![Deveraux Deveraux](https://images.evetech.net/characters/308061833/portrait?size=64)
Deveraux
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2006.11.08 19:54:00 -
[2]
I must first state that i consider both "Warp to 0km" and "Warp to 15km in accordance with complete bookmark removal" bad solutions. I will try to explain why.
Warp to 0 - bad solution. If it wasnt a bad one i think it would have been ingame already. It's ignorance to say that this option will not change a think because everyone else has bookmarks already. That's the stupidest argument i have seen related to this topic. Less the 30% of Eve subscribers have 1 complete region set of G2G BMs and way way less have an Empire Region set. If you dont believe me stay at a gate in empire and see how many players are using bookmarks. In 2 hours i think i saw 2-3 players only and i doubt the rest were afk ! Furthermore, the bookmarks that already exist are player created and they are not perfect (for example, the only way i could kill a 3 WCS'd hauler in 0.0 was when his bookmark landed him 4 km after the gate and i got to web him in time and killed him before he reached jump distance). Warp to 0 will add in the game PERFECT bookmarks from all celestial objects to all others in all system for all players. That is too much.
Others say there is no problem in Warping to 0 for all players because you can always get him on the other side or in a different manner (interdictors, mobile warp bubbles, etc). True, but why completely remove the posibility of getting him while approaching the gate. Beside, getting it on the other side is completly imposible or near imposible in some situations (empire wars, snipping, a pirate following a victim that jumps into safe space, etc). Some say that a pirate should use an Interdictor or bubles, but following the same logic why a hauler isnt forced to use a scout to safely lead the way. What if at a point you want to solo roam low sec or 0.0. Using a solo interdictor in 0.0 is a certain death. Warp bubble condemn you to stay put at a gate and you wont last long there solo.
Another argument:it's more realistic to warp to 0 km from a celestial object. I can only say LOL. Why airplanes need a runway to stop, why not from full airborne to a complete stop instantly. And please dont tell me that warp deceleration is the same with an airplane landing. And after all, this is not about imitating reality. In real life you are not offered with a ship or any vehicles and a very easy way to make A LOT of money. The gov doesnt offer you a miner and lets you go in a gold mine and exploit it freely.
I have tried to argue why this option would be bad because i have seen an alarming approval toward this solution without taking in consideration all aspects and all changes. In the past CCP considered that BMs offer near invulnerability to travel. And they considered completely removal. I hope they are not consider the opposite solution now.
Completely removal of bookmarks and Warp to 15km minimum is also a bad solution. To many ppl are dependent on BMs to make their travel faster and safer. Removing this ability would most certainly mean that fewer and fewer will leave empire space and more and more will get bored in useless travel times. A lot of ppl would leave Eve i think.
After logging in to Sisi i am more and more convinced that this Warp to 0 feature is for faster travel. I have selected to dock at a station via conventional way Right Click -> Stations -> Station name -> Dock (not warp to 0 at station and then dock) and i exited warp at 1.5 km away and i insta docked. This feature will never be considered by CCP even if warp to 0 is considered. That is why i think all that is on sisi now (concerning travel) is for reducing time needed for players to arrive at the test sight :). Oh, and to test comunity reaction i am sure :D.
CURRENT BOOKMARK MECHANIC IS THE BEST COMPROMISE. It has only one MAJOR drawback.It creates a lot of lag and the need for a lot of resources from the server. How this can be solved?
MY SOLUTION. It's not new on this forums but maybe i can hint a GM with my implementation.
continues...
|