|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 47 post(s) |
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
   |
Posted - 2009.01.26 15:27:00 -
[1]
Sounds aweeeeeeeeeeeeesome!!
I still have a question or two:
1) Would it be possible to jump OUT of a wormhole system, for example with a jumpfreighter? Or is the only connection between wormhole-space and normal space the wormhole(s)?
2)Since it will be possible to see how much time and mass is left on the wormhole, will it also be possible to see how much mass was available in the first place for the wormhole? Otherwise any prediction on how many ships used that wormhole might be pretty nonsense.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 15:40:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: WarlockX
One possible exploit that no one's brought up yet, that comes to mind.
Since worm holes have a mass limit what's to prevent ppl from jumping back and forth with multiple ships on purpose to collapse worm holes so that no one else can access the area.
That is no exploit but intended mechanism. CCP Whisper covered it already 
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 17:31:00 -
[3]
Originally by: CCP Whisper
Every wormhole system will have a wormhole that leads you back to known space.
Noooooooooooooo.......
No 'search for eve space' - treck then? So it is always guaranteed that you can move from wormhole space directly into eve-space through one single wormhole?
Please consider that!!
It would be even more awesome if there would be an x% chance that there are only wormholes leading into wormhole space and not back to eve space! This way it would be really possible that you would end up with some space-nomanding in the (desperate) search for a way back.  |
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.26 17:43:00 -
[4]
Originally by: CCP Whisper
Originally by: Gnulpie
It would be even more awesome if there would be an x% chance that there are only wormholes leading into wormhole space and not back to eve space! This way it would be really possible that you would end up with some space-nomanding in the (desperate) search for a way back.
I'll let Greyscale answer this in more detail in his blog, but I think he's come up with a different solution in the interim that might make getting home bit more difficult from the wormholes with higher difficulty levels. So yes, it might turn into an epic trek back home.
Wooooooot!!
love you all 
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.27 08:35:00 -
[5]
About 2-way wormholes and 'gameing the system'
At the moment it seems to be an easy way to 'fool' the wormhole mechanism so that it spawns wormholes to your favour. How so? Say that you are in W-space and have a wormhole leading to unfavourable space. Now, that to do to improve the sitation? Just jump through the wormhole often enough that the mass limit is reached and the wormhole will close. This should be very easy and very fast also. Then a new wormhole opens with the chance of a connection to a better K-place.
This is not good.
What could be done? 1-way wormholes? They will cause a lot of new problems and are way to harsh.
My idea is that the collapsing mechanism should be reworked!
At the moment for the wormhole the mass of each ship counts at each point of time the same. It doesn't matter to the wormhole if a ship jumps though right after creating of the wormhole or if the wormhole is at the end of its natural lifetime. Each ship counts exactly the same at any point of time.
That should be changed.
Right after the creation of the wormhole, the wormhole should be more stable and ships flying through shouldn't have a big impact on its stability. At the end of the lifetime of a wormhole, it is already quite destabilized and a ship flying though it should have a much bigger impact than normal. In other words, the effective mass of a ship towards the wormhole should vary in time. For a new wormhole the effective mass of a ship should be scaled down compared to the real mass, for an old wormhole the effective mass should be increase. Here two diagrams explaining it more current mass count and new mass count.
Now for the second step.
The maximum mass you could send in a single go through a wormhole should be limited also! And this limit should change with time as well. At first only small and lightweight ships should be able to pass through the freshly created wormhole (tons of it though since their effective mass would be very low!) but when the wormhole matures it should also 'widen' and should allow bigger and more bulky ships to pass.
TL;DR
Introduce 'effective affecting shipmass'; young wormholes will be more stable towards shipmasses, old wormholes will be more unstable towards the same shipmasses.
Introduce maximum mass per single jump for each wormhole.
Introduce time variancy of this maximum mass per single jump; young wormholes will allow only light ships to pass, old wormholes will allow huge and bulky ships to pass. |
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.27 09:24:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Demeterus
Originally by: Gnulpie
At the moment it seems to be an easy way to 'fool' the wormhole mechanism so that it spawns wormholes to your favour.
...
This is not good.
Why not?
Because the big alliances will just hop in there, set up their deathstar pos' and occupy the systems and keep everyone from entering there.
Yeah, they are going to keep people from entering. Because they will quickly close every wormhole leading to unfavourable space with above described mechanism.
Imagine you are in a good W-system and do not want other hostile people to enter there. You scan for wormholes (no problem with enough people at hand) and as soon as you find some you will check if they are leading to unfavourable space where other people can enter easily. If you find such a wormhole, they quickly close it.
This way, they not only can keep a good logistic route running but also they can prevent other people from entering their system easily.
The big alliances will the only ones to profit from such a mechanism and the small guys will have no chance. I don't think that anyone (except the big guys maybe  ) could want this. |
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.27 11:51:00 -
[7]
Originally by: ori thermos
So all worm holes leed to null sec, well my interest in the whole thing just went out the door.
What are you talking about? That is certainly NOT true.
Frist of all, wormholes are (at the moment) all 2-way. That means if you found a wormhole in high sec and entered it and ended up in the wormhole space then you can use that same wormhole to go back to the high-sec system you came from.
Second, if the original wormhole (we assume it was in high sec) collapsed then a new wormhole in this system will open up, somewhere. This new wormhole will connect to some other space and this other space will likely be high sec (because orginally you entered the current system from high-sec) but there is also a chance that this wormhole will not lead to high sec but deeper into w-space or it could also end up at low sec or 0.0, this is completely chance based.
So, not at all each and every w-system will be directly conneced to 0.0!
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.27 11:56:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Xennith
i think what he means is that w-space has no concord.
Ah! My mistake then.
Yeah, no concord in w-space ... and that is GOOD! Really good move from CCP. Makes things really interesting I think.
Of course they can always add, if they feel it necessary later, some sort of npc-concord later. Who knows.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.27 18:07:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Gamer4liff
Originally by: Rex Lashar
Prices are high because fuel costs are high
I really, really, doubt that. How many billions per month does a dysprosium moon make?
off topic:
At current prices around 10 bil per month per dys-moon. Fuel costs are 0.12 bil per month. Fuel costs are quite low atm, it is the supply from the cheated pos-production which is missing and driving prices up currently - and lots of speculation. |
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 14:45:00 -
[10]
If the pos would burn the fuel at a much higher rate so that you cannot fuel them for 3+ weeks in advance then things would be less in favour of the defenders and the attackers will have a better chance.
It is CCP's decision if they want some easier defence or some easier attack. Balancing (especially something completely new like this) is always very difficult and there will be ALWAYS people unhappy with it.
|
|
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.28 15:55:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Zackalwe
...stuf...
How is the above example not viable?
If it is true that this space is terran space and if it is also true (if you remember the background stories) that a single volley of a terran weapon destroyed a whole fleet of dreads (the elders fleet) because the effect was such that the shield of the ships reversed their effect - instead of protecting they crushed the ships - it is easy to imagine that this new wormhole space could have some nasty properties.
Properties which won't affect you much if you are there for a short time but will become annoying and dangerous if you stay longer.
I can imagine for example that a pos would need constant repping. The larger the pos and the shields, the more repping it would need.
Have fun with repping constantly dozens of pos scattered all over wormhole space
Now, I don't say that this will happen. But I say that this is some reasonable scenario based on the background story and the info the devs gave so far.
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2009.01.30 15:45:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Haniblecter Teg
No reinforcement of POSs in W space
That hopefully is completely out of the question!!
Only the super-alliances who has a 23/7 coverage of all the timezones will then benefit from it.
As far as I understand, CCP wants the small people to get best benefits from it and not again those super-alliances dominating everything.
No reinforcements would put the small people at a huge disadvantage. We certainly do not need that.
|
|
|
| |
|