Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
corbexx
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1374
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:30:52 -
[31] - Quote
Jack Hayson wrote:If they are meant as an addition to the Z142s we have now, sure why not? As a replacement? Hell no! There are a lot of things you could not do through those holes... -Using Black Ops. -Dropping a dread when a tackled ratting carrier starts spawning additional carriers. -Evacing your caps when you went Bhaals deep somewhere -Seeding caps (not sure how to feel about that one - we usually don't do this, but it would certainly affect w-space in a way) 400kt mass is roughly 15 cruisers. (If you want to get back home) Even for us that would get very tight on some days and we are not an especially large corp. It would also mean that you can't go out through that connection a second time when the nullbears have respawned in their sites.
ment as a addition to make up for the small amount of stuff we lost. total mass isnt fixed its a idea so discussion is welcome
Corbexx for CSM X - Wormholes still deserve better
|
Keskora Yaari
POS Party Low-Class
143
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:32:26 -
[32] - Quote
I think allowing BSs to go through would be fine. The low mass already limits how many you can put through. Sure it will make them easier to roll but that's part of the idea - they roll quickly and spawn frequently. Besides, if you couldn't jump BSs you could still put a higgs rig on a mauler or something and close it pretty quickly. |
Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
708
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:35:39 -
[33] - Quote
Wouldnt it be better if some CSM explained to CCP what a ****** idea removing c5-ns holes is, instead of us trying to come up with some not totally **** replacement?
SSC Brokering Service
|
Kalel Nimrott
Sentu Demina Corpa
1163
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:42:26 -
[34] - Quote
cor, you are telling us that we cannot go out to null and kill a Cap without help from another null power. The latest chages and this idea reduces the wh activity in null to "kill small **** and don't ******* bother us big boys while we play our serious bussines". Instead of that I propose to revert the changes. In fact, we want more Z142s.
"I'm the Master!, of suspense so Intense,
No defense against Hitchcock once he presents!"
|
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1188
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:43:54 -
[35] - Quote
So you can roll it instantly... Not bad.
If they would stick to 500mil, the common caring nullsec inhabitant could assign a higgs-blops and jump that to holes as they are reported, even. Teamwork to control your space! |
Tim Nering
R3d Fire
94
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:44:16 -
[36] - Quote
maybe kes is a little sighted being in a low class hole and doesnt mind low mass. This sounds like a good idea for c4 and below. But the reason any pvp entity wants to be in c5-c6 space is to use capitals. high class wspace has the potential for the highest skill capital piloting in the game (because u usually only get 1 or 2 per fleet) so let us use capitals. just make it as big as any other null connection.
that being said we can still roam out of these proposed holes... so its a plus for sure. but it just doesn't make sense ya know? |
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
1188
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 21:49:12 -
[37] - Quote
Rephrased to:
We are replacing half of the holes with ones that you can roll with a BS on the side instead of with BS+moros. You can also only get 25man T3 gangs through, screw you PL.
|
Keskora Yaari
POS Party Low-Class
143
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 22:13:10 -
[38] - Quote
Lawl Tim <3
But again, these aren't supposed to replace any existing holes and it's not intended to be a supplement to lower spawns of z142. This idea is for an entirely new type of wormhole. Basically I'm hearing about all of these changes that are effecting w-space because of people in null and I wanted to think of a type of wh that would bring a little more fun to w-space that wouldn't cause all of null sec to cry. One of the things I love most about w-space is the danger and unknown of where your connections will be at any given moment. Having connections that spawn frequently but die quickly adds to that and allows for more content and more chains - both things that w-space always needs.
But thinking about what you said, Tim, these could potentially be well served in low-class space too. Perhaps they don't need to be limited to c5/c6 space but can spawn in any class space? |
Tim Nering
R3d Fire
96
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 22:19:17 -
[39] - Quote
i have all these fancy toys because i wan2 use them. i see a nullsec that i want to cap escalate with... oh wait i cant because its like a frig hole and i cant....sht.
i just would like to see that tweak. low class version and highclass version. give them some other big drawbacks like short lifetime and whateverwhatever. im all for it. I just really want to make it known that i would live in a c3 or c4 if i didnt want to use capitals. im here in high class to use them, ccp please let me use them.
The other big reason im here in high class space is how many nulls i get. Our corp is very focused on microgang null roaming and because i have so many null connections is roam all over null talkin smack all day. its great. This change will allow me to have even more exits. so more slicer roams, more small nano gang roams! yay!
If null connections get super low, high class space isnt serving one of its biggest purposes to me. id prob go to thera or something. |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
1482
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 22:20:53 -
[40] - Quote
Keskora Yaari wrote:Lawl Tim <3
But again, these aren't supposed to replace any existing holes and it's not intended to be a supplement to lower spawns of z142. This idea is for an entirely new type of wormhole. Basically I'm hearing about all of these changes that are effecting w-space because of people in null and I wanted to think of a type of wh that would bring a little more fun to w-space that wouldn't cause all of null sec to cry. One of the things I love most about w-space is the danger and unknown of where your connections will be at any given moment. Having connections that spawn frequently but die quickly adds to that and allows for more content and more chains - both things that w-space always needs.
But thinking about what you said, Tim, these could potentially be well served in low-class space too. Perhaps they don't need to be limited to c5/c6 space but can spawn in any class space?
The issue isn't c1 through c3 space (and no c4 shouldn't start getting nullsecs). If we start over analyzing the situation nothing will get done.
Will this work for c5 and c6 space as a adequate substitute for now, probably.
Yaay!!!!
|
|
Tim Nering
R3d Fire
96
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 22:49:08 -
[41] - Quote
i dont think this is overthinking. the biggest fundamental difference from low class to high class is the use of capitals. If i wanted to live in low class space i would or better yet id prob be in pospy or something.
Sure stupid ppl do stupid things and think its a good idea to rat in a c1 using an archon.... but im just going to pretend i never saw that. |
Bleedingthrough
Project AIice
170
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 23:41:41 -
[42] - Quote
A more elegant solution could be to change how the mass of a ship affects WHs. This could be done by introducing effective mass factors as a ship-specific property that impacts how the mass of a ship degrades WHs.
Getting these factors right could not only limit power projection via Wh space and blobbing in WH space but also change the meta in WH space. For instance, these factors could be significantly higher for lower mass ships and roughly *1 for capital ships.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5305080#post5305080
|
O'nira
13. Enigma Project
69
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 00:14:49 -
[43] - Quote
No, Frig Holes are already there for this sort of stuff and no one uses them.
1b holes already feel extremely restricting, can't even imagine what a half a bill hole will feel like. |
Alundil
Isogen 5
993
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 00:30:22 -
[44] - Quote
You know it's bad when several of your friends, who are in nullsec groups, message you with the basic tone of 'I heard the news. My condolences. Get out while you can, we've got a spot for you.' Especially when they know I love wspace.
Why does it appear to be the CCP MO to nerf, with broad sweeping strokes, gameplay when they clearly don't realize MOST of the downstream effects those changes will cause.
Further reducing our abilities to take fights through null connected chains and further reducing our abilities to deploy capital ships in combat through null connected chains results in less for us to do. This has a deleterious affect on player retention simply by way of reducing the various methods of playing the game.
It's somewhat staggering to be quite honest.
I'm right behind you
|
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
2540
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 01:18:56 -
[45] - Quote
Mass limit 300,000t = 110 bombers each way.
or 80 Svipuls
Gents, blobs will fit through anything they can. Putting in mass-restricted wormholes of any kind will make Keskora Yaari feel like a genius and let him brag around the fire in the Wormholers Exclusive No Goonbexx Gentleman's Lodge, but won't stop anything. People will bring 150-man sniper Hecate fleets through wormholes if they have to.
replacing Z142's with Z060's isn't the solution. it's better than more frig holes, but it doesn't address the issues.
I also really wonder what CCP's brains are on. They complain that S199's are too prevalent and too hard to collapse. That's a staggering exposition of lack of knowledge and experience. S199's are rarer than a two sentence Chance Ravinne post, or a Wingspan pilot taking a fight; they are not any harder to crush than a n432 or K162 to C5s.
If anything, S199's could use their mass reduction to being a Z060, and if you want more small-mass limit wormholes, put them in from null to null and null to low and low to low.
Oh, and can C4's get their full-sized transients to nullsec and lowsec? Pretty please?
Doctor Prince Field Marshall of Prolapse. Alliance and Grand Sasquatch of Bob
We take Batphones. Contact us at Hola Batmanuel - Free call 1800-UR-MOMMA
~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
|
Keskora Yaari
POS Party Low-Class
144
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 01:57:16 -
[46] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:
replacing Z142's with Z060's isn't the solution. it's better than more frig holes, but it doesn't address the issues.
As i have said in previous posts.... This idea isn't meant to replace anything. Z142s will continue to exist with their own spawn rates and their own frequency. This is an idea for a completely new type of wormhole that wouldn't have any relation to current wormhole spawn rates.
|
Jack Miton
WeebleCORP
4559
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 04:14:20 -
[47] - Quote
Regardless of how people feel about the reduction of the current holes, adding these proposed low mass holes seems like a giant waste of time that won't do anything useful for the game (much like frig holes).
Also, if adding these is fine, then why remove the old holes? Makes no sense AT ALL...
There is no Bob.
Stuck In Here With Me: http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/
Down the Pipe: http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
|
unimatrix0030
Viperfleet Inc. Official Winners Of Takeshi's Castle
197
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 05:12:28 -
[48] - Quote
First of all i don't like the changes to wormhole spawns.
This proposal would help some w-space entities to still do small null roams. I would say 2 bs trough(one back and forth) and 10-15 cruisers back and forth would give us the best options. As an addition(never to be used replacing te other ones!!!!!!!!!!) it would help the w-space corps that do small roams. Best not to limit them to c5/c6 .
It does not help with the loss of targets in wh's because the nullbears won't be using these to move fleets and capitals we could catch. It does not help with the loss of options for capital ships.
No local in null sec would fix everything!
Fleet warp proposal = the rubix cube is back into eve especialy the second part of the saying.
Wh players need to adapt, null sec players get the rules changed.
|
GizzyBoy
Aperture Harmonics K162
157
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 05:59:52 -
[49] - Quote
TurboX3 wrote:OMG I just wrote this idea on this forum post --> https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=432168&p=4I do believe a C5 or C6 should have a static Null !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It would create more content for us wormhole living anal probers! GoonBexx, thanks for posting on here. Can I say VERY GAY; members on CSM agree with "A significant decrease in the spawn rate of direct Nullsec to Nullsec wormhole connections "... I am outraged by this decision (as a betting man I am sure Bob is pissed too) is the CSM full of carebears to try & limit power projection...
no static k space exits c5,c6 please. unless only black holes get them..
you see what i did there! |
Iyokus Patrouette
Sudden Buggery Prolapse.
558
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 06:04:09 -
[50] - Quote
I don't know... Static holes, Wandering holes, Frig holes, Drifter holes. . . . . Thera. Do we really need more types of wormholes? I feel like it's just another set of numbers and colours to identify to take us to essentially all the same places we can already get to with our existing wormholes.
---- Advocate for the initiation of purple coloured wormholes----
|
|
ChrisLCTR
Lazerhawks
154
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 06:22:44 -
[51] - Quote
I'm starting to think the only purpose of asking what we think about new 'features' is to figure out how much resistance you would get out of this community. "Lets see, do we have 20 pages of solid blocks of salt?? We do?!?!" Push that into the next expansion!"
If there is a strong resistance to it, CCP will implement it. Any ideas that WH residents think will stifle our gameplay, they will think is a good idea. Great for game dynamics.
You're going to find that a majority of the sub won't agree with the changes, and yet they will be implemented anyway. I don't really understand the point in asking for feedback anymore.
Whatever CCP. We're still going to figure out ways to dumpster everything. You keep your s*** coming.
Keep the laughter in S**laughter**
|
Luft Reich
No Vacancies
112
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 06:36:21 -
[52] - Quote
So you are trying to screw us, but trying to distract us with these great new low mass wormholes that we can use to explore more of space because we all LOVE our current low mass wormhole friends.
Please.....
ISD Cyberdyne liked your forum post
|
Rek Seven
Pandemic Horde Inc. Pandemic Horde
1981
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 07:34:33 -
[53] - Quote
Nah stick it!
Improve the QFG for the null sec people and give wormholers the ability to create new unstable wormholes as part of the structure revamp.
I'm tired of the little tweaks and ballsing up of mechanics in place of something to cool to/build.
+1
|
Lucius Kalari
Limited Power Inc
14
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 10:23:10 -
[54] - Quote
I think if these proposed had the same stats as a E175, it would be perfect. 2 bil hole, no cap entry, big enough fleet to take out, and if people are worried about closing them with battleships, why not just have as regen holes?
Hi, I'm Lucius Kalari and I'm .LIMP
LichReaper - according to zkill they probably wont make it past the undock
|
Winthorp
3547
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 10:38:51 -
[55] - Quote
I find it absurd that this is even an idea we are entertaining enough to present.
Wasn't the whole idea we got frig holes to increase connections between WH's and null/k-space. Frig holes are such a waste of time why would we want more low mass WH's?
I also don't think the null nerf will be as much of an issue as it has been made out to be.
I would love to see the figures on usage stats of frig Wh's before we go asking CCP for more useless crap tbh.
EDIT: Also why would you even want a WH with less mass to null????? Mostly null roams go like this - take a few guys, find content yell for more lads to help out (Just like those null guys are cynoing in more help). Wouldn't lower mass holes just tilt this even more to the favor of null residents. Why do you want to gimp yourselves further and why would you care that null blobs are moving through your chain, You should be ******* ecstatic about them using your chain.
I am Winthorp, you might remember me from such films as "Winthorp is to blame for permanent signature ID's".
Please note i don't engage in any meaningful discussion with NPC alts, nut up or shut up...
|
Samantha Elroy
Atztech Inc. Ixtab.
27
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 10:48:53 -
[56] - Quote
Axloth Okiah wrote:Wouldnt it be better if some CSM explained to CCP what a ****** idea removing c5-ns holes is, instead of us trying to come up with some not totally **** replacement?
|
DeathForMeh
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 12:42:44 -
[57] - Quote
The amount of C4's in our chains is massive after they obtained dual static but (unlikely any other wh space) they are lacking kspace connection other than frig null... My proposal is to load them up with wandering 0.0>C4 C4>0.0 connections 2 bill max mass 300kt max jumpable, 24 h life - that would be my slight suggestion for new wormhole type under Kes idea. Also increase the spawn rate of C248 and U319 to make C6 space a little more interesting. |
TurboX3
Hax. Wrecked.
129
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 13:17:42 -
[58] - Quote
Winthorp wrote:I find it absurd that this is even an idea we are entertaining enough to present.
Wasn't the whole idea we got frig holes to increase connections between WH's and null/k-space. Frig holes are such a waste of time why would we want more low mass WH's?
I also don't think the null nerf will be as much of an issue as it has been made out to be.
I would love to see the figures on usage stats of frig Wh's before we go asking CCP for more useless crap tbh.
EDIT: Also why would you even want a WH with less mass to null????? Mostly null roams go like this - take a few guys, find content yell for more lads to help out (Just like those null guys are cynoing in more help). Wouldn't lower mass holes just tilt this even more to the favor of null residents. Why do you want to gimp yourselves further and why would you care that null blobs are moving through your chain, You should be ******* ecstatic about them using your chain.
This man makes sense..... We need the frig null-sec wh's removed full stop. Null exits provide content for both w-space residents if we use them or nullbears... We should all be ******* ecstatic!!
No Trolling Please
|
TurboX3
Hax. Wrecked.
129
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 13:20:12 -
[59] - Quote
ChrisLCTR wrote:
If there is a strong resistance to it, CCP will implement it. Any ideas that WH residents think will stifle our gameplay, they will think is a good idea. Great for game dynamics.
You're going to find that a majority of the sub won't agree with the changes, and yet they will be implemented anyway. I don't really understand the point in asking for feedback anymore.
Goonbexx - Can you please comment on this cos Chris is right CCP will implement it anyways & us wormholers meant to have a voice? clearly not...
No Trolling Please
|
Tim Nering
R3d Fire
97
|
Posted - 2015.07.09 18:33:27 -
[60] - Quote
i agree with winthorp. I don't buy that nullsecers using wormhole chains is a bad thing. For wormholers it is a really good thing. It is potential content for us! And as far as im concerned if they are using them to "expand their power range" they deserve it! they find a random wormhole scan it all down, get a capital or a fleet through there. They put the work in to achieve this. They arent rage rolling null holes for where they need to go. they are just using wormhole chains. its smart imo.
they took the risk why shouldn't they get the reward?!?!
let them keep coming through wormholes. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |