Complain to CCP for the 24 Roadmap and Wormhole Suggestions

I just sent that message to CCP support, but GM Killer Koala told me to write it back here, which is a poor standardized answer that makes no sense, but here it is.


Hi all,

After reading the directors letter, I send you this email to complain for another more year with nothing planned for wormholes.Year after year without new content in wormhole space. And the little things that have happened so far (frigholes spawnrate, changes to marauders, ahbazon, etc.) just reduced activity and targets from the game.

I can understand, from a business perspective, that there are more customers (and potential customers) in nullsec, but wormhole players are customers too, and we pay for the game too. Would be nice that get some attention too. Good attention though, not all the bad decisions taken in the last 4 years that reduced even more the chances of content.

I would like to suggest some ideas for your consideration:

  1. Reduce the amount of wormholes. A big cut, not a small one. 2600 systems is a ridiculous amount considering the wormhole space population. Just as a comparison that you may know, all nullsec space have around 3300 systems. If nullsec space feels empty most of the time, with system after system with no-one (or just 1 or two) guys in local, how do you guys think wormhole space feels? Even more considering the extra work that requires to move from system to system (because we don’t have warpable gates).

  2. Change the ratio between non-shattered and shattered wormholes. Make much more, much, much more, of wormhole space shattered. Force players to:
    a. Do their pve activities in open systems.
    b. Aggregate with other players, instead of living by themselves in a farmhole where they barely log in), because there will be less available systems to anchor structures.
    At the same time, the extra granted static of shattereds will provide more chances to find content too.

  3. Change the wormhole space statics spawn mechanics. All wormhole statics should be open after they spawn. In other words, remove the high class mechanics where the static remains unopened (on the far side of the wormhole) for hours, allowing players to avoid anyone to get into that system by scanning.

Players who want to rat safely have enough tools (criting the hole, door stopping it, scouting the far side, anchoring bubbles o cloaking dictors, etc.). They don’t need the option of just leaving the wormhole unopened during the whole session.

All the previous suggestions are addressed to fix the “players in space” density. In my opinion, wormhole space have another major problem, there is no big goals for groups.

Big and mid-sized groups have nothing to fight for, and nothing to fight for between each other. They might want more members o some more for farms, but not much more. And because they don’t want to annoy their members, they don’t go one against each other.
Most of what you find between big groups is arranged fights just for fun and explosions, which is fine, but is not my cup of tea and I don’t think suit well with what the game is about.

The changes mentioned above will probably help with that problem, as the cut in wormholes plus the increase of the shattered systems will bring some scarcity to wormhole regions that might lead to conflict between groups, but I think that there is something else that can be done that make a bigger difference.

  1. Introduce very few special wormhole systems that have extra value. How many? I’m not sure, probably less than 10 or 12. Why? Because you want them to become the goal for a corporation to have them and keep them as their homehole.

What will make this systems special? Here are some suggestions:

a. The system have an extra static. For example, a non-shattered C6 with 2 statics; a C2 with NS/C5 and an extra C3 static. You get the idea.
b. Introducing wandering wormholes don’t follow normal rules. For example, a C4 that can have wandering nullsec (not just ns frigholes), lowsec or highsec wanderings.
c. The system statics do not follow normal static rules. For example, a C6 with a nullsec static.
d. The system have 2 effects. For example, a non-shattered C5 with Wolf Rayer and Cataclysmic effect; or Pulsar and Magnetar effect; or the system have a permanent non-wormhole weather, like the weathers that exist in other regions of space.
e. Make all those special systems more valuable (greater green site spawn rate, greater wandering spawn rate, better moons and planets, ice fields, etc).

In my opinion, this system will become the target for corporations to become their homes, and they will fight for them if they are valuable overtime, introducing a new and strong conflict driver into the game. Groups will grow and thrive and get control and lose those systems. And that will be awesome to see and be part of it.

Finally, there are some other minor things that I think that you guys have to consider for wormhole space. I’m not sure about how to balance them precisely, that’s on you:

  1. Increase blue loot drop or value in low class (1-4). I know that people say that wormhole is very worth it… I disagree. I think that highclass players have more skills and accounts than the average non-wormhole player, so they are more efficient and capable than a single ishtar spinner in nullsec; and also economy inflation have reduced blue loot value overtime.
    Even with that, my suggestion is just for low class. Make low class more attractive for non-wormhole players and small groups, so we can make wormhole population grow overtime.
    Wormhole have to be more rewarding than nullsec, because everything here is harder (sites, logistics, no-local…) and also cause wormhole groups are less capable recruiting than nullsec groups.

  2. Bring miners and industrials back to wormhole space. For the last years, rorquals have disappeared from wh space (yeah… some rorquals are still out there, but they are for red giant ratting). No more big mining operations, fewer industrials, less mining-focused type of player getting interested in wormholes.
    Make mining and other associated activities worth it. Bring back players who like to undock and sit in a rock for hours. Is great for them and great for hunters.

Some of the previous suggestions can be hard to implement, but most not (like 3, 4 and 5) that are just a few lines of code, and will give a huge boost in wormhole activity.

I understand that influential groups might complain. It is understandable, as they might need to adjust to the changes, but those changes are good to create a new balance.

Please, don’t forget wormhole players. We are as much customers as any other customers that play somewhere else in space.

Regards,
Jeremiah

I’m getting that headache again. It must be Saturday in the ol’ EVE-O forums.

Mr Epeen :sunglasses:

4 Likes

This will never happen. In fact since WH space is literally in the far reaches of uncharted space in our galaxy the amount of WH systems is likely to EXPAND… not contract…

Anyways that’s what stood out to me. I got no opinion on the rest of the suggestions.

Try running for CSM to pitch this directly to the devs.

1 Like

It is not a lore problem. They can keep all the systems if they want, just do not connect them to the chain.

Regarding CSM, I have no interest on it. I’m not this kind of player and, at the same time, I don’t believe that the CSM can help with those issues. Most of the CSM guys are there because they gather support from their groups and allies, so they are not just representing Eve players, but also their group’s interest.

There is no way big groups in wh space will be happy cutting a chunk of c5 and c6, and turning into shattered some of the remaining systems.

1 Like

I’ve stopped reading after this.

4 Likes

Yah I got a good feeling that OP lost a lot of people who might have been ok with the other points he made by first saying to reduce playable systems as that is super unrealistic when CCP markets that there are X number of systems you can fly in and that is what makes EVE so cool.

2 Likes

You may not be aware, but Customer Support is there to handle actual problems and issues players are having with the game. They’re not a venue for passing on your suggestions as to how EVE should be changed.

From what I’ve read, CCP thinks WHs are working fairly close to “as intended” and matching their vision for EVE. So you’ll likely need to demonstrate a bit more of “how this is broken and what the consequences are” before you’ll get much traction with “how to fix it” notions.

So your idea is to make WH less interesting to larger WH entities? Does this strike you as making business sense from CCP’s standpoint?

2 Likes

Big no. At the top end it is already possible to rage-roll into a specific WH with a professional rolling crew (within a reasonable timeframe I might add…). And thats somewhat okay, because the corps living there have either manpower or relations to powerful allys as means of defense (or the defense is somewhow part ofthe renting contract). However, the few low-class inhabitants that remained after the horrible M-Citadel changes that were pushed by the nullsec CSMs for their big groups convenience, cannot rely on such defenses. They are mostly small groups who don’t even make much money in their low-tier holes and their only hope of defense is to fly under the radar, not to step on someones powerful’ feet and have their little 2-station system just vanish in the sea of hundreds of other systems. If you reduce the amount of WHs especially at the lower end, smaller groups simply wouldn’t be able to settle there. You would force everyone into the same crapsystem of blue-standing-chains like in nullsec and lowsec, else you simply couldn’t defend against the constant harassment and eviction attempts.

I have no problem with them adding more shattered WHs, I agree that they offer exciting and interesting “expedition like” content. But not turning existing ones into shattered ones, reasons given above.

I agree somewhat, because the ability to completely “lock in” yourself is quite strong and simply prevents (intentional) player interaction. Yes you can rageroll and surprise a farming crew, but tbh you only can make kills if they are using immobile ships (Indu Core, Bastion) or are not paying attention. Always-Open statics won’t change much however, all the farming groups would simply use one additional char that sits there cloaked and reports any jump, directly triggering an EVAC of the farming ships.

Agree, nothing against that. However: These “values” shall not be limited to “financial” value (aka more sleeper farming) - because especially the groups that could take and hold these handful of special holes already are super-rich. I could imagine a dozen systems with higher rarity moons, so the owners could only reap the benefits if they would actually do mining-ops and have reaction-stations in there.
Also I could imagine a special effect, making it harder to settle (all anchoring/onlining-timers +100%) but also harder to evict (all structure HP/Resist increased). Something along these lines, just not “more anos” or “better anos”.

Somewhat disagree. In the lowclass WHs, the NPCs don’t tackle and you can farm up to C3 in a cheap HAC (250M Sacri will do all of their Anos easily). C4 in a somewhat blingy T3C if you want. If you aren’t greedy and put a Marauder in Bastion into them, you can hardly be catched (just pay attention, fly aligned most of the time). The ISK/eHP should reflect that and the reward per hitpoint to remove should rise from C1 to C6. Yes, the high-Class WH players have more tools and more skills available, but it is a good thing they are rewarded for that with higher profts - it gives fresh wormholers a motivation to learn, group up and skill up until they also can hope to climb up the ladder and some day hold their own C5.

Well, most people I knew who made WH industry did quit it when the M-Structures had their second timer removed. Because if you want to do it efficiently, you need to have some storage buffer to ship stuff in/out when you have good connections and keep the jobs running even if you get bad ones in a row. But that means lots of value locked in these systems, without asset safety. So with only one timer left that already means “all or nothing” your only reasonable choice is to put the most valuable stuff into EVAC freighters and log off. Smaller indu groups putting a L-Structure up is like an invitation for an eviction by some larger PvP group and given the costs of these structures, they can’t ever hope to get their money back for lets say a rigged Tatara in a C2. And the larger groups… well they mostly live in C5 or C6 that barely have convenient HighSec connections, so they have little interest to haul in raw mats for industry and haul out products, especially if they can farm money more easy with just doing sleeper sites. Give them the chance to farm more of the raw mats in WH space (home or static), Nullsec Ores, Lowsec Ores, Ice, higher Rarity Moon Ores - but all randomly appearing so if you want to take it, you have to do an Ops now, else it will despawn quickly.

I like your way of thinking in general, but remember - if you force people too much in the PvP direction, many will simply quit instead of “harden up”. So don’t enforce an environment that makes it too easy to harass and jump on everyone who dares to undock. The lonelyness and somewhat mixtures of safety with the chance of a surprise is what makes WH space attractive to many people. Take that away, and they go elsewhere. And you have gained nothing.

3 Likes

To Kezrai Charzai

The correct answer would have been: "We are sad to know that you don’t feel the new roadmap appealing, and we appreciate your suggestions, that will be forwarded to the development team.

Consider posting [,] and CSM […]".

If we don’t agree on that, then we clearly disagree of how a business should deal with their customers.

I’m not proposing making it less appealing for larger groups. I think that will be more interesting and challenging for them. That doesn’t mean that they want to give up the status quo for a different situation that can create a new balance.

To Syzygium:

Thanks for your kind comments and considerations. Let me clarify some of my previous points.

I disagree in two facts: 1) evictions (even evictions of small groups in c1-3) is not a common thing at all. It wasn’t before the structure changes, it is not after it.; and 2) most of the wormhole space is mostly inhabited, even if they have structures. Cutting systems will gather players and make everyone easier to find between each other. But that will not put any risk on getting evicted. Big part of the systems that i would cut are c5.

At least will give the chance to get into them. RR is not a solid option for C6 and unreasonable for C5.

If you take a look at my suggestions, the most relevant ones are more statics and different type of statics. Statics means more chances to get content; and different type of statics means more variety of content. For example, a C5 with 5 and NS. Than much much better than just C5-5. And I would fight for it.

I understand your point. C3 sites are worth it, but less worth it than what they were used to be (because of the inflation and because now there are other sources of isk - like pochven, abyss, etc.).
At the same time, i strongly disagree that C3 ratting is that safe. My killboard is a solid evidence that is not.

It is not my intention to force people into too much pvp, just make them gather more and make them easier to find.

Dear customer, GM Koala was correct in sending you to this here forum. Welcome to the community! Here, we value your input and comments.
Your complaint nr.8903291 will be treated on a first-come, first-served basis. Meanwhile you’re invited to take a number and a seat in the General Discussion hall in case more ideas knock you off your feet.

1 Like

Why not just increase free isk, straight to your wallet?

4 Likes

As others have said, reducing systems is a non starter. What you may eventually get is a wormhole stabilizer mechanic that would be facilitated by way of an in space deployable. CCP would probably want those only in some wormholes and not all of them though, to prevent them all turning into static elements.

So the obvious choice here would be to make more shattered wormholes (since you can’t deploy major structures there,) which would also prevent the wh stabilizer structure from being deployed.

2 Likes