open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked exploration question/assumptions for wormholes (long post)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

shady trader
Posted - 2008.12.28 21:47:00 - [1]
 

I have been putting together a list assumptions and questions that are outstanding about exploration. I am more interested in exploration side and not the new tech3 hardware (as for as this thread is concerned) Hopefully CCP will release some of the information in the next couple of months. This assumption maybe incorrect and CCP can easily correct them, but they seam logical to me.

Feel free to add any additional questions related to the exploration side of wormholes as I have probably missed a large number. Please do not post feature requests only questions or discussions about the questions/assumptions.

Assumptions
1) the exploration sites will be unregulated space (effectively 0.0). As there would be no reason for concord to spawn there as its space not claimed by empire.

2) all systems have a chance to have a wormhole leading to these exploration sites (taken form the original dev announcement).

3) each exploration site will not have multiple entrances in different sec levels or only link to one source system.

4) The NPC's are going to be rogue drones or automated defenses.

5) The exploration sites will be authored as part of the dungeon system like complexes. The other option is to use some of the unused systems that players normally do not have access to.

Questions
1) If the space is part of the dungeon management system, that happens to people left behind once the site expires? As this are technically another system they should not just pop back up in the original system then it despawns.

2a) Can capital ships use the wormholes ?
2b) If some opens a cyno field can a capital ship jump in?
If both are true it could allow Capital ships into high sec by find a uncharted system with a wormhole in highsec and within jump range of a low sec 0.0 system. Jump the capital in and then use the wormhole to enter high sec. The same could be true if assumption 3 is wrong

3) Will some wormholes have class limits like missions?

4) since Concord maintain the communications network via the star gate network, will people be cut of form the main chat system? that about pod killing? If not will there be a news story outing the technical improvement before hand.

5) Could stable wormholes be a solution to player owned housing? Allow player to have there own place without impacting the host star system or the player who are not interested. As a stable wormhole Concord could police it.

6) Will there be traditional materials available like asteroids that can be mined or moons? could be a good way to test the new asteroid creation system as part of the dungeon management system. If so that ore will be present.

7) will loot be proportional to the wormholes originating system? If assumption 1 is correct the risk will be higher for hi sec and low sec linked systems as 0.0 will be locked up by the major alliances where anyone can enter the hi sec and low sec exploration sites and attack other players.

8) if there are multiple entry points how are they going to be organized? thinking of temporary express ways being formed. This could be very important to alliances, since it could allow enemy forces to suddenly appear well within there territory with a full cap support fleet.

Captain Pompous
Is Right Even When He's Wrong So Deal With It
Posted - 2008.12.28 22:52:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Captain Pompous on 28/12/2008 22:53:55
you know what assumptions make, right?


a big fat waste of my time :)


edit: now having read your post, there are quite a lot of good assumptions - but a lot of them are simply too incredibly precise (i.e., the chat system you mentioned), or just too out there to warrant much consideration. i'd say, best wait till march (or earlier on SiSi) and see what comes up ugh

soldieroffortune 258
Gallente
Tribal Liberation Force
Posted - 2008.12.29 00:38:00 - [3]
 

some of my questions are:

where will these "unstable wormholes" be located? (hopefully not ALL 00 space)

how many new systems are they going to create to be found? a constellation's worth, a region, two regions worth? (hopefully alot, as having only a region's worth of new systems, they would all be discovered, and the new feature would be short lived)

Cypherous
Minmatar
Lions of Judah Incorporated
Posted - 2008.12.29 00:43:00 - [4]
 

Originally by: soldieroffortune 258


how many new systems are they going to create to be found? a constellation's worth, a region, two regions worth? (hopefully alot, as having only a region's worth of new systems, they would all be discovered, and the new feature would be short lived)


The way i read it it doesn't matter how many systems are added as they will simply respawn with goodies and the wormholes will be based like how the current exploration sites are and would be randomly spawned so they wouldn't ever be in fixed locations just to make sure all of EVE gets a chance at finding them.

Avernus
Gallente
Paragon Fury
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2008.12.29 00:53:00 - [5]
 

Quote:
Assumptions
1) the exploration sites will be unregulated space (effectively 0.0). As there would be no reason for concord to spawn there as its space not claimed by empire.
Magic 8ball says yes.

Quote:
2) all systems have a chance to have a wormhole leading to these exploration sites (taken form the original dev announcement).
My understanding is that these aren't exploration sites, these are full fledged systems (belts, planets, moons etc.) Perhaps there will be exploration sites within the Wormhole systems, dunno.

Quote:
3) each exploration site will not have multiple entrances in different sec levels or only link to one source system.
One way in, one way out; the wormhole.

Quote:
4) The NPC's are going to be rogue drones or automated defenses.
Good guess on the rogue drones, makes a certain amount of sense; if there are automated defenses, the question is who they would belong too. Would personally like to see either NPC's that are common to the region, or a certain randomization of what you could come across.

Quote:
5) The exploration sites will be authored as part of the dungeon system like complexes. The other option is to use some of the unused systems that players normally do not have access to.
Unused systems, it's not deadspace.

Questions
Quote:
2a) Can capital ships use the wormholes ?
2b) If some opens a cyno field can a capital ship jump in?
If both are true it could allow Capital ships into high sec by find a uncharted system with a wormhole in highsec and within jump range of a low sec 0.0 system. Jump the capital in and then use the wormhole to enter high sec. The same could be true if assumption 3 is wrong
Cap usage depends on if the wormholes act like jumpgates, or jumpbridges. I'm guessing jumpgates because => CCP stated that some of these systems will be within jump range of 'normal' space, others will be outside jump range.

Quote:
3) Will some wormholes have class limits like missions?
Doubtful.

Quote:
4) since Concord maintain the communications network via the star gate network, will people be cut of form the main chat system? that about pod killing? If not will there be a news story outing the technical improvement before hand.
CCP may be changing how local works in this patch altogether. You speak, you appear in local. You don't speak... Twisted Evil

Quote:
5) Could stable wormholes be a solution to player owned housing? Allow player to have there own place without impacting the host star system or the player who are not interested. As a stable wormhole Concord could police it.
Most likely you're going to have to police it yourself. This is the source of T3 components, it will be competitive... Concord won't be doing your work for you. Wink

Quote:
6) Will there be traditional materials available like asteroids that can be mined or moons? could be a good way to test the new asteroid creation system as part of the dungeon management system. If so that ore will be present.
CCP stated that you can make a Wormhole stable by placing a POS... so hence, there will have to be moons unless CCP changes the POS system (unlikely). It would make sense that you'll find most anything there you'd find in a regular system.

Quote:
7) will loot be proportional to the wormholes originating system? If assumption 1 is correct the risk will be higher for hi sec and low sec linked systems as 0.0 will be locked up by the major alliances where anyone can enter the hi sec and low sec exploration sites and attack other players.
No idea about the loot depending on originating system security level. I'm of the mind that all access points are going to be heavily contested. 0.0 alliances that have a firm hold on their space could be sitting pretty, but I'm sure there will be a few intrepid system snipers out there to provide entertainment.

shady trader
Posted - 2008.12.29 13:33:00 - [6]
 

Avernus, It was probably a poor chose of word. Then I said exploration site, I meant the system at the other end of the worm hole.

On assumption 3, I agree on the one way in or out, but I have not seen any dev statement to that effect. Having multiple entries and exits would reduce the ability for one group to camp the entrance. Also people could not see who is already there until they enter.

On assume 5) I agree that they will not be deadspace, the dungeon system is that CCP use to create complexes and missions. It a set of tools that they use.

About the whole chat, this is more form a Role play perspective since the current exploration as to how it works would not fit if the systems were not connected.

Question five is not part of the tech3 work, its a question about player housing. It not relevant with regard to tech3 exploration just something that could use the same mechanics.


Do you have the link to the CCP statement about stabilizing wormholes? I have not seen it, if true they are going to reproduce the static complexes that were removed especially in 0.0 space that the alliance has secured.

Princess Jodi
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2008.12.29 15:07:00 - [7]
 

Its just conjecture at this point, but there have been 'Unstable Wormholes' in Drone Region Radar sites for over a year. When you Show Info, they state that they could allow you access to another area 'if only you could find a way to stabalize it.



Karanth
Gallente
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2008.12.29 15:15:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: Princess Jodi
Its just conjecture at this point, but there have been 'Unstable Wormholes' in Drone Region Radar sites for over a year. When you Show Info, they state that they could allow you access to another area 'if only you could find a way to stabalize it.





So, drop POS, and hope for lewts on the other side? I see awesome forum whines ahead. /me readies a tear collector.


Maria Kalista
Amarr
Knights of Kador
Posted - 2008.12.29 16:03:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Princess Jodi
Its just conjecture at this point, but there have been 'Unstable Wormholes' in Drone Region Radar sites for over a year. When you Show Info, they state that they could allow you access to another area 'if only you could find a way to stabalize it.





That reminds me of something. A year or so ago you had zombies under your overview settings.
What the heck was that all about? Shocked

Avernus
Gallente
Paragon Fury
Cascade Imminent
Posted - 2008.12.30 01:29:00 - [10]
 

Shady, for the part about stabilizing wormholes, my memory isn't firing on all cylinders. I recall that information in the video World Domination where Torfi first introduces the concept of unstable wormholes, but I don't believe it was in that part where stabilizing the wormholes was mentioned.

Can't remember who said it and where. Pretty sure I didn't dream it up one night while drunk and meglomanical... outside chance that I did.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only