloquently, I might add) this can really only lead to the stagnation of wormholes. So much combat comes into play when you have caps on holes, and a random-distant spawn point is going to lead risk-averse groups into not committing caps, full-stop.
Wormholes aren't broken (comparitively speaking) - stop trying to fix them. Instead, please focus your attention on things that DO need fixing: POS mechanics, corporation mechanics, sovereignty, the still-soul-crushing new player experience. |
Maverick Capasso
Narwhals Ate My Duck. Narwhals Ate My Duck
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:01:00 -
[39] - Quote
-1 Interesting concept, but it seems like it will just discourage PvP in WH space. |
O'nira
United System's Commonwealth
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:03:00 -
[40] - Quote
think i might leave whs if this change goes through or join a blob. basically the only 2 choices if i want to have any control of the content i get. |
|
Alundil
Isogen 5
617
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:06:00 -
[41] - Quote
Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it.
In kspace (different meta) Capital ships do not use gates. Gates do not have mass. Mass does not affect spawn ranges on cynos or jump bridges.
In wspace(our meta) Caps need support ships more than anywhere else already (and this is how it should be) because there is no easy exit cyno escape. This change places them out side of support ship range and effectively has their asses hanging out blowing in the breeze.
Furthermore, this spreads sub caps immediately. To what purpose? In heavy armor fights (most of them) multiple dps ships are needed to kill another setup group with logi support. This means it will be even easier to tank incoming damage for the defenders since the attackers will be all spread out.
Jumping capitals into a hostile fleet in wspace is a dicey proposition already with a very common tactic to attempt to bump them out of refit range, cap range, or range of the wh. With this change all of that is unnecessary now because CCP has decided to do it for the defenders, unasked for I might add.
I'm right behind you |
dexter xio
TURN LEFT
63
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:11:00 -
[42] - Quote
Thanks Dexter xio - That cool guy |
Xyllo
2
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:11:00 -
[43] - Quote
This is rly bad idea, bad bad idea ;/ |
Aelias Zero
Jaded.
12
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:12:00 -
[44] - Quote
Makes it easier to camp a wormhole and nothing more. Also makes it so the smaller corps/fleets have less control in picking their fights.
-1 to the idea, all this is going to do is frustrate lots of people and get them to leave an already-empty wormhole space. "Is probably the best person alive." -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á -Ron Paul |
Adarnof
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:12:00 -
[45] - Quote
Dear CCP,
Although you never intended for wormholes to be colonized, it's happened, and you need to accept this. What's made them such a fantastic content creator is the ability to connect to random areas of space on a whim, which is only truly possible by rolling wormholes.
Groups set up shop in specific systems to take advantage of the static connection. Our current ability to roll statics means we can generate our own content with ease, whenever we please. Your proposed change greatly hinders smaller groups' abilities to roll and hence would be detrimental to the wormhole community as a whole.
My group, for example, thrives off rolling our C3 static. If we jumped an orca through and it appeared 40km off the hole, it would most certainly discourage us from continuing to do so. With content disappearing, our member base will grow bored and move on. Assuming this is the norm for most smaller groups, this would lead to an exodus of wormhole space.
Now I'm sure this is not the intended effect, but this is just the latest in a long line of "features" that hurt wormhole space. There's already frustration over the jump fuel changes; the industry taxation; API kill data; and we all remember the ESS. We're all for promoting content in wormhole space, however breaking such a fundamental part of life out here is not the way to do so.
If you want to promote content in wormhole space, you need to listen to your member base. There are already lists of features requested by the community you could be working on instead of generating Sunday morning threadnaughts. This change adds no real content aside from the occasional rolling ship kill, and instead removes it by discouraging groups from utilizing statics (and even content at home).
Sincerely, A concerned wormhole resident. |
Ziirn
Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
29
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:17:00 -
[46] - Quote
Janus Nanzikambe wrote:Do Not Want +1 |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
112
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:17:00 -
[47] - Quote
This is a bad, bad idea. It's going to lead to people just sitting and orbiting their towers instead of taking the risk to roll a hole and go do something, be that trying to find a fight or doing some PvE. People are going to extract from fights instead of committing caps to try and win them. It's punishing smaller groups who need the advantage of caps, and it's going to lead to less people doing things in wormholes in general, which is the exact opposite of what you should be trying to do.
Don't make the things people are already doing more tedious, add in new things for them to do that are riskier. |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
58
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:19:00 -
[48] - Quote
So wormholes should be the unknown, so CCP doesn-¦t even communicate planned changes. Yeah that-¦s gonna work out great. Maybe you can add that as the new space with constructable gates: R-Space aka everything is random. Why not also add this change to cynos in k-space for an even bigger shitstorm? Imagine capitals or JFs even landing 10 km off the cynoship. Or a titan suddenly not landing on the FFedge.
Quick reflection on this change: If your dread really spawns 40km off the hole and goes 126 m/s with MWD it takes it about 6 minutes (combatfit about 70% longer) to get back to the hole. An orca should spawn around 7-9km, better selfdestruct, will save you alot of time. If you jump a dread and carrier into a fight chances are good they will not be in reprange to each other. Same for the subcaps brawling it out on the dread. Gives a completely new meaning to the word suicidetriage. Isn-¦t it fun to do the maths on a fight, decide it is doable, then jump in (attack something, defender has perfect positioning) and then get told by your triagepilot "Sorry guys, can-¦t help you. RNG made me useless." Good thing there are never any weblokis there to make sure you will stay where you are. Want to annoy a roller that you can-¦t kill: Webloki full of WCS 50 off the roller and keep him there until the hole dies of old age. Add a handful of ishtars to that and the carrier is forefeight every time you jump. While this change will definitely shake things up it will need a lot of thinking and debate wether it is helpful. It-¦s not like there is a list of small changes that people are begging for or a fully outlined and debated scenario (sigspawntimings) that this devtime could have been put into. What are the three major differences between gates and wormholes: You can jump with aggression, you get polarization and unless you are really unlucky you can jump back with one pulse of your propmod. So after this change it is "J-space: Now with 33% more gates" |
Mealtime
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
19
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:22:00 -
[49] - Quote
D3m0n sam wrote:http://i.imgur.com/nojWx.gif
All i have to say
|
|
CCP Fozzie
C C P C C P Alliance
10845
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:24:00 -
[50] - Quote
Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend. Game Designer | Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/ |
|
|
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:25:00 -
[51] - Quote
Alundil wrote:Kynric wrote:Zara Arran wrote:When connected to a pvp entity, who will now dare to jump into the other WH for a fight? Especially if it is their home system?
This is bad!! It would change the meta which is not exactly the same as the end of all life. I thought everyone was tired of t3 fleet as the fleet for every occasion? This change sounds very similar to jumping through a regional gate into another gang and that happens every day in other regions of space. Scouts get killed doing it also although it is a bit more difficult to catch them. It might even be more fun as it would greatly expand the number of viable doctrines. More options is usually more interesting. Perhaps the numbers used for spawn distance are off but conceptually I kinda like it. In kspace (different meta) Capital ships do not use gates. Gates do not have mass. Mass does not affect spawn ranges on cynos or jump bridges. In wspace(our meta) Caps need support ships more than anywhere else already (and this is how it should be) because there is no easy exit cyno escape. This change places them out side of support ship range and effectively has their asses hanging out blowing in the breeze. Furthermore, this spreads sub caps immediately. To what purpose? In heavy armor fights (most of them) multiple dps ships are needed to kill another setup group with logi support. This means it will be even easier to tank incoming damage for the defenders since the attackers will be all spread out. Jumping capitals into a hostile fleet in wspace is a dicey proposition already with a very common tactic to attempt to bump them out of refit range, cap range, or range of the wh. With this change all of that is unnecessary now because CCP has decided to do it for the defenders, unasked for I might add.
With most of the doctrines I fly I would prefer to be a bit further out on the other side. It certainly is not the end of the world. Yes it would change doctrines and tactics but that is not the same as being the end of wormholes. Instead of rolling with caps try nano - phoons or panthers or cloak-tricking a battleship or preparing advance and making some pings to cloak trick a warp to and then cloak trick a warp back down. I regularly roll 3 bil mass holes with only subcaps and it is not a big deal.
The current spawning at zero is a significant disadvantage to nano fleets, sniper fleets, Frig fleets and such. It would be more fun to see more of those than the current universal-t3-meta. As I said perhaps it needs to be inverted with smaller spawning further or a fixed distance for all or maybe even make spawn distance proportional to remaining wormhole mass. But the mere idea of the change doesn't sound like the end of the world. |
Crispinius
Negative Density No Response
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:26:00 -
[52] - Quote
Mealtime wrote:D3m0n sam wrote:http://i.imgur.com/nojWx.gif
All i have to say
Lets go and Shoot the Monuments again.
|
Mrs Curtain
4
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:26:00 -
[53] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone.
We are indeed working on some changes to how ships spawn when they jump through wormholes. This is one part of a series of wormhole iterations we are working on and that we will be publishing a dev blog on soon. We will be looking for player feedback at that time. The version of the code that is on SISI is absolutely not the final version, and is not running final numbers (the ranges we are working with internally are quite a bit closer than what is on this build of SISI).
We'll be posting a dev blog with the whole collection of proposed changes next week and we will be very interested in taking your feedback then. In the meantime I advise you all to not panic. Nobody is out to get you.
Hope you all have a great weekend.
Good, Well you can remove this " Change " from the dev/new build. I wonder what were in store for this time around guys.... Sov in WHs? We are still masters of our fate. We are still captains of our souls |
Erasmus Phoenix
Balls to the Walls No Response
112
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:27:00 -
[54] - Quote
Sniper fleets work for defense, extremely well... So well that they usually just make the attackers go "screw this" and jump back, because they know they can't counter a bunch of ishtars at 80KM. |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:27:00 -
[55] - Quote
In the interests of proving a point, I'm going to continue updating my reddit post with all the groups that immediately said no to this change: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2ci5ue/dear_ccp_stop_fucking_with_wormholes_please/cjfq2pi
I suspect that your feedback will come down to "no, don't do this".
Could we perhaps work on having changes as fundamental as this announced before we discover them? It's becoming a running trend that wormholers find out these things as they're being implemented, rather than before they're being implemented, and it makes planning out workarounds much more difficult. |
Mizhir
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
66484
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:28:00 -
[56] - Quote
Would be hilarious if the same things happened to everything that jumps to a cyno. Nullsec would burn when their precious supers suddenly lands over 50km away from the cyno. One Man Crew - Collective solo pvp |
kashkaisha
SnaiLs aNd FroGs
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:29:00 -
[57] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:Good afternoon everyone. Nobody is out to get you.
If there is one harsh environnement for player in eve, its wh. Why would you do anything to make it harder ?
Why dont you work on stuff more important like finding a alternative on the ongoing nerf of nanoship... #stopKillingMyWayofPewPew |
Kynric
Sky Fighters
142
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:29:00 -
[58] - Quote
Aelias Zero wrote:Makes it easier to camp a wormhole and nothing more. Also makes it so the smaller corps/fleets have less control in picking their fights.
-1 to the idea, all this is going to do is frustrate lots of people and get them to leave an already-empty wormhole space.
You might have more control and better opportunities as a small gang as you can more easily get outside of scram range and if you fall back through you have new disengagement options which you do not have now. |
Traiori
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
25
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:30:00 -
[59] - Quote
Kynric wrote: Instead of rolling with caps try nano - phoons or panthers or cloak-tricking a battleship or preparing advance and making some pings to cloak trick a warp to and then cloak trick a warp back down. I regularly roll 3 bil mass holes with only subcaps and it is not a big deal.
3 bil hole needs 5 consecutive round trips with an orca (give or take). That's 10-20 minutes longer than it takes at the minute with capitals. It's fine if you have the pilots to bring tons of battleships. If you don't, then you're going to have problems. Nano-phoons would require even more jumps (15 round trips). I'm fairly sure it would take at least 30 minutes to collapse using 3 pilots.
|
Beffah
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
26
|
Posted - 2014.08.03 16:31:00 -
[60] - Quote
(I checked, I didn't see it, so don't crucify me if I'm wrong on this, but...)
It would be nice if the Features and Ideas subforum was used for... you know, new features and ideas. You'd think that feedback before the work into putting these changes onto Sisi would make some sense. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 25 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |