| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc
W-Space
51
   |
Posted - 2013.04.26 14:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
I'm not there at Rejk. to get all the info from first hands, but from those things I've heard from people and what one can read at Massively, some things look like wh dwellers may not totally agree with CCP about. I don't know what was said at the roundtable there, but this post is about what I think of it. Sure, these are the possible plans for distant future, but later, when it goes on like devblog, ot can be too late.
Quote:
We also learned that CCP never intended for wormhole space to be mapped out and colonised as thoroughly it has been, so developers are looking into ways to rekindle the element of danger and the unknown that wormholes had at launch. Wormhole mass may get a larger random factor added, and the devs are considering ways to possibly remove inactive starbases from a wormhole.
Should we understand it like "we want less people live in wormholes, and don't like you to chain-collapse" ? It is not out of thing air, that many people say Wormholes are the least broken part of EVE. Both making wormholes less desirable to live in and preventing chain-collapsing will force people, who PVP in wormholes, to seek some way out, either by making it all about k-space holes, or moving out of wormholes altogether, or leaving the game. You cannot keep PVP-people interested in wormhole corporation when there are no inhabitants around, or when each wh collapsing is a quest with a surprise in the end.
Quote:One major point of contention between CCP and fans was the issue of capital escalations. Sleeper sites in class 5 and 6 systems have a defense mechanism that causes additional deadly battleships to spawn if you warp a capital ship into the site. This was intended to discourage use of capitals, but players quickly learned to use the feature to farm the extra battleships for ISK. Capital escalations may be nerfed in a future patch, either by removing them or by making the spawn more random. Other ideas thrown around included anti-capital ships spawning or energy neutralisers being used. Capital escalations is the only thing, making it possible to sustain big corporation/alliance in one system allowing pilots to use faction fitted T3 and other shiny things (I'll talk on the necessity of those later). With capital escalations gone or seriously nerfed, big entities will have to move people to different wormholes, thus limiting the amount of people available for PVP any given time (you don't usually plan for PVP here, it often goes like "there is PVP ,everybody to fleet!"), and thus once again limiting the interest of PVP pilots to living in wormholes.
Once will say, that "don't fly shiny ships, then!", but what works OK for k-space is not an option for w-space. For k-space a quality of a fleet can be roughly measured by the following comparison: ship efficiency for its price. For wormholes it looks like ship efficiency for its MASS. Price is not a question here. Partially cos we have ISK, really, but on the other hand, we have limited wormhole mass to bring in our fleet. We have to keep one given fleet been able to work in maximum number of different conditions, as one ship-type fleets of null are usually limited in that, our fleets often look rag-tag, but it works in WH and it all needs isk. Without expensive ships how are we expected to fight capitals in neighbours home-system, when we can bring 2 or 3 and any decent corp can field more? Straight nerf will also influence WH PVP badly.
I hope that's not what CCP wants. I hope CCP is more interested in those "one-man fleets", farming escalations for large isk with 2 or 3 actual persons. I agree that this is not OK. And really, they rare PVP, they mostly farm. So if CCP want them gone - so be it. Just I hope that change does not kick everyone from wormholes altogether.
From my experience I'd say a problem, such farmers can have, is small ships. So maybe adding a group of frigates with heavy neutralizing bonuses to each escalation is an option? Rebalancing blue-loot to keep the "bounty" the same. Something decent corporations with enough alive pilots will find more challenging, but not too threatening, but that will be a huge pain in the butt for those wiling to farm in me-and-alts fleets.
Thank you for your time. I hope no matter when any changes to WH are coming, they will not stripe wormholes of the "least broken" tag.
PS. Would be nice to have some of devs living in C5 or C6 WH. What you have created is the best environment in the game, even though it may not be as you intended. But maybe it is even better then you have intended it to be? |
Xen Solarus
Inner 5phere
396
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 14:58:00 -
[2] - Quote
I hope none of this happens. I've always thought wormholes are the only place that doesn't need any changing. Why are CCP wasting their time with changes when so many other aspects of the game need working on, and have done so for years!
Could this be the result of non-wormhole dwellers that constantly moan about how jealous they are of the advantages of higher classes? Far from it being easy-street, those classes need to be actively defended from other PvP groups to protect what they've earned. Its a far cry from the blue donut moon-goo easy-mode.
I agree with the removal of inactive POS' though, far too many of those. Though i think it would be better to add a mechanic that allows people to steal them, thats far more in line with the creed of EvE imo.
Post with your main, like a BOSS! |
Nox Arnoux
Aperture Harmonics
K162
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 15:24:00 -
[3] - Quote
Xen Solarus wrote:I hope none of this happens. I've always thought wormholes are the only place that doesn't need any changing. Why are CCP wasting their time with changes when so many other aspects of the game need working on, and have done so for years!
Quote:CCP made it clear that iterating on EVE's wormholes is not a high priority for development right now... |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc
W-Space
55
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 15:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
We are not talking on "right now", we are talking on their said plans for some future. |
Nathan Jameson
Talocan Dominion
Talocan United
1126
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 15:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
Quote:With capital escalations gone or seriously nerfed, big entities will have to move people to different wormholes
I agree that changes to wormholes must be done very carefully and with a mind of political implications, but isn't one of the other current complaints about wormholes the blobfest arms race in C5/C6s?
My alliance holds several different C5s (and lower-class C2s); and while no one of these systems competes with the headquarters of other major wormhole powers, we have a much broader profile. Which means, as an alliance, we run into action a lot more often than if we were all in one system. There are advantages and disadvantages to this playstyle, but my point is that it is a successful alternate playstyle. These proposed changes would only marginalize your specific approach to wormholes, not all of them.
However, your playstyle is still valid, and diversity needs to be protected. I like your proposed idea of some heavy neuting frigs. The smaller the change we can make to the game for the same intended result, the better.
Nathan Jameson for CSM 8!
My CSM 8 Blog
My Twitter |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc
W-Space
58
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 16:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
Nathan, I agree that is an option, but believe me, having more people in one WH gives a lot of abilities to fight people you would not be able to even with less.
But yeah, it is you playstyle. And this is mine. I think we both have people who would agree with us. |
Xen Solarus
Inner 5phere
397
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 16:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote:We are not talking on "right now", we are talking on their said plans for some future.
Phew! In CCP terms, that probably means years! 
Post with your main, like a BOSS! |
Nox Arnoux
Aperture Harmonics
K162
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 16:21:00 -
[8] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote:We are not talking on "right now", we are talking on their said plans for some future.
He's complaining that CCP is wasting their time on things that don't need to be changed when these are merely ideas off a drawing board and no real effort has been put in.
You've taken something that was said at a roundtable and blew it completely out of proportion by emphasizing its extreme scenarios. Adding a larger random factor to wormhole mass isn't the same as "no, you're not allowed to chain collapse, f*** off." and nerfing capital escalations isn't going to cripple someone's ability to field ships above and beyond its weight.
CCP stated that they want to bring back the danger factor involved with wormhole operations. Just look at the current methods for chain collapsing in systems where people actually chain collapse for PvP. 1 Dread + 3 battleships, totaling 3.5 billion mass. This fully encompasses the 10% random factor on current C5/C6 static mass, making it a 0 risk operation. Even adding another 10% just means you "might" need to bring a 4th battleship. Larger random factor on wh mass just means you have to exercise more precision in order to not accidentally trap your precious dreads out, as opposed to "EVERYONE JUMP OUT AND JUMP BACK IN WITH YOUR PROP MODS ON, NEXT HOLE!!".
Also, tell me with a straight face that you or any other half competent wormhole entity aren't rolling in mountains of excess isk to the extent that even a fully blinged out T3 being blown up can be shrugged off with relative ease. We've been so rich for so long that losing what's supposed to be one of the most expensive subcaps in the game is now nothing more than a minor inconvenience. Losing T3s are supposed to hurt, and cutting back on the number of capital escalations might actually remedy that. It'll bring back the level of excitement and adrenaline rush that is supposed to be associated with PvP, especially what's supposed to be "dangerous and unknown PvP" that occurs in wormhole space. |
Rroff
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
244
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 16:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
I'd imagine nerfing capital escalations would reduce the amount of capital fights and some of the most engaging content of wormhole space - seems like a poorly thought out off the cuff comment to me. |
Casirio
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
Polarized.
449
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 16:26:00 -
[10] - Quote
i trust our future wh csm will make our concerns heard if/when these future changes are coming. until then its all just talk |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc
W-Space
60
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 17:32:00 -
[11] - Quote
Nox, like I've said, making it more difficult to chain-collapse would result in lesser PVP.
And honestly, some people in our alliance, with 5-6 accounts are not very happy currently with the income. Maybe it is due to the fact we have a lot paying by plexes only. My own reserves where enough to buy only 2 dreads and rigs for them at once recently. I don't like the idea I know many use: having extra systems for PVE only.
And T3 lose hurts. If that would hurt too much - then maybe it would not be use? Are there alternatives for serious PVP in WH? |
MisterAl tt1
Pretenders Inc
W-Space
60
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 17:34:00 -
[12] - Quote
delete plz |
Longinius Spear
Semper Ubi Sub Ubi
134
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 17:58:00 -
[13] - Quote
Interesting to know that wormhole space is being thought about, even if its in a horrible way.
Co-host of Down the Pipe Podcast
Read more of my ramblings on my blog Invading Your Hole
|
Castor Troyy
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
Polarized.
50
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 18:35:00 -
[14] - Quote
 oh noes... mah iskies! |
Shilalasar
Dead Sky Inc.
11
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 19:34:00 -
[15] - Quote
Making escalations more random is only bad for the people who run it with the bare minimum. If you have some spare pilots you can always bring them in if the sleepers try to **** with you.
Holemass more random should have barely any effect, because you can still get the 50% mark. Maybe a few more HICjumps, but meh.
So, Nathan, with the Devblogs out how much fun is it to watch the fuelprices? |
Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
428
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:06:00 -
[16] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote:Capital escalations is the only thing, making it possible to sustain big corporation/alliance in one system
That's not really true. Cap Escalations are ony truly profitable if you do them with 5 people max.
1st guy: Archon & booster alt
2nd: Dread #1
3rd: Carrier #2 & Noctis/Rorqual
4th: Dread #2 & Loki
5th: Another Loki (maybe) & Scanner
Or some similar combination. And that is the super-relaxed version where nobody has to actively play two accounts under pressure.
Everyone you add after that is just dragging down the efficiency, but since corps usually (and rightly) let every member who can bring a suitable ship join ops, ISK/hour often drops to 150m or less. You can make much better ISK doing PvE alone in the chains, be it C3, C4 or even some C5 sites. The reason people don't do it is mostly that it's a lot safer to farm in a big group in your home system.
If CCP changes w-space in a way that makes us fan out and scatter in our chains, running sites in several small groups that are easier to attack with quick hit'n'runs, that is not necessarily a bad thing...
That said, I don't think cap escalations should just be removed, I'd like more fun uses for (normal) caps in wormholes, not less. Not sure how to do it though.
. |
Svodola Darkfury
Heaven's End
League of Infamy
163
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:11:00 -
[17] - Quote
Castor Troyy wrote: oh noes... mah iskies!
I sort of feel like it's a little too late to nerf sleeper sites. If they announce a nerf I get the feeling that everyone will just ISK farm until the change and then be like "lol what's Technetium, we were there in the wormhole gold rush."
I, too, am amused that they say so often "POS revamp doesn't make sense because it affects too few players" but they need to nerf wormhole mass being predictable and capital escalations because... you know... 10s of 20s of people are making good use of that. Maybe even hundreds!
Svo. |
Nox Arnoux
Aperture Harmonics
K162
18
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:14:00 -
[18] - Quote
MisterAl tt1 wrote:Nox, like I've said, making it more difficult to chain-collapse would result in lesser PVP.
No it won't.
1. There are ways to find PvP other than non-stop chain collapsing (I know, shocking right?). Personally I've had way more luck finding PvP by scanning down the chain than mindlessly sitting at home going from one static to another. In fact, I can't actually remember the last time I got an engagement out of static rolling.
2. Competent entities will simply adapt. It doesn't take a whole lot of additional forethought to accommodate the additional random factor.
Quote:And honestly, some people in our alliance, with 5-6 accounts are not very happy currently with the income.
Neither am I. I wish I never have to PvE ever again and T3s just magically appear in my hanger. Just because you want something doesn't mean you're entitled to it.
Quote:And T3 lose hurts. If that would hurt too much - then maybe it would not be use? Are there alternatives for serious PVP in WH?
Then don't use it. To quote a corpmate of mine, "you don't have to bring a T3 to everything", The argument that you have to hit above your weight only applies in PvP if you're in a fleet that's big enough to collapse the hole behind you. Then every isk that you can squeeze into a kilogram of mass counts. Believe it or not, there are people in wormholes who don't exclusively fly T3s, and you don't need to bring T3s to kill them.
If nerfing nanoribbon income weeds out people who are just here for the isk, then I don't have the slightest problem with that at all. If the events of the past month has taught us anything it's that WH blobs are massive and the fat needs to be trimmed. If the supersized corps have to be reduced in size because there's not enough isk to go around, then maybe we could actually have fun small gang engagements as a status quo again instead of a 300-man staring contest in a C5 where the side that brings the most friends win. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo
Polarized.
238
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:36:00 -
[19] - Quote
Thanks for sharing this, MisterAl.
Seeing the amount of consideration that CCP has been taking while continuing their changes to the game, I'd imagine we would see plenty of testing, reviews, and player involvement as they move forward. I understand that some changes are not the most well liked ideas, and our proactivity as a community should help see that our thoughts and ideas are considered.
Some of these ideas may never come to fruition, and some may. As wormholers, we have found ways to adapt to mechanics and create gameplay that wasn't intended, so I'm sure that ultimately, either we or someone else will find a way for this community to adapt and move forward in w-space.
If these changes do occur, it'll be interesting.
~Boredom Breeds Direction~ |
Bane Nucleus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
420
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 20:45:00 -
[20] - Quote
Good. Capitals really **** up wh space as it is. Off with their heads!
Free Agent |
|
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
1812
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:34:00 -
[21] - Quote
Ok, so:
It's totally true that we didn't expect WH to get as colonized as they have, that's no secret, we've been saying it for years.
We also stressed, repeatedly, at the RT that we *like* what it's become and we want to make sure that any changes to W-Space don't drive out the people who're already there.
We're not totally enamoured with the way capital escalations are farmed, and we're not totally enamoured with the amount of money that generates, but we're also not keen to just flat-out remove them because the gameplay there is interesting.
One of the consistent themes, being said to us by the WHers at the RT, was that W-Space was too predictable and now lacked the excitement/danger of the early days. Messing with mass variation, and messing with the predictability of the sites (including escalations) were, IIRC, suggestion from players, that were broadly well-received by the other players present. We like these ideas and would like to look into them further when we have time.
The reason that W-Space changes have not been a huge priority for us is because we feel like the feature is working pretty well and we don't see a need to hugely mess with it right now.
Hope this makes everyone feel better  |
|
Laurici
eXceed Inc.
No Holes Barred
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 21:54:00 -
[22] - Quote
holy ****, a greyscale post that isn't terribad.
What has happened to CCP??? |
Godfrey Silvarna
Frozen Dawn Inc
Arctic Light
77
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:14:00 -
[23] - Quote
I am fine with increased randomization. |
Morwraith
Obstergo
Polarized.
13
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:16:00 -
[24] - Quote
Mr. Blue poster,
You're only allowed in the WH forums if you're closing a thread. Or did something change?
On a serious note glad to see that any changes will be well considered in regards to maintaining WH playstyle/playerbase. Although I do hope that any changes will be well published ahead of time so we can all go on expo for a couple of months and stockpile ribbons :P |
Nero Pantera
Wormholers Anonymous
Transmission Lost
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:17:00 -
[25] - Quote
sleeper dreadnoughts would be awesome |
Indo Nira
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD
Polarized.
56
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:19:00 -
[26] - Quote
Laurici wrote:holy ****, a greyscale post that isn't terribad.
What has happened to CCP???
and you wonder why blues never respond in wormhole forums |
Fradle
Beavercreek Popcorn Festival Patrons
64
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:24:00 -
[27] - Quote
Laurici wrote:holy ****, a greyscale post that isn't terribad.
What has happened to CCP???
If we could downvote posts... if we could only downvote |
Alexander McKeon
Ekchuah's Shrine Comporium
Kill It With Fire
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 22:58:00 -
[28] - Quote
What would be really nice to see would be Sleeper Capitals; give W-space a draw to it by including PvE capital fights. This would certainly include a very high element of risk to high value assets and need corresponding rewards, but would make cap escalations less predictable if a sleeper Dread or RR Carrier had a chance to spawn in. It might also prevent those aforementioned 5-man groups from farming the escalation sites. |
Tahna Rouspel
Risk-Averse
PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
94
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:04:00 -
[29] - Quote
If the capital escalation is too profitable, would it be preferable to reduce the blue book value from those escalation battleships? |
Sandslinger
NorCorp Enterprise
No Holes Barred
75
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 23:25:00 -
[30] - Quote
CCP Greyscale wrote:Ok, so: It's totally true that we didn't expect WH to get as colonized as they have, that's no secret, we've been saying it for years. We also stressed, repeatedly, at the RT that we *like* what it's become and we want to make sure that any changes to W-Space don't drive out the people who're already there. We're not totally enamoured with the way capital escalations are farmed, and we're not totally enamoured with the amount of money that generates, but we're also not keen to just flat-out remove them because the gameplay there is interesting. One of the consistent themes, being said to us by the WHers at the RT, was that W-Space was too predictable and now lacked the excitement/danger of the early days. Messing with mass variation, and messing with the predictability of the sites (including escalations) were, IIRC, suggestion from players, that were broadly well-received by the other players present. We like these ideas and would like to look into them further when we have time. The reason that W-Space changes have not been a huge priority for us is because we feel like the feature is working pretty well and we don't see a need to hugely mess with it right now. Hope this makes everyone feel better
Increased randomization on hole sizes is a terrible terrible idea.
The only thing it would bring to the game is "large" gangs especially ones ready to go ******* deep into enemy systems with capital support completely unwilling to do so !!!.
No one will ever risk taking a fleet through a hole and into a enemy gang unless they can reliably calculate the available mass on the hole, the risk of having half your fleet cut off and the other half incinerated by an awaiting fleet is WAY too large.
What the heck is increased randomization on holes meant to bring to the game play ?????????????????????
So suddenly there is a large chance of getting your capital stuck when cycling a hole.... Does anyone who has ever cycled a hole really think getting your capital character stuck in a hostile system for 1 month as fun ?????
And never mind not being able to cycle all that does is make wh space ten times more static I would absolutely hate to be stuck with a boring static for a entire night. Because if your neighbors pos up then there is frankly nothing you can get out of the hole.
Is it fun when what would be a calculated risk of your gang taking the ultimate risk and jumping into a hostile gang knowing it will close your way home with the last ship for a Win or die maneuver only to find with new mechanics the hole suddenly closes on half your gang and your gang is slaughtered wholesale...Is that fun for anyone ??
Seriously stop listening to the people at fan fest they are drunk as hell and talking out of their backsides =). Anyone who has been there knows the mentality of the place it's a circle jerk not a brainstorm :P
...
One thing is for sure however.
your "balancing" of dreads has REALLY messed up wh pvp and a lot of low sec pvp too. Creating a scenario where the defending side is the only one that gets to have them with reliability makes that situation much much worse and does nothing to improve it. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |