With the coming of new capital modules (plates). Masses for C5 and C6 wormholes are going to have to be changed and altered to take this in to account.

At the summit I brought up the subject of maybe allowing more capitals though a wormhole. Which people felt was worth getting player feedback. Since the mass on these have to change anyway. This would be fairly simple to do.

So if people would like to discussion if its a good or bad idea on maybe allowing more than 3 caps through a wormhole.

There is obviously pro's and con's. But we'd be interested in getting feedback on these.

From a C4 point of view, I absolutely would not want Capitals to come in and out, no matter how they are fit.
From a C5 point of view, My experience is a bit rusty, but this would merely increase the destructive level one could bring in.
Is that a good thing? Or just increase the opportunity to encourage PVE in the static?
It probably would not be sufficient to affect PVP results, but might encourage slightly bigger fights?
Changing the limits, so two (specific) caps can do a hole roll and not get locked out, can be popular, but lower class holes, don't have such an easily predictable, ship/hole combination, so a little unfair.
Am I right a dread can pass both ways, but add another cap and it isn't making it back?

How about some sweetspot that gives people incentive to fly through shield capitals instead? It would shake up the meta and offer an alternative to the endless armor brawlfests. Very few corps fly with shield on a regular basis sadly :/

How about some sweetspot that gives people incentive to fly through shield capitals instead? It would shake up the meta and offer an alternative to the endless armor brawlfests. Very few corps fly with shield on a regular basis sadly :/

yes, im sure that would be nice for the largest WH blob group...

I think the change would be mostly positive - for larger groups. There are some significant disadvantages though and those disadvantages are going to really hurt smaller groups rather than the big groups, so I'm not sure if this change is worth it. Still worth discussing the pros and cons though.

Sticking to 3 capitals through a wormhole is probably the best idea, simply because it allows smaller groups to still effectively fight with capitals without getting capital blobbed.

Advantages
- Fights would allow both sides to commit more capitals, so multiple carriers or multiple high angle gun dreads could actually become viable. At the moment from a high class perspective with the mass limits the way they are, there's going to be very few situations in which people are going to use high angle gun dreads in PvP, a similar thing could be achieved with a vindicator or 2 which has significantly less mass and isn't constricted to a siege cycle. I'm really still at a loss as to why anyone would use high angle dreads in w-space and this mass change would be a solution to that. Realistically though how many groups would actually experience the sort of situation where 2 large fleets with 4 caps each go against each other? Probably very few.

- More capitals could be seeded into the home of a target at any one time, speeding up the seeding and/or eviction process which, when citadels come out, is going to become significantly harder.

- Increase in battleships in w-space. Most people love flying battleship hulls but in larger groups it's often difficult because of mass restrictions. Higher mass on the hole would probably force most major groups to incorporate large numbers of faction battleships into the typical T3 meta. If anything the entire T3 meta might go away and entire battleship fleets could become a very realistic thing. The counterplay there would also be interesting if one side was able to drop 4 high angle gun dreads and begin to volley battleships, so more interesting setups and the subsequent counterplay to these setups is always fun. If you're connected to another group through anything that isn't a high class connection though the whole battleship fleet goes out the window.

- Many people seem to believe that static sites is the way forward for wormhole PvE, alluding that there's more risk and danger if you do this rather than locking yourself down in your home and farming. I don't agree with this in the slightest, especially when groups that support this are usually the first to crit and roll all holes in their static before farming, just like you do farming in your home, but if that was the direction CCP took with PvE, this is a great step to make it viable, allowing 2 caps into the static to actually farm static sites.

Disadvantages
- Increased time to rage roll. Instead of a dread and a battleship to roll a 3b hole, you might need 2 dreads and a battleship. This would make it harder for smaller rage rolling crews or smaller corps who want to frequently roll. Not a major thing though, just a slightly longer roll time.

- Smaller groups will potentially be less interested in fielding capitals in the first place if they know they can get dropped on by more than they have available. Some groups would really struggle to find 4 capital pilots with caps ready to go.

- Prevalence of null groups using these high mass connections to get massive fleets through. For example, if you increased the mass on a H296 connection to 5B (theoretical number there), you would also have to increase the mass on a Z142 to 5b, otherwise you would jump your 5 caps out your H296 to seed a target and not all of them would get out to null, from which they would move into another wormhole. With the increased mass to 5b larger null fleets would be able to make it through and back chains. Having said that I don't think it's a big deal, 3b is more than enough as it is now for a large null fleet to make it through and it's not something that I've seen often.

So yeah, overall I think it's negative. It's definitely a buff to larger groups though, I see very few advantages in the change for smaller groups.

There are some significant disadvantages though and those disadvantages are going to really hurt smaller groups rather than the big groups, so I'm not sure if this change is worth it. Still worth discussing the pros and cons though.

Smaller groups will potentially be less interested in fielding capitals in the first place if they know they can get dropped on by more than they have available. Some groups would really struggle to find 4 capital pilots with caps ready to go.

So Low-Class would benefit quite nicely from it then ey?!

The main advantage smaller groups should always have over larger groups should be that the game design should grant them better mobility. To that end, going through WH should be choke points for larger groups more than it is for smaller groups.

Allowing more capitals to go through following mass changes to WH would be a direct benefit to the larger groups. The calculations should provide similar results as now, or, if anything, always making collapsing on odd numbers of max mases rather than making it easier to collapse through even number of largest ships going through. I.e. If the max mass is 300m for example, the total mass should be a multiple of 300m and not be a multiple of 600m.

then clearly when Hard Knocks builds its XL Citadel in its C6 Magnetar it will become literally impregnable.
.

Lets say the mass allows 3 armor fitted caps, but allows 4 shield fitted caps what will be the consequences?

**** when did HK move into a C6 mag, i am so behind on the intels.........

"Internal Playtest update: XL citadel successfully reinforced. We entered the field with 41 faction fit dreads, left with 26." - CCP Fozzie

Tweet
Reddit Thread

I've been trying to emphasize the increase in defensive capabilities in all classes of wormholes. Has there ever been a single POS that killed 26 out of 41 faction fit dreads by itself before being reinforced? Imagine attacking a citadel with that much firepower while there is an enemy fleet defending it as well.

Note that the OP mentions high-class WH mass only. If you get an XL citadel up in a C1-C4 it will be nearly impervious as you can focus all defenses entirely on subcaps.

C6-C6 should have an appropriate amount of risk for the higher site payout. Part of that has risk has been invasions, which has led to some of the most memorable fights. It would be a shame if invasions become impractical/irrelevant in the citadel expansion. WH space is supposed to be dangerous, not just an ISK printing option.

That said, hopefully the capital escalation changes are done right to keep the reward side balanced as well.

Allowing more than 3 capital to pass through the hole would be a huge problem for smaller groups, they will get blobbed even worse by groups who reckless abandon gank and take the maximum amount of capitals they can and rely on scanning themselves out through a different hole.

i feel very strongly that this will just further promote faggotry with more hero dreading etc to reduce risk because defending against in rollers will just be that much more harder....

after all, most of the people that roll in claim to be after "PvP" not butchering people in smaller groups that can't hope to defend themselves if their capital number superiority is now null and void.

I doubt allowing one additional cap can be considered a "huge problem". If someone is willing to crash their own hole using three caps and a subcab fleet to kill someone in the connecting wormhole, they will almost certainly win the fight with or without a fourth capital. Allowing 4 capitals to pass through a wormhole is primarily intended for people to make one round trip with 2 capitals, be it to run sites or fight someone in their home.

IMO only C6 wormholes should have their mass increased to allow 4 cap jumps through. This will give people a reason to fight for c6 systems.

What!? how did you take the insinuation that the attacking side will have an even bigger advantage post patch with the refitting change

How will they have a bigger advantage? ... You can still refit post patch btw.

Anyone arguing that increasing mass on WHs does not benefit large corps way more than small corps is either lying, ignorant or selling something.

