Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 81 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 18 post(s) |
Reve Uhad
Outer Ring Sleeper Collective Illusion of Solitude
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:08:00 -
[91] - Quote
Retar Aveymone wrote:Reve Uhad wrote:Retar Aveymone wrote:Reve Uhad wrote:Speaking as a pilot in a small/med wormhole corp, the spawn distance change will be a detriment to our ability to generate content in an already highly risk-averse area of space. I do not support this change.
RNG ganks != goodfights. a lot of the arguments against this change appear to stem from a premise that wormholers are entitled to control every aspect of the wormhole in which they live, rather than wormholes being a place where you deal with uncertainty and must constantly adapt that doesn't seem like a good argument to me The dynamic quality of wormholes creates an environment where you can go several days without having anything to shoot. This being a game where the primary goal is to shoot things, some amount of control needs to be there. We're not suggesting we get a menu where we can select which hole we roll into next, and we're not asking for any advantage we haven't already had. We're just asking that the current mechanic not be made worse. that argument is obsoleted by "We will be significantly increasing the spawn rate of all the existing wormholes that originate in W-space"
I don't agree. I think it just means I'll be running into empty ships in POS's more often. |
Adarnof
Free Trade Monopoly You Are Being Monitored
18
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:09:00 -
[92] - Quote
To reiterate my concerns from the other thread,
Due to the nature of w-space, the majority of your content should be coming from the static. An integral part of this content discovery is the ability to roll the static connection on demand and look for something else. The proposed change greatly reduces our ability to do so.
For weeks now my group has starved with a lack of home content. Few incomings and no anomalies mean we've been stuck with content in our static to keep members interested. We've rolled that thing probably 20 times daily now looking for entertainment, and we've been finding it. Sometimes we want to farm, sometimes we want to pew, sometimes we just need to make a run to Jita.
By both greatly increasing the risk associated with doing so and making the process much slower, you've come into direct conflict with your goals of providing players with content. On our off-hours I'm absolutely certain members won't be rolling our static because there's no backup if it hits the fan.
This change only promotes POSing up or merging into a larger group. The whole appeal of w-space has been that smaller groups can have a space of their own; I fear this change discourages these small groups from attempting to do so.
Consider a scenario such as the one that unfolded last week. We were rolled into by a 400-man corp. Being significantly smaller than that, we were stuck with three options: get our faces stomped in by a blobfest, log off and do something else, or combat roll the connection and find other content more suited to us. Can you guess which one we chose? Yeah, we rolled it and went back to stuff we could manage. Now imagine that scenario with your proposed changes. We send the rollers in, and they get absolutely murdered by the other group who catches them 20k off the hole. Which do you suppose provides more "content" in wormholes? Them eating a cap and making us log off, or us rolling them away and staying on to do stuff?
While this change is certainly a shake-up to wormhole space, I fear it will not have the intended effect. If you don't believe me, just watch your pretty activity graphs after this goes live and you'll see. |
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:09:00 -
[93] - Quote
I foresee Null sec interceptor gangs roaming WH space. |
crazy0146
The Federation of assorted candy
65
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:11:00 -
[94] - Quote
This is a Bad idea as show by many good posts above.
Two points i'd like to make about why it's a bad change, with relation to C5/6 whs:
1. When a smaller entity and larger entity clash the one way a smaller entity had of evening the odds was to bring a triage carrier, after this change i don't see this happening as bringing a cap is basically suicide for it. So smaller groups will have less chances to fight larger ones and less content for members leads to people leaving the corp, Thus it's either grow bigger or leave, which leads to bigger corps/alliances but less of them.
2. Taking the fight to a hostile home system gives the defender a HUGE advantage as the attacker has to worry about whether their caps will be in refit range, if they'll be able to extract, etc. This change adds more to the downsides of fighting in a home system for the attacker (This is based on the assumption that both parties are aware of each other).
I would rather see a change where attackers have less of a disadvantage in attacking a home system as i remember many fights where we/they wouldn't jump in because of the massive defending advantage.
If you are still set on the idea of implementing this then perhaps add in wh stabilizers (as a module or deployable) that reduce the range which ships spawn from after jumping through.
Also as a final point: Add this behavior to cynos/ covert cynos, because it's not like they need to jump to a specific point.
Now that i think about it, it's an instant rr sentry carrier n |
Longinius Spear
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
284
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:12:00 -
[95] - Quote
If your intention is to slow down the rage rolling process. You have succeeded.
If your intention was to bring meaningful value to the current meta game, you have failed.
I'm indifferent honestly, the other changes to w-space are so awesome, I'll take this change in stride.
Read more of my ramblings on my blog www.invadingyourhole.blogspot.com |
Saraki Ishikela
Deep Space Adventure Time
57
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:15:00 -
[96] - Quote
Shouldn't the real problem here be that groups of players have to "rage roll" wormholes in the first place to look for targets? It seems like CCP is trying to force player interaction on a process that most people use to try and facilitate player interaction. The problem to me seems to be that ragerolling is necessary, not that players have found the optimimum way of doing it.
Why not create a weapon system, bomb, mobile structure etc that will instead collapse the worm hole after a set amount of time? It can go a number of ways, players either shoot at the wormhole with a specialized weapon system to collapse it, so more players equals faster collapse, you set a mobile structure and after x amount of time the wormhole collapse around it, have it be a like a graviton mass accelerator and causes gravity spike that collapses the hole or what not.
The trick is whenever this process is initiated on one side, alert the other side it's going on. This will generate an opportunity for another group to try and disrupt and engage.
I just came up with this in 2 seconds, i'm sure it can be much more refined, but it seems silly to treat a symptom when the problem is with ragerolling itself. One newbies quest to ExploreEVE: Youtube:www.youtube.com/exploreeve- Blogspot:http://exploreeve.blogspot.com Twitter:www.twitter.com/exploreeve - Facebook:www.facebook.com/exploreeve |
Xenn Marc
Comunidad Hispania
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:17:00 -
[97] - Quote
Aside from the impacts in rage rolling due to landing distance from WHs, I like the rest of ideas, C4 with 2 statics, balancing effects and more random statics (including this new low mass idea) - However, together with my dislike towards the distance you appear from the WH I feel that all the proposals, if all go live there is too much change to take at once into a way of live that's not considered 'broken'.
WH needs more ppl, living, passing, hunting and getting lost - and bringing some chaos via more random WH or statics I think is the right way to go - but making it difficult to rage-roll or for small corps to jump a hole and find their fleet miles apart isn't the way - there has to be something we can control - or less people will adventure inside the hole. |
Janeway84
Its a good day to die
91
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:17:00 -
[98] - Quote
Worst change ever but its gonna shake up wh meta down to its core. Not sure i like it from the perspective of small gang / solo player.
Its gonna turn a boring task into even more boring and make me spend more time with boring. maybe can reduce some of the maximum ranges a little? |
Kennesaw Breach
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
52
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:17:00 -
[99] - Quote
The scientist in me doesn't like this idea. Wormholes are supposed to be connections between two points that ignore all the distance between. By that metric, I'd much rather have all ships spawn at 0 on the hole when jumping through. Decloak distance for EVERYONE, and more plausible science. |
ForgedMind
Astrum Fidelis Apocalypse Now.
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:18:00 -
[100] - Quote
Again CCP you have chosen to harm solo pilots and small corps due to complaints from your larger bread winners.
CCP your hypocrisy knows no bounds. When you devs want to log on just to relax and play eve you have 2 perfectly isolated systems, and an entire galactic spiral to play in privately. Yes. Some pilots have figured out to create the next best thing in wh space. And for this reason these changes are being applied.
Some of us do not care about the politics of eve. We want to log into a game. Casually shoot some red crosses. Stare at some awesome looking graphics, all while shooting the breeze with our corp mates. This is because we are decent people. Perhaps you are not familiar with the concept of decent?
If any decent people are still reading this I encourage you to either play this game with no personal investment or, unsub as your life will be richer without this broken thing in it. |
|
Kivena
EVE University Ivy League
45
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:21:00 -
[101] - Quote
C2 occupant here. We have a small group of E-UNI students & older members, occasionally we roll holes (usually using battleships & HICs, sometimes with an Orca) with 3 or fewer people, but normally a few more.
I don't think this will make a big change to the way we close holes. Sure, it'll take a bit longer to burn back to the hole on the far side, and therefore carry a bit more risk, but with propulsion modules and other pilots available for support that's really no problem. 2-9km to jump distance - within bubble range - seems pretty reasonable to me.
What this change will do is help us gank people travelling through wormholes - making w-space more dangerous. With some distance to make back it provides ample opportunity for webs and tackle to slow them and kill them.
If I read this correctly it also means you will never spawn within 2km of a wormhole - so you can always immediately cloak on the far side. In that respect it could make travelling a little safer.
I can't really speak about capitals spawn distance since our holes can't carry them. Director of Education EVE University
Follow me on Twitter: @eveKivena
|
Verran Skarne
4 Marketeers
21
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:22:00 -
[102] - Quote
We routinely roll our static looking for content (both PvE and PvP) to do. This change is definitely going to slow us down in that regard as well, and that's bad. As others have pointed out, there's a maximum to the number of people you can have in a w-space system simply because of available content.
I don't mind the PvP effects of this change - players will adapt. We'll use battleships instead of Orcas, we'll change tactics and doctrines to protect our ships better during the burn back to the hole, and so on. It's the knock-on effect of the change where it takes longer and becomes riskier to roll a hole or collapse a chain though that's the problem. |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
62
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:23:00 -
[103] - Quote
Rroff wrote:xpaulx wrote:Time to shoot the monument There is a monument in wormhole space?
It-¦s the shattered planet in that one C3, pretty sure someone has the j-sig.
Not sure about the change for capitals, but I definitly do not like them for the small ships. Very slim chance your scanner will be able to cloak even if he is in a T3. Also faction/officer smartbomb or, god forbid, red giant hole will kill your covertops 100% of the time. Way too strong for the hometeam. |
Gospadin
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
184
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:23:00 -
[104] - Quote
What if they kept the distance changes, but changed the spawn mechanics when you land, such that you appeared somewhere in a 60 degree cone that was the opposite polar direction you had when you entered the wormhole? Even better, maybe you should have an intial velocity that you had when you started the jump?
Make it so if you jump through at < 20% of your ship's maximum unboosted speed, you land cloaked and unmoving.
If you jump through in excess of 20% of your ship's maximum unboosted speed, you land with a ~5s cloak with an initial velocity in the same direction you were previously heading, somewhere in the cone described above.
That'd allow fleets to stay together, and allow for some really cool mechanics for fleet positioning through a wh. |
Two step
Aperture Harmonics No Holes Barred
4715
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:23:00 -
[105] - Quote
Chitsa Jason wrote:There are many good arguments why this change is good and why this change is bad. I do like the change however as someone pointed out previously it will be harder for higher class people to bring in carriers + dreads for a fight as they will not be able to refit. If there would be a possibility for all the ships to spawn in same random direction for their designated ranges and dread + carrier ranges would be the same I would be happy. Plus make it so that if you jump into kspace you are not dragged away from the wh. A lot of time wspace people will fight on the wormhole with null sec blob and the reason we can do that is that we can just jump back to wh. No matter how the change ends up being in the end it will shake up wspace quite a bit. super graphic: http://i.imgur.com/jYofIa7.png
Perhaps you should have considered both sides when you proposed it. From https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4765901#post4765901:
Chitsa Jason wrote: 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.
CSM 7 Secretary CSM 6 Alternate Delegate @two_step_eve on Twitter My Blog
|
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
127
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:23:00 -
[106] - Quote
Saraki Ishikela wrote:Shouldn't the real problem here be that groups of players have to "rage roll" wormholes in the first place to look for targets? It seems like CCP is trying to force player interaction on a process that most people use to try and facilitate player interaction. The problem to me seems to be that ragerolling is necessary, not that players have found the optimimum way of doing it.
Why not create a weapon system, bomb, mobile structure etc that will instead collapse the worm hole after a set amount of time? It can go a number of ways, players either shoot at the wormhole with a specialized weapon system to collapse it, so more players equals faster collapse, you set a mobile structure and after x amount of time the wormhole collapse around it, have it be a like a graviton mass accelerator and causes gravity spike that collapses the hole or what not.
The trick is whenever this process is initiated on one side, alert the other side it's going on. This will generate an opportunity for another group to try and disrupt and engage.
I just came up with this in 2 seconds, i'm sure it can be much more refined, but it seems silly to treat a symptom when the problem is with ragerolling itself.
This idea is amazing. In fact, let's just give the wormholes hitpoints, you don't need to worry about making a new type of weapon. Should probably make sure it has millions of hitpoints to make it difficult enough.
You know, I changed my mind. I like the anchoring of structures instead. Let's call it a WCU. A Wormhole Claim Unit. Once you anchor it you collapse the wormhole you now own. |
Cay Deschain
Stryker Industries
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:23:00 -
[107] - Quote
If CCP really wants to do make this change (and I still don't see a reason for it), why not just invert the distances (i.e. make larger masses spawn closer and smaller masses spawn farther out)? This solves the cap/orca ragerolling problem. Yes, it will keep being able to keep scouts out harder and break up T3s all landing at the same distance, but these are ships that can burn back quickly. |
blackish person
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
1
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:25:00 -
[108] - Quote
Sorry this is such a long post but Fozzie please read it!!
I really don't post much because i'm bad at writing but this thread needs some constructive comments.
The main issues I see with this are (in order of importance):
1. Rage rolling is much slower. Landing ~15k out of jump range in a dread and then burning back at 80m/s is a real pain. You could fit some kind of nano dread/carrier and do it a little faster (still not that fast). If one of these "rolling caps" get tackled we suddenly have a **** fit cap stuck on the other side of the wh with no way of refitting. We then have a small amount of mass left on the wh to work with when trying to save this cap. As a result this wont create a fight. Just a cheap fit carrier getting ganked... meh.
The net result of all this is people will just stop rolling. I know this is just speculation but im the kind of guy that logs in to coms and says "you guys are doing nothing, lets roll!". I will stop doing this I think because its not worth risking a cap dying to roll holes slower than I could before. If people stop chain rolling or even just rolling for a new chain to find something to do; wh space will become really bad.
2. I think one of the big things that stops people from taking fights in wh space is the fact that jumping 3 caps and 20 t3s through a wormhole and closing it behind you is really scary. You are jumping ~40b (2 super carriers in value) through a hole in to someones home system where they can just cap blob you with like 10 dreads if they have the pilots, yes there are groups that can do this to you. After doing this you have no means of quickly extracting. If you win you then have to sit there rolling holes (which is now more risky) looking for an exit completely naked with no means of posing up. If you lose you are in a world of hurt. You are stuck in someone else's system potentially being combat scanned. You have to wait out your 15 min timer and log, trapped until you get a sneaky exit which could be days later. (This is if the people you are fighting are total dicks, some people are total dicks). The people you are jumping in to on the other hand can just warp back to towers if **** goes good or bad.
Ok i'm getting to the point; Having your caps jump through the wormhole and then land out of refitting range and randomly spaced out makes it even harder to fight people in their home system. There is no way we would have taken this fight http://www.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=24659592 if our caps were going to land out of refitting range.
Also if your caps can land 40km apart then you only have to bump them for ~12km before they are out of archon cap transfer range. ~17 to be out of carrier rep range.
EVEN WORSE All the defenders have to do is make a warp-in for carriers/dreads 30 km away from your dread on the opposite side of the dread to your carrier. Suddenly all their caps are out of rep range of your carrier which is fine except for the fact that your sub-caps cant go close to them to do anything. To neut with a neut legion suddenly you have to be out of rep range and you WILL die. They can kill your dread and you WILL lose the fight.
3. "This change is intended to ensure that all attempts to control the local wormhole environment are open to risk of player disruption."
Ok so you have made holes more risky to close for farmers. If people play the way they do now and ignore this change then yes lots of caps will die. If you think they will not adapt to this then you are being really naive.
What will happen is people will just scout out the chain for a few jumps and make sure there are no pvp entities around then crit it and be pretty safe for the most part. If they see anyone even remotely threatening they will just log off and do nothing. People doing nothing is really bad for wh space. This is a shift from the way it is now in that you can actually kill people rolling holes, we have our ways ;) . People think they are safer than they are and this leads to mistakes and carelessness.
TL;DR
1. This will stop us from rolling
2. This will stop us from taking fights
3. This will stop us from killing rolling caps
4. This will stop people from doing stuff in general and this will make wh space a dark empty sad place :( |
ShadowfireWraith
Astral Inferno
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:25:00 -
[109] - Quote
I like all of the ideas of this patch EXCEPT the spawn distance from the wormhole. You guys are saying that you want all sides of eve open to player interaction, but many groups are unable to leave, unable to operate, or unable to do well....anything if they cannot close that incoming wormhole. There already is a fight in order to close a wormhole, if the attacker wants to keep it from closing all it takes is a HIC on the other side to trap people that land on the hole or keep people from landing at 0 on the hole, and then the enemy fleet can kill the entire wormhole closing force. Additionally, small groups need a way to shield themselves from outside interaction. Against small ship wormholes, you know they cannot bring in t3's which means you will gladly fight the incoming force. It will be fun pvp and very interesting. When the enemy comes from a normal wormhole though, you will see small groups shutting down if they cannot roll a hole without support. Instead of needing to pitch ships from a wormhole, the larger groups should know that they simply need to do what? Risk their own ass by going INTO the target wormhole instead of sitting safe and sound on their side of it waiting for hole rollers to come. This is frequently seen already, stop trying to add more 'content' in a way that will only ruin things for small groups. Small groups need to be able to scout the wormhole, safely roll it, and continue on with THEIR content, instead of just being smaller fish in everyone else's content. Support fleets in wormholes are not common to be had, you do not frequently see 20+ person fleets just hanging around with nothing to do or supporting wormhole rolls, because then it would get too crowded during peak times with nobody having any content to do besides kill other players. Just drop the mass pitching you far from a wormhole and we have the best wormhole patch we've ever seen, and buff the loot in c2 wormholes to not put them so far from C3 and C3+ wormholes and we will love you. The small ship wormhole is enough, it levels the field between large groups and small groups and causes more fights, which we want to see, instead of more turtling whether it be the enemy OR ourselves hiding in fright due to not being able to close our wormhole off. The larger groups need to watch the hole if they want to keep it alive, not just magically expect the fear of their numbers will let them be lazy and not have to force the other group not to roll the wormhole. PVP groups can always roll a wormhole to get more content, this change means that small groups CANNOT roll a wormhole to even have the slightest hope of even a little pitiful bit of something to do besides quit and come back later hoping the larger group rolled the wh for them. Equalize the field, not balance it further only towards large groups. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
627
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:26:00 -
[110] - Quote
Traiori wrote:20km or 40km, the time it takes a dread to warp off a hole and back to the hole remains the same. All the issues that we've brought up previously are still problematic, so I'll bring them up again on behalf of the community: 1) Rage rolling becomes much more annoying for large groups. This limits their ability to find content that they can take, whether it be site-runners to kill (which you *have* to rage-roll for, incidentally) or other large groups. The proposed change slows down chain-rolling, slowing down the speed at which content can be found. This also has the side effect of making farming safer, because the probability being rolled into whilst running sites comes down to how many holes can be opened whilst your caps are not in their POS. Less holes=less chance of dying to everyone else. 2) Rage rolling becomes essentially impossible for small groups. They also have to find content, and rolling the chain is often the only way to reliably find content of interest - whether that be PvP or PvE or anything else. The proposed changes stop you from being able to do this without fighting the larger groups... which you can't do because numbers are important in every case. Small groups can no longer rage-roll consistently, especially given that most larger groups will seed scouts into their chain. 3) Committing capitals to wormholes outside of home systems requires winning the fight or losing the cap... which in turn means that it won't be committed by anyone that hasn't already got the forces on-grid to win it. The proposed change ensures that capitals shoved into another wormhole can't get back into home system. Whereas we currently see Triage used to balance out fights against bigger entities, smaller entities can't afford to lose the triage carrier every time, so they'll just stop bringing them. Less fights is bad for everyone. 4) Using our capitals in nullsec (and arguably losec) means losing them. We're not stupid. The proposed change would strand our capitals 15-20km away from the hole. The fight would become a race against time: will they be able to form up capitals/supercapitals to kill our triage archon before we get it back into the hole? In most cases, the answer will be no. Power projection means that we can no longer commit capitals. It's bad enough at present, without increasing the scope of the problem. Once again, less fights is bad for everyone. 5) Sub-capital wormholes also suffer from the problem because orcas land far away too. The major difference between rolling C4 wormholes and C5 wormholes is that C4 wormholes use Orcas. If those orcas are guaranteed to be in danger, they're also guaranteed to die. We'll take orca kills any time of the day. So will other groups. This means that C4 groups also need to be fielding support fleets for their orca if they don't fancy losing them daily. Bad for small groups, which means they'll leave, which means we lose more groups and hence, lose content. The error here is the belief that all groups can afford to field support groups. We can't. We aren't 10000 man coalitions, because wormholes can't support that kind of lifestyle. There is a maximum limit to how many people can fit into a wormhole, and unless we're now expecting all pilots to be on all of the time, that means that this change will make smaller groups increasingly unfeasible. I originally made most of these points on a reddit post here: http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2cro9k/where_are_the_devblogs/cjihkl9. Some inital discussion over it can also be found. EDIT: A better solution would be to invert the numbers: have distance landed be proportional to a function of mass and speed, making it so that lighter and faster ships landing further away from the hole. This would allow us to use kiting HACs as well as brawling T3s. EDIT 2: In the interest of clarifying my suggested change, I propose that distance landed from the hole should be inversely proportional to mass (higher mass=close) and directly proportional to maximum speed (higher maximum speed = further away). Not empty quoting because I still think this captures the most salient points/issues with this proposal.
You will be stranding 3+b ISK ships well outside of their operational envelope (possibly outside of rep/capxfer range and definitely outside of refit range). This will result in fewer caps being used in wh PvP and that is bad in my opinion. People won't suicide multiple billions of isk 'just cuz'. We aren't stupid and/or moongoo+renter srp rich.
I'm right behind you |
|
Kim Briggs
Aurora Armaments The Bastion
16
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:26:00 -
[111] - Quote
I realy like the change, that higher mass ships spawn further away from the wh.
In the current state it is nearly impossible to get a fight with wh residence, if they are active and don't want to fight. I face this situation on a nearly daily base, that i scan a wh, scout it, form a fleet, suddenly caps appear on my side and 5 sec later the wh is gone. That is a risk free method to avoid any unwanted contact, because the K162 WH pops up, directly after i initiate the warp in my scanning ship.
Good change CCP! |
Shock 2u
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:30:00 -
[112] - Quote
I do not support these changes.
I have lived in WH space since joining EvE and it is by far the best content in this game. These changes will not encourage more PvP they will just allow the large WH corps to keep their connections open longer meaning the smaller corps will turtle and log. Eventually they will move out of WH space and only the large groups will remain.
Some of these changes will ruin W space. We already get random WH opening and to increase that "significantly" and make some of them unable to be closed is insane.
I can only guess CCP wants people out of WH space to stop isk farming to plex. I pay for he game so that's not such a big deal for me but I like to have isk for shinny ships.
We will have to make a decision on if this is what WH space should be, my guess is the Null Sec peeps in CCP want all space to be Null like, why not add a local while you are at it?
|
ShadowfireWraith
Astral Inferno
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:30:00 -
[113] - Quote
blackish person wrote:Sorry this is such a long post but Fozzie please read it!! I really don't post much because i'm bad at writing but this thread needs some constructive comments. The main issues I see with this are (in order of importance): 1. Rage rolling is much slower. Landing ~15k out of jump range in a dread and then burning back at 80m/s is a real pain. You could fit some kind of nano dread/carrier and do it a little faster (still not that fast). If one of these "rolling caps" get tackled we suddenly have a **** fit cap stuck on the other side of the wh with no way of refitting. We then have a small amount of mass left on the wh to work with when trying to save this cap. As a result this wont create a fight. Just a cheap fit carrier getting ganked... meh. The net result of all this is people will just stop rolling. I know this is just speculation but im the kind of guy that logs in to coms and says "you guys are doing nothing, lets roll!". I will stop doing this I think because its not worth risking a cap dying to roll holes slower than I could before. If people stop chain rolling or even just rolling for a new chain to find something to do; wh space will become really bad. 2. I think one of the big things that stops people from taking fights in wh space is the fact that jumping 3 caps and 20 t3s through a wormhole and closing it behind you is really scary. You are jumping ~40b (2 super carriers in value) through a hole in to someones home system where they can just cap blob you with like 10 dreads if they have the pilots, yes there are groups that can do this to you. After doing this you have no means of quickly extracting. If you win you then have to sit there rolling holes (which is now more risky) looking for an exit completely naked with no means of posing up. If you lose you are in a world of hurt. You are stuck in someone else's system potentially being combat scanned. You have to wait out your 15 min timer and log, trapped until you get a sneaky exit which could be days later. (This is if the people you are fighting are total dicks, some people are total dicks). The people you are jumping in to on the other hand can just warp back to towers if **** goes good or bad. Ok i'm getting to the point; Having your caps jump through the wormhole and then land out of refitting range and randomly spaced out makes it even harder to fight people in their home system. There is no way we would have taken this fight http://www.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=24659592 if our caps were going to land out of refitting range. Also if your caps can land 40km apart then you only have to bump them for ~12km before they are out of archon cap transfer range. ~17 to be out of carrier rep range. EVEN WORSE All the defenders have to do is make a warp-in for carriers/dreads 30 km away from your dread on the opposite side of the dread to your carrier. Suddenly all their caps are out of rep range of your carrier which is fine except for the fact that your sub-caps cant go close to them to do anything. To neut with a neut legion suddenly you have to be out of rep range and you WILL die. They can kill your dread and you WILL lose the fight. 3. "This change is intended to ensure that all attempts to control the local wormhole environment are open to risk of player disruption." Ok so you have made holes more risky to close for farmers. If people play the way they do now and ignore this change then yes lots of caps will die. If you think they will not adapt to this then you are being really naive. What will happen is people will just scout out the chain for a few jumps and make sure there are no pvp entities around then crit it and be pretty safe for the most part. If they see anyone even remotely threatening they will just log off and do nothing. People doing nothing is really bad for wh space. This is a shift from the way it is now in that you can actually kill people rolling holes, we have our ways ;) . People think they are safer than they are and this leads to mistakes and carelessness. TL;DR 1. This will stop us from rolling 2. This will stop us from taking fights 3. This will stop us from killing rolling caps 4. This will stop people from doing stuff in general and this will make wh space a dark empty sad place :(
This post is the most perfect summation of what we are trying to say, said by a very well respected and large group of wormholes with lots of experience. Please please please for the love of god listen! |
Reve Uhad
Outer Ring Sleeper Collective Illusion of Solitude
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:31:00 -
[114] - Quote
Shock 2u wrote:
I can only guess CCP wants people out of WH space to stop isk farming to plex. I pay for he game so that's not such a big deal for me but I like to have isk for shinny ships.
CCP still gets paid when people plex. The plex has to be bought by someone. This is never a valid accusation. |
Joran Jackson
The Red Circle Inc. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
128
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:36:00 -
[115] - Quote
Kim Briggs wrote:I realy like the change, that higher mass ships spawn further away from the wh.
In the current state it is nearly impossible to get a fight with wh residence, if they are active and don't want to fight. I face this situation on a nearly daily base, that i scan a wh, scout it, form a fleet, suddenly caps appear on my side and 5 sec later the wh is gone. That is a risk free method to avoid any unwanted contact and should be gone
Good change CCP!
Yeah, good point. You know, I hate people avoiding unwanted contact, too. Completely risk free.
I'll tell you what, let's keep this and add in these things called wormhole shipyards. You could basically put yourself inside them whenever you felt like. It would make it easy for people to keep their possessions, but most importantly it would allow people to reship for PvP. And then you could combine it with something like an alert that went off whenever you were in danger. That way whenever someone came by, you could always ship up and bring the fight!!
Dear CCP...please institute some type of intelligence verification for this forum. |
Shock 2u
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:37:00 -
[116] - Quote
Reve Uhad wrote:Shock 2u wrote:
I can only guess CCP wants people out of WH space to stop isk farming to plex. I pay for he game so that's not such a big deal for me but I like to have isk for shinny ships.
CCP still gets paid when people plex. The plex has to be bought by someone. This is never a valid accusation.
You assume people will continue to play if they can not farm for isk. You are wrong. |
Reve Uhad
Outer Ring Sleeper Collective Illusion of Solitude
3
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:39:00 -
[117] - Quote
Shock 2u wrote:Reve Uhad wrote:Shock 2u wrote:
I can only guess CCP wants people out of WH space to stop isk farming to plex. I pay for he game so that's not such a big deal for me but I like to have isk for shinny ships.
CCP still gets paid when people plex. The plex has to be bought by someone. This is never a valid accusation. You assume people will continue to play if they can not farm for isk. You are wrong.
I'm definitely not suggesting that. I'm just saying that the idea that CCP hates people who plex [because it means they don't get paid] is invalid. |
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
470
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:41:00 -
[118] - Quote
I would suggest making the distances even shorter, like 6-8km for caps. That way it will be a slowboatable/bumpable distance that will not slow us down as much as bouncing when rolling, but at the same time if someone decloaks and webs you on grid you are screwed anyway. W-Space Realtor |
Bob Artis
Into the Ether RAZOR Alliance
69
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:42:00 -
[119] - Quote
I said it before and I'll say it again. The only way this feature will ever work is if you reverse the direction. Heavier ships spawn close while lighter ships spawn further away.
I understand that it might be a little too safe to use Capital ships to roll right now, but pushing it so far in the other direction will just stop people from using them for anything other then home defense. |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
758
|
Posted - 2014.08.06 16:43:00 -
[120] - Quote
Reve Uhad wrote: I'm definitely not suggesting that. I'm just saying that the idea that CCP hates people who plex [because it means they don't get paid] is invalid.
There are still people in TYOOL 2014 who believe that an account being activated by PLEX somehow denies them income?
Hint: people who maintain their accounts using PLEX are actually causing CCP to profit MORE than someone who pays monthly; PLEX cost $20, and a monthly subscription costs $15/mo. This post was crafted by a member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 81 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |