open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked CSM comment on new jump bridge changes?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Vincent Jarjadian
Posted - 2011.05.10 18:15:00 - [1]
 

can someone from the CSM plz comment on the CSM's position on this horrible change....

0.0 seems to be getting worse by the patch.... less anoms... now less jump bridges... whats next...

Mr LaForge
Posted - 2011.05.10 18:50:00 - [2]
 

Source of this change?

Vincent Jarjadian
Posted - 2011.05.10 18:51:00 - [3]
 

http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=908

Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2011.05.10 19:14:00 - [4]
 

CCP is making changes to gather tears from those who think null sec should not require :effort:. Op success!

Obsidian Hawk
RONA Corporation
RONA Directorate
Posted - 2011.05.10 20:54:00 - [5]
 

Vincent


There was a time when 0.0 had no anomolies and no jump bridges.

IMO those were better days, people actually worked for their space.


BITTER VET here supporting the jump bridge nerf!

Wolodymyr
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:21:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Wolodymyr on 10/05/2011 21:39:18
OK so lets think of what would actually change if jump bridges went away.

1. It'd be harder to ship in everything from Jita which would force people to actually mine and manufacture in their space. Honestly I don't like how the majority of the materials that are used in null are harvested under the protective blanket of concord.

2. I'd be harder to defend an empire. OK so imagine you are shooting at an empire that is 30 jumps from end to end. Your fleet has to go 20 jumps to go shoot at whatever target you are going after, (maybe you are sieging a POS or something) The defenders on the other hand just have to ride their jump bridge network 5 jumps or so to cut you off.

3. There would be no safe jumps. Imagine you are in a hauler in one 0.0 system and you want to get to another 0.0 system, fortunately for you there is a jump bridge chain in place. You undock from you station and head to a POS with a jump bridge on it. You then jump through to another POS full of turrets then warp directly to another defended POS and another jump bridge. If the chain is set up right you can warp to and from death star POSes and never have to risk running into a gate camp or roaming gang. (By the way this is how I got in and out of Fountain for 3 months)

4. Renters and pets would be less viable. Right now if you are a renter or pet of a bigger power block if anybody heads into your space and disrupts your carebearing all you have to do is scream into an intel channel till your overlords send a "rent a home defense" fleet through the jump bridge network.


So yeah I love nullsec but hate jump bridges.

Malcanis
Caldari
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:23:00 - [7]
 

Many people conflate "easier" with better". The JB changes - and they're a small change - make living in highly developed sov space a tiny bit more challenging.

The hysterical complaints that being forced to use a gate or two to cross a region will destroy sov 0.0 leave the inhabitants of lo-sec, NPC 0.0, W-space and even empire (wardecs, dontchaknow?) bemused and baffled.

We can manage it - why can't you?

Aamrr
Posted - 2011.05.10 21:44:00 - [8]
 

If wormhole inhabitants can manage to regularly fuel their stations, I think you guys can manage a couple extra jumpgates.

Supporting the change. +1

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.05.10 22:42:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Obsidian Hawk
There was a time when 0.0 had no anomolies and no jump bridges.

IMO those were better days, people actually worked for their space.

There were also, what, one quarter as many people in 0.0 as now?

Shiroi Kiba
Posted - 2011.05.11 00:34:00 - [10]
 

I don't see what people are complaining about, The game worked fine before jump bridges were implemented.


bartos100
DARK ADAMA
Terra Axiom
Posted - 2011.05.11 07:08:00 - [11]
 

i like the first change that will go live :)

there goes the cap advantage for the defenders in a cynojammed sys

Bo Tosh
Posted - 2011.05.11 07:47:00 - [12]
 

A step in the right direction, I use gates 90% of the time and ignore JB's. I feel that we in 0.0 are to dependent on them.

Yeep
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.05.11 08:24:00 - [13]
 

Originally by: Shiroi Kiba
I don't see what people are complaining about, The game worked fine before jump bridges were implemented.




The game worked fine before supercaps and T3 ships were implemented, we should probably remove those too.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.05.11 08:53:00 - [14]
 

Considering that the raison d'etre of bridges is no longer part of Eