Just going to say that forcing caps to be moored and not stored is a bad idea.
It gives out totally free intel which is not what WHs are about.

And best of all, no one was a complete idiot about asking questions.

There are plenty of morons who like leave their capital floating the pos.

yes, and thats their choice.
if they want to talk in local too while theyre at it, that's also fine by me.
but forcing people to do something that is currently considered stupid is, well, stupid.

^ This. Next time boot the people that don't get that they can't continually ask questions without using the chat.

And i will hate a little less on Two Step after this, i think he listened and answered the best he could. Even if he didn't agree with stuff he has said he is prepared to listen to the views and put them forward if enough people want them. So start eve mailing him your views people, don't ***** later.

Can we get this meeting advertised next time, there was a lot of Alliance representation but not a lot of small corps there as far as i am aware.

I miss my forcefield already

I-¦m starting to think that If you do not "nerf" low end WH poses (The fuel limit proposed by ccp sounded more solid, natural balance), make walking the stations optional and a docking ring big enough that lets you undock and warp out without being locked, then ppl wouldnt complain.

Removing forcefields is more than likely a terrible idea, as I see a lot of ways in which it'll make organising a defense/escape from a pos that is under siege near impossible

Gimping towers in lower class wormholes is just a god damn awful idea. I have yet to see a single justification for it either, or at least one that isn't simply stupid and wrong (wah wah you can't evict people from lower class wormholes as easily! - except evictions in c2s happen just as much as evictions in c5s, and even if they WERE more 'secure' I think that'd be a legitimate trade off for the worse sites/opportunities you have in c1s/c2s...)

Before running around with the nerfstick like a window-licking moron, how about you determine if there is actually a problem, and if there is how your solutions would improve it. Gimping lower class wormholes won't improve them at all, it'll just depoulate them - there'll be less incentive for people to live in them, less incentive for people to evict others from them, etc. They'll be the lowsec of w-space

Gunny, you obviously didn't listen. The explanation was you shouldn't need more people than the WH can support to evict someone from a WH. With exception of Transmission Lost you shouldn't have 20+ people living in a C2, even 10+ is pushing it, which you would need to take down a tower.

The explanation was you shouldn't need more people than the WH can support to evict someone from a WH. With exception of Transmission Lost you shouldn't have 20+ people living in a C2, even 10+ is pushing it, which you would need to take down a tower.

Being able to see who is active is SUPER important to us, not sure how to implement but we want to be able to see who is active

Gunny, you obviously didn't listen. The explanation was you shouldn't need more people than the WH can support to evict someone from a WH. With exception of Transmission Lost you shouldn't have 20+ people living in a C2, even 10+ is pushing it, which you would need to take down a tower.

...some lazy scrub fleet can't take down a POS before they get jumped by a third party looking for a fight.

Look what you guys need to realize is change IS HAPPENING. You can't stop it, the objective is to give requirements on what we want. It's not your job to say what is or what can't possibly be done, you're not the game designer. If I said I want to believe able to tell who is active in a POS to gain intelligence. THERE that's my requirement, I don't care how they do it, so don't go and poke holes whining about docking.

I've given my requirement and it's up to them to figure out how to do it. Also what we'd really like to hear is something from SMALLER corps, not the big names. Sorry gunny you don't live in a lower class WH, and nor do I. It's their voice that needs to be heard.

Once again Two Step isn't looking for a long whining post, it would be nice to know what the problem is with force fields so that we could better understand... But we can't.

So how about we realize that change is and will happen, what we need to do is help shape it and make sure our ways of life can remain as much the same as possible.

Also what we'd really like to hear is something from SMALLER corps, not the big names. Sorry gunny you don't live in a lower class WH, and nor do I. It's their voice that needs to be heard.

Two Step invited everyone onto AHARM's Mumble to discuss the state of W-Space. He did a Q&A and answered everyone's questions to the best of his ability.


http://soundcloud.com/haha-15/wormhole-townhall-with-csm-two

I miss my forcefield already

If you also went through listening Two Step explained that he's not sure how he would suggest they balance it, but that's not OUR job or HIS. We bring our REQUIREMENTS, not gripes with WAHHHHH I don't want change.

Smaller POS's = bigger targets. I don't see how that benefits any small corps in C1-C4 wormhole space.

And best of all, no one was a complete idiot about asking questions.

I don't much like the idea of it taking weeks to take down a smaller tower. Why spend so much time to remove a small tower in a system that will only allow a small tower?

Look what you guys need to realize is change IS HAPPENING. You can't stop it, the objective is to give requirements on what we want. It's not your job to say what is or what can't possibly be done, you're not the game designer. If I said I want to believe able to tell who is active in a POS to gain intelligence. THERE that's my requirement, I don't care how they do it, so don't go and poke holes whining about docking.

I've given my requirement and it's up to them to figure out how to do it. Also what we'd really like to hear is something from SMALLER corps, not the big names. Sorry gunny you don't live in a lower class WH, and nor do I. It's their voice that needs to be heard.

Once again Two Step isn't looking for a long whining post, it would be nice to know what the problem is with force fields so that we could better understand... But we can't.

So how about we realize that change is and will happen, what we need to do is help shape it and make sure our ways of life can remain as much the same as possible.

Personally as a resident of one of the lower class wormholes, it sickens me that they would want to limit what types of towers we can use.

I chose a corp in a lower category because I like small gang PvP and find capital warfare crap.

If with the New POS setup coming out, I am not able to have my new "Home' as I would like it and would become an easy target for people who felt like kicking me out. Well what is the point? I might as well go live in lo-sec or Null where although I can get my POS hot dropped but I can also defend it to my hearts content.

Stuffing up C1-C4 Wormholes just because you cannot attack the POS with capitals is insane.

We are getting the new POS system no matter what and that means no force fields, to this we will adapt to but limiting us is crap, and as to the ability to support corporations I normally don't run anoms or harvest Ladar sites in my own system thats what other peoples space is for

Making C1-C4 Wormholes different because they are popular is just nuts, they are popular because they work. They work for everyone who doesn't want to be in a Large corp. They work for people who don't want to be in a Null sec sized blob and they work for people who want to be involved in combat and not as an also appearing in capital combat.

Maybe the question should really be why are the lower wormholes more popular than the C5 and C6, maybe it is the C5 and C6 that needs altering?

Really what is so wrong with a control tower + forcefield? this isn't highsec if you want to dock up head back to k-space...

There are CODING problems with the forcefield and supposedly it's hell on their system or something like that. As a coder IRL I can see the potential problems with them and the load.

BUT WAIT FRADLE, it's their job, they're lazy... just fix it! (it's never that easy and if they say it needs to go, it needs to go)

We don't know the real problem with forcefields as it's held under NDA, maybe they'll eventually tell us. What I would urge is for Two Step, moreso everyone else is to evemail Two Step and NICELY explain that it would help us all understand some of these changes if they lifted the NDA on what's wrong with forcefields(unless there's something exploitable)

I know that a lot of us are noticing system memory usage massively increase when inside a POS forcefield.

I know that a lot of us are noticing system memory usage massively increase when inside a POS forcefield.

2) I am in no way advocating player limits or some such nonsense for lower class wormholes. My view is that because a POS in a C1 doesn't have to face dreadnaught guns, it shouldn't have dreadnaught-level shields and weapons. In exchange, perhaps these POSes would have the longer reinforcement timers mentioned in the minutes, especially if those timers required action from both the attacker and the defender to prolong. I think this would be a good solution to folks worried about having their POS randomly reinforced.

2) I am in no way advocating player limits or some such nonsense for lower class wormholes. My view is that because a POS in a C1 doesn't have to face dreadnaught guns, it shouldn't have dreadnaught-level shields and weapons. In exchange, perhaps these POSes would have the longer reinforcement timers mentioned in the minutes, especially if those timers required action from both the attacker and the defender to prolong. I think this would be a good solution to folks worried about having their POS randomly reinforced.

As fun as it is to speculate on why CCP wants to remove FF's, it isn't actually helpful to the discussion, so I would ask folks to take that speculation elsewhere.

I've heard some great feedback from a lot of people via EVE mail and convos. Just wanted to answer a couple of the more common questions I get via eve mail in this thread:

1) Yes there will be more of these town halls. I'm not quite sure when, but the next one will be advertised more widely, including a post here and on my twitter account (@two_step_eve), as well as my blog.

2) I am in no way advocating player limits or some such nonsense for lower class wormholes. My view is that because a POS in a C1 doesn't have to face dreadnaught guns, it shouldn't have dreadnaught-level shields and weapons. In exchange, perhaps these POSes would have the longer reinforcement timers mentioned in the minutes, especially if those timers required action from both the attacker and the defender to prolong. I think this would be a good solution to folks worried about having their POS randomly reinforced.

3) There have been some accusations both here and elsewhere that this is because AHARM wants to attack more lower class wormholes or something similar. This is total nonsense. If we wanted to attack lower class wormholes, we could certainly do so right now. Your 10 man corp isn't going to be saved by your large POS full of ECM, it is safe because large groups have no interest in attacking you. We aren't in it for the loot, which is pretty meager, we are there for the fights, and we wouldn't get one from a small corp in a C1.

we wouldn't get one from a small corp in a C1

It seems to me the C5-C6 dwellers want to change wh's into Null. Bring in the caps, blast the POS. Rinse and Repeat. Boring.

To me, as a C2 dweller wh's are all about small gang PvP. Because a larger alliance cannot bring in the big guns into our wh it allows us to fight on a more even basis. We regularly fight larger alliances because we know they cannot just enter our home and destroy it in minutes.

Yes, I agree POS's do need a revamp but leave the basic mechanics of WH's alone please. It is IMO the best aspect of this game currently and from what I have seen so far generates the best PvP.

If you want to make POSes weaker in lower classes, then do the same thing for highsec where you can't use dreads either. Where's your excuse there?

2) I am in no way advocating player limits or some such nonsense for lower class wormholes. My view is that because a POS in a C1 doesn't have to face dreadnaught guns, it shouldn't have dreadnaught-level shields and weapons. In exchange, perhaps these POSes would have the longer reinforcement timers mentioned in the minutes, especially if those timers required action from both the attacker and the defender to prolong. I think this would be a good solution to folks worried about having their POS randomly reinforced.

I, personally, do not give a rats about what happens in Highsec and would hope Two-Step is of a similar mindset. It's completely irrelevant to the WH discussion.

2) I am in no way advocating player limits or some such nonsense for lower class wormholes. My view is that because a POS in a C1 doesn't have to face dreadnaught guns, it shouldn't have dreadnaught-level shields and weapons. In exchange, perhaps these POSes would have the longer reinforcement timers mentioned in the minutes, especially if those timers required action from both the attacker and the defender to prolong. I think this would be a good solution to folks worried about having their POS randomly reinforced.

3) There have been some accusations both here and elsewhere that this is because AHARM wants to attack more lower class wormholes or something similar. This is total nonsense. If we wanted to attack lower class wormholes, we could certainly do so right now. Your 10 man corp isn't going to be saved by your large POS full of ECM, it is safe because large groups have no interest in attacking you. We aren't in it for the loot, which is pretty meager, we are there for the fights, and we wouldn't get one from a small corp in a C1.

Two Step, I know I've poked you a couple of times about AHARM's attempt to bash a POS in a C3 and then the carnage that followed, but try to see it from the perspective of those of us who live in C1-C4 systems.

We do this sort of thing all the time. Yes, we even get jumped from time to time (though the more organized groups tend to have scouts making it less of a bloodbath). WE have to face the large dickstars with no siege Dreads, you don't. WE have to spend the extra time shooting a tower while hostile third parties could jump in on us; because these systems are so accessible from k-space, it could happen at any moment and local could spike immediately. We know this, and we choose to live here anyway.

I understand change will come--I just don't want to see the little guy (independent corps in lower class wormholes) getting screwed over by something that can only benefit the larger wormhole alliances, especially when we've had to work so hard to build up our defenses to something survivable already, given our lack of access to direct high-sec routes. The proposal to change what POSes can be anchored in what class of wormhole seems as profoundly bad to me as the Goonswarm suggestion that grav sites be removed from wormholes from a few months back--no benefit to anybody except the one clamoring for the change.

RE: Removing Large towers from C1-4.

Taking down a large POS without caps is more challenging than taking down a medium or small. But it's not much harder.

If you remove large towers from C1-4, you limit what can be done within the POS itself - Industry in particular.

So No, I would not support this as I fear all the smaller WH corps would move out.

Forcefields work well, if they need to go then so be it. If you are going to recode WH Space staions completely - why not rewrite the code for Force fields completely?

WH life is where a small but significant number of players enjoy what is a challenging and rewarding environment.

Don't Fek it up.

Restricting pos sizes based on class of the wormhole is a bad idea. If we get stuck with medium and small pos', then our "lower" class systems should give a large pos equivilant bonus to our pos' pg and cpu.

Why should a high class get caps and large towers and we get stuck with less? Because we are the lower class in wormhole society right?

Two Step mentioned that he believes the process of taking down a tower should be an investment of time and resources. His idea is to only allow smaller towers in lower class wormholes with extremely high reinforcement times. Currently taking down a large tower in a lower class wormhole is a big investment in time and resources. So what's with the need to reduce the size of the towers.
Learn to adapt to the surroundings.
"Empty your mind...be formless, shapeless like water. Be water my friend." - Bruce Lee

You do not need caps to take down a large tower in a lower class wormhole. If you really want that system, then you adapt to the defenses. You move in your own tower. Set up your own stronghold. Deny your opponent the use of their sites and the exits. You break their will to fight. Then they either pack up and move out, or they attempt to drive you out. Either they see it as too much work to continue living there, or they fight to the end to maintain their claim in the system.



There is no need to dumb down wormhole space.

It seems to me the C5-C6 dwellers want to change wh's into Null. Bring in the caps, blast the POS. Rinse and Repeat. Boring.

To me, as a C2 dweller wh's are all about small gang PvP. Because a larger alliance cannot bring in the big guns into our wh it allows us to fight on a more even basis. We regularly fight larger alliances because we know they cannot just enter our home and destroy it in minutes.

Yes, I agree POS's do need a revamp but leave the basic mechanics of WH's alone please. It is IMO the best aspect of this game currently and from what I have seen so far generates the best PvP.

A 15-20 man fleet can equal the dps of a dread. Think about that as the fleets get bigger. This whole "cant shoot it with dreads" stuff means nothing when a fleet of ships will equal the same dps.

RE: Removing Large towers from C1-4.

Taking down a large POS without caps is more challenging than taking down a medium or small. But it's not much harder.

If you remove large towers from C1-4, you limit what can be done within the POS itself - Industry in particular.

So you want CCP to create special exceptions with no explanation for a subset of the systems in eve. (They are firmly agaisnt special exceptions, this is why PLEX was made an movable item, and many other things fixed and changed)

If you want to make POSes weaker in lower classes, then do the same thing for highsec where you can't use dreads either. Where's your excuse there?


Terrible excuse, remember those 400 russians invaded our wormhole systems that invaded our wormhole system on the excuse of expecting a fight? yea......no....

I'm puzzled. You say you don't want player limits on lower class wormholes, but then you say their POSes should nothave dreadnaughtlevel shields and weapons? Isn't that a limit on the players? Or do you just mean a population cap?

Okay, so if you are not looking to attack lower class wormhole POSes, what does it matter whether the POS is large or not, since you aren't going to attack them anyway?

My corp has been living in a class one wormhole for three years or so. We're a small, tight-knit corp, and we like being small in number for various reasons. We have had our POS previously destroyed once, and rebuilt from scratch afterward in the same system.

If our large POS gets nerfed we we can't use large POSes anymore, I suspect the the "little guy" corps like our will have to shrug and move elsewhere, if it is no longer economically viable in terms of time (hauling fuel through low-sec/nulsec to our static) or money (income gained from sleepers versus income lost to POS replacement). The longterm effect I see would be depopulation of the class ones and class twos. I just don't see any way that is helpful or healthy for the PvP community in wormholes. How do you think a change to the anchoring of large POSes will benefit those living in class 1-class 3 WHs, exactly? I see how it will help those in class 4-6--but that's not us.

Two Step, I know I've poked you a couple of times about AHARM's attempt to bash a POS in a C3 and then the carnage that followed, but try to see it from the perspective of those of us who live in C1-C4 systems.

We do this sort of thing all the time. Yes, we even get jumped from time to time (though the more organized groups tend to have scouts making it less of a bloodbath). WE have to face the large dickstars with no siege Dreads, you don't. WE have to spend the extra time shooting a tower while hostile third parties could jump in on us; because these systems are so accessible from k-space, it could happen at any moment and local could spike immediately. We know this, and we choose to live here anyway.

This is perhaps the most profound thing that has been said here so far. The fear is that CCP will change WHs into Nullsec minus fixed gate connections, and that will be no fun at all. We need to look at this from a proper balance and gameplay standpoint, rather than what any one player WANTS to happen, such as only being able to anchor small towers in C1 for no purpose other than to make griefing and posbashing MUCH easier for anyone who happens by in a BS.

@twostep and ccp Dont turn wh space into the pile of fail that is nullsec i.e. if your not a blob alliance without half of eve set to blue you must be a renter. WH's have provided small alliances with the chance to pvp on their own level and are a great game mechanic at present.

I get the feeling some of the people in this thread cant do anything unless they can bring their dread fleet to the party (sounds like sov space to me.)

Why are we thinking of nerfing the size of tower that can come into a hole when a bit of planning can bring a large enough fleet into a c2 to remove someone within a few days? A wormhole is still 0.0 and high risk of being attacked/camped and therefore should be as defensible, not just easier to kill.

Are we going to limit the size of towers in other areas of the game too? I don't see much danger in highsec either all those large towers. What about lowsec? NPC Space? Is the issue here really the size of the tower?or something else.

If people who live strictly in a c1 or c2 cant afford t3 then the bigger alliances in their c5 and c6 should have nothing to fear about attacking with a band of t3's or bc's and certainly shouldn't have an issue taking anything down. it just needs commitment.

Across EVE, the game mechanics push people toward larger organizations. K-Space, particularly null, would have to undergo serious and fundamental change to remove or even mitigate the advantage of numbers. W-Space currently has mechanics in place that make it possible for small groups to thrive. In spite of this, the unstoppable advantage of numbers has been slowly but steadily changing W-Space gameplay. We now have several groups numbering over 500 (including my own) and one approaching 800. Fleets of 50+ used to be unheard of. There is a slow, but steady trend of players and corporations migrating to larger entities. We have more people among fewer groups.

Politics and finger pointing aside, it's an arms race where most people probably don't want to be that big, but nor do they want to be steamrolled by those who are. For that reason alone, we should not be supporting decisions that make survival harder for small groups. For the health of W-Space, we should be against any change that adds further advantage to the larger group. We should be actively looking for changes that motivate people to break up the power blocs and spread out across W-Space again.

For a small, young group in a low class wormhole, they already have no counter for superior numbers. AHARM (sorry, you're the best example) is old, rich, incredibly well entrenched, and can summon a silly number of capital pilots for their home defense. Groups like that can defend their homes outnumbered. Those in low class wormholes cannot.

Do not support a change that pushes yet more people into larger groups.

I 100% agree with your goals, and in fact just posted something very much like what you are saying here, but I disagree with your conclusions. I think what has caused the larger groups to accumulate in w-space is not that POS defenses are too easy, it is that they are too strong. The fact that people basically have to hire mercenaries to kill someone's POS in a lower class wormhole is a huge problem, and it results in mercenary/PvP groups that have to get ever-larger in order to fight off other mercenary/PvP groups.

I'd love to hear *why* you think making POSes easier to kill would make people group up more. I think it would have the opposite effect.

The biggest pain in the ass in POS bashing without dreads is pos ECM. It's not the lack of dreads or the large tower's hp.

My *why* it would drive groups to be larger is that as POS are made easier to bash, it will take larger groups to defend them. This need will drive groups to either leave W-Space or will force them to join in with other groups so there is the chance to defend their homes against random invaders/POS bashers.

I also believe that when a POS becomes easier to take down, there will be more POS's bashed for lols and this will drive players from w-space. I believe that you will see a new subset of mercinaries that are strickly used to bash lower end POS's. Since they will be easier to remove it will be cheaper to hire these groups. I am not sure that this is the intended outcome of the POS modification but I could see this becoming an uninteded consequence of the change.

All of this would lead to the need for a larger group to be able to support and maintain life in w-space.

I hope I am wrong and none of this happens, but the nature of game play in eve leads me to believe that this is a very likely outcome for such a change.

Two Step your logic regarding making lower class POS's easier to destroy is pretty wack. If POS's are easier to destroy, people will blue up and form bigger groups to be able to defend, or they will be pushed out of WH space for lolz. Don't understand why you don't seem to see that.

I think you are contradicting yourself here. If you have smaller merc groups that are bashing these POSes (or if people don't have to hire mercs at all), then you can have a smaller number of people fighting them off. This sounds like a good thing to me.

I'd love to hear *why* you think making POSes easier to kill would make people group up more. I think it would have the opposite effect.

Your logic doesn't add up mate. At the moment, having a large POS in a C1-C4 FORCES your attacker to form a large blob. In turn, to defend, you have to blob up too. This stops smaller groups from attempting to invade, and also small groups cannot defend themselves without blueing up or hiring mercs.

I think you are contradicting yourself here. If you have smaller merc groups that are bashing these POSes (or if people don't have to hire mercs at all), then you can have a smaller number of people fighting them off. This sounds like a good thing to me.

It matters because small groups like your corp should be able to take and hold wormholes just like the larger groups.

I think it is really interesting that folks in this thread are arguing that less HP for lower class wormhole POSes would both reduce and increase PvP.

I think you are missing my point here though. Right now, if some larger wormhole corp wanted to kill your POS, they would be able to do so, as it sounds like happened to your corp before. Do you really think that having less shields would make that more likely to happen?

I don't think that is the case, especially if it took longer to wait out the reinforcement timer.

The thing that less shields *might* do is make some other small corp decide to invade you, and that would bring more of the good, small-scale PvP that makes w-space fun.

Your logic doesn't add up mate. At the moment, having a large POS in a C1-C4 FORCES your attacker to form a large blob. In turn, to defend, you have to blob up too. This stops smaller groups from attempting to invade, and also small groups cannot defend themselves without blueing up or hiring mercs.

Of course, you can't stop people blobbing up if that's how they want to play the game. But if you can give people the chance to get small gang goodfites based around infrastructure attack/defence and not just site ganks or wormhole camping then that must be a good thing, right? Well, this change would allow that option - whether people took that would be up to them, but at the moment it isn't even possible.

And who takes responsibility for telling the rest of the fleet to stand down when that C3 Plex fleet turns out to be bait for the 10-15 player group holding the next w-space system over, and the "appropriately sized" fleet ends up in new med clones before the rest of the support can arrive on grid?

The beauty of PvP in w-space is that you Just Don't Know what you will really be facing.

Change is cool, I love it, but don't tell me how to play, and don't **** up my sandbox. It's w-space, anything can happen, but good organization and tactics do tend to prevail in the long-run.

Out of all the proposed POS changes, the POS size in the lower class w-space is literally the most insignificant one, meaning that you have very few people actually complaining about the current mechanics. So why is it that we have pages of proposals and rebuttals when we clearly need to keep our eye on a different prize?

Two Step, its time to pick your battles and drop this argument. Its pretty clear that most of the w-space players do not really care if lower class w-space has the access and ability to anchor large POSes. Also, most of w-space players realize that in exchange for capital ship restrictions the lower class w-space gives up the ability to control their exits and prevent the enemy from getting in.

Removing forcefields is more than likely a terrible idea, as I see a lot of ways in which it'll make organising a defense/escape from a pos that is under siege near impossible

Making scanning easier seems a bit silly, especially considering people are complaining that they can't find POS', where you can find them with no probes what-so-ever. Compared to the old-school scanning, current scanning is ridiculously easy! Making it even easier seems to be a step in the wrong direction imo.

I don't see the need to nerf lower end wh space. Any potential hostile gives up his ability to bring in caps for the sheer ease of bringing in more people. That is the trade off for lower end wormhole space. Logistics may be easier, but hostiles getting a massive fleet in is a lot easier too.

Two Step, based on the sheer number of people that think this is a terrible idea, why do you continue to support this idea of lesser POS's?

I don't mind if Two Step wants to nerf the hell out of lower class wormholes, so long as he does his "job" and tells CCP that pretty much everyone except him DOESN'T want that :)

I honestly can't see anything good coming out of nerfing lower class wormholes. All I see happening is the depopulation of the lower classes, fewer people in wormhole space in general, and the remaining ones moving into ever growing huge alliances (because good luck establishing a c5/c6 home if you're a solitary small corp). Two Step, you have to look at both sides of this, not just people (both big and small entities) wishing to evict people from lower classes, but also people who wish to live in lower classes. Why would ANYONE ever move into a lower class wormhole if the system effects are worse, the isk is pathetic AND they have a horrific limitation put on their defenses (a limitation not even high sec has)?

It seems to fly in the face of the "risk vs reward" thing we have going in EVE. Higher risk for higher rewards. Except apparently in lower class wormholes, where you want higher risk and lower rewards. Dumb.

I'll start responding to your posts once you start posting with your main.

Your arrogance is astounding. Main or alt makes no difference if it's a legit eve character on an account being paid for; an account that helps pay for your free forking trips to Iceland. Such a character has every forking right to ask you questions. His subscription fees entitle him to the same representation on the CSM as anybody else. You are clueless and you have no place on the CSM.

I'd rather be represented by an entire CSM full of Goons or PL guys than you. You need to start stepping up to the plate, little man, and start representing the players who elected you.

Please post with your main.

NPC alts should stay away from posting, forever.

Please post with your main.

Maybe it's time to let the whole POS size issue die. If we work on the principle that the majority rules, then Two Step's views can be discounted and we should trust that CCP have people on staff that agree with our opinions on the matter.

Please post with your main.

Personally, I "trust" that CCP doesn't consider w-space and those of us who live here to be on equal footing to Nullsec. I really don't expect that CCP will debate among themselves how changes they make for the benefit of Nullsec will affect us, that's why they have the CSM. When they make comments or suggestions and ask for input, if Two Step says it's all good for w-space, they won't stop to ask him whether that is his own viewpoint or that of his constituents. And rightly so. That's what elected representation is all about.

Collectively, we elected Two Step to represent our needs and fight for us in the eyes of CCP, and he is failing to do so. We have few choices other than putting someone else on the CSM next time to hopefully represent us more faithfully. I'm not even sure trying to go around Two Step to address CCP directly would work.

Meanwhile, we must keep trying to break through Two Step's thick skull in the hopes that he may yet start doing the job for which he was elected.

^This.
If people don't care enough about something to post on their main, why should Two Step care enough to respond on his main?

^This.
If people don't care enough about something to post on their main, why should Two Step care enough to respond on his main?

^This.
If people don't care enough about something to post on their main, why should Two Step care enough to respond on his main?

One of the issues with peopel posting with alts is you have no idea if they are doing it to score points off another or just because they dont like the person in question, They might have nothing at all to do with wh's and just use it as a cheap shot at people.

Posting with your main atleast lets people know who they are and then its easy to see if its point scoring being a douche or some one who does live in wh's who is genuinely concerned.

I really have no idea why people wouldnt want to post with there main, I've spoke to a number of people about some of the stuff on pos's on both our ts and there ts and while some i dont agree with with its always been civilised.

at the end of teh day if you want to get your point across just be polite and civil.

I personally dont see any issue with large pos's in low class wh's i do think nerfing ecm alot would help sort that issue out as others have stated.

but there is a diffence with me posting it like that and going

OMG TWO STEP HOW OFTEN DO I HAVE TO SCREAM AT YOU TO LISTEN YOU ONLY CARE ABOUT HIGH END WHS NOT OUR STUFF YOU DONT KNWO ANYTHING LEAVE IT HOW IT IS FOR US.

Two Step, I know I've poked you a couple of times about AHARM's attempt to bash a POS in a C3 and then the carnage that followed, but try to see it from the perspective of those of us who live in C1-C4 systems.

We do this sort of thing all the time. Yes, we even get jumped from time to time (though the more organized groups tend to have scouts making it less of a bloodbath). WE have to face the large dickstars with no siege Dreads, you don't. WE have to spend the extra time shooting a tower while hostile third parties could jump in on us; because these systems are so accessible from k-space, it could happen at any moment and local could spike immediately. We know this, and we choose to live here anyway.

Please post with your main.

It's pretty sad to see this from a "representative" voice. This is a bunk argument and meaningless. Either the points are valid or invalid. The poster delivering those points is immaterial. Attack the debate, not the debater. Simple enough for some, shame that you aren't doing so.

From the context of THAT message it is pretty clear to me that the person who is making the post is at least aware of w-space mechanics. He brought up and illustrated points that are valid despite the toon with which he posted them.

you dont get it... lets see if I can explain.

what if suddenly I decided that I want WH stabilizers and i went and created 100 noob alts on trial accounts and posted posts regrading WH stabilizers and how awesome they are and with 100 posts backing myself up? should Two Step then go 'oh, well, lots of people seem to want WH stabilizers, maybe I should get CCP to add them' ? obviously not.
obviously i'm exaggerating and picked a stupid topic for dramatic effect but you should get the point.

likewise here, the most vocal group against nerfing low class POSs have been TL (understandably), so what's to stop them from all alt posting to get their agenda across?
i'm not suggesting they are doing so or would do so but again, you should get the point.

tl;dr: alt posting is bad mmk?

you dont get it... lets see if I can explain.

what if suddenly I decided that I want WH stabilizers and i went and created 100 noob alts on trial accounts and posted posts regrading WH stabilizers and how awesome they are and with 100 posts backing myself up? should Two Step then go 'oh, well, lots of people seem to want WH stabilizers, maybe I should get CCP to add them' ? obviously not.
obviously i'm exaggerating and picked a stupid topic for dramatic effect but you should get the point.

likewise here, the most vocal group against nerfing low class POSs have been TL (understandably), so what's to stop them from all alt posting to get their agenda across?
i'm not suggesting they are doing so or would do so but again, you should get the point.

tl;dr: alt posting is bad mmk?

good to see this thread has derailed into the region of stupidity ive come to expect in most threads over 2-3 pages long...
im removing this from my BMs, i would suggest two step do the same.

good to see this thread has derailed into the region of stupidity ive come to expect in most threads over 2-3 pages long...
im removing this from my BMs, i would suggest two step do the same.

good to see this thread has derailed into the region of stupidity ive come to expect in most threads over 2-3 pages long...
im removing this from my BMs, i would suggest two step do the same.

Because when someone disagrees with your point of view then its stupid.

Everyone in this so called "de-railement" have made a valid point, that a CSM representative should not dismiss an articulate post simply because it was made from an alt. Now, you could argue against that and you should, but calling it stupid is marginalizing the argument and your very own point of view at the same time. In the end the discussion is not being derailed, I think we are just trying to get a consensus on this minor point in order to legitimize the question, mainly "why does the lower class w-space does not deserve equal protection as higher class w-space considering the fact that the utilization of capital ships is substituted by ease of access?".

Your arrogance is astounding. Main or alt makes no difference if it's a legit eve character on an account being paid for; an account that helps pay for your free forking trips to Iceland. Such a character has every forking right to ask you questions. His subscription fees entitle him to the same representation on the CSM as anybody else. You are clueless and you have no place on the CSM.

I'd rather be represented by an entire CSM full of Goons or PL guys than you. You need to start stepping up to the plate, little man, and start representing the players who elected you.

snip

Please point me to the articulate part of this post:

Being elected to the CSM doesn't obligate me to answer each and every post someone makes. I choose which things I want to respond to, and I am saying that I am *choosing* not to respond to alt posts. I'm sorry if that makes you mad, but that is what I am choosing to do. As was pointed out before, do you really think you will get a response from an elected official if you send them mail with an obviously fake name and address?

If folks don't want to reveal their identity in public, they should feel free to eve mail or convo me.

Please point me to the articulate part of this post:



Being elected to the CSM doesn't obligate me to answer each and every post someone makes. I choose which things I want to respond to, and I am saying that I am *choosing* not to respond to alt posts. I'm sorry if that makes you mad, but that is what I am choosing to do. As was pointed out before, do you really think you will get a response from an elected official if you send them mail with an obviously fake name and address?

If folks don't want to reveal their identity in public, they should feel free to eve mail or convo me.

Two Step, I know I've poked you a couple of times about AHARM's attempt to bash a POS in a C3 and then the carnage that followed, but try to see it from the perspective of those of us who live in C1-C4 systems.

We do this sort of thing all the time. Yes, we even get jumped from time to time (though the more organized groups tend to have scouts making it less of a bloodbath). WE have to face the large dickstars with no siege Dreads, you don't. WE have to spend the extra time shooting a tower while hostile third parties could jump in on us; because these systems are so accessible from k-space, it could happen at any moment and local could spike immediately. We know this, and we choose to live here anyway.

Being elected to the CSM doesn't obligate me to answer each and every post someone makes. I choose which things I want to respond to, and I am saying that I am *choosing* not to respond to alt posts. I'm sorry if that makes you mad, but that is what I am choosing to do. As was pointed out before, do you really think you will get a response from an elected official if you send them mail with an obviously fake name and address?

If folks don't want to reveal their identity in public, they should feel free to eve mail or convo me.

good to see this thread has derailed into the region of stupidity ive come to expect in most threads over 2-3 pages long...
im removing this from my BMs, i would suggest two step do the same.

Back to the topic at hand, I"m still not entirely sure how "Hey, we're revamping the POS Forcefield/setup" mechanism evolved into a "Lets take large POSs out of C1-3s"....its confusing to me and I dont support that mentality at all.

... maybe mass limits of those WHs need to go down too?

Your logic doesn't add up mate. At the moment, having a large POS in a C1-C4 FORCES your attacker to form a large blob. In turn, to defend, you have to blob up too. This stops smaller groups from attempting to invade.

Someone (I think two step but there's so much drama here i can't tell for sure) raised the thought that it is to hard for small corps to siege and claim a low class wormhole. So, he suggested for the new POS system to limit defences in some way to make it easier for those small corps.

What I understand is that the community (at least the ones posting here) interpreted that as taking away large towers. But you see, they want the new system to be modular and scalable so there will not be a small, medium or large tower.

The discussion is called `taking away large towers` but is actually about restricting or not restricting POS's in any way in lower class wormholes. Wich I also think is a pretty bad idea. (for context, my home is a C5 with static C5)

WH space is not broken. This needs repeating until it gets through to whoever needs to hear it. Two Step it is your job to do this on our behalf!

this

Stuff...

Of note: in the experience of my corp, attacking people's POCOs is more likely to get them to sortie for a fleet showdown than attacking their towers. Perhaps what is needed is more destructible infrastructure targets that aren't also existential targets for the defender. Destructible modular services like station services in nullsec perhaps?

Thinking on this further: the way the current POS reinforce system works is sort of backward. Attacker fights a PVE battle against automated posguns, then defender gets two days to form up a fleet to defeat attacker. Automated posguns are just barrier to entry for the fight; attacker must bring a fleet that is at least this tall, so to speak, to have a battle. Posguns also do not actually help defender keep the system unless defender is a bunch of insomniacs who are online 23-7, assuming attacker's fleet is indeed this tall.


What if the mechanic worked in reverse? Consider:

Initial battle: Attacker tags a POS as seiged with minimal work, and posguns cannot be killed at this time. Perhaps attacker onlines some sort of siege module similar to the SBU in nullsec.

Final battle: Defender gets 2 days to form a fleet that fights alongside their posguns, which are still alive. Attacker has to defeat defender's fleet + posguns to win.


Advantages:
1. No barrier to entry for attacker. All they have to do is tag the pos for seige.
2. No more boring PVE fights against automated guns.
3. Defender actually gets some legitimate terrain advantage in the fight that matters.
4. Less logging in to find defenses already down, leading to hopelessness --> destruct all switch.
5. If defender throws destruct all switch before final battle, attacker can just leave and does not actually have to fight the posguns at any time.
6. Defender no longer has to worry about getting attacked at Ridiculous O'clock because it's no longer possible to defang the POS while defense is asleep or at work.
7. EPIC BATTLES with folks manning guns while fleet action goes down becomes the norm

EDIT further thoughts: if the attacker is onlining some object to tag the POS for siege, perhaps the mechanic could be: defender has to blow that thing up to stop the siege, or else their POS continues to be vulnerable once the reinforce timer is up. So defender MUST sortie to kill it. Battle rages until pos+guns are down or until the attacker's siege thingy is down. Attacker's siege thingy could be a pricey item so you can't just spam it around to troll folks without significant cost.

It would also be nice if the POS guns were a bit (just a bit) better when unmanned and auto firing. Because other than if someone is actively driving them, I've never considered them too much of a threat.

I like your thinking of removing things that directly lead to the defenders going "well screw this SD all" but the dynamics of wormhole space and favoring the prepared kind of appeal to me to and to a degree if you enter WH space unprepared and ignore the risks you only have yourself to blame in the end

tho that said its a bit of a different story if someone drops a 200 man T3 fleet on your 10 man C3 corp very little in the way of being prepared can help you there.

I disagree, because I believe PVE against unmanned guns is lame, and more competent AI guns would encourage defenders to rely more on them for defense instead of their fleet.

IMO starting a siege should be less about surprise attacks taking out all the guns before defender can wake up, and more about sending formal notice that defender is going to lose assets later unless they take positive action. As it is with POCOs, for example. IMO posguns should be there to support the defender's human players, giving them an advantage; without the humans they should be weak as hell, but conversely they should be impossible to incapacitate until the human defenders get a chance to wake up and use them.

Of course, If this happens then welp and there's really no saving the corp/wh at that point without hiring mercs for defense.

Drop your idea in the Features & Ideas section.

The downside is, timing towers is an important defender advantage.

Hiring mercs isn't likely to help much if the hostiles maintain proper hole control - that said comes back to how prepared you are - even when someone maintains around the clock WH control there are still ways for a prepared corp to get reinforcements in if they take the necessary steps in advance - which are almost entirely impossible to a corp that either ignores the risk entirely or takes the attitude of dealing with it when it comes to it.

As mentioned this is one of the reasons I like WH space you can't just batphone for reinforcements to pile in when agressed.

Thinking on this further: the way the current POS reinforce system works is sort of backward. Attacker fights a PVE battle against automated posguns, then defender gets two days to form up a fleet to defeat attacker. Automated posguns are just barrier to entry for the fight; attacker must bring a fleet that is at least this tall, so to speak, to have a battle. Posguns also do not actually help defender keep the system unless defender is a bunch of insomniacs who are online 23-7, assuming attacker's fleet is indeed this tall.


What if the mechanic worked in reverse? Consider:

Initial battle: Attacker tags a POS as seiged with minimal work, and posguns cannot be killed at this time. Perhaps attacker onlines some sort of siege module similar to the SBU in nullsec.

Final battle: Defender gets 2 days to form a fleet that fights alongside their posguns, which are still alive. Attacker has to defeat defender's fleet + posguns to win.


Advantages:
1. No barrier to entry for attacker. All they have to do is tag the pos for seige.
2. No more boring PVE fights against automated guns.
3. Defender actually gets some legitimate terrain advantage in the fight that matters.
4. Less logging in to find defenses already down, leading to hopelessness --> destruct all switch.
5. If defender throws destruct all switch before final battle, attacker can just leave and does not actually have to fight the posguns at any time.
6. Defender no longer has to worry about getting attacked at Ridiculous O'clock because it's no longer possible to defang the POS while defense is asleep or at work.
7. EPIC BATTLES with folks manning guns while fleet action goes down becomes the norm

EDIT further thoughts: if the attacker is onlining some object to tag the POS for siege, perhaps the mechanic could be: defender has to blow that thing up to stop the siege, or else their POS continues to be vulnerable once the reinforce timer is up. So defender MUST sortie to kill it. Battle rages until pos+guns are down or until the attacker's siege thingy is down. Attacker's siege thingy could be a pricey item so you can't just spam it around to troll folks without significant cost.

I believe much of the confussion about what is being proposed is based on symantics and current term usage.

Currently we have 3 pos sizes. In the future there will be a "pos" like structure that can be added on to till some max limit is reached. The question is should that size limit be restricted based on WH type? the same could be said should that size limit be based on HS, LS and null? One might conclude those questions are being asked. (I would hope) So the first thing we must all do is suspend our current understanding of "pos" design and remember this is a whole new way of looking at that design. Should a C1 allow you to create a system wide spanning "POS"? or should there be a some limit imposed?


For the most part I am against limits. The limits of WH mass really help in the structure of what will work and what will not. So you set up a huge pos in a C1... logistics thorugh the mass retrictions of your connection should be the limiting factor. But that said, until more is known about the propsed changes it is futule to have an arguement on limits for the new POS system.

Forgot to add... clones and T3 susbsystem changing in the POS in a WH!

Agree with T3 subsystem changing......

Yes we would like this , the clones would be simplifying things too much though I think.

Yes we would like this , the clones would be simplifying things too much though I think.

I wouldn't consider it simplifying anything since, as it stands, a variety of clones are very impractical to use. I have never logged off in the wormhole with a crystal set because if an armor fleet is called, all I'm doing is adding a couple bil to my killmail if I die. If people are just flying around with learning implants and a couple of hardwires, sure, I can see this point of view. However, if you're willing to fly in Crystals, Slaves, Talismans, etc. then this feature suddenly becomes amazing. To be clear, this has nothing to do with clone jumping; only clone swapping at a single location. If I choose to install 8 billion isk in implants in my POS, then that's all the more I stand to lose if it gets blown up.

I would like to see the swapping of clones within a station too for that ^ very reason. Not clone jumping from station/region to another. Just swapping for implant reasons.

Thinking on this further: the way the current POS reinforce system works is sort of backward. Attacker fights a PVE battle against automated posguns, then defender gets two days to form up a fleet to defeat attacker. Automated posguns are just barrier to entry for the fight; attacker must bring a fleet that is at least this tall, so to speak, to have a battle. Posguns also do not actually help defender keep the system unless defender is a bunch of insomniacs who are online 23-7, assuming attacker's fleet is indeed this tall.


What if the mechanic worked in reverse? Consider:

Initial battle: Attacker tags a POS as seiged with minimal work, and posguns cannot be killed at this time. Perhaps attacker onlines some sort of siege module similar to the SBU in nullsec.

Final battle: Defender gets 2 days to form a fleet that fights alongside their posguns, which are still alive. Attacker has to defeat defender's fleet + posguns to win.


Advantages:
1. No barrier to entry for attacker. All they have to do is tag the pos for seige.
2. No more boring PVE fights against automated guns.
3. Defender actually gets some legitimate terrain advantage in the fight that matters.
4. Less logging in to find defenses already down, leading to hopelessness --> destruct all switch.
5. If defender throws destruct all switch before final battle, attacker can just leave and does not actually have to fight the posguns at any time.
6. Defender no longer has to worry about getting attacked at Ridiculous O'clock because it's no longer possible to defang the POS while defense is asleep or at work.
7. EPIC BATTLES with folks manning guns while fleet action goes down becomes the norm

EDIT further thoughts: if the attacker is onlining some object to tag the POS for siege, perhaps the mechanic could be: defender has to blow that thing up to stop the siege, or else their POS continues to be vulnerable once the reinforce timer is up. So defender MUST sortie to kill it. Battle rages until pos+guns are down or until the attacker's siege thingy is down. Attacker's siege thingy could be a pricey item so you can't just spam it around to troll folks without significant cost.

defenders: oh okay thanks for warning we will just fly out all valuable stuff and only leave a rawr tower with nothing worth shotting it there.....

In PURE theory its a neat idea and sounds good in all but in reallty it will be the carebear dream....

why ?

because in reallty it will look like this: Attackers come and declare "your pos is now sieged"

defenders: oh okay thanks for warning we will just fly out all valuable stuff and only leave a rawr tower with nothing worth shotting it there..... you cant even bubble the pos because pos guns or defenders could risk free destroy them....also they can log out thier alts with hauler/orkas/caps with their stuff in gets even easier. Also you couldnt punish thos special people who dont stront up thier pos like this .... REF system is fine like it is ..... reffing a pos does not take that long about 1-3hrs depends if u have a dread handy or not...

Not a jump clone just a clone so if you die you could choose where you will come back to empire or 0.0 or your wh .

But you are accurately describing the current situation. Except for one thing: currently, the attackers have to do an annoying fight against PVE guns and then the defenders can choose to blow up or log out all their stuff !

All this talk of / desire for clone jumping (or more accurately 'swapping', since I don't think anyone wants people jumping into/out of/respawning in wormhole space clones) all sounds like a bit of a faff. It's a bit of a convoluted work around to the issue of not being able to just unplug implants (without destroying them).

Now, the arguments for/against that and how to balance it if it were to be done (A 'timer' to prevent it being too easy? Wait at least 24 hours after your brain surgery before doing it again! What will become of actual clone jumping? Etc) is a bit off topic, but I think that'd be better to address that rather than asking for new weird clone mechanics which only serve to accomplish the same thing.