How does a pilots intentions change the effects of a jump? Is there a menu that asks whether you are here for business or pleasure? And now that the pilot has successfully convinced customs that he is here to enjoy the sites, what's to stop him from shooting anything he wants?

You may think it's a casual use, but there is no difference in what you can do. Unless you consider hot dropping regions away as casual use then I guess that's part of the issue.

It doesn't matter what you intend to do at the other end. I could decide to refit my ratting carrier for combat after shooting a rat or two. How do you plan on differentiating the two? How do you plan to ensure a ship on the other side of a jump is not allowed to do combat? And it's not the jump itself that's the problem, it's the pilots movement. That's why phoebe came with death clone changes as well.

There are too many dumb questions in here to really give a coherent response while addressing all of them so I'll be brief.

How a pilots intentions change the effect of a jump is so obvious even a small child should be able to understand it: it changes what they will do after they complete the jump.

Now, it is so obvious that it is beyond all reasonable dispute that many jump bridge uses are for casual, not strategic, reasons. That's just an obvious fact that anyone who has been in nullsec and used jump bridges knows. Your (dumb) argument is that the jump bridge itself cannot know those intentions, and from there you leap to those intentions don't exist. That's dumb, and we will ignore those arguments going forward because your babbling does not grasp what the actual conversation is about.

What the casual jump bridge use argument says is that certain uses of jump bridges merely improve quality of life without conferring a strategic benefit. As those make the game better without causing balance issues, they should be preserved if possible. So what people propose are mechanics that permit casual use and penalize strategic use through in-game heuristics that are obviously effective. For example, casual use will have very small groups going through it at once, vs strategic will have a small gang at a minimum, so you can make mechanic changes that depend on people going through in a short time. Or, as has been done, you can look at the ship itself that's going through.

basically all of your arguments come down to that you don't understand that you can answer the above questions trivially, it's just a question of which mechanics are good ones

you're essentially arguing from your own ignorance, that you do not know how to do it ergo not only can it not be done but the concept of it being done cannot exist

And I'm going to ask again, how do you plan to stop abuse of this? If you can shoot rats at your destination what's to stop from shooting players or structures?

I keep asking these questions because you won't answer them. Just snide remarks about "duh they're different. Everybody knows that". Yes jump bridges provide better QoL, but how do you plan to prevent that change from being abused for unintended purposes? Apparently it's so obvious that nobody brought it up in the last 400+ pages of discussion that preceded phoebe.

So please, educate my ignorant self.

If you can shoot rats at your destination what's to stop from shooting players or structures?

you appear to believe your ignorance islimited to that you do not know the proper mechanics proposals

it's not

what the best solutions are is a thing we (omni, other people, apparently not you) can discuss and weigh the pros and cons of various proposals

you, on the other hand, blank on a proposal and then use that to deny not only that such a proposal can exist, but also to deny even basic concepts any normal human can understand (such as intent) exist

that's just moronic and means there's not anything to be gained by discussing mechanics issues with you because you've defined away the whole problem to escape having to think

If you only knew

What is the difference in mechanics between when a jump drive is used for strategic purposes and when it is used for anythin non-combat? I don't care what actually happens after or before the jump, since that is completely up to the pilots ever changing objectives. How does the jump bridge/drive itself change its behavior between the two scenarios?

What is the difference in mechanics between when a jump drive is used for strategic purposes and when it is used for anythin non-combat? I don't care what actually happens after or before the jump, since that is completely up to the pilots ever changing objectives. How does the jump bridge/drive itself change its behavior between the two scenarios?

Here's why we are disregarding you and determining that none of your input is useful: no answer to these questions (even the answer you think is true, that there are none) does not affect in any way that causal jump bridge use exists. It merely challenges the idea that it is possible to design mechanics that differentiate between the two.

That you have such difficulty comprehending the difference between reality as we percieve it, and our ability to program the game to recognize reality

suggests that a discussion with you will not be fruitful. That said, we have already answered your question: the number of people going through the jump bridge in a short amount of time is a very useful heuristic for determining if the purpose and effect is strategic or casual.

Fundamentally changing the isotope consumption formula to increase the costs by a significant percent (see: more than tenfold) would be a much better change overall for the game than jump fatigue. Increasing the cost of jumping means that each jump requires more isotopes, which can only be stored in a limited space on each given ship or Jump Bridge. Thus, at a certain point, it becomes basically impossible to facilitate large fleet movements over regions because of the amount of manpower or logistics to keep all the caps/bridges fueled in each direction.

address projection change, while not completely destroying casual usage.

The mechanic doesn't change whether or not you're jumping into rats or an enemy.

Looking at the jump drive in this fashion is pointless, because you can look at any action in a small enough time frame to curtail it to your exact argument.

What you should be looking at is the aggregate cost of all jumps to get to what their objective is.

If an individual person is using three jump bridges to get from his home system to his local hub, then the aggregate cost is low because it is casual use.

This is why it would have the same exact impact as the jump fatigue, except more beneficial in other areas of the game.

Thus, saying "but what are they doing on the other side of the jump" literally has no impact, because that argument could be extrapolated all the way to "but what are they doing when they log into eve, how should the login mechanic change if they're pvping or mining in high sec".

I explained a few pages back that there is no difference between casual and any other descriptive use of a jump anything. Casually using something does not make it casual as you would like it to be defined. Before phoebe people were dropping carriers everywhere and jumping around all the time. Simply saying you are trying to protect casual use does not make it better in any way. Especially when there is a claim to keep it relatively possible compared someone using it explicitly for strategic purposes. Thats why I kept asking the difference.

you did not "explain" this, you "foolishly said this incorrect thing and have been corrected on it"

you keep saying this stupid thing where you try to assert that your inability to think of mechanics that separate things means those things do not exist

let me be exceedingly clear on this: anytime you try to argue that "casual" something does not exist you are being paint-eatingly stupid. this is a meaningful distinction normals are able to understand.

stop saying paint-eatingly stupid things like that and we can avoid teaching you what basic human language means, and instead get back to the useful discussion: the extent to which various mechanics would succeed or fail to succeed in restricting "strategic" use of jump bridges while not penalizing "casual" use of jump bridges, language that is clear and well-understood to everyone else here

It's extremely ironic that CCP wants to move towards more of a "Local production" environment, but jump fatigue basically doesn't affect jump freighters in a meaningful way.

A change in the isotope requirement formula would significantly impact the cost of transport. This means that local markets would have more value and people would be forced to make meaningful decisions on whether or not to import/export or produce locally. In moving goods, people would decide whether or not to jump the goods to market or to take gates to save their margins.

But apparently cost is not an effective balancing factor, while a flat timer where you can't move is.

I still don't understand the overall goal of the patch.

How is this going to create content if no one can advance on one another?

Im noticing a massive decrease in content post patch endless you count dropping supers within 5 ly of staging system on nothing and only doing it for the "lulz"...

Jump bridges are atrocious. Its OUR sov we shouldn't be dam near punished for using it. I shouldn't have to spend hours traveling just to attempt to fight with a gang rolling threw.

Even after these slight changes I still feel this was/is by far the worst mechanic in eve ( not including sov but I didn't think id have to say it)

Why do you hate content?

I was kinda hoping for a travel time on jumping via jump drives. Like a 8ly jump would take x amount of time in tunnel. Not this "Jump! But now you can't jump again for a week... Sincerely, CCP"

The mechanic doesn't change whether or not you're jumping into rats or an enemy.

Looking at the jump drive in this fashion is pointless, because you can look at any action in a small enough time frame to curtail it to your exact argument.

What you should be looking at is the aggregate cost of all jumps to get to what their objective is.

If an individual person is using three jump bridges to get from his home system to his local hub, then the aggregate cost is low because it is casual use.

If a fleet of 250 players is trying to use a jump bridge network to get from Deklein to Delve, that aggregate cost would be gigantic and prohibitive to any organization. Not only that, but the proposed changes would mean that a jump bridge could not hold enough fuel to facilitate 250 ships larger than frigs without being refueled. Logistically speaking, they'd have to refill each bridge every jump, and that would not be feasible. This is why it would have the same exact impact as the jump fatigue, except more beneficial in other areas of the game.

Thus, saying "but what are they doing on the other side of the jump" literally has no impact, because that argument could be extrapolated all the way to "but what are they doing when they log into eve, how should the login mechanic change if they're pvping or mining in high sec".

thats why CCp is losing customers.
It will take me probly a month!! to move my carrier from deep north 0.0 to low sec!!
A MONTH!!!
next jump i can make is in 3 days.

Confirming that not enough caps are blindly jumping through stargates into subcap gatecamps so the jump drive is being completely removed entirely with no skill point compensation of course. Enjoy! Another present from CCP. Merry Christmas. Oh, and no complaining or you are too soft and not able to adapt. And of course, Black Ops get their range extended to 100 ly with no fatigue. Another Christmas present. Merry Ratter Hotdrops and a Happy New Eden! Ho ho ho!

thats why CCp is losing customers.
It will take me probly a month!! to move my carrier from deep north 0.0 to low sec!!
A MONTH!!!
next jump i can make is in 3 days.

Ok, lets do this again for the people who don't get it. To be fair I reread the dev blog before I wrote this and I will say that somewhere along the line some info may have gotten lost. I don't see a clear explanation of what happens to fatigue when you get below 10 minutes. This is because fatigue was originally a number representing an amount of time, not an actual amount of time. In switching the explanation over to minutes they seem to have left out the strict explanation of this breakpoint. To be clear, the following statement from the dev blog infers what you need to know but doesn't state it very clearly:

Jump fatigue has a minimum amount of 10 x (1 + (LY traveled)) minutes after a jump. Jump fatigue has a maximum amount of 30 days.

That 10 is a representation of minutes. Since 10 is the minimum they use in the calculation that means that jumping during the last 10 minutes of fatigue is the same as jumping at 0 minutes of fatigue. With that explained clearly, here we go.

Starting Fatigue: 0
Starting Jump Cooldown: 0

All jumps will be 5LY.

Cooldown after first jump: 6 minutes (this is the minimum for any jump)
Fatigue after first jump: 60 minutes

So you wait the 6 minutes, because you have to. Then we break into the two scenarios. Scenario A will be waiting until the optimum moment to jump to minimize fatigue. Scenario B will just jump when the cooldown timer ends.

Scenario A Jump 2: Knowing that the best time to jump is when you have 10 minutes of fatigue or less, you wait 50 minutes after the first jump. That's an additional 44 minutes of waiting past the cooldown for a clean jump.

Distance Traveled: 10LY
Jump Cooldown: 6 minutes
Fatigue: 60 minutes
Time spent: 50 minutes


Scenario B Jump 2: Not caring about the effect of the fatigue mechanic, you jump after the 6 minute cooldown timer is up. That means you jumped with 54 minutes of fatigue remaining.

Distance Traveled: 10LY
Jump Cooldown: 6 minutes
Fatigue: 324 minutes (5.4 hours)
Time spent: 6 minutes


Scenario A Jump 3: Once again you repeat the 50 minute wait, which is 44 minutes more than your jump cooldown.

Distance Traveled: 15LY
Jump Cooldown: 6 minutes
Fatigue: 60 minutes
Time spent: 100 minutes (1.66 hours)


Scenario B Jump 3: Still not caring about the effect of the fatigue mechanic, you jump after the 6 minute cooldown timer is up. That means you jumped with 318 minutes of fatigue remaining.

Distance Traveled: 15LY
Jump Cooldown: 31.8 minutes (10 % of fatigue before jump, or 6, whichever is higher)
Fatigue: 1908 minutes (31.8 hours)
Time spent: 12 minutes


Summary: Max sustained jump speed is now 5LY/50 minutes for carriers/dreads/supers/titans. You can go faster than that, but after the 3rd jump things get slow due to the cooldown blooming past the 6 minute minimum.

If you didn't notice the pattern by now, you should always wait your fatigue down to 10 minutes or less before you jump unless it's absolutely necessary. Things get multiplicative quickly if you don't.

Excellent, now we have mathematical proof as to why Capital travel with the now anemic jump drive is not worth the time not mater which way you go. Capitals on gate....seems Marxist to me.