EVE Search - Sticky:Reserved #4

All Channels

Wormholes

Sticky:Reserved #4

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 18 post(s)
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.25 11:24:00 - [1] - Quote This and the other changes look great to me and have in fact made me re-subcribe, even though I may not actually have much time to play for RL reasons. This change in particular seems to be the change to kick farmers out of w-space. Closing of holes just to be safe is more work now and involves a little risk. Lazy farmers will either give up and leave or just leave their holes open and hope for the best. Ragerolling shouldn't be too badly affected because the groups doing it can easily field caps + webbers to make a short warp and then warp back to the hole GÇô of course also adding some risk in the process which is good. And larger standoffs at holes should be less boring now, things might actually happen. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.25 14:01:00 - [2] - Quote Ragerolling was always just a poor substitute for actual decent gameplay. It came into fashion only because it ended up being the only way to catch cautious farmers at all, by opening a new connection into their system. After the changes, I expect w-space residents will gradually become used to a) less frequent attacks from rage-rolling groups and b) having open holes in their system most of the time (even if it's just the new frigate-sized, un-closable holes). People will be forced to accept some degree of risk and uncertainty. The result should/could be that w-space becomes less about closing any hole you don't like (which includes the static of pvp-seeking groups) and more about a web of systems that are and remain connected and where you stay alive by being vigilant and actual scouting, not by cutting connections. When you have open connections which you cannot close effectively or at all, and it's like that every day, you either learn to accept that and take more risk or you give up and leave. Sure, you will lose more ships, but you also have a greater chance to catch others while hunting. I perceive this as an attempt to change people's mindset regarding risk, or to lure more of the people with the right attitude into w-space. And I think it might well work. We will see. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.26 10:03:00 - [3] - Quote After thinking a bit more about it, I think this change is intentionally made to effectively kill rage-rolling. Sure, many people will still do it, but less often, and not so long because it's more tedious, and a lot of people will probably completely give up on it. So, assuming this is correct, why do they do it? My guess: To break up the big groups in w-space (those with ~30+ players). Which, incidentally, are the groups who provide 90% of the complaints here. The bigger groups are those who do almost all of the rage-rolling. What if this activity becomes unfeasible? There will be a chronic lack of content for those 30 or 50 or 100 people crammed into the same hole. They will get terribly, terribly bored. What happens then? Corps will break apart, shrink, failscade because of inner tensions (that is, even more than normal). But is that bad? People have to go somewhere. Sure, some will quit. But not so many, and only those who had become too inert and crusty anyway to do anything new. That type of player who still logs in for a pvp ping but logs shortly after the fight and hasn't scanned a single wormhole himself in over a year. Every old wh corp is full of them. No, most players will move somewhere else in EVE. Those for whom it was all about being part of an impressive, famous big group will go (back) to Null. But many who are really into w-space will regroup in smaller entities. And because so many people do that GÇô are forced to do it GÇô it might once again be possible to find true small-gang pvp in our space. More, smaller groups scattered around means also less need for rage-rolling to get content. Well, at least that is how I make sense of it. And I think it might well work out. Next on the designer's list: Make escalation farming with maximum-efficient skeleton crews unfeasible (e.g. add more work so using alts does not work so well) and limit/eliminate site regeneration to disrupt isk generation for big groups. If rage-rolling for pvp content becomes too tedious, and rolling for new pve sites too, and income from a single system supports only a few players, then the big groups are starved to death and will break up into smaller groups, thus finally reversing the long-time trend that has been choking w-space to a slow death. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.26 10:58:00 - [4] - Quote Yeah, I more or less reconsidered on what you quoted there, see my newer post above yours. The impact on rage-rolling and the people who do that as their primary activity is probably greater than I initially thought. But as I also said, rage-rolling is terrible and in any case something 3-5 people actively do while the rest are either just bored or happy to let their buddies work while they're just waiting to get content spoon-fed to them. We had this for a couple years, it was sometimes fun, but let's move on and leave it behind now. I'm honestly surprised that so many people shed tears for rage-rolling, something I was sure nobody really enjoys. I guess people are mostly afraid that there will be nothing else to do, but as I pointed out, maybe there will be. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.26 11:16:00 - [5] - Quote Van Steiza wrote: We dislike ragerolling but it is a necessity to find new chains and as anyone will agree when scanning chains pretty often you will find dead chains with no k space and no targets. Because everyone else does the same and almost all pvp-oriented players are concentrated in a small number of large entities. That means that there is only a relatively small number of systems with pvp-potential and, since everyone closes their chain all the time, only short time-windows to connect to one of those. If the larger groups were broken up, and pvp-oriented players scattered over more systems, and chains stayed connected longer and with more connections in general (because of more random holes), then the need to rage-roll for finding content may simply not be there anymore. Now you usually roll until you connect to a single other group you hope to get a fight from. Sometimes by chance a third party joins in. But that's it. You get a fight, or not, then the hole is closed and everyone starts a new chain. But what if the chains became much more interconnected because of less closing and generally more holes, and not two or three big, but instead five or seven or ten smaller groups were connected to each other and shared one complex chain for a whole day? To me that sounds like much more fun, potentially. And further down the road, when people who are now just farmers, notice that they meet actual small gangs more often and not every proteus they see is just the bait of a 30+ army, then the pool of players who are willing to fight might even grow. (Although I'm under no illusion that w-space is full of people who will never fight, no matter what.) .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.26 11:37:00 - [6] - Quote But do you really feel that this method of invading someone is fun? Something that should be preserved for the good of the game? People do it because they have to and because it works, like people shoot sov strucutres in null wars because they have to GÇô but does anyone like it? EVE history tells us that players will always do what it takes, even if they curse CCP every second of it for making it so boring. That said, certainly the imbalance of unlimited capitals for the defenders vs. unlimited tedium for the attackers needs to be addressed, with this change now even more than before. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.26 12:50:00 - [7] - Quote epicurus ataraxia wrote: Well that's it. It went live in spite of the near total agreement that this was a destructive change, was wanted by nobody (in wormholes) and it was universally despised. Well Fozzie, super excited, is not what we feel, nor will we just forget it and suck it up. I want it and I'm excited, and people who constantly speak of "we" when spouting their personal opinion, are pathetic :) .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.26 14:22:00 - [8] - Quote His post wasn't edited, he quoted a faked/edited Fozzie post. Lol. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 641	Posted - 2014.08.26 21:21:00 - [9] - Quote Like the change so far, jumping with my T3 has gotten more convenient, no more spawning <2km from wh :) .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 643	Posted - 2014.08.27 07:56:00 - [10] - Quote I like this change and so do most likely more than 5% of all wormholers. XGADuke wrote: This is all fine and well, however lets say the wormhole is empty, the residents are offline or not interested. We just need to roll again right? Spotted your mistake there. With the vast number of holes now everywhere, there are so many connections in virtually every chain that you have a higher chance to find an active system by simply scanning and scouting than by rolling your static. And, very importantly, the new way scales much better with corp size: Only a few people can actively roll, but a lot of people can spread out and explore a chain. Ok, so you didn't find anything. Finding active systems has been hard for a long time now. But this change didn't make it harder. The new level of interconnectedness, combined with how fast and easy scanning is nowadays, makes rolling basically obsolete. All the crybabies here are just either too stuck in their old crusty ways or their real concern is that their safe farming is now also obsolete. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 643	Posted - 2014.08.27 08:42:00 - [11] - Quote But that is exactly the problem: 50+ people herding together for safety. Made possible by the large income provided by regenerating cap escalations and easily rolled statics. Many wormholers have bemoaned this concentration of players in ever-larger corps for a long time. Maybe now is finally the time to downsize again and become more mobile. As someone in the smallest corp possible (currently solo), I don't feel the new environment threatens me. Sure, solo bearing is very dangerous now, but I don't expect I should be allowed to solo-bear in peace in an environment that is supposed to be the most dangerous in EVE. CCP let me farm C4s in absolute safety for way too long already and I won't miss it. For solo hunting the changes are not negative; and if corps become smaller and more numerous again in the future, I very much expect it will be good for my playstyle in the longer term. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 644	Posted - 2014.08.27 14:13:00 - [12] - Quote Talking to old corpmates (including the CEO) from a relatively big c5 pvp/pve wh corp, I'm relieved to see that most people are actually quite unconcerned about this change and w-space is not in the state of hysterical anger and grieving despair this thread makes it look to be .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 644	Posted - 2014.08.27 14:24:00 - [13] - Quote Rroff wrote: From those I've talked to there are quite a few unconcerned about it, there are quite a few who think its a bad idea to vary degrees and I've yet to find anyone who is actually for it - other than the fact they like that their scouts and blockade runners are safer than ever. That is not really surprising because the change does not directly benefit any individual in their daily life (except while scouting/hauling). Its sense is clearly strategic and transcending individual players or corporations, and obviously 99% of players don't get that or don't care because they only see their own short-term convenience and disruption of routines established over many years. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 644	Posted - 2014.08.27 14:45:00 - [14] - Quote Rroff wrote: Only as pointed out it largely doesn't address the issue(s) it was supposed to while having a largely negative aspect on day to day activities for the sake of mixing up the dynamic in some fringe cases. If the concerns of "safe" collapsing and frequency of collapsing are really such an issue there are much better ways to address that (technical considerations aside) while there are some potential ways this kind of mechanism could be used to mix up the meta a bit without impacting on the tedious day to day activities. With no reasons officially given, I assume that the intent is to discourage collapsing in general. This assumption is supported by the fact that we got a huge amount of additional connections to compensate. My conclusion is that someone wants us to stop collapsing holes and this someone thinks that it is better to have a more persistent web of connected systems instead of the countless islands of isolation we have now. People are being forced to exert control over space instead of control over connections. I happen to like this thinking. Most people here apparently don't. I think they will change their mind eventually, or be replaced by people who embrace the new environment. But I could be wrong. Or maybe there was no plan at all and Fozzie just hates us, who knows ^^ .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 644	Posted - 2014.08.27 15:17:00 - [15] - Quote Iku Nergal wrote: After the change, we login and notice 4 wormholes connecting to us (almost every single night). We would spend an average of 1-1.5 hours closing wormholes/ensuring security to our Orca's whilst closing to run sites/mine for two hours, then go to bed. Amazing how you can give daily averages and speak of "almost every single night" when exactly one (1) night has elapsed since the change. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 644	Posted - 2014.08.27 15:32:00 - [16] - Quote Iku Nergal wrote: This change was implemented 1 expansion ago (one month ago), and as such, I can give an average of these results. The change involving the mass increase of LS-LS Wormholes also impacted the WH-WH connections we received inside our Wormhole. Hm okay, the patch notes do not show anything related to this prior to Hyperion, but since I was away from the game during that time, I'll take your word for it. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 648	Posted - 2014.08.28 15:20:00 - [17] - Quote Enthropic wrote: what you should consider when making this argument (which is a valid and good argument) is that you cant force people to fight you, unless you gank them by rolling into them. But arguably there are many people who really want to play EVE, and who want to be in wormholes, and they want or need to do PvE to make ISK. Up until now, that was easily possible with zero risk in subcapitals (no siege/triage, usually no sleeper scrams -> by the time someone jumps through that new hole, you are already back in your pos) and with just a little risk (and higher reward) in capitals. There was absolutely no need to do PvE when your system was not 100% secured. I have active neighbors today and can't close? Ok, I'll just do these sites tomorrow when it's 100% safe again. That is why you basically never see anyone doing a site in w-space anymore. By the time you see them, they are already idling in their pos, if you see them at all. More often than not they have already cloaked up to make the system look inactive. Now, when closing all open holes may be impossible or at least uneconomical over the long term, people have the choice to leave or to still try to make ISK under the new conditions, and that means exposing themselves to a risk greater than zero. If even a fraction of current wormhole residents stay and are now forced to do PvE under the new conditions, there will be more (subcap) gank targets than before. Because before you could basically only catch someone who really didn't pay any attention. Another point: I suspect that a significant portion of people who do nothing but bearing could become useful EVE players if they are forced. I noticed in myself that when I was alone in a c4 with constant access to 100% safe bearing, I would do it more than I really wanted because it was risk-free and it seemed wrong to let these sites go to waste. But when I was done with them, I usually didn't have the real life time resources left to do anything else, i.e. scanning for pvp. My hope is that when all those people bearing away solo or with 2-3 guys find it now too dangerous to do so, they will migrate into real corporations. And by that I don't mean 50+ people, more like 5+. And then these people may find out that with just a few friends at your side, you can do fun things instead of bearing. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 651	Posted - 2014.09.04 09:51:00 - [18] - Quote Significant change always meets strong resistance from the vested special interests. The amount of whining and complaints is quite meaningless. There is nothing meaningful Fozzie can say now, all that matters are the metrics. And not those from one day or one week after the change... maybe in one month there is enough meaningful data to assess how well the changes worked, or didn't work. Personally, I like how people can now die close to hisec wormholes, so close to and yet so far from safety. And it's not just luck; as with most things in EVE, the stupid and careless die where others would have survived. Like that hauler pilot who was smart enough to fit a full tank complete with DC and bulkheads, but not smart enough to also add a prop mod which would have carried him back to the hole in time ^^ .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 651	Posted - 2014.09.04 10:52:00 - [19] - Quote Enthropic wrote: However, leaving the situation unresolved like this, will, and Im speculating, drive many people out of wh space for good (once you moved out, youre out, its so much a hassle to get set up again).. This is so not true. If it were true, everyone who got bombed out of wspace once by superior meanies would never come back. Well, I got bombed out once or twice, a long time ago. And I have changed my wspace home voluntarily at least a dozen times, with small or big corps or just by myself because of changing corp, five ships or five dozen or five hundred ships, with my capitals or without them. Dude, if one move, and one that is not even forced and where you probably don't lose your stuff, is enough to make you leave wspace 'for good', then I don't really know what to say to that. Honestly, if all the whiners are right and wspace will be deserted to a man next month, CCP can always just double or triple sleeper loot values and twice the number of people will be back in wspace within one week. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 651	Posted - 2014.09.04 11:46:00 - [20] - Quote I'm quite sure others will be happy to take over your c3 if 100m per anom is still too low for Your Majesty ^^ C3 anoms are easily run in under 10 minutes using two ships with a combined value of <250m, so the risk is quite manageable. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 651	Posted - 2014.09.04 12:39:00 - [21] - Quote 100m was for the hypothetical doubling. But yeah, sites are probably more like 40m nowadays. When I farmed C3s a few years back, it was still 45-50m. The way I did it I didn't need ammo. Run to market doesn't count, because you can hoard your stuff indefinitely and just sell when you are going to Jita anyway for other reasons. Ofc a lot of time goes into scanning and scouting first, as always in wspace. But the more sites you can run in one go, the less your average is dragged down by the preparations. I used to make about 1-1.5b solo in one long session (4-5 hours) on a good day. Now of course, under the new rules, there would be occasional losses, but if the loot values doubled, that would more than make up for it. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 651	Posted - 2014.09.04 13:01:00 - [22] - Quote Shilalasar wrote: No they can-¦t since nonblueloot is marketdriven and introducing new demand for it isn-¦t something you "just" do. If you double blueloot it makes it even more ridiculous for the c6 farmers who already have the lowest risk. So what? Just change the number of blue loot items dropped in certain sites (double in c3 sites but leave unaltered in c6). I don't think something like that will actually happen, but it could easily be done in one day if they wanted to. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 652	Posted - 2014.09.04 13:09:00 - [23] - Quote Chicken Exroofer wrote: However, if the pvp oriented want lots of targets...... there needs to be a reason for there to be lots of targets. Currently that reason does not exist. Especially in the lower class wormholes. Go run a few C1 or C2 sites in the next week or two. Those guys don't even bother half the time. If income versus class was to scale , C1 through C3 would need a fairly significant bump to equal escalations in the higher classes. Arguably there is just as much risk in a C1 as there is in a C5, possibly more risk, since a lot of the lower class holes have hi sec daytrippers, etc. Yes the ships are a lot cheaper in a C1 in that example. But getting blown up and podded out sucks no matter who you are. I completely agree. I would love to see yield from c1/2 buffed significantly, so I can find more targets there again that I can engage solo. And maybe even run a few sites myself at other times. .
Terrorfrodo Renegade Hobbits for Mordor 686	Posted - 2014.11.05 07:34:45 - [24] - Quote The only lasting effect of that change is that people who don't have the manpower to back up hole-collapsing capitals mostly stopped rolling holes, and by extension stopped living in capital-escalation space. They had no business living there in the first place so that is totally fine. And now it is less of a problem than ever before because CCP made low-class a very viable place to live once again. The small-corp isk farmers should just give up on c5 and come back where they belong, into a nice c2 with c4 static. .

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.