PS: There's a really big difference between 3 dreads and 4 dreads Rek. There really is.

Corp size and capital power I all relative. Yes there are extreme examples like hard knocks but most but most corps will not field 3 capitals and a large sub cap fleet in the current system, because of the huge risk and logistical nightmare. People only do it if they think they are going to win which I why I said 1 extra dread won't matter.

I reality most people will just bring 2 caps to a fight in a connected wormhole and returned home. I think this is better than the current situation.

For example: Do you really think that or are you simply trying to be a smart ass?

The ability to field a dread and a carrier against someone in there own home (with cap superiority) clearly adds variety to gameplay. Yes you can escalate with a further 2 caps but the hostlers will always have the home field advantage. It allows small groups to even up the odds without committing 100% by closing the wormhole behind.

If you don't want to have a constructive discussion fine, don't reply to my posts, and save your snide comments for someone else please.

if you up the mass, sure ok, i can concede that it might make a few small groups commit caps to a fight with another small group.
what it also does it guarantee that the large groups will always crush the smaller groups because theyll now be able to dump 4-5 caps on them rather than just 3 and the smaller groups lose home field advantage because they dont have access to 10 caps to out escalate an attacking force anymore and will be forced to defend with even or lower cap numbers against larger invading forces in fights they have no chance of winning far more often.

the general end result is a widening of the large corp vs. small corp gap in terms of what fights they can expect to stand a chance in which only leads to an N+1 mentality that isnt good for anything at all, ESPECIALLY not diversity of any kind.

none of this is rocket science, just think about what is really going to happen, not what you hope will happen in an idea world of butterflies and rainbows.

if you actually want to have WHs be return tripable in multiple caps, I get that, it would be nice. but flat upping the WH mass so that more caps fit through is NOT the answer.
the idea solution IMO would require a rework of the mechanics to allow cap ships (possibly any ships?) to return through a jumped WH without adding mass to it.
eg: you could take 3 caps through a 3bil WH 1 way, OR you could take 2 in and back without closing the hole.

PS: any mass changes the the cap ships themselves will obviously need to be reflected in the WH masses too, that's a completely separate issue.

Increase C4 connection mass to allow one capital.

Keep jumpable mass the same, increase total WH mass so we can make battleship fleets shadow T3 fleets.
Allow maximum of one more cap through (total of four) a fresh wormhole?
Increase C4 connection mass to allow one capital.

Interesting idea - we talking both ways?

The Corps living in C4 wormholes atm are living there for a reason.
And most of the time it is thex either can-¦t or won-¦t have capital warfare for whatever reasons or they just want to have the edge by having acces to capitals when aggressors don-¦t,
but do enjoy the double j-space

I'm more in favor of the opposite; allow more subcaps through holes but not necessarily more caps.
...
Would be nice if more battleships could be used in wspace, either by increasing hole mass or reducing battleship mass..

I would advocate keeping WH Mass limits the same, however I would also like to see more capital movement around - why not consider another option, such as introduce a rig, like a capital (or possibly large) rig that specifically reduces mass, at the expense of a related statistic - an inverse Higgs Rig of some type.

This could allow for additional mobility of caps for seeding, or just getting capitals into a home hole, whilst not adjusting WH mass caps, which would affect more ship movements rather than just capitals.

^ Sounds interesting but it would be massively overpowered. You could too easily use it as a capital staging point for evictions.

You could simple use holder charters and log off multiple capitals in the shattered system, then as soon as your scout finds a good target and plots you a chain to bring your subcaps in... Boom, instant siege force!

As i said it's an interesting idea and needs work but it's not really what this thread is about.

2 amarr faux with each one t2 plate on it have a mass of 2.796 , a minimum variance hole is 3 bil-10% 2.7 bil .
So if they do not change the mass of wormhole's ,then tommorow less caps fit trough a wh.

Send 1 fax in first, send subcap fleet in 2nd, send 2nd fax in to close the hole.
Send dread, subcaps, fax 2 then 3.
Hell offline the plate and online it on the otherside...