You mean like how wormholers get the advatage of wormhole space?
they gain bonus’s
they gain the option of suprise
they gain the options of their entire fleet being 1 jump from the engagement, while null sec entities could be multiple jumps.
Dont even play that card, it wont fly.
15 Posts have been removed for Below posted Violations. Several posts have been kicked back to there Owners for Review and re-post. I suggest everyone edit out any Violations in there posts before resubmitting.
Several Edge cases have been left behind.
Regardless of your views, or the person who is posting, everyone has the ability to post and make ideas, good or bad. Lets stay on topic.
- Specifically restricted conduct.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to courteous when disagreeing with others.
In order to maintain an environment where everyone is welcome and discussion flows freely, certain types of conduct are prohibited on the EVE Online forums. These are:
Trolling
Flaming
Ranting
Personal Attacks
Harassment
Doxxing
Racism & Discrimination
Hate Speech
Sexism
Spamming
Bumping
Off-Topic Posting
Pyramid Quoting
Rumor Mongering
New Player Bashing
Impersonation
Advertising
I don’t care what advantage someone else has in an unrelated aspect of the game. The point at issue here is that the suggestion you are making, this “wormhole closing bomb” by itself is too broken and overpowered. It provides zero option of counter play for the other party.
That seems an unnecessary buff to wormholer safety. Wormholes aren’t easy to close as it isn’t really something players are suppose to be able to do at all or at least players were never intended to do it. It isn’t some oversight or anything. Wormhole space is suppose to be random and dangerous.
That said, if you want to “clean up” the mechanic, instead of having an instant bomb to close it, why not a laser that eats mass at a similar rate to rolling, or maybe two deployables that need to placed on either end that take time to work? Something that does make it trivially easy to cut yourself off from any risk of attack.
I don’t mean to get personal here but your ideas often feel like bull-in-the-china-shop ones thrown out there with little thought of balance or downstream. You rarely give clear reasons why something is a problem or how you feel “idea” is better. And you often fail to demonstrate even a basic understanding a system before offering up ideas.
I’m tempted to think your persona is some sort of performance art piece but let’s not take this anymore out-of-game. It simple to focus on the ideas rather than speculate on where they are coming from, and this one is easily marked as a poor one.
So, -1.
Two more posts removed.
The name Calling and Labeling others as a Troll needs to stop. Just stay on topic. if you have nothing to say regarding the Topic, then simply move on.
this could potentially be an option, though i’d argue that it should be faster then current rolling. visual effects added might be interesting addition. we could also look at once the cycle is complete, it adds say, a 30-60 minute timer to collapse? we could apply a warm up cycle, requiring a channel for say 3 minutes.
i could support that.
Why should it be faster than current rolling? This will reduce danger because it increases the ability to control your Wormholes. Additionally it will reduce travel times because you can roll holes better, and reduce the need to scout longer routes through multiple Wormholes which then have far greater risk of unplanned encounters along the branches of the routes.
Additionally, why should you be able to close a wormhole without placing a ship at risk in possibly hostile territory and instead leave it in your space covered by your entire fleet. This applies to all areas of space, (except perhaps high), because a wormhole limits either side of it from projecting large fleets through it, so WH’ers can’t project out large numbers of capitals.
It is even common for WH’ers to have Capitals that can’t be jumped out of the lower class WH’s that they built locally. Which gives them a significant defensive advantage, which they can then use to cover this sort of ship.
Again, this whole idea seems like it is designed to increase farming in safety, which is directly against the core tenants EVE is designed under, and trying to become WOW in space will just result in EVE getting crushed by games built for that purpose from the ground up, rather than trying to slap it onto a game that started getting designed 20 years ago. EVE has it’s niche, and it should stay in that niche.
N.B. This doesn’t mean CCP couldn’t try and design WOW with Spaceships mind you, but it should be a separate game from EVE.
All i can see with this idea is “make rolling wormholes easier”
-1
This idea is way too powerful and easy to abuse. -1
If you don’t understand the mechanics and the reasons behind them, don’t suggest improvements. You seem to think that every game should be built on the same ideas.
There is one thing to say about this topic: wormhole would become the safest place in eve. One wormhole pop ? just close it, no risk involved !
No thanks, your vision of EVE means no more fun.
Oh, btw, the industrialists won’t support this either, as no destruction means no business at all.
Also increases safety for nullsec ratting. The game definitely doesn’t need that.
Reduction in the direct null-null wormholes was bad enough. Adding a faster way to collapse holes in system is the opposite to what is needed.
How would that apply to a k162, or a wandering wormhole?
Good luck, they’ve been dodging that question right from the start.
I’m well aware, which is why I am calmly repeating myself until it gets answered. One does not become a power and remain that way by flying off the handle at every little thing.
Also, @Nuuri_Naarian, how does this affect modules that were created for wormholers, specifically the mass entangler?
Why are you all replying to one eight word sentence opening post from a known troll? Don’t feed him, its bad manners.
As to the “idea” itself, its clear that it would make hole-control so easy, that it would remove all WH related conflict, if the defending side doesent want to be attacked.
This thread should be closed and the op moved to the “one line bad idea”-thread, please isd, do your thing.
This is a lie. As usual.
Naari Naarian got banned.
OP wrongfully wants people to believe he doesn’t have at least three characters.
The banned character:
His other two:
OP is, as usual, being dishonest.
/thread.
Also: why the ■■■■ is ones own char always in the search results?
You clearly don’t live in a WH or haven’t lived in a WH, I have yet to encounter a situation where the WH reconnected to the system it was just in.
I know it is statistically possible, but your “counter play” would spend 1000s of these bombs on the WH side just to get back to a specific system, and the a single bomb to close the hole again.
Where as on the WH side the players don’t even have a chance to see what’s going on just that the hole closed.
The main question remains - how will your suggestion make EvE “better” if all it will achieve is even less destruction?
I absolutely love it.
Im sure if your short sighted, and take a single position into account you’ll draw that conclusion, but if you really want to talk about more pvp, why dont we start by utterly destroying the concepts of blue donuts, and coalitions of any form.
I dont see you advocating for change then, yet, hypocritically claiming to want more pvp this single change would give it.
