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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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:



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.

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.

Honestly can't wait to see the blog about how badly Worm Holes need Jump Gates (i.e.: Stabilizers) to be *better*...

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.

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.

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.

If anything, update the nebulae in WH space so it looks all cool and shiny like the rest of EvE. We still have the old crappy nebulae with new cool pulsar, mag, etc effects and the contrast is rather odd.

I am not a wormhole dweller although I have considered moving into one several times.

But even I can see how damaging this would be to the wormhole way of life.

W-space is the only place in EVE where you can PVP without the risk of getting blobbed or hot-dropped and it needs to stay that way.

I used to think that it would would be cool if cyno's and jumpdrives worked in W-space. with a mechanic to prevent cyno's in C4 and lower. Of course systems linked by a worm hole would not necessarily be close to one another so it would take so time to find systems within jump distance of each other. But even this would severely damage the current wormhole way of life. The possibility of getting hot-dropped would be equally damaging to the small scale as this idea of wormhole stabilizers.

Leave W-space alone, except maybe expanding it. but the mechanics are close to perfect. do not break them.

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.

Just wanted to agree with the poster.

WH stabilizers would COMPLETELY DESTROY any and all reason to live in a wh.

You could hop in at any time from a system with a blob (which is why GOON supports stabilizers, f**king blob warfare needs to stay in null)
Clear out all the sites, and hop back.

This would completely thrash/destroy the market for any and all WH goods... probably another thing GOON wants.

WH's are excellent in their design atm. Small gang pvp for the most part, with the ability to siege and have take downs if properly planned (RnK or AHARM anyone?)

I've lived in a WH for just shy of a year now, and while they can be very profitable, there is also a lot of risk and a lot of time investment (constant scanning, logistics for getting stuff in/out)

All in all i think WH's are one of the most balanced aspects of eve, and shouldn't really be bothered.

think it was attually the rnk csm member who suggested it not any of the null sec csm's

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.

Ah... Never had your wormhole pos camped 24/7 by a major invader huh?

Most wormhole corps are small size. The current wormhole mechanic is a good thing.

You want to stabilize my wormhole so you can shove endless amounts of T3's through it? Would you consider letting me moon mine in my wormhole? Now that would make you 0.0 carebears really cry.

Oh... and for crying out loud. You wanted the 5000+ members in your alliance so you could "own" 0.0. What's the problem? Having a hard time supporting all of them?

Cry harder. I'll send some tissues. I suggest you figure out how to make 0.0 profitable. Hint: You can't all be mindless pvp'ers who plex in their T3's and carriers. Suggest you train "industry" skills. Seem them rocks? Go get 'em!

Otherwise it seems like you're a failure at 0.0 and just want to mooch off the pro's who specialize in making team work happen iCertainly seems that way with lowsec incursions. Pathetic. Really pathetic.

+1
This petition needs to stay on the first page.

+1 Just say no to easy cap and blob mechanics.

One of mittani's stupid ideas so that everything in the game is homogeneous and the same strategies apply everywhere, because that would most benefit him.

+1 Just say no to easy cap and blob mechanics.

I tried very hard not to snigger, but the juvenile in me could not resist a smirk at your begging for your wormholes not to be interfered with.

Ah... Never had your wormhole pos camped 24/7 by a major invader huh?

Most wormhole corps are small size. The current wormhole mechanic is a good thing.

You want to stabilize my wormhole so you can shove endless amounts of T3's through it? Would you consider letting me moon mine in my wormhole? Now that would make you 0.0 carebears really cry.

Oh... and for crying out loud. You wanted the 5000+ members in your alliance so you could "own" 0.0. What's the problem? Having a hard time supporting all of them?

Cry harder. I'll send some tissues. I suggest you figure out how to make 0.0 profitable.

Otherwise it seems like you're a failure at 0.0 and just want to mooch off the pro's who specialize in making team work happen in Wormholes. Certainly seems that way with lowsec incursions. Pathetic. Really pathetic.

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

Seriously? What the hell is wrong with the people in this thread. WH dwellers too. WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?! Line up right now so I can slap some sense in you.

Wormholes are one of the richest areas of the game currently. You put in money, you get out MUCH more money, and you have the ability to buy your super shiney you have always dreamed of.

WHY IN THE HELL would anyone want to change that. I can see the c2-c4 residents making their claims here and ACTUALLY thinking they are good, that can be forgiven, but your c5-c6ers... do you realize what you are supporting? You are supporting the death of wormholes as we know it.

Sleepers shooting posses... No just no. I do not want to have to haul in ammo for my pos every two weeks along with the fuel runs. (well I dont actually make the runs, but I have in the past so I know the pain)

Sleepers podding people. Yes cause this makes sense. Lets support getting podded by sleepers... that way it can take us three weeks to get back into our home.



What?! So we run sites in static, even get a little bit of pew in, time to pop our hole. OH LOOK our dread got caught in the static because we reached the hard limit on number of jumps. Think before you post...


Sleepers attacking safespots... Seriously? Are you serious here? You are going to make me fit a cloak on EVERY SINGLE ship I have? I guess this would also move sleepers to appear on the wormholes as well, cause you know it fits in with this line of thinking. This would mean that no calculated ganks, no concerted setups that take a few minutes to get going are viable. Everything is all. "Grab a kite ship and HURRY sleepers will start showing up any second and I my oracle/falcon/rapier cant tank them."

One final note that was not mentioned in the OP but several people are mentioning. Wormhole stabilizers. NO NO NO NO NO! This will end all wormhole life as it is. The major null sec groups will invade when either cfc or soco wins their little war over delve and we, the wormholers, will pay the price for it.

---

This is what wormholes need. More noobs in my c5s and c6s (its more likely than you think) so I can shoot them. Simple as that.

I make plenty of money inside of wormholes, and I work a full time job with only two days out of the week to make my money. I rarely, if ever, make money on my work days, and I make enough to support two toons with plexes, and buy bhaalghorns, black ops, and other shiny ships that tickle my fancy, and I get enough time to rustle enough jimmies of noobs to fill my cup with their delicious tears.

If you want to change anything about wormholes, give us some pos upgrades (NO DOCKING!!!!) so that it will be a tad bit easier to not get donkey effed by a spai.

+1 Just say no to easy cap and blob mechanics.

WH's are not well in the current incarnation.... but that has to do with predictability...

A wh stabilizer by itself is a bad idea.... but a WH stabilizer coupled with more... interesting... WH mechanics is potentially a good idea. ... WH's need to be far, far less manageable, so players actually gamble on whether they'll lose a ship on the wrong side.

If you make the WH's much more risky to close, people will start to leave them "destabilized".... to compensate, add a WH stabilizer that insures a moderate force can traverse the WH without it collapsing.... The stabilizer can then act as a beach head that needs defending, because if it gets destroyed, that force probably wont' all be able to return...

I realize there is a downside to making WH's far harder to safely close..... Essentially, it hurts the ability of WH dwellers who farm out their system's plexes and need to be able to create new WH's to other systems to run.... IMO, rather than continuously collapse your static WH until you find a system you like, there should be a mechanic to open new WH's, while leaving the old WH's alone....

They seem to be working perfectly fine actually, We all seem to enjoy them.



Actually a stabilizer is just a bad idea, You want to take one of the only parts of the eve that limits blobs and remove that limiter? Doesn't really make sense there



People already leave holes critical, it happens all the time, moderate forces already can go through wormholes, It seems you dont know how mass works, and that 3billion is a rather large number and can fit a large amount of ships. I'm getting the feeling you don't even fly in W-Space because your views are so skewed.



No, you just want wormholes to be like Kspace, gtfo.

Actually a stabilizer is just a bad idea, You want to take one of the only parts of the eve that limits blobs and remove that limiter? Doesn't really make sense there

People already leave holes critical, it happens all the time, moderate forces already can go through wormholes, It seems you dont know how mass works, and that 3billion is a rather large number and can fit a large amount of ships. I'm getting the feeling you don't even fly in W-Space because your views are so skewed.



No, you just want wormholes to be like Kspace, gtfo.

My point is that if WH mechanics change, so you use stabilizers to control ship movement through a WH (rather than static game-able mass attributes), you could solve the idiotically low-risk close WH, open WH, close WH, open WH nonsense that prevails in WH Life. In this sense, WH stabilizers (which are really just the new player operated mass mechanic that can be interfered with by third parties) would be interesting and potentially good.... Then again, if you were a risk-adverse PvE'er that can't handle more risk in your WH, I understand why you'd be vehemently opposed to this...

It isn't low risk to close a hole, nearly every orca we kill is on a wormhole, and I like killing orcas on wormholes, as do other people I'm sure.

You can say whatever you would like, but the point stands that you want to have players manipulate wormhole timers and mass using a module, known as a "wormhole stabilizer", which would then be the only method for using an actual wormhole and overly complicates the regular use, and eliminates many opportunities to kill capitals and other hole closing ships in Wspace

My point is that if WH mechanics change, so you use stabilizers to control ship movement through a WH (rather than static game-able mass attributes), you could solve the idiotically low-risk close WH, open WH, close WH, open WH nonsense that prevails in WH Life. In this sense, WH stabilizers (which are really just the new player operated mass mechanic that can be interfered with by third parties) would be interesting and potentially good.... Then again, if you were a risk-adverse PvE'er that can't handle more risk in your WH, I understand why you'd be vehemently opposed to this...

The problem with everything posted in this thread is that is just makes no sense to me. You see I am a simple kind of man. I love to shoot people, sleepers, gas clouds, and posses. (posses is barely on that list because it only produces tears.)

Anything that will make it harder for me to produce the tears of others makes me die a little bit on the inside. Do you feel me dying? Do you feel it? WELL STOP IT!!!

As I said earlier, WHs only need 1 thing. More noobs for me to shoot. The spawn rate on sleeper sites is good, the frequency on ladar sites is good, the unpredictability of finding wild holes is great. It gives us a sense of adventure. We cant just go about willy nilly like putting our big ships through new holes, you never know whats inside there.

But you sir... want to change that. You want to make it safe to move large amounts of ships through a wormhole at one time. **** THAT, and **** your plan. (with a capital *). You will completely kill all of us when you allow the goons or HBC into our holes by simply erecting a module on our holes. (Trust me, I know how TheMitanni likes to erect things)

You simply have no clue how WHs or the WH community works. You have never lived in anything that required brain power to use, and you have no clue of the amount of death that awaits you if you ever step foot inside one of our holes. All you simply know is that "WHs are hard, I want to make them easier"

Sit in your drake, farm your c2 sleepers, and leave us higher end folks alone. You will be better for the experience.

Why not wormhole DEstabilizers. That way we can really just give a giant middle finger to everyone suggested stupid crap in this thread.

lol... we pretty much want the same thing...

The only way I'd advocate a WH stabilizer, is if all WH's are initially"destabilized," and the stabilizer (which would be a vulnerable, attack-able module) somehow replaced the mass limits that currently governs WH travel.... I understand most people hear only "module to let infinite ships through a WH" and equate it with WH blobbing... but that's not even remotely what I'm suggesting....

And as for your WH destablizer....How would it function? A bomb you launch at the WH to randomly remove mass (<-- terrible idea, as people would just launch bombs to close WH's without risking your precious orca targets)?? Would it be a module you anchored that collapsed the WH the next time a ship comes through (<-- terrible idea, as people would use them to close WH's without risking your precious orca targets)? How could it function in a manner that I can't exploit to risklessly close a WH??

The problem is, WH mass limit is too mathematically defined... people know exactly how to close each type of WH.... and worse, WH vitality is actually dependent on the ability to close a WH, because you need to spawn a new WH to find more sites to run.... What CCP really needs to do is randomize WH extinction events... and I don't know the best way to do this, but I'll listen to whatever's on the table to identify it as good or bad....

Other ideas, coupled together, could also work: 1.) Prevent ships from using a WH when their mass is more than the remaining mass on a WH.... and perhaps have it actually close the WH without going through!! 2.) Make it so a new static WH will spawn without needing to close your old static. Example: Whenever a current static goes critical (time and/or mass), a new static will spawn. 3.) More ambiguous WH mass limits via WH mass regeneration (+100m-ish kg/hr).... but don't update the mass critical messages. 4.) Change the critical point, so a WH claims critical randomly when the mass limit remaining is between 10-35% WH's mass limit. 5.) Alter the time-remaining to vary inversely with mass regeneration.... i.e., if a WH's mass is regenerating, then perhaps it's life cycle speeds up so it decays faster...

There are pro's and con's to each of the above too...

+1

i find it kind of lazy that sleepers are still based around the scan anom run anom mechanic, i would find it more fitting to have to go through acceleration gates perhaps using hackers etc and other skills to navigate through complexs

ie longer perhaps even randomly generated DED sites which could be completed with different ships, some requiring only a covops say others requiring pure combat vessals

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)

Yes, occasionally nice ships get caught trying to close a WH, that doesn't make it unsafe.... it could easily be just moronic pilots...

Whatever words you're trying to attribute to me, this is how I feel:

The ability to control your entrance and exits allows a WH dweller to make their system far more safe than I think they should be.... In my opinion, if you can dictate your entrances and exits, you have WAY to much control.... Imagine living in k-space, where you could tell the stargate to randomly aim at a different system anytime you want.... you just need to pass the right mass of ships through it.... that level of control is bad for the game, even if WH's don't have local, cyno's, or stations....

If changing WH mechanics involves some type of WH stabilizer, I'm more than willing to listen and evaluate it... it might make WH travel overly complicated or it might make an interesting and new tactical tool. I'm not vetoing the idea until I can review it within the appropriate framework... Also, I'm not saying WH stabilizers are the only way to solve the ease with which WH's are closed.... perhaps the mass equation needs to be balanced with diminishing returns, such that if you send a Specific Ship through a WH, it counts for full mass the first time, 10% mass the second time, 1% mass the third time and so on.... Then you might catch multiple orcas instead of just one...

I agree that mass limits should not be touched however i can see a stabilizer preventing natural decay and keeping the wormhole from despawning until it actually collapses.