|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
Situation: Normal
2296
   |
Posted - 2014.08.06 20:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
Sanuki Sukuuvestaa wrote:As one of the few groups thats actually lived in a C4 for over a year now,
Wow now I feel old.
We are coming up on our second year in C4 space. We are isolated in a C4/C4, not because we are against PVP, but mostly because we wanted to truly feel like we were living out on the ragged edge. I've lived in other WH's and it felt largely pointless in a C2/C3/HS with an easy way back to k-space every day.
At the same time we are a small corp of old farts with busy lives, so we don't have the numbers to hold our own in the cap heavy C5+ world. C4's have given us the right mix of living deep in unknown space, risk, but without worrying that every time I go on a family vacation I'm gonna get a text that we are getting evicted.
That being said I'm not opposed to a second static idea. I would have the same concerns that any C4 dweller has. Which would probably be the same as anyone in say a C1 or C3 finding out they are getting a second static. Mainly hoping whatever second static we get doesn't totally suck and make us want to move out.
On the other hand, our slim PVP pickings have become even more so in recent months. So if a second static can help revialize that I would be happy.
That being said I feel similar to this idea as all the rest. Part of it i like, part of it not so much. But EVE has always been about a changing landscape and we will adjust and adapt.
If I were to make a decision now, personally I would hold off on this change. Not saying don't do it. But first I'd just be happy with C4's getting more random wormholes. Well ANY outgoing random wormholes. If there is going to be an increased number I think that having C4's get them could be enough to revitalize them without totally changing the landscape. If not then the dual static could still be implemented down the road. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
Situation: Normal
2297
|
Posted - 2014.08.12 02:09:00 -
[2] - Quote
Amgurr Alabel wrote:Our C4/C3 got a C4 static. Not going to complain about that but I still feel that this whole thing was rolled out poorly.
I would tend to agree. And not just this change. It feels like they tried to ninja these changes in and then backpedal when it was found out early. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
Situation: Normal
2301
|
Posted - 2014.08.14 17:33:00 -
[3] - Quote
Pavel Sohaj wrote:Just checked, if my current WH has new C5 static ill get stuck with C5 for all time?
At least you didn't get a brand new C6 static. |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
Situation: Normal
2301
|
Posted - 2014.08.15 17:45:00 -
[4] - Quote
Aureline Dwyrr wrote:Hello, my question for CCP.
Have you a wormhole list of with changes and new static ?
It is very important for us.
Thank you
Load Sisi, Scan, question answered |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
Situation: Normal
2301
|
Posted - 2014.08.20 16:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
So there are far more posts than I can go through so I apologize if this has already been answered.
Aside from the other unique things about C4's having only one static and no random spawns, their connections were only 16 hours vs 24.
With all of these changes, are they also getting changed to 24 hour WH's or are they staying at 16 hours? |
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings
Situation: Normal
2301
|
Posted - 2014.08.21 14:23:00 -
[6] - Quote
calaretu wrote:Derath Ellecon wrote:So there are far more posts than I can go through so I apologize if this has already been answered.
Aside from the other unique things about C4's having only one static and no random spawns, their connections were only 16 hours vs 24.
With all of these changes, are they also getting changed to 24 hour WH's or are they staying at 16 hours? The second static have the same id and attributes as the already existing statics. P060, N477, H900 etc
I am aware of that. What I was curious about is if I had missed any discussion of those WH's getting changed in the future to be 24 hour instead of 16 hour.
I'm guessing no, but there were a lot of posts so it could have easily been missed |
|
|
| |
|