Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Sarina Rhoda
Viral Target
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 00:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
Recently we've been noticing a few issues with our static wormhole. It has closed 3 times now well before we have exceeded the mass limit. For example the other night we put a carrier through a c6-c6 wh which was above 50% to have the wormhole collapse straight behind it.
I just made this thread to enquire if anyone else has had any similar issues and hopefully can get ccp to comment on whenever they have altered the wormhole mass limits without mentioning anything? |
Ajita al Tchar
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
10
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 01:32:00 -
[2] - Quote
That's happened to me a number of times in the past. For example, I know the static is fresh because the old one *just* despawned and a new sig appeared, yet it collapses way before it should have (and I know no one but my Appropriate Hole Roller went through due to keeping eyes on the wh). I've had it happen the other way around, too, when the hole didn't collapse even though it most definitely should have.
I guess this is the unpredictable nature of wormholes. Unless something *did* change recently, on purpose or accidentally because :ccp: |
R0Y4L
Scifried Strategic Military Industries
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 01:45:00 -
[3] - Quote
our 5-4 seems fine to me been closing it all day IF-á YOU-á-á DONT-á WANNA-á DIE-á DONT-á FLY-á-á |
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
378
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 13:58:00 -
[4] - Quote
There is a random variance in total mass of a wh. Of the times I've kept track, I've seen as much as 18% variance of mass either more or less. Just recently had one collapse without ever going critical. I was not keeping track of the times we jumped but I would put it's variance at 25%, perhaps. I've collapsed a lot of holes and never seen one with that much variance.
If anything CCP made the variance more frequent and larger.
It's another stealth nerf for w-space on CCP's march to make null the only viable space. Perhaps I should stop fighting it, go join null and get my very own army of bots to feed CCP's RMT. I mean, that's what it looks like they want.
On second thought, Fk it! If it comes to it I'll just leave Eve rather than deal with the mess in null. I love w-space. Most w-space inhabitants do. We want breast augmentations and sluttier clothing in the NeX! |
Vertisce Soritenshi
Varion Galactic Tragedy.
996
|
Posted - 2012.01.31 14:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:There is a random variance in total mass of a wh. Of the times I've kept track, I've seen as much as 18% variance of mass either more or less. Just recently had one collapse without ever going critical. I was not keeping track of the times we jumped but I would put it's variance at 25%, perhaps. I've collapsed a lot of holes and never seen one with that much variance.
If anything CCP made the variance more frequent and larger.
It's another stealth nerf for w-space on CCP's march to make null the only viable space. Perhaps I should stop fighting it, go join null and get my very own army of bots to feed CCP's RMT. I mean, that's what it looks like they want.
On second thought, Fk it! If it comes to it I'll just leave Eve rather than deal with the mess in null. I love w-space. Most w-space inhabitants do. What he said. WH mass limits are not set in stone. They do vary to some degree. EvE is not about PvP.-á EvE is about the SANDBOX! - CCP!-á Open the door!!! |
corbexx
Aperture Harmonics K162
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 23:10:00 -
[6] - Quote
ok we had this happen a few times in last week.
number 1 carrier jumps through wh is above 50% wh collaspes (even with a minus 10% wh this shouldng happen)
number 2 moving 3 dreads through a brand new wh should be easy but wh collaspes after second dread
number 3 wh above 50% and dread went through and wh collaspes
number 4 wh above 50% and dread jumps through wh collaspes (ok was a phonix heavy arse dreadsbut should still be able to jump out even with a -10% wh if its over 50%)
my guess is either a stealth nerf and stuff not been put in patch notes or just something gone wrong and they dont know
|
Ammzi
Imperial Guardians Wall of Shadow
805
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 23:14:00 -
[7] - Quote
I knew a guy who allegedly petitioned this and the response was a wormhole mass deviation of 20 %. quote CCP Spitfire
"Hello Im Blue,"
|
Aidamina Omen
Aperture Harmonics K162
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 23:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
Ammzi wrote:I knew a guy who allegedly petitioned this and the response was a wormhole mass deviation of 20 %.
We've petioned and escalated it, and the response was:
Quote:" While some players may have figured out how they usually behave, results sometimes may vary. This is by design. What you experienced is not abnormal for a wormhole. " |
Sarina Rhoda
Viral Target
9
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 23:26:00 -
[9] - Quote
We don't mind if they have changed it from +-10% to +-20% I just wish they would comment on it and at least let people know that they have changed it. |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
558
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 23:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0. |
|
|
Skydell
Space Mermaids Somethin Awfull Forums
130
|
Posted - 2012.02.01 23:55:00 -
[11] - Quote
I don't think it's a mass issue. WH times seem to be very short, sometimes despawning 8 hrs after they spawn |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
187
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 00:00:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mr Kidd wrote:There is a random variance in total mass of a wh. Of the times I've kept track, I've seen as much as 18% variance of mass either more or less. Just recently had one collapse without ever going critical. I was not keeping track of the times we jumped but I would put it's variance at 25%, perhaps. I've collapsed a lot of holes and never seen one with that much variance.
If anything CCP made the variance more frequent and larger.
It's another stealth nerf for w-space on CCP's march to make null the only viable space. Perhaps I should stop fighting it, go join null and get my very own army of bots to feed CCP's RMT. I mean, that's what it looks like they want.
On second thought, Fk it! If it comes to it I'll just leave Eve rather than deal with the mess in null. I love w-space. Most w-space inhabitants do.
^^Not sure if sarcastic, but I think/hope/pray that that is the case.^^
Because even as a part-time "holie," that last statement applies to me, and I'm sure many others.
IME though, there has always been at least a bit of variance in the limits, though I never thought it was that significant. Think of me as the Jester to your King Lear: Because annoying you is more fun than politicking with you. Because your predictable outrage makes you even more fun to play with. Because forum PvP = best PvP. Come to me, little puppet! |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
187
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 00:03:00 -
[13] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.
Could you address this, please (Haven't seen it myself yet, but this isn't the first I've heard of it, either, since Crucible):
Skydell wrote: I don't think it's a mass issue. WH times seem to be very short, sometimes despawning 8 hrs after they spawn.
Thank you.
Think of me as the Jester to your King Lear: Because annoying you is more fun than politicking with you. Because your predictable outrage makes you even more fun to play with. Because forum PvP = best PvP. Come to me, little puppet! |
sgtk
Aperture Harmonics K162
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 00:48:00 -
[14] - Quote
something has changed.........the worm hole takes like 5 -10 sec after u jump thru the wh to post the u are trapped message. where as before the patch it was imediate. further more a 1.3 billion mass ship should not close a wh with 3 billion mass and has had limited traffic on 1 trip thru. and the wh didnt show the indications of having mass reduced on it i.e. the wormhole has had its stabuility reduced, but not to a criticil degree or or the worm has had its mass criticaly reduced and is on the verge of collaps |
Sarina Rhoda
Viral Target
9
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 00:52:00 -
[15] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.
Hi,
Thank you for your response. Just to clarify though when you say mass limits do you mean just the expected standard mass value or does that include the +-% changes to wormholes as well.
I think the main fear for me and my corp mates is that after we filed the bug report over an issue with wormhole mass calculations that the bug has been fixed and that you have altered how mass is taken off the wormholes. The reason why we are concerned is that we keep getting people stuck out whilst chain collapsing when jumping through wormholes that appear to have more than enough mass to accommodate the capitals we are jumping through
Examples being jumping an archon through a WH which has above 50% mass and closing straight after. Even with a -10% wormhole it should have at least 1.35b mass left meaning our archon of 1.15b mass should not close it.
3/4 times that the wormhole has closed when we weren't expecting it we have received the following message: 21:37:26 Info The wormhole collapses before your travel completes, spitting you back out."
After living in wormholes for over 2 years no one in our corp has ever seen this message before so we can only conclude that it is something new. We are simply wondering if the wormhole mechanics have been changed and if we can get a dev to comment or explain the differences in what is happening.
Thank you
Sarina |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
558
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 02:24:00 -
[16] - Quote
they probably fixed the random number generator ;) a new bounty system for eve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=359105 You fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail you fail to jump because you are cloaked |
Hamatitio
Aperture Harmonics K162
65
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 02:31:00 -
[17] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0.
We filed a petition for a bug report that i can almost guarantee introduced this new 'feature'. Unfortunately it was regarding a possible exploit so I don't want to discuss it openly on the forums...
What member of the dev/QA team deals with wormholes, so I know who to address a petition / bug report to? |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
559
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 12:07:00 -
[18] - Quote
Just to clarify, those mass cap changes in 1.0.2 were the *only* changes we've made to the stats of the wormholes themselves since Apocrypha.
Hamatitio wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0. We filed a petition for a bug report that i can almost guarantee introduced this new 'feature'. Unfortunately it was regarding a possible exploit so I don't want to discuss it openly on the forums... What member of the dev/QA team deals with wormholes, so I know who to address a petition / bug report to?
I'll bump this across to the relevant person, I believe I know the defect you're talking about. |
|
Riley Moore
Sentinum Research
320
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 13:05:00 -
[19] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Just to clarify, those mass cap changes in 1.0.2 were the *only* changes we've made to the stats of the wormholes themselves since Apocrypha. Hamatitio wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0. We filed a petition for a bug report that i can almost guarantee introduced this new 'feature'. Unfortunately it was regarding a possible exploit so I don't want to discuss it openly on the forums... What member of the dev/QA team deals with wormholes, so I know who to address a petition / bug report to? I'll bump this across to the relevant person, I believe I know the defect you're talking about.
The plot thickens! Large volumes of highly researched Ammo, drones, charges and ship bpo's. Biggest BPO store in EVE! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=445524#post445524 |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P C C P Alliance
559
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 14:47:00 -
[20] - Quote
Riley Moore wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:Just to clarify, those mass cap changes in 1.0.2 were the *only* changes we've made to the stats of the wormholes themselves since Apocrypha. Hamatitio wrote:CCP Greyscale wrote:I just checked the changelog on all the wormholes. Mass limits on two of them were adjusted in Apocrypha 1.0.2 (ie, early 2009), the rest haven't been touched since Apocrypha 1.0. We filed a petition for a bug report that i can almost guarantee introduced this new 'feature'. Unfortunately it was regarding a possible exploit so I don't want to discuss it openly on the forums... What member of the dev/QA team deals with wormholes, so I know who to address a petition / bug report to? I'll bump this across to the relevant person, I believe I know the defect you're talking about. The plot thickens!
Relevant person says the fix shouldn't have anything remotely like the effect described in this thread.
As far as we're aware nothing's changed in the code or the content that should have any impact on anything to do with collapse rates.
If you're getting consistent and verifiable issues, please submit a bug report and mark it as "Urgent/FAO BellaBee" and/or find a QA dev to get it bumped along - if there is something broken, it'll be easier to find if we can look at it the same day rather than the next week |
|
|
Fitz VonHeise
Eye Bee Em Stellar Defense Alliance
22
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 15:16:00 -
[21] - Quote
sgtk wrote:something has changed.........the worm hole takes like 5 -10 sec after u jump thru the wh to post the u are trapped message. where as before the patch it was imediate. I have also seen this happen since the patch.
|
Kata Amentis
Re-Awakened Technologies Inc
30
|
Posted - 2012.02.02 15:31:00 -
[22] - Quote
did anything change with the way in which a ships mass is calculated? maybe it's a problem that end if it's not a change to the wormholes?
no idea, but if a+b isn't giving c, and you don't think it's a... maybe it's b. |
corbexx
Aperture Harmonics K162
4
|
Posted - 2012.02.04 22:53:00 -
[23] - Quote
ok not even sure if i'm allowed to post this site here but...
http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?5532-Wormhole-masses-gone-mad
seems alot more people having same issues might be helpful if they also posted here for ccp
seems something has changed we're still checking various stuff.
i would say if your having issues with wh mass post here as well as other places (fill in a bug report as well) |
Capt Willard
Battlestars S E D I T I O N
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 00:13:00 -
[24] - Quote
i have been talking to friends living in various clases of wh as well as living in one myself recently, and the pattern seems to be as follows;
In the past, all wh's had a generally similar amount of total mass varience. Since last expansion, people have noticed a change in this. Most of the complaint is coming from C4-6 in habitants because they are getting the greater % vary in mass.
It seems that an additional modifier has been placed on wh total mass similar to the one that determines the sig strength, infact people in c5's i've talked with have indeed noticed the harder to scan the wh (e.g lower % scanned at dif au ranges), the more mass variance they get. The same applies to average distance from planet.
Soooo, essentially it seems that the mass limit varience has been made to be proportionate to the sig strength of the wh. Try taking note of how far from planets and what % of the wh sig you discover with different probe ranges and you too should see a pattern. I know alot of people do that anyways to tell the dif between their static wh's without warping to them, i certainly have.
This is another one that is easily classed more of a fix than a change in mechanics and gets the standard 'nothing going on here' responce from ccp |
Lyrrashae
Crushed Ambitions Reckless Ambition
192
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 01:37:00 -
[25] - Quote
@CCP:
Dependencies.
Check them.
All of them.
That is all. Think of me as the Jester to your King Lear: Because annoying you is more fun than politicking with you. Because your predictable outrage makes you even more fun to play with. Because forum PvP = best PvP. Come to me, little puppet! |
Capt Willard
Battlestars S E D I T I O N
0
|
Posted - 2012.02.05 01:43:00 -
[26] - Quote
Lyrrashae wrote:
Dependencies.
Lol my whole tiresome post in one word, goodwork sir!
Only CCP knows how teh fark this is all supposed to be linked together, but unfortunately we get to suffer how it act does |
Tas Nok
Hedion University Amarr Empire
30
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 21:21:00 -
[27] - Quote
I'm concerned this isn't getting the attention it deserves...
I'm out of WH life atm but corpies tell me that mass limits are deff bugged (hard proof not in hand apologies)
I saw the dev response, but so far no follow-up
I feel like WH-space has gotten hit by the nerf bat repeatedly lately, it was one of the FEW areas CCP got right and now its it becoming annoying, grinding and now unpredictable (yes that's the nature of WH, I know) but if I have to deal with the randomness of roaming T3 gangs and incommings, why did ccp feel the need to trap more ships and screw with folks who can't be on 23/7 watching all the sigs?
|
Sarina Rhoda
Viral Target
9
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 21:31:00 -
[28] - Quote
Not sure if it was just down to chance or not, but we just collapsed 9 holes in a row of which 6 were -10% and 3 were +10%. Is the ratio of +- variance holes meant to be this high because it kind of looks like we aren't getting any regular mass holes now.
Also the 15 second delay between jumping through a wormhole and the status of its mass being updated is really annoying :( |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC 0ccupational Hazzard
150
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 21:45:00 -
[29] - Quote
The math used for wspace is simply put broken, signature IDs still repeat the same patterns making new wormholes easy to spot, wormhole masses and age timers are borked and sometimes wormholes connect to other systems out of nowhere wihtout even despawning. Heck we've had 4 H296s(static 5s) in a C5 spawn 2-3 hours apart from each other just the other day. 2 days before that, I've had a completely fresh wormhole(has not begun it's natural cycle of decay) collaspe behind on a single covert ops frigate. |
Oxandrolone
Bite me inc. Exhale.
13
|
Posted - 2012.02.06 23:16:00 -
[30] - Quote
I have experienced the '... have you become trapped' message taking longer, not noticed any of the mass varience problems though.
Sig id's are obviously broken, if they all spawn at the same time (ie after server restart) they all end in the same letter, eg
DEA FEA ECA GCA LPA OPA
so when a new sig spawns (usually a wh) its so easy to spot, this makes it very easy to scan wh chains in a hurry but its not working as intended obviously. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |