Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Squelch
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 18:00:00 -
[1] - Quote
Seeing as CCP are pushing the new deployable structures, I've been thinking about a wormhole generator structure.
Firstly, No, this should not be able to generate wormhole after wormhole until you get the one you want. My idea is to have a structure that can generate a wormhole and has a cooldown period equal to the lifetime of the wormhole it has generated (more on this below).
Only one Wormhole Generator can be active in a system, and the wormhole generator needs to be loaded with 3 different types of charges:
Charge 1: Destination Schematic. This is an item that specifies where you want the new wormhole to go. Hisec, Losec, Nullsec, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5 or C6. Using any of these does NOT guarantee you will get a wormhole to that place. It should give a base chance (maybe 25% or something) of giving you what you wanted. Possibly introduce a new skill to increase your chances at getting what you asked for.
Charge 2: Stability Schematic. This is an item that specifies how long you want to wormhole to remain open. Different schematics would be available for different amounts of time the wh would remain open. This could be skill based, so you can only use schematics based on your skill lvl. At [New Skill] lvl 1, you can use a schematic to create a 24 hr hole. lvl2 = 18, or 24hr hole. lvl3 = 12, 18 or 24 hr hole. lvl4 = 8, 12, 18 or 24 hr hole. lvl5 = 4, 8, 12, 18 or 24 hr hole. The system would not allow this, or another wormhole generator to be used again in this period of time. So at best you could make a wormhole last only 4 hours to cycle through looking for something specific, but doing it this way would mean when you find what you want, you only have it for 4 hours.
Charge 3: Magnitude Schematic (or some better name) This is an item that specifes what mass limits you want on the wormhole. For ease of explaination, let's assume this item controls both jumpable mass, and total allowable mass.
So, how do you make these 3 charges, or schematics?
Charge 1: Destination Schematic. Thematically, using Ancient Database Coordinates to construct the Destination Schematics (which type of space you want your wh to go to) makes sense to me, and gives them an alternative to just being sold to NPC orders. A combination of ADC's, and the other blue loot could determine what the destination is for your generated wormhole. Some thought would be needed here to figure out the cost of each type of wh, but I imagine a Highsec hole would be the most expensive.
Charge 2: Stability Schematic. Controlling the duration of the wh's life could be made from Thermoelectric Catalysts, and other sleeper salvage components.
Charge 3: Magnitude Schematic (or some better name) Thematically, I want to link this somehow to incursions, as the Sansha seem pretty good at opening wormholes, however I'm not sure giving incursion runners another way of making isk is the way to go.
The construction of these three schematics needed to open a wormhole should not be so expensive that they stop smaller groups from using them, but expensive enough that after the initial fascination has worn off, we don't have newly generated wormholes popping up all over the galaxy.
Another thought that I've not really fleshed out yet would be to possilbly use Capacitor Transfers to 'power up' the wormhole generator. This could affect the duration of the hole, or maybe the mass limit. Maybe it would just be needed in additition to the schematics to actually provide the power to generate the hole. Different types of hole would require different amounts of power, which would require ships to be sitting on the generator for x amount of time feeding it cap. Possibly have the structure pop straight up on the overview like a FW beacon, or a cyno, so there is some risk at feeding it power to open a hole.
Anyway, I'm sure there is more that could be imagined here, but this is a start. Whaddya think?
|
ChrisLCTR
Lazerhawks
122
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 18:15:00 -
[2] - Quote
Wait for it......... |
Winthorp
Sky Fighters
1336
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 18:22:00 -
[3] - Quote
FFS. (Insert witty signature here) |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1409
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 18:47:00 -
[4] - Quote
People get slammed when they suggest this mate, so you are not the first the open yourself up to the upcoming flaming.
Here is what i want:
Rek Seven wrote:
Wormhole Generator (WG)
A lot of people seem to be asking CCP to add duel statics to some wormholes that currently only have one. Instead of CCP forcing this change, why not put the choice in the players hands?
Here's a feature list describing how it could work:
1. The WG is manufactured using sleeper salvage 2. Can only be deployed in wormhole space 3. Can only be deployed at the sun 4. One WG allowed per system 5. 15 minuet spool up and shutdown time 6. Can be activated by someone in the owning corp that has required roles (anyone can pass through it) 7. System wide notification when new wormhole generation in initiated 8. 23 hour reinforce time 9. Hit points: Shield= 5,000,000 - Armor= 1,250,000 - Structure= 1,000,000 10. Drops sleeper salvage if destroyed
+1 |
Squelch
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 19:06:00 -
[5] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:People get slammed when they suggest this mate, so you are not the first the open yourself up to the upcoming flaming.
Slamming I can take, It just makes those people look like typical internet morons.
On the other hand, Intelligent discussion either furthering the idea, or explaining why this isn't a good idea is welcome, and funnilly enough, the point of a forum.
I for one would appreciate the ability to open a hole (even a random one) when there is nothing happening in the chain, but we didn't want to close the static.
|
Nightingale Actault
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 19:31:00 -
[6] - Quote
The reason we all love wormholes is because they're unpredictable and "dangerous". Being able to create a new wormhole at will is largely defeating the reason most people live in wormhole space.
There are ideas being thrown about of increased wandering wormholes that I feel is more akin to what the community is actually reaching towards. Ones that have differing mass and time variables than the existing connections so as to increase the unpredictability without making them completely random. |
Squelch
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 20:55:00 -
[7] - Quote
Nightingale Actault wrote:The reason we all love wormholes is because they're unpredictable and "dangerous".
I agree with you there, re-reading my OP I probably made it sound a bit too easy to get what you want when you want it.
The idea was supposed to be more, "we don't want to close the static (maybe cos people are moving ships in/out), but there is nothing else happening in the chain at all.... I wish we could open another wormhole to have another option of looking for pew.
Maybe I got a little carried away with the details... it's not supposed to be about controlling what you get, more like just having another option, and with a SP investement, making that option slightly less than completely random.
|
Winthorp
Sky Fighters
1337
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 20:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
Squelch wrote:Rek Seven wrote:People get slammed when they suggest this mate, so you are not the first the open yourself up to the upcoming flaming.
Slamming I can take, It just makes those people look like typical internet morons. On the other hand, Intelligent discussion either furthering the idea, or explaining why this isn't a good idea is welcome, and funnilly enough, the point of a forum. I for one would appreciate the ability to open a hole (even a random one) when there is nothing happening in the chain, but we didn't want to close the static.
The problem is this has been debated to death and yours is nothing new at all. The problem you dont get is you already possess a WH generator, you have ships that can make you a new WH at will (you wanting to keep that perfect chain to Jita isnt CCP's problem its the choices you as players and a corp must make). You also have a WH generator module you can fit to your ship and even load it with probes to expand that perfect Jita chain. (Unless you live in a C4/C4 it is impossible to have a dead end chain you simply have to use the WH generator module in that high slot next to your covops cloak to male them magically appear onto your mapper)
Poasting in WH generator thread #36332775.
Next week its WH stabalizer thread #75;3/6675 (Insert witty signature here) |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2055
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 21:15:00 -
[9] - Quote
Squelch wrote:Slamming I can take, It just makes those people look like typical internet morons.
Well no, not always. In some cases the OP gets to look like a moron for posting what is the same idea that has been done before over, and over, and over.
Squelch wrote:On the other hand, Intelligent discussion either furthering the idea, or explaining why this isn't a good idea is welcome, and funnilly enough, the point of a forum.
Use the search/google/ whatever floats your boat to find all of the intelligent discussion that has already been done to death.
|
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters
1195
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 21:18:00 -
[10] - Quote
While I like the idea of more wormholes, I don't think a player influenced approach is the way to go. Maybe CCP can allow the wormhole environment to produce more random connections to random wormholes. This would still allow more options as far as where to go, while still leaving the randomness of wormholes intact. No trolling please |
|
Jack Miton
Sky Fighters
3094
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 21:56:00 -
[11] - Quote
Get out Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/ |
Tyrant Scorn
91
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 22:02:00 -
[12] - Quote
For once I have to agree with the rest of the people here... WH's should stay random and if you want a new chain or a new empire connection, jam a couple of orca's up your hole. Host at Legacy Of A Capsuleer Podcast: Http://www.legacyofacapsuleer
Editor On EveNews24: Http://www.evenews24.com |
Alundil
Sky Fighters
425
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 23:12:00 -
[13] - Quote
Tyrant Scorn wrote:For once I have to agree with the rest of the people here... WH's should stay random and if you want a new chain or a new empire connection, jam a couple of orca's up your hole. Your choice of phrasing....replete with innuendo
I approve
Post #13 in the new and improved Sky Fighter forum. Clone mechanics enchancements Deep Space Probe Revival |
Andrew Jester
Jester's Hole
93
|
Posted - 2014.03.13 23:57:00 -
[14] - Quote
Do people just come up with this **** when they're drunk and think, "oh hey, wormholers will love this ****! I've never posted in this forum before because I obviously don't know that it's been suggested to death, but they'll ******* love it. And if they don't, they're wrong"? |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1231
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 00:26:00 -
[15] - Quote
Andrew Jester wrote:Do people just come up with this **** when they're drunk and think, "oh hey, wormholers will love this ****! I've never posted in this forum before because I obviously don't know that it's been suggested to death, but they'll ******* love it. And if they don't, they're wrong"?
Yes. It doesn't matter what you've accomplished, what you know, or anything. Nothing matters except the opinion of the guy that disagrees with you... I mean fact, not opinion. It's his fact, and yours is just a biased opinion and you were born wrong. Sorry, Andrew, it's a shame that you can't be right. It's a shame that I can't be right. I'm wrong, and you are wrong, but the other guy is correct because he has thought this idea through, and through his limited knowledgebase and ignorance finds ZERO flaw in this, his brilliant idea.
Wormholes are already generatable, OP. Although your commitment to your idea could be admired, the fact is that wormhole generators already exist. They are hardwired into the code and all you have to do is roll the hole to generate another. It's a perfect mechanic and with the exception of the occasional wobble, works splendidly.
Thanks for sharing though. CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
Bane Nucleus
Sky Fighters
1197
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 00:35:00 -
[16] - Quote
Bane Nucleus wrote:While I like the idea of more wormholes, I don't think a player influenced approach is the way to go. Maybe CCP can allow the wormhole environment to produce more random connections to random wormholes. This would still allow more options as far as where to go, while still leaving the randomness of wormholes intact.
This guy has it right No trolling please |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1231
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 00:39:00 -
[17] - Quote
Bane Nucleus wrote:Bane Nucleus wrote:While I like the idea of more wormholes, I don't think a player influenced approach is the way to go. Maybe CCP can allow the wormhole environment to produce more random connections to random wormholes. This would still allow more options as far as where to go, while still leaving the randomness of wormholes intact. This guy has it right
It's called wandering wormholes, champ.
And... agreed. CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
Haseo Antares
Corollary Forest Fairytail.
74
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 01:27:00 -
[18] - Quote
No.
I would however like to see a deployable structure that generates a pseudo WH and signature. It should look and act like a WH until someone attempts to activate it. Upon activation it will nuet, web, smartbomb, even ransom and trash talk its target (in local) until either it is destroyed or the target is dead or out of range.
No need to thank me, I have terrible ideas on a regular basis. I just had an uncontrollable urge to share that one. We currently have the world's greatest linguists and scientists trying to decode whatn++ you just said. |
krazyskillz
Danneskjold Shipping Chained Reactions
3
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 03:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
Haseo Antares wrote:No.
I would however like to see a deployable structure that generates a pseudo WH and signature. It should look and act like a WH until someone attempts to activate it. Upon activation it will nuet, web, smartbomb, even ransom and trash talk its target (in local) until either it is destroyed or the target is dead or out of range.
No need to thank me, I have terrible ideas on a regular basis. I just had an uncontrollable urge to share that one.
^This is what WH space REALLY needs
|
LtauSTinpoWErs
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
26
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 04:32:00 -
[20] - Quote
I think what EVE really needs is a new ship called Icicle. It would go around selling ice cream to little kids around the solar systems.
It would be a specialized ship designed by the Prompt Delivery Corporation because lets be real, ice cream needs to be delivered yesterday.
Ship: Icicle Hull: Bantam (in faded light blue with ice cream images on the side)
Caldari Frigate bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to cargo capacity amount 5% bonus to ship agility
Role Bonus: Can fit Festival Launchers and use them without the need of firework ammo
Structure Hitpoints: 310 HP Cargo Capacity: 400 m3 Drone Capacity: 10 m3 Drone Bandwidth: 10 Mbit/sec Mass: 1,480,000 kg Volume: 20,000.0 m3 (2,500.0 m3 Packaged) Inertia Modifier: 4.1 x Armor Hitpoints: 260 HP Shield Capacity: 670 HP Shield recharge time: 550.00 s Capacitor Capacity: 450 GJ Recharge time: 200.00s Maximum Targeting Range: 20.00 km Max Locked Targets: 15 Signature Radius: 30 m Gravimetric Sensor Strength: 14 points Max Velocity: 320 m/s Ship Warp Speed 5.25 AU/s |
|
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox
332
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 04:51:00 -
[21] - Quote
Collapsing one's own static can be a great way to shift the chain around a little. And if your static leads to a system with a nice static of its own but it happens to have been a poor roll? Then roll your static's static (and so on and so forth) for extra edginess points. If anyone stops you along the way then you've got fun pew on your hands, either way it's a win/win.
I'm not even attempting to troll. A 100MN prop mod can be a great wormhole generator with some quick math and teamwork! I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.
Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever |
Adoris Nolen
Sama Guild
45
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 05:59:00 -
[22] - Quote
Squelch wrote: (Unless you live in a C4/C4 it is impossible to have a dead end chain
C4 chain will always lead to k space via static or k162. Might be 10 deep but it always does unless choke point is collapsed. |
Quinn Corvez
Probe Patrol Awakened.
220
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 07:54:00 -
[23] - Quote
Bane Nucleus wrote:While I like the idea of more wormholes, I don't think a player influenced approach is the way to go. Maybe CCP can allow the wormhole environment to produce more random connections to random wormholes. This would still allow more options as far as where to go, while still leaving the randomness of wormholes intact.
I disagree. IMO player created content is better than random mechanics. |
Zlorthishen
Blue-Fire
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 07:54:00 -
[24] - Quote
Only BOB is able to open His Holey wormholes, and only He decides where they open to.
Your suggestion borders on blasphemy. Blue-Fire : Best Fire |
Glyndi
Doom Generation THE H0NEYBADGER
169
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 08:39:00 -
[25] - Quote
Quinn Corvez wrote:Bane Nucleus wrote:While I like the idea of more wormholes, I don't think a player influenced approach is the way to go. Maybe CCP can allow the wormhole environment to produce more random connections to random wormholes. This would still allow more options as far as where to go, while still leaving the randomness of wormholes intact. I disagree. IMO player created content is better than random mechanics.
Players create content using those random mechanics, them being random adds to the excitement of logging in everyday. Opening and closing WH's via module on demand is a terrible idea. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1411
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 08:53:00 -
[26] - Quote
Glyndi wrote:Quinn Corvez wrote:Bane Nucleus wrote:While I like the idea of more wormholes, I don't think a player influenced approach is the way to go. Maybe CCP can allow the wormhole environment to produce more random connections to random wormholes. This would still allow more options as far as where to go, while still leaving the randomness of wormholes intact. I disagree. IMO player created content is better than random mechanics. Players create content using those random mechanics, them being random adds to the excitement of logging in everyday. Opening and closing WH's via module on demand is a terrible idea.
Isn't that essentially what we do when we collapse wormholes with mass?
+1 |
Glyndi
Doom Generation THE H0NEYBADGER
169
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:16:00 -
[27] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: Isn't that essentially what we do when we collapse wormholes with mass?
If you had a module that created a wormhole, the connection would still be random. All it would be doing is replicating the process of chain rolling in a way that is accessible to everyone.
Increasing the spawn rate of wondering wormholes would affect everyone in wormhole space, so much so that is could drive some people out.
How would increasing a random spawn be more harmful then a bunch of players opening WHs at their will which isn't random at all? Rolling the static already function in this way, why have a module that does the exact same thing.
In theory you could have one group rolling the static and another in the same hole opening up WHs with a module. Sounds like this would affect way more people because it's not random at all. |
Jay Joringer
Serene Vendetta
366
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:29:00 -
[28] - Quote
Brilliant idea. You should also be able to load a script so that it can stabilise wormholes.
No?
I'll get my coat.
Always bet on stupid
http://smug-bastard.blogspot.co.uk
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1411
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:32:00 -
[29] - Quote
Glyndi wrote:Rek Seven wrote: Isn't that essentially what we do when we collapse wormholes with mass?
If you had a module that created a wormhole, the connection would still be random. All it would be doing is replicating the process of chain rolling in a way that is accessible to everyone.
Increasing the spawn rate of wondering wormholes would affect everyone in wormhole space, so much so that is could drive some people out.
How would increasing a random spawn be more harmful then a bunch of players opening WHs at their will which isn't random at all? Rolling the static already function in this way, why have a module that does the exact same thing. In theory you could have one group rolling the static and another in the same hole opening up WHs with a module. Sounds like this would affect way more people because it's not random at all.
I guess it wouldn't be anymore harmful really.
Whether you roll a wormhole or use a module to create one, you would still be randomly connecting to another system.
Increasing wandering wormholes would be a pretty boring change IMO. If CCP introduce a wormhole generator, they would achieve the same goal but we would also have a new structure to attack and fight over and people would stop asking for duel static to be added to c4-c6 wormholes. +1 |
Lenroc Elisav
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
8
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:35:00 -
[30] - Quote
Damn some of your are the most entrenched SOBs I've seen. How about this twist to his idea:
New structure: "Mobile worm-hole sparkler"
Description: Mobile structures that allows the capsuleers to initiate the form-up of a new random worm-hole with-in the system. The worm-hole will have all the attributes and characteristics of a natural formed worm-hole (meaning for the slow ones out there that if it spawns a C5->C6 it will have the mass restrictions and life duration as a C5->C6 natural WH).
Attributes: -Needs anchoring level one -Has a 15 minutes anchoring time -Needs fuel in the form of strontium -Only one such structure allowed per star system -Cool down period 24 hours (after activation) after cool down it needs refueling. -During cool down the structure is invulnerable (again for the slow kittens you can't destroy it and deploy another fresh one) -Volume 500 m3
Why? For fun.
P.S. This was posted as a pure exercise and I don't care for it one way or the other and no, I didn't dug through a pile of muddy forum posts to see if this "gem" was proposed before. I'm wearing my hazmat suit so your **** flinging is pointless . |
|
Foedus Latro
Doom Generation THE H0NEYBADGER
2
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:50:00 -
[31] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: I guess it wouldn't be anymore harmful really.
Whether you roll a wormhole or use a module to create one, you would still be randomly connecting to another system.
Increasing wandering wormholes would be a pretty boring change IMO. If CCP introduce a wormhole generator, they would achieve the same goal but we would also have a new structure to attack and fight over and people would stop asking for duel static to be added to c4-c6 wormholes.
What's the purpose of this module that rolling your static doesn't accomplish? Using a module to create a wormhole would be a lazy way of scanning down your chain to get a direct to your hole. And what if you have a dead or undesirable chain? Roll your hole. There's no need to generate new holes with a module when you have a perfectly fine static - which you chose by living in that hole - to use. ~Feel free to call me Bandit ------ Eve Content Creator Extrodinaire~
Twitter: @Eve_FoedusLatro Killboard: http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=1623372 |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1411
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:56:00 -
[32] - Quote
Try reading the third paragraph. I sneakily hid the answer to your question way down there. +1 |
Foedus Latro
Doom Generation THE H0NEYBADGER
3
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 09:59:00 -
[33] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:Try reading the third paragraph. I sneakily hid the answer to your question way down there.
What's the reason to fight over the proposed deployable though? If there's no ISK or incentive in this game, players won't care. What do I care that some other corp has a wormhole generator in their hole? ~Feel free to call me Bandit ------ Eve Content Creator Extrodinaire~
Twitter: @Eve_FoedusLatro Killboard: http://eve-kill.net/?a=pilot_detail&plt_id=1623372 |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1411
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 10:11:00 -
[34] - Quote
I'm thinking more along the lines of the wormhole generator i described on the first page. That structure would drop sleeper loot and if someone was threatening to take away your ability to create a second static, most people would fight over that. +1 |
Cheesy Feet
Anomalous Existence
67
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 11:51:00 -
[35] - Quote
Yes sir, intelligent debate on wormhole generators you want? This has been ongoing for months just over there through the door marked exit -> once outside please turn right and use the other door marked Google, have a nice day! |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2058
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 12:20:00 -
[36] - Quote
Adoris Nolen wrote:Squelch wrote: (Unless you live in a C4/C4 it is impossible to have a dead end chain C4 chain will always lead to k space via static or k162. Might be 10 deep but it always does unless choke point is collapsed.
False |
The Cue
Applied Agoraphobia
11
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 12:52:00 -
[37] - Quote
Adoris Nolen wrote:Squelch wrote: (Unless you live in a C4/C4 it is impossible to have a dead end chain C4 chain will always lead to k space via static or k162. Might be 10 deep but it always does unless choke point is collapsed. It's possible to have a C4 loop in which case you have no way out. Since C4 space doesn't have any dynamic wormholes, it's more likely to encounter this loop as opposed to C5 or C6 space.
Rek Seven wrote:Increasing wandering wormholes would be a pretty boring change IMO. If CCP introduce a wormhole generator, they would achieve the same goal but we would also have a new structure to attack and fight over and people would stop asking for duel static to be added to c4-c6 wormholes.
Increasing dynamic connections would increase the number of connections without removing the probing structure of play that is required by WH space. |
Adoris Nolen
Sama Guild
45
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 13:22:00 -
[38] - Quote
Dunno what C4 space you guys play in but there's always a way out from C4 space via statics. The only time that ends if some1 down the chain collapses a static.
So if you have a C4 - c4-c6-c6-c4 chain of ridiculousness that doesn't lead to kspace at all. One of the wh's in the chain will either get a roaming pop up, like c2-c4/hs or c2 -c6/ns. If you roll any of the wormholes in the chain, the next system will definately route to kspace. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1414
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 13:22:00 -
[39] - Quote
The Cue wrote:Rek Seven wrote:Increasing wandering wormholes would be a pretty boring change IMO. If CCP introduce a wormhole generator, they would achieve the same goal but we would also have a new structure to attack and fight over and people would stop asking for duel static to be added to c4-c6 wormholes. Increasing dynamic connections would increase the number of connections without removing the probing structure of play that is required by WH space.
True but a wormhole generator would not decrease the need to probe either, (combat scan) plus it would introduce the other features that i listed.
I don't think CCP should change the current mechanics (apart from black holes), instead i would like them to give players the tools to augment the game/mechanics to achieve the goals we are talking about. +1 |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1232
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 13:48:00 -
[40] - Quote
Adoris Nolen wrote:Dunno what C4 space you guys play in but there's always a way out from C4 space via statics. The only time that ends if some1 down the chain collapses a static.
So if you have a C4 - c4-c6-c6-c4 chain of ridiculousness that doesn't lead to kspace at all. One of the wh's in the chain will either get a roaming pop up, like c2-c4/hs or c2 -c6/ns. If you roll any of the wormholes in the chain, the next system will definately route to kspace.
I lived in a C4-C4 back in the day, and "back in my day", we did encounter loops. Infact there are even threads about these loops if you feel compelled to hunt them down. The argument that C4's don't always lead to known space and can "dead end" is true, however it seems you are refering to the chance of someone else opening into a loop, which can also happen. CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
|
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2059
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 14:17:00 -
[41] - Quote
Adoris Nolen wrote:Dunno what C4 space you guys play in but there's always a way out from C4 space via statics. The only time that ends if some1 down the chain collapses a static.
So if you have a C4 - c4-c6-c6-c4 chain of ridiculousness that doesn't lead to kspace at all. One of the wh's in the chain will either get a roaming pop up, like c2-c4/hs or c2 -c6/ns. If you roll any of the wormholes in the chain, the next system will definately route to kspace.
I have had on multiple occasions where we had Homesystem--C4/C4---C4/C4---Homesystem
Essentially a closed loop with no way out. And no k162's spawned during that time.
Using the term "always" along with "random k162" doesn't really work. The only way to say "always' would imply relying only on statics. |
Talaq
Anomalous Existence
16
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 16:05:00 -
[42] - Quote
only deploy able i would perhaps want to see would be a :
wormhole effect diffuser
A POS sized generator anchorable only at the sun. with a anchor time of a large. and stront bay for a proper rio timer.
effects in a wh with effect, it will dampen the current effect to a generic system. in a generic system you can give the wh a specific effect like a magentar/pulsar (different charges for effects), only at 50% strength of a real effect.
It will Broadcast and system conversion timer of 24 hrs before going online.
use the code of the one time usable ever in a wh, claim units and make them your new conflict driver, also take away the home field advantage of the residents. or give those pesky people in armor t3's a new pulsar to live in.
Or will make your expo system more interesting, and putting new life into some systems like black holes.
fuel for the generator will last 4 days and it will have a 4 day cd before it can restarted.
it would be at least a good conflict driver, it will **** the residents off way more than shooting poco's, it would also something specific for the wh crowd.
to powerful and tool for grief? perhaps but it would bring some new stuff into a hole (also you can make 3 versions for it) c1/2 fits in hauler, c3/4 in orca, c5/6 freighter sized.
It will also **** off sleepers to no end, forcing the deploying party, to attend to it. perhaps bring in the sleeper incursions (sleeper dreads in c5'/6s bs in lower) give them lower loot tables to prevent farming, then again its a farming fleet at the sun..
This ofc won't happen and probably be flamed down to the ground, still i think it would be a nice addition to w-space and actually cater to pve and pvp.
AE Diplomat
|
Nightingale Actault
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 16:23:00 -
[43] - Quote
Haseo Antares wrote:No.
I would however like to see a deployable structure that generates a pseudo WH and signature. It should look and act like a WH until someone attempts to activate it. Upon activation it will nuet, web, smartbomb, even ransom and trash talk its target (in local) until either it is destroyed or the target is dead or out of range.
No need to thank me, I have terrible ideas on a regular basis. I just had an uncontrollable urge to share that one.
Out of all the deployable ideas, I believe that although you may have done this in jest it probably has the most merits.
A deployable that does in fact create a new wormhole signature could have interesting implications. It would need to not show on dscan to prevent it being easily identifiable as such. Likely it would appear as a K162 wormhole to anyone cloaked on grid with it and only show it's true deployable nature once someone was uncloaked on grid with it. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1233
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 16:43:00 -
[44] - Quote
Talaq wrote:only deploy able i would perhaps want to see would be a :
wormhole effect diffuser
My imagination with this idea ran a bit wild, but with something like this, you could call it a "mobile star emulator".
As you stated it could be used in a vanilla hole to generate a particular star type's effects. Since this device is synthetic, it will surely be reduced effect, as you suggest by half...
It could be used by residents to effect their homes, torn down by visitors/invaders weakening the residents, and the invaders would even have the ability to turn the tide, or vice versa depending on how the engagement was going. It would need some sort of timer, so it isn't simply destroyed during someone's offtime, and would by scriptable, or "programmed" to emulate a particular star, and for systems that have effects, it could have a particular script that would create a "third star", dampening the effects of the existing stars in system.
I don't even care if the science is wrong, but this sounds like fun. CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
Quinn Corvez
Probe Patrol Awakened.
221
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 16:55:00 -
[45] - Quote
I believe that was my idea but I'll allow it |
Nightingale Actault
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 16:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
Changing existing system effects defeats the purpose of having systems with effects. |
Proclus Diadochu
Obstergo Red Coat Conspiracy
1233
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 17:50:00 -
[47] - Quote
Nightingale Actault wrote:Changing existing system effects defeats the purpose of having systems with effects.
And technology has never changed nature... CSM9 Candidate | Twitter: @autoritare | Gmail: [email protected] Campaign Thread: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=325889 Wormhole Discussion: http://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326273 |
Talaq
Anomalous Existence
18
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 17:53:00 -
[48] - Quote
Nightingale Actault wrote:Changing existing system effects defeats the purpose of having systems with effects.
that's the point, unlike a wh generator, or shooting a poco it is something that does really affect you, either good or bad, and does make you do something, but it shouldn't be as overpowered that it will be just a tool for grievers.
at least i think it will be beneficial for using the less used Blackholes. and with the negative effects it should not fully counter the wh-effect just dampen it to level the playing field.
AE Diplomat
|
Nightingale Actault
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
13
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 18:11:00 -
[49] - Quote
People choose to live in systems with effects often specifically for that effect. Introducing something that nullifies their reason for living in that system means that some will simply choose to live in a no effect system instead. I believe Bane said it best, if you are fighting in a system with a different effect than your doctrine, then bring a different doctrine (ie armor for wolfs and shield for pulsars).
If the sole use is to counter the effects of black holes, then why not just continue with the existing mission of changing the effects of black hole systems? |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1414
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 18:41:00 -
[50] - Quote
Nightingale Actault wrote:People choose to live in systems with effects often specifically for that effect. Introducing something that nullifies their reason for living in that system means that some will simply choose to live in a no effect system instead. I believe Bane said it best, if you are fighting in a system with a different effect than your doctrine, then bring a different doctrine (ie armor for wolfs and shield for pulsars).
So what if people choose to live in a system with no effect?
TBH i think your assessment is wrong. People will still pick a system with an effect because of the benefits it offers but the introduction of a module like this means that invaders would be able the temporarily take away the home advantage.
Yeah people could reship to suit the effect but few corps will have the right ship doctrine ready. +1 |
|
Rall Mekin
End-of-Line
279
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 19:07:00 -
[51] - Quote
Mobile Capital Fleet Simulator-- Feeling bored? Thirsty for kill mails? WELL MY FRIENDS HAVE I GOT A GADGET FOR YOU!
Get your daily lulz and kill mail sets quickly and simply with this handy-dandy module. Simply load it into your friendly zefyr and anchor in ANY C5 OR ABOVE ESCALATABLE SLEEPER SITE!
2 NPC lokis, an archon, and a random dreadnought will appear and begin to run the sites--and 10 minutes later, another dread will appear, followed by a niddy 2 minutes later. Sites will FULLY escalate, and ganking the capital ships will yield legit kill mails. All drops will be officer mods.
Module build cost is estimated at 500,000 isk. Join End-of-Line, -EOL, today, and kill your CEO! (Terms and conditions apply.)
http://imgur.com/yEQqAeb |
Nightingale Actault
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 19:07:00 -
[52] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote: few corps will have the right ship doctrine ready.
This is the point I and others are trying to make. Stop just flying armor, get a shield doctrine set up if you plan on sieging a pulsar.
Look at it another way, what makes wormholes unique? System effects!! You don't find them anywhere else in EVE, why take what makes wormholes unique out of the equation? |
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
3688
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 19:37:00 -
[53] - Quote
I like the basic premise your idea, but think it needs some limitations:
1.) The mass limitations need to be adhered, so you can't get capitals into a C1, or other silly possibilities. Realistically, you don't need 3 types of scripts, you just need one script to designate the type of WH (example: A641 for creating a WH to Highsec).
2.) It would be really interesting if this structure resulted in a designated grid for the WH to appear. For example, allowing someone to generate a WH on grid with a POS or a stargate or station. However, this would need some limitations if this happens. Possible limitations may include a minimum distance from other structures. That, or perhaps have the exit be a designation other than K162.
3.) It should not be a "I want a WH now" device. In my opinion, it should take some time to activate before it actually spawns a WH. Example, give it a 1 hour "onlining" time before the new WH pops open in system.
4.) I agree there needs to be a limit on how many can be used. I'd recommend one per constellation (in Kspace), not just one per system.
5.) I like the idea of the "scripts" getting consumed with each use. I'd recommend that the script varies in cost significantly.
6.) I would also recommend a means of easily identifying if one of these are activated in a system. Perhaps with a system wide beacon on it allowing anyone to notice it, and perhaps even instantly warp to it.
7.) What happens to the WH when someone destroys one of these? I'd recommend these things enter an RF "mode" when attacked to the point of destruction. While in RF, their generating WH remains up and open until its mass or time limit expires. Then the module itself detonates as its WH collapses.
|
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1414
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 19:55:00 -
[54] - Quote
Nightingale Actault wrote:Rek Seven wrote: few corps will have the right ship doctrine ready. This is the point I and others are trying to make. Stop just flying armor, get a shield doctrine set up if you plan on sieging a pulsar. Look at it another way, what makes wormholes unique? System effects!! You don't find them anywhere else in EVE, why take what makes wormholes unique out of the equation?
If we are talking about siegeing then yeah, you are obviously going to bring the right tool for the job but we are talking about day to day activities. It's a fact that some people will choose to roll a hole instead of fighting under an effect that they are not set up for,(or have the people for) and you asking nicely wont change that.
If you want the effect to remain unchanged, then you would have to ensure that the new structure was not anchored in your system.
Look at it from another perspective. The structure could allow smaller groups to combat unbreakable RR setups in cataclysmic wormmholes, which may help stop the need for corps to grow bigger...
Anyway, we appear to have gone off topic. o/ +1 |
Nightingale Actault
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 20:06:00 -
[55] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:If you want the effect to remain unchanged, then you would have to ensure that the new structure was not anchored in your system.
Look at it from another perspective. The structure could allow smaller groups to combat unbreakable RR setups in cataclysmic wormmholes, which may help stop the need for corps to grow bigger...
We're talking about deployables so I believe this remains perfectly within topic :)
In your situation, you're talking about a group fielding an unbreakable RR setup in a cataclysmic, and I assume you are the smaller group who would like to fight this setup. So you're saying that as the smaller group, you are going to take a force into their wormhole, setup this negation device, and guard it through its activation against this other group?
I just don't see it playing out like that. In that situation your force would likely be wiped out before the device could ever activate, and knowing this your smaller group would never choose to go into that engagement.
However, what I do see it being used for, is a much larger group going into a wormhole against a smaller entity who's only hope of survival is clever use of their system effect and using it to negate any chance this smaller entity would have at making it out with their ships. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1415
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 20:16:00 -
[56] - Quote
Nightingale Actault wrote: I just don't see it playing out like that. In that situation your force would likely be wiped out before the device could ever activate, and knowing this your smaller group would never choose to go into that engagement.
You just reaffirmed my point... right?
In a stalemate, this device could tip the scale. The alternative being, you go home and plan your upcoming recruitment drive for bhaalgorn pilots. +1 |
Nightingale Actault
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 20:25:00 -
[57] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:You just reaffirmed my point... right?
I understand your desire to fight. I also understand that I will weigh a situation, and in the case of the unbreakable RR will simply choose not to lead the isk of my corpmates to death. Will I recruit just so that I can break that groups RR, no? I enjoy small gang and will engage when appropriate. |
Rek Seven
Probe Patrol Awakened.
1415
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 20:32:00 -
[58] - Quote
Cool, so we are agreed. The ability to disrupt the effect of a system would encourage you to fight in this hypothetical situation. +1 |
Nightingale Actault
The Night Crew The Night Crew Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 20:51:00 -
[59] - Quote
I would attempt something different within the confines of existing game mechanics if fighting was the only thing motivating me. For instance diverting them to a different area of the system and attempting to catch one of their group before warp. Or I would consider attempting to drag the group into a different system. I would not try to negate their system effect, even with a module to do so. |
Glyndi
Doom Generation THE H0NEYBADGER
174
|
Posted - 2014.03.14 23:26:00 -
[60] - Quote
Instead of adding something that would only apply to WSpace, why not something that is universal all across EVE?
It's been discussed before, most recently during the WH interview with Fozzie, but why not add a new/repurpose a hacking module for POSs? Its already something most of us agree with and has potential to make people a lot of money.
Not only could we clean up all the offlined faction towers of WSpace, but null sec as well. LOL, imagine someone finding you and your buddies ransacking their moon coverage of 50 small POSs!
This would be much more useful imo. It would cause a lot of conflict as well. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |