Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rei Moon
Murderous Inc
80
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 03:11:23 -
[31] - Quote
Lots of cow excretion
Murderous Inc. wants woobs (does that work as "wormhole newbies"?)
|
Elyas Crux
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 07:52:30 -
[32] - Quote
Non-harvestable Gas clouds in combat anomalies are overly mean to graphics cards compared to the other decorations eg. large-collidables. Sorry to not name specific anomalies but they are used in many. |
Chesterfield Fancypantz
Radical Astronauts Plundering Eve WormHole Occupation and Resource Exploitation
26
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 08:25:23 -
[33] - Quote
Elyas Crux wrote:Non-harvestable Gas clouds in combat anomalies are overly mean to graphics cards compared to the other decorations eg. large-collidables. Sorry to not name specific anomalies but they are used in many.
I would post this into the "pve small things" rather then this post. This is more theory crafting ways to fix PvE, rather then a simple change like yours.
No offense. |
SwagYolo420
Vertical Rebirth
65
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 09:07:40 -
[34] - Quote
Farming static sites? Did everyone forget how to expo? |
Ridvanson
14
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 09:11:40 -
[35] - Quote
corbexx wrote:1 Lower the capital escalations in C5 to 2 waves of 6 sleeper guardians, and C6 to 2 waves of 9. Then adding a can at the end of the site, that appears when all the none capital escalation waves are cleared (sleeper store house, what ever) that can be salvaged for approx 350m in blue books and salvage. This would lower the reliance on capital escalations and encourage people in to there static to farm these sites.
Just to be clear: the can at the end of the site appears regardless of capitals being warped in, right?
How about you make it 3 waves of 7/9 guardians for C5/C6 respectively and make the can at the end have 150-200m? Otherwise the balance would be pretty out of whack imho.
corbexx wrote:2 Make the capital escalation waves spawn in random points around the site and remove 1 sleeper guardian from each capital escalation and replace it with 3 cruisers and 4 frigates( numbers could be increased or decreased), that orbit at 30km and point. This would mean smart bombing all waves and warping to where the capital escalation spawn would be alot harder and that you would potentially need sub capital support.
I don't like this idea. ~30 more small ships too shoot and salvage? :effort: Waiting for guardians to get into my optimal? I really don't want to spend more time on PVE, why do you want to make us do so?
C5/C6 space doesn't get any more luring to people when it's made more annoying. C5 especially is a desolate place already ...
tl;dr idea no1 kind of makes sense to me, idea no2 is just a plain nerf, that's not what wh-space needs (or what a wh CSM should advocate for, anyway ;))
|
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
413
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 10:23:05 -
[36] - Quote
Based on the information available here:
http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online/npc_ships.php?supergroup=23
which I have found nothing to discredit thus far, is it time for sleepers to be rebalanced? In the interests of fairness to other NPCs in the game sleepers aren't particularly hard they just seem to have a lot of HP.
I note that there is nearly no RR in the lower class wormholes. Neuting is also fairly neglible with the peak neuting occuring in a c3 anom I think peaking at like 16gj/s. Webbing and scramming are more commonplace but not really noticable.
Now obviously as you go C4 and higher this story changes but if wormholes are now a point of developer focus (due to their obviously neglected and underdeveloped nature) then perhaps as part of a comprehensive, longer term wormhole revision we can look at these NPCs themselves.
Blue loot was buffed to make the rewards of living in lower class holes better and for this reason I am getting and seeing a lot of questions related to lower class holes where previously no interest was expressed at all. But there is a caveat which I would say is that certainly some parts of the space could be made harder, just to drive home the point of this space.
Now I don't claim to have years and years of experience in wormholes but I have for the last 6 months lived variously between C1s and C3's in different capacities.
To start with I would broadly propose that CCP create 1 new kind of anomoly per class of wormhole that is a bit harder than normal, say perhaps in the mid-difficulty range of the next highest class of wormhole.
This would allow C1's to have one site that spawns a battleship, without escalating (which might require more people than the group can field). And so forth. These sites would also feature a higher degree of webbing/neuting than normal, possibly as much as or more than the amount expressed inside of the class it's emulating.
The ultimate objective of this kind of introduced anomaly would be to provide more challenge to people within their current residences that might not have the numbers available to proc an escalation but otherwise can handle the sites in their home hole relatively easily. It could also present a milestone for smaller groups building up membership, they would complete this site and then guage whether or not based on their success whether or not they have the capacity to upgrade their hole class. All from the ease of their home hole.
I feel that in the interest of fairness, loot should be comparable to the same mid-level anomaly from the next higher class and that clearance times should be similar for a given fleet size that would be used in the next higher class. This is not simply a port of a higher level anomaly in to a lower class hole - that would be easy but raise balancing issues. You might as well upgrade your hole at that point not to mention the jump from c2-c3 is larger than from c1-c2.
It's just food for thought.
Join channel Aussies in space to chat with AU/NZ players
|
Levina Windstar
Mekalon Industry
36
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 13:58:26 -
[37] - Quote
I'm not sure about adding escalations in C1 to C4.
As you may know, C1 to C4 corp are made of meaby 1-7 ppl and not all of them are online at the same time.
What I would suggest tho is since C4 is considered as a "high end WH" (no K-space static), I would like to have escalation in C4 only. Here is an idea how t trigger it :
Escalation trigger by 4+BS or 1 Marauder.
I think this seams more doable and like I said, my only concern is the number of people needed for escalation in lower class WH.
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
843
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 14:20:57 -
[38] - Quote
corbexx wrote:Obil Que wrote:Random is good
The chances of you getting and introducing new "sleeper faction" modules is probably highly unlikely you say this but in the recent dev blog there is new weapons coming out.
The problem with this Corbexx
Quoted from the dev blog.
Quote:The modules are Tech II, meta-level 9 modules. They thus have the same skill requirements as Tech II, but they also benefit from the specialization skills. They require their Tech II counterpart to manufacture
This isn't a wormhole space weapon. This is a weapon made from K-space materials (you need the T2 weapon to build it). In addition, it requires T2 skills (not noob friendly which is ok), and the price won't be very friendly.
If this was a true wormhole space weapon/equipment, it should only be built from the stuff you can farm out of the wormhole. Which is Sleeper Salvage, Ore, Gas. These new "Polarized" weapons requires T2 components, which is moongoop, which wormholes have 0 of. Do I want moon goop. HELL NO. wormholes should be able to produce a set of weapons that are created purely from wormhole space.
Good Slogan.
Made in Wormhole space, From Wormhole Land, by Wormholers.
Bad Slogan Blueprint in Wormhole space, Made in Lowsec, With Nullsec Moongoop.
You see the problem. This new weapon system is not for wormholers, because its completely made with products wormholers have zero access to.
Not made in wormhole space? Do Not Want.
Yaay!!!!
|
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
908
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 15:10:54 -
[39] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote:corbexx wrote:Obil Que wrote:Random is good
The chances of you getting and introducing new "sleeper faction" modules is probably highly unlikely you say this but in the recent dev blog there is new weapons coming out. The problem with this Corbexx Quoted from the dev blog. Quote:The modules are Tech II, meta-level 9 modules. They thus have the same skill requirements as Tech II, but they also benefit from the specialization skills. They require their Tech II counterpart to manufacture This isn't a wormhole space weapon. This is a weapon made from K-space materials (you need the T2 weapon to build it). In addition, it requires T2 skills (not noob friendly which is ok), and the price won't be very friendly. If this was a true wormhole space weapon/equipment, it should only be built from the stuff you can farm out of the wormhole. Which is Sleeper Salvage, Ore, Gas. These new "Polarized" weapons requires T2 components, which is moongoop, which wormholes have 0 of. Do I want moon goop. HELL NO. wormholes should be able to produce a set of weapons that are created purely from wormhole space. Good Slogan. Made in Wormhole space, From Wormhole Land, by Wormholers. Bad Slogan Blueprint in Wormhole space, Made in Lowsec, With Nullsec Moongoop. You see the problem. This new weapon system is not for wormholers, because its completely made with products wormholers have zero access to. Not made in wormhole space? Do Not Want.
argh some times i ******* give up. I really do.
first i'm not saying anywhere these are sleeper weapons.
obil que says the chances of getting new sleeper modules are highly unlikely. I reply that there is new weapons coming out. Showing that ccp is putting new modules in the game and implying its no where near as highly unlikely as he thought.
You would notice in the inital ideas I said made from sleeper stuff. Seriously I know those guns arent made from sleeper stuff if they were I'd have made a huge ******* point of saying that. This is what I mean with people digging way to much in to **** and not looking at the general concept.
Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better
|
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
843
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 15:19:41 -
[40] - Quote
No need to get mad corbexx. I can be particularly hard headed. Been putting those ideas in every thread about polarized weapons since they were announced.
No one wants you to give up. You are doing an amazing job and we all know it. You are open and upfront with the community and put your heart into the game. For that we all thank you for your hard work.
Don't take my post as any type of attack. You can treat it more like propoganda than anything else. I'll edit the above as it should be in a different thread.
Yaay!!!!
|
|
Mizhir
Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships.
69362
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 15:21:46 -
[41] - Quote
I like the idea about mini escalations in lowclass WH, but are you sure that it is a good idea to have mechanics that encourage caps in lowclass WHs? Caps in lowclass WHs should be something people build for defence or for being lazy with sites. I would rather see Marauders take that role, but still make it possible (and profitable) for corps with a large (but inexperianced) player group to do it with smaller subcaps.
One Man Crew - Collective solo pvp
|
Steven Hackett
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
95
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 15:44:53 -
[42] - Quote
I obv. can't comment on c1-c4 space.. but my thoughts on the C5+ changes to escalations..
Don't make escalations and PVE in general more tedious than it already is! Trying to fix an issue by adding changes that makes the game more tedious is pretty damn bad gamedesign tbh. with that I mean, don't do **** that makes the sites take longer to run(adding cruisers/frigs or moving spawns).
Im also not sure I like moving the isk to the finish of the site. This will remove isk from corp activities(cap escalations) and put the isk into the hands of the solo player(Marauders, dreads, carriers). Changes shouldn't encourage people to play solo, which would be the case here.
As for burner missions in W-space.. Fozzie is bad.. Frigats sucks.. Don't buy in to his BS and don't ruin EVE by listening to him. thx <3 |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
843
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 15:56:43 -
[43] - Quote
Steven Hackett wrote:I obv. can't comment on c1-c4 space.. but my thoughts on the C5+ changes to escalations..
Don't make escalations and PVE in general more tedious than it already is! Trying to fix an issue by adding changes that makes the game more tedious is pretty damn bad gamedesign tbh. with that I mean, don't do **** that makes the sites take longer to run(adding cruisers/frigs or moving spawns).
Im also not sure I like moving the isk to the finish of the site. This will remove isk from corp activities(cap escalations) and put the isk into the hands of the solo player(Marauders, dreads, carriers). Changes shouldn't encourage people to play solo, which would be the case here.
As for burner missions in W-space.. Fozzie is bad.. Frigats sucks.. Don't buy in to his BS and don't ruin EVE by listening to him. thx <3
Frigates are great, just not in Wspace. You want people to consider smaller ships, wormholers need a way to "swap" clones from our cruiser dedicated clones to something more acceptable for frigate sized piloting, in Wspace.
That's just one of the issues though.
Yaay!!!!
|
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
227
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 16:05:38 -
[44] - Quote
Phoenix Jones wrote: Frigates are great, just not in Wspace. You want people to consider smaller ships, wormholers need a way to "swap" clones from our cruiser dedicated clones to something more acceptable for frigate sized piloting, in Wspace.
That's just one of the issues though.
Frigates are great everywhere. I have only one medium turret specific implant, doesn't really bother me when flying other ship classes. Rest are useful for all ships.
|
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
44
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 16:13:23 -
[45] - Quote
As a small wh corp CEO, he have seen a big rise of tourists from Phoebe. But this is mainly T1 frig and covops. They come for the nullsec relic/data. Sometimes there is a couple of bc T1 comin for anomaly but this is still rare.
We need sleeper DED like DED in WSpace with sleepers DED modules loots to increase activity.
For escalations, should be based on Battleship in C1/C2 and Marauders in C3/C4. |
Ridvanson
15
|
Posted - 2014.11.12 16:15:13 -
[46] - Quote
Hey corbexx, I have given this some more thought.
I remember someone from CCP stating, that they didn't like how sites in C5/C6 space were run with regards to escalating them more than once. So any discussion about an overhaul must take into account that this feature is likely going to be removed.
Having that in mind, I imagine the following changes would accomplish the goal of encouraging people to run sites in there static without skewing the balance of escalation risk/reward.
- increase the value of the sites themselves by some 100m/150m isk for C5/C6 class wh (simply by adding 1 or 2 waves) - introduce a 14 day timer after which sites despawn automatically without being triggered - turn up the total number of combat sites (if necessary) - leave capital escalations alone! - introduce a sleeper capital that spawns on the warp-in of a third dread. To motivate people to actually finish the site, the sleeper capitals's wreck can only be accessed by way of hacking after ALL sleepers in the site are dead. I'm thinking the value of the sleeper capital should be around ~50m + the chance to drop some rare mods.
What do you think?
|
Michal Jita
Lords Of The Universe
10
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 07:09:04 -
[47] - Quote
corbexx as a side note in CSM minutes there is a lot said about new sov space, there are ideas about soveless type of structures for null, if that is introduced in null sec, surely same soveless mechanic could be implemented in WH. Now what this means for Bobs beloved space is that we could for example get 'pirate detection' upgrades and stuff like that and what this means for a large corp that can afford them and can keep them online they would no longer require cap escalations at all as there could be enough anomalies for all members to run at some point in 24h cycle. Just mentioning this here as if CCP takes this approach a lot of above ideas and discussion would become irrelevant.
What is your view on this and can we count on you pushing WH upgrades IF null gets to be claim it by using it soveless type of space. You can already find TCUs in WH space for people wanting to have their flag post in WH surely there would be people interested in that. |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
45
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 11:01:40 -
[48] - Quote
I know this is not a pve stuff but with the Hyperion Changes on mass jump distance, covops are impossible to catch even with inty full stuff for scan resolution.
With proper fit, an inty can lock anything in less then one second. And even with that kind of scan res, a covops cloaking right after a jump is uncatchable.
It is a big issue, we should be able to kill covops when defending a hole, or at least force him to go back. Not easily but with the right setup and fit we should be able to do that.
Actually it depends only on luck (is the covops close enough to another ship to get a very quick decloak before the covops w/o or before the covops go out a dictor bubble. |
Michal Swiostek
X Legion
3
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 11:28:45 -
[49] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:I know this is not a pve stuff but with the Hyperion Changes on mass jump distance, covops are impossible to catch even with inty full stuff for scan resolution.
With proper fit, an inty can lock anything in less then one second. And even with that kind of scan res, a covops cloaking right after a jump is uncatchable.
It is a big issue, we should be able to kill covops when defending a hole, or at least force him to go back. Not easily but with the right setup and fit we should be able to do that.
Actually it depends only on luck (is the covops close enough to another ship to get a very quick decloak before the covops w/o or before the covops go out a dictor bubble.
This is nearly the same as jumping through gates in null sec or low sec, and people die there quite regularly so cant see why this is a problem for you?
Also is killing cov ops frigs the top pvp content your looking for? |
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
45
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 11:40:35 -
[50] - Quote
Michal Swiostek wrote: This is nearly the same as jumping through gates in null sec or low sec, and people die there quite regularly so cant see why this is a problem for you?
Yes ... but ... We are in WSpace ... Not in KSpace. And with gates you are not randomly poped around the gate, there is a direction. So it is easier to decloak a covops in nullsec.
Before Hyperion, covops was not able to cloak after jump, so even with a prop on that covops you had the time to lock it down with an inty before cloak.
Now you can't.
Michal Swiostek wrote: Also is killing cov ops frigs the top pvp content your looking for?
Killing a covops entering in your hole remove intel to your ennemies before a fight. So if you field the right ships to defend your hole against ennemy intel (dictor + inty) you should be able to avoid ennemy intel.
That has nothing to do with killing covops for killing covops. |
|
Michal Swiostek
X Legion
3
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 11:57:31 -
[51] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:
Yes ... but ... We are in WSpace ... Not in KSpace. And with gates you are not randomly poped around the gate, there is a direction. So it is easier to decloak a covops in nullsec.
Jumping through gate you can appear ANYWHERE 12km away from gate in ANY direction effectively you can be 25+km away from your target. In a WH covops will normally land 5km away from WH giving a bubble of about 15km diameter a lot closer than on gate effectively giving you a lot more chance of catching one.
Not saying its easy, just easier in a WH than kspace, a lot easier. |
King Fu Hostile
Imperial Collective Unsettled.
231
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 12:28:51 -
[52] - Quote
Papa Django wrote: Before Hyperion, covops was not able to cloak after jump, so even with a prop on that covops you had the time to lock it down with an inty before cloak.
Now you can't.
Yes they were able to cloak after jump, unless bad luck landed them in decloak range of the hole, which was not that often.
|
Papa Django
CosmoTeK LTD La Division Bleue
45
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 13:36:45 -
[53] - Quote
King Fu Hostile wrote:Yes they were able to cloak after jump, unless bad luck landed them in decloak range of the hole, which was not that often.
It was A LOT easier. |
Phoenix Jones
Isogen 5
849
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 13:39:59 -
[54] - Quote
Papa Django wrote:King Fu Hostile wrote:Yes they were able to cloak after jump, unless bad luck landed them in decloak range of the hole, which was not that often.
It was A LOT easier.
Since the mass changes in wormhole space, I maybe once landed in decloak range of the hole.
There are ways to address this, all are kinda bad.
Yaay!!!!
|
MooMooDachshundCow
Incertae Sedis
128
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 14:54:50 -
[55] - Quote
Even before the change a properly fitted and piloted covops was nigh-impossible to catch. I only lost mine when I was in warp to a wh and something happened where I forgot that I had landed (high) and there was someone there to insta-blap.
I literally can't think of a time that my covops was decloaked by a WH gatecamp, though props to Band of Magnus for coming the closest (they used multiple inties/dictors).
I've been in wormholes since before Odyssey and IMHO covops have always been pretty damn slippery. I think that's fine. All they can do effectively is look.
Yeah, well, it's just like my-áopinion, man.
|
epicurus ataraxia
Z3R0 Return Mining Inc. Illusion of Solitude
1359
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 16:17:45 -
[56] - Quote
Covert ops have always been difficuilt to catch when fit and piloted well, the same tecniques work as they always have, however, if one is trying to lock them before they warp, one still is relying on them making a mistake or being careless. Personally I would not expect anything else when hunting them. That is their Job and what they are designed for. A few Bombs however still work as well as they always have. It works well for us. Just do not expect 100% success in killing them.
If you find covert ops annoying to catch the triple (at least) stabbed, interdiction nullifying, jamming, neuting T3 cloaky scanning ship designed for "hot" holes, (plus some other sneaky features) that one player we know uses, would really annoy you.
[u]_There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE _[/u]
|
Luft Reich
Lazerhawks
55
|
Posted - 2014.11.13 18:56:35 -
[57] - Quote
Reasoning behind c6 space having more battleships spawn than c5 space? Biased much? Should really be even.
ISD Cyberdyne liked your forum post
|
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
919
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 10:17:51 -
[58] - Quote
Luft Reich wrote:Reasoning behind c6 space having more battleships spawn than c5 space? Biased much? Should really be even.
funny enough the idea for that attually came from someone who lives in C5 space as at the moment there is literally no reason what so ever to live in c6 over c5 the iskis exactly the same, your safer in a c5 get more null sec exits for pew. there is literally no reason to be in a c6 wh over a c5.
But playing devils advocate, why should they really be the same?
Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better
|
corbexx
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
919
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 10:21:37 -
[59] - Quote
Michal Jita wrote:corbexx as a side note in CSM minutes there is a lot said about new sov space, there are ideas about soveless type of structures for null, if that is introduced in null sec, surely same soveless mechanic could be implemented in WH. Now what this means for Bobs beloved space is that we could for example get 'pirate detection' upgrades and stuff like that and what this means for a large corp that can afford them and can keep them online they would no longer require cap escalations at all as there could be enough anomalies for all members to run at some point in 24h cycle. Just mentioning this here as if CCP takes this approach a lot of above ideas and discussion would become irrelevant.
What is your view on this and can we count on you pushing WH upgrades IF null gets to be claim it by using it soveless type of space. You can already find TCUs in WH space for people wanting to have their flag post in WH surely there would be people interested in that.
One of the issues is your starting to turn everything in to the sort of thing. I cetainly dont want ever last anoms in wh space and people never leaving there home system i'm trying to encourage people to go out and do more stuff in there static
Corbexx for CSM 9 - Wormholes deserve better
|
Lloyd Roses
Blue-Fire
750
|
Posted - 2014.11.14 10:38:09 -
[60] - Quote
Biggest complaint would be _Sentries_ in some anoms. They're dumb, they defy sigtanking and they occasionally make it necessary to fly with your scanner fleeted, cause else they're vollying you into structure on some armorships. Yes, no issue with the 10% extra-hp from being fleeted, but damn risky without fleet-boni.
In addition, they kill ambitioned rookies that go *hey it shoot sperfectly out to 60km, it surely doesn't track then*... they thought, before I dropped the tractor.
I also hear a lot of supposedly honourable wormholers whine about frigate holes. Yes, frig piloting is hard, especially in a gang. That does't mean frigates are bad, but only that you can't pilot things.
"I honestly thought I was in lowsec"
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |