Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
50
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 10:40:00 -
[1] - Quote
First of all, Two Step - I hope I can count on Your support for this motion.
Now on to the topic:
Right now WH's are unique in their design and with that they are very different in their nature than k-space.
There are hard limits on what one can move trough a certain type of WH.
This limits both: ship size and ships amount that can at one time move into given WH in short time. This allows us to keep WH in range of small-pvp scale engagements. Which is great for WH gameplay
If anyone bottered to watch RnK famous Clarion Call 3 on Youtube - You can siege WH with small forces. Once You overcome initial resistance with good planning and resources You can start amassing troups inside (once you controll WH's in system its piece of cake)
WH are like fortresses of Middle Age Europe - You need to actually take time and preparations to siege them. But once You breach outer walls you can move more people in, as the gate is broken, and walls crumbled.
As history of W-space showed - no WH is inpenetrable.
What some members of CSM are sugesting is terrible - to implement some form of WH stabilizers? This will remove the hard limit that make this space unique. This will remove the hard work required to siege well-defended WH's. This will actually hurt more the small corps that dont have huge forces, but just enough to fight on equall footing against forces that can move trough their WH limits.
What W-space needs or could benefit from is totally different than what is proposed:
- WH need POS revamp - WH needs individual storing place in hangars and more security of those - WH needs more variety in terms of PVE (the same problems incursion have - to predictable) - WH needs more dangers from Sleepers (sleepres atacking on safespots, rewarping to mining sites, atacking pos, etc) - WH may need more variety in WH's - like ocassional smaller or lager WH (within current system capital limit - so no capitals in C1-4) - WH may (i stress that - MAY) need some form of upgrades (this one is very, very delicate subject) - WH may (i stress that - MAY) need some form of moon-mining (no moon goo, some totally different material that can be linked to some new features or maybe just the source of ice) - again a very delicate subject - WH may need higher triers of WH (C7,8???) with even more difficult to counter bonuses/penalties and even harder Sleepres - WH may need more variance in terms of anomalies bonuses (pulsar, blackhole, etc...) - WH may need more WH systems added
WHAT WH DONT NEED is: - any form of moving supercaps inside - any form of moving much larger forces trough a single WH - any form of moving capital ships inside lower WH's (C1-4) - any form of prolonging WH life to allow connection to Your home WH for entire Siege time (jump in, fight over space, reinfore, reinforce time, finish taking donw poses, get loot get back home) |
Jabba Miner
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 10:48:00 -
[2] - Quote
Agreed, +1 |
Maksia I
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 10:53:00 -
[3] - Quote
I apologize for my English, I use a translator :D I'm ok at read, but I write poorly in English
although they do not agree with all points, I still contend that it is a good proposal
|
Lord Lewtz
AQUILA INC 0ccupational Hazzard
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:06:00 -
[4] - Quote
+1 Just say no to easy cap and blob mechanics. |
King Rothgar
Autocannons Anonymous
146
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:31:00 -
[5] - Quote
Agreed, I may not hang out in w-space often but it's current basic mechanics must remain untouched, they are perfect as is. I don't think anyone can reasonably argue against more site anom/sig variety or adding more systems. |
Takeshi Yamato
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
135
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 11:56:00 -
[6] - Quote
I agree, though I do think that longer lasting wormholes would be nice to improve quality of wh life, especially for small scale activities. With wh's lasting two days instead of one, it would save you rescanning if yesterday's wormhole system chain still has targets or resources to harvest. Unless of course you or someone else exhausted the mass.
I'm hardly a wh veteran but don't see how longer wormhole durations would benefit an invasion force. The limiting factor is mass, not duration. |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
56
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 12:58:00 -
[7] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:I agree, though I do think that longer lasting wormholes would be nice to improve quality of wh life, especially for small scale activities. With wh's lasting two days instead of one, it would save you rescanning if yesterday's wormhole system chain still has targets or resources to harvest. Unless of course you or someone else exhausted the mass.
I'm hardly a wh veteran but don't see how longer wormhole durations would benefit an invasion force. The limiting factor is mass, not duration.
All depends on what kind of forces are needed to kill enemy.
While attacking heavy bunkered capital forces require large ships, so yes, mass if a deciding factor. But when atacking c4 for example, you can move 40 tengus/BC tier 3/command ships/HAC's - clean up in two days and get back, while all this time having a way out if **** hits the fan. Or get home, do some pve while waiting for reinforcment timer to end than move there again and than get back home - thats still less than needed for WH to enter Criticall mass if i remember corectly
|
Takeshi Yamato
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
137
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 13:30:00 -
[8] - Quote
Max Kolonko wrote:While attacking heavy bunkered capital forces require large ships, so yes, mass if a deciding factor. But when atacking c4 for example, you can move 40 tengus/BC tier 3/command ships/HAC's - clean up in two days and get back, while all this time having a way out if **** hits the fan. Or get home, do some pve while waiting for reinforcment timer to end than move there again and than get back home - thats still less than needed for WH to enter Criticall mass if i remember corectly
Still failing to see how that would be an advantage to invasion forces. A convenience yes, a real advantage? No.
Going back home and relinquish control of your entry wormhole? Your enemy will close it in a few minutes. If you want to come back, you'll need to have a character in the invasion system to find you a new entry (or cycle holes hoping to get lucky).
There is always a way out and back home. If you can't go back where you came from, you scan a new hole down. Finding an exit from the invasion system should be trivial. If you're really carrying lots of loot, you'll need to consume multiple holes anyway. |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
56
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 13:36:00 -
[9] - Quote
Takeshi Yamato wrote:Max Kolonko wrote:While attacking heavy bunkered capital forces require large ships, so yes, mass if a deciding factor. But when atacking c4 for example, you can move 40 tengus/BC tier 3/command ships/HAC's - clean up in two days and get back, while all this time having a way out if **** hits the fan. Or get home, do some pve while waiting for reinforcment timer to end than move there again and than get back home - thats still less than needed for WH to enter Criticall mass if i remember corectly Still failing to see how that would be an advantage to invasion forces. A convenience yes, a real advantage? No. Going back home and relinquish control of your entry wormhole? Your enemy will close it in a few minutes. If you want to come back, you'll need to have a character in the invasion system to find you a new entry (or cycle holes hoping to get lucky). There is always a way out and back home. If you can't go back where you came from, you scan a new hole down.
I'm not gona argue about it. You are right.
Having WH open for longer than 24 hours is not as bad as my first assumption - but the question is, should it be player driven way of expending lifetime of connection or just random WH having longer than usual lifespan
|
Jaari Val'Dara
The Illuminatii Mildly Intoxicated
58
|
Posted - 2012.01.18 15:06:00 -
[10] - Quote
Wh's as they currently are, is the closest any part of eve comes to perfect. Any "wh stabilizer" would be disastrous beyond words. |
|
Jish Ness
Invictus Industries Eternal Strife
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 07:31:00 -
[11] - Quote
Agreed. As a wormhole inhabitant I would not like these changes. |
L Salander
Bite me inc. Narwhals Ate My Duck
13
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 08:10:00 -
[12] - Quote
Csm are really proposing wh stabilizers? Urgh how stupid, have they actually been in w-space? Proposal to remove clueless csm from proposing changes to aspects of gameplay they know nothing about |
Lunataria
Blackstar Privateer Consortium Sovereign Technologies
8
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 11:52:00 -
[13] - Quote
Supporting this, no WH stabilizers, wormholes are actually fun as they are now for smaller gangs |
Ya Huei
Imperial Collective
46
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 12:28:00 -
[14] - Quote
I think it was Mittens trying to monopolize C6 farming by kicking out all W-space corps and static linking those C6's to his evil nullsec empire ;)
|
Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
110
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 15:25:00 -
[15] - Quote
Supported. |
Parsee789
Immaterial and Missing Power
64
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 19:41:00 -
[16] - Quote
Wormhole Stabilizers? I have never heard of such a moronic idea. This goes against the very meaning of what wormhole space needs to be, and it goes against CCP's idea of making wormholes more difficult to inhabit.
Nullsec CSM members probably never lived in a wormhole or been in one for very long.
Remember these guys are in it for themselves.
Nullsec CSM members wanted high-end ores to be REMOVED from Wormholes a few months ago. |
Tarunik Raqalth'Qui
The Kairos Syndicate Transmission Lost
58
|
Posted - 2012.01.19 20:34:00 -
[17] - Quote
Parsee789 wrote:Wormhole Stabilizers? I have never heard of such a moronic idea. This goes against the very meaning of what wormhole space needs to be, and it goes against CCP's idea of making wormholes more difficult to inhabit.
Nullsec CSM members probably never lived in a wormhole or been in one for very long.
Remember these guys are in it for themselves.
Nullsec CSM members wanted high-end ores to be REMOVED from Wormholes a few months ago. Yeah, nullbears don't do WHs well, if at all. ;) |
Goodluvins
Darkstorm Corporation
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 01:18:00 -
[18] - Quote
Agree with OP. +1 |
Mars Theran
EVE Rogues EVE Rogues Alliance
72
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 07:42:00 -
[19] - Quote
Agree with you on everything but the last bit, which I have supported elsewhere. I can see a use for limited mass stabilization of Wormholes using player anchored gates/structures. These would require fuel of course, and function like a POS in that fashion, and also be capable of being destroyed. No reinforcement timer. |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
145
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 20:05:00 -
[20] - Quote
Mars Theran wrote:Agree with you on everything but the last bit, which I have supported elsewhere. I can see a use for limited mass stabilization of Wormholes using player anchored gates/structures. These would require fuel of course, and function like a POS in that fashion, and also be capable of being destroyed. No reinforcement timer. I have to disagree with the poster above me (with all due respect sir!).
Remember, Two-Step isn't the only CSM with a familiarity with WH's: Meissa Anunthiel's Blog - Ahhhh, just to stir the pot a bit, and maybe get WH'ers stirred up and involved in the process. From the Blog the interesting bit to WHers here:
Meissa Anunthiel wrote: This would be a long post, and I'm not sure this is the place to handle it because it's going to be long-winded argument. The short version of it is I am in favour of a mechanic, no matter what it is, that removes the invulnerability that some people well entrenched in their wormhole enjoy. Obviously that position is not one shared by AHARM.
That said, the difficulty with which one can reach a wormhole (logistics wise and all that) is what makes it interesting and viable too, something that makes it unique and interesting.
Balanced mechanics can be found, and the wormhole stabilizer idea is but one that has already been discussed (we actually had a discussion with Two Step from AHARM and CCP Soundwave on that very subject during the emergency meeting), but I do not shy away from stating that I was the one advocating for a mechanism to get rid of the invulnerability some groups enjoy in wormholes while keeping the overwhelming majority of the wormhole dwellers in no worse a position than they are now. Which is a bit not mentioned in the minutes.
I don't care if it's a stabilizer, a destabilizer, an undectectable wormhole entrance, or a divine intervention. I'll make a longer post as soon as humanly possible on the subject because, as shortly described, this would be a negative game-changer for everyone living in a wormhole. So if you can hold your judgement on my position until you heard it in full, that'd be great. And if you want to bash me then, by all means. :-)
"Some CSMs suggested that Sleepers should attack POSes, and/or pod people.". Pod people, why not, attack POSes I objected to that idea.
I have my own opinion of these statements, however, for the moment i prefer to think it through, rather than post before I have considered everything, which is a bit of change for me...
Lastly, I don't know if I'm remembering this correctly, but there was some speculation that the mechanic/module whatever that Sansha was using to form incursion wormholes was something that was going to/might be put into play generally in Eve. Can't remember where I read that, so it might just have been uninformed rambling.
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
|
D'Tell Annoh
4Sight Enterprises Pulsar Prime
25
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 23:29:00 -
[21] - Quote
Yeah, I'm with you on most of this stuff.
Keep WH's for the small corps.
+1 |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
91
|
Posted - 2012.01.20 23:43:00 -
[22] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:Mars Theran wrote:Agree with you on everything but the last bit, which I have supported elsewhere. I can see a use for limited mass stabilization of Wormholes using player anchored gates/structures. These would require fuel of course, and function like a POS in that fashion, and also be capable of being destroyed. No reinforcement timer. I have to disagree with the poster above me (with all due respect sir!). Remember, Two-Step isn't the only CSM with a familiarity with WH's: Meissa Anunthiel's Blog - Ahhhh, just to stir the pot a bit, and maybe get WH'ers stirred up and involved in the process. From the Blog the interesting bit to WHers here: Meissa Anunthiel wrote: This would be a long post, and I'm not sure this is the place to handle it because it's going to be long-winded argument. The short version of it is I am in favour of a mechanic, no matter what it is, that removes the invulnerability that some people well entrenched in their wormhole enjoy. Obviously that position is not one shared by AHARM.
That said, the difficulty with which one can reach a wormhole (logistics wise and all that) is what makes it interesting and viable too, something that makes it unique and interesting.
Balanced mechanics can be found, and the wormhole stabilizer idea is but one that has already been discussed (we actually had a discussion with Two Step from AHARM and CCP Soundwave on that very subject during the emergency meeting), but I do not shy away from stating that I was the one advocating for a mechanism to get rid of the invulnerability some groups enjoy in wormholes while keeping the overwhelming majority of the wormhole dwellers in no worse a position than they are now. Which is a bit not mentioned in the minutes.
I don't care if it's a stabilizer, a destabilizer, an undectectable wormhole entrance, or a divine intervention. I'll make a longer post as soon as humanly possible on the subject because, as shortly described, this would be a negative game-changer for everyone living in a wormhole. So if you can hold your judgement on my position until you heard it in full, that'd be great. And if you want to bash me then, by all means. :-)
"Some CSMs suggested that Sleepers should attack POSes, and/or pod people.". Pod people, why not, attack POSes I objected to that idea. I have my own opinion of these statements, however, for the moment i prefer to think it through, rather than post before I have considered everything, which is a bit of change for me... Lastly, I don't know if I'm remembering this correctly, but there was some speculation that the mechanic/module whatever that Sansha was using to form incursion wormholes was something that was going to/might be put into play generally in Eve. Can't remember where I read that, so it might just have been uninformed rambling.
Yeah, I've read the blog. I know she has SOME experience, since she is from RnK, and some RnK corps tag along when Guilotine Therapy roams wormholes. But she is still Null-sec representative and not WH representative.
However, until she will show us her (well, his) magnificent great idea I'm going to assume the end result will cause larger blobs in WH's - and WH's are all about SMALL SCALE PVP.
I, of course, can imagine that there is a solution that will be acceptable for both sides.
Apart from main subject I dont agree with rest of what she wrote regarding WH's (so in other words: NO for podding, YES for sleepers atacking players/poses/etc in space) |
Memoocan
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
11
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 02:10:00 -
[23] - Quote
Before I rant, I support most of OP.
The continuing persistence of the CSM to meddle with mechanics that they do not already have much or any regard for continues to astound me. I realize that there may be some experience for some, but they show their ignorance of how wormholes are meant to be played. That way is the way inhabitants have been living for years now. Personally, I've lived in wormholes for over a year.
In regards to the proposal of a mechanic (stabilization, destab., etcetc) to make wormholes "less invulnerable for the residents" is insulting. That immediately shows true or willful ignorace, perhaps even arrogance, in my eyes. No system is invulnerable, no inhabitant is safe. Not even AHARM. They persist because they fight for it. To live in wspace, you must survive and for a corp to thrive takes more than nullsec players seem to realize. It's not a carebear haven and it's not a minigame. It is the endgame for many and to trod heavily into "our" territory in such a manner is irresponsible of a CSM representative.
I'll end the rant there, I know plenty of similar words have been and will be exchanged. Now what I think should happen for real progress.
Talk to wormhole dwellers. Simple as that. Go straight to the horse's mouth and you will find that things can be better for all involved. If interweb spcshps iz srs bsnz, which as the CSM it would be so for reps, then do it right the first time.
Wormhole mechanics as they stand now are solid. Ideas like Sleepers attacking POSes, at least in higher class whs imo, is a good direction and can fit into the existing lore. I'd rather not see a wormhole control mechanic appear, but if it somehow does it better at least fit the lore, again imo.
There's many things that can be done for all sec space and those that live there should be consulted in each case. As I live in wspace, this got to me. No super blobs, no assurances, no mercy.
Take it or leave it. |
Sarina Rhoda
Viral Target
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.21 10:31:00 -
[24] - Quote
I would like to point out though that it was Meissa who raised and suggested the wormhole stabiliser at the most recent csm meeting.
This is from her own blog she sent to evenews 24
Meissa's blog
Quote:That said, the difficulty with which one can reach a wormhole (logistics wise and all that) is what makes it interesting and viable too, something that makes it unique and interesting. Balanced mechanics can be found, and the wormhole stabilizer idea is but one that has already been discussed (we actually had a discussion with Two Step from AHARM and CCP Soundwave on that very subject during the emergency meeting), but I do not shy away from stating that I was the one advocating for a mechanism to get rid of the invulnerabilitysome groups enjoy in wormholes while keeping the overwhelming majority of the wormhole dwellers in no worse a position than they are now.
I used to have faith in what she was saying until this :( I'm definitely going to be voting for Two Step to represent us wh folk in the next csm to make sure no idea as bad as this ever sees the light! |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
145
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 02:34:00 -
[25] - Quote
Honestly can't wait to see the blog about how badly Worm Holes need Jump Gates (i.e.: Stabilizers) to be *better*...
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Borg Stoneson
SWARTA Mostly Clueless
1
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 10:00:00 -
[26] - Quote
I agree with pretty much everything the OP stated. I'd like some sort of nullsec claiming system, but entirely seperate from nullsec mechanics. As for WH stabilisation. I have to admit I can see a use for it, though not in the way intended. I see it as more of a way to link up groups that are spread across several WH's, acting more like a logistical jumpbridge between them. If it has to be placed in a deadspace location away from POS's then all the better as it would give something else for roaming gangs to camp. Thats just what I think it should be like though, and I'll admit there's potential gamebreaking issues involved so I'm not clinging to it as "teh best thing ev4r!". The only people that think it's needed forlarge scale invasions are those that know fuckall about WH invasion mechanics and logistics. |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
93
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 15:30:00 -
[27] - Quote
Asuri Kinnes wrote:Honestly can't wait to see the blog about how badly Worm Holes need Jump Gates (i.e.: Stabilizers) to be *better*...
Borg Stoneson wrote:I agree with pretty much everything the OP stated. I'd like some sort of nullsec claiming system, but entirely seperate from nullsec mechanics. As for WH stabilisation. I have to admit I can see a use for it, though not in the way intended. I see it as more of a way to link up groups that are spread across several WH's, acting more like a logistical jumpbridge between them. If it has to be placed in a deadspace location away from POS's then all the better as it would give something else for roaming gangs to camp. Thats just what I think it should be like though, and I'll admit there's potential gamebreaking issues involved so I'm not clinging to it as "teh best thing ev4r!". The only people that think it's needed forlarge scale invasions are those that know fuckall about WH invasion mechanics and logistics.
Only one post Asuri :) Maybe not a blog, but still :)
Borg, thanks for support, but I dont like JB idea at all. |
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Aperture Harmonics K162
34
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 21:06:00 -
[28] - Quote
Basically, Meissa's clan couldn't rest nova from our control so, they want a game that would let them do it while we all sleep using one connection only.
Most corrupt politicians at least try to conceal their motives. 2/10 for lack of subtlety Meissa. |
Max Kolonko
High Voltage Industries Ash Alliance
95
|
Posted - 2012.01.22 22:53:00 -
[29] - Quote
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:Basically, Meissa's clan couldn't rest nova from our control so, they want a game that would let them do it while we all sleep using one connection only.
Most corrupt politicians at least try to conceal their motives. 2/10 for lack of subtlety Meissa.
High five :) |
L Salander
Bite me inc. Narwhals Ate My Duck
15
|
Posted - 2012.01.23 14:05:00 -
[30] - Quote
Memoocan wrote:Before I rant, I support most of OP.
The continuing persistence of the CSM to meddle with mechanics that they do not already have much or any regard for continues to astound me. I realize that there may be some experience for some, but they show their ignorance of how wormholes are meant to be played. That way is the way inhabitants have been living for years now. Personally, I've lived in wormholes for over a year.
In regards to the proposal of a mechanic (stabilization, destab., etcetc) to make wormholes "less invulnerable for the residents" is insulting. That immediately shows true or willful ignorace, perhaps even arrogance, in my eyes. No system is invulnerable, no inhabitant is safe. Not even AHARM. They persist because they fight for it. To live in wspace, you must survive and for a corp to thrive takes more than nullsec players seem to realize. It's not a carebear haven and it's not a minigame. It is the endgame for many and to trod heavily into "our" territory in such a manner is irresponsible of a CSM representative.
I'll end the rant there, I know plenty of similar words have been and will be exchanged. Now what I think should happen for real progress.
Talk to wormhole dwellers. Simple as that. Go straight to the horse's mouth and you will find that things can be better for all involved. If interweb spcshps iz srs bsnz, which as the CSM it would be so for reps, then do it right the first time.
Wormhole mechanics as they stand now are solid. Ideas like Sleepers attacking POSes, at least in higher class whs imo, is a good direction and can fit into the existing lore. I'd rather not see a wormhole control mechanic appear, but if it somehow does it better at least fit the lore, again imo.
There's many things that can be done for all sec space and those that live there should be consulted in each case. As I live in wspace, this got to me. No super blobs, no assurances, no mercy.
Take it or leave it.
I agree with the rant-y part, particularly how insulting it is to insinuate w-space dwellers are "invulnerable". That's a load of crap, and it seems to me that what people actually mean by "w-space is invulnerable" is "I cant roll in my big nullsec supercap fleet and wreck them". Mechanics that allow you to actually control wormholes, manage their mass, etc completely defeat the point of them in my opinion, and would shift wormhole space into being little more than a nullsec extension.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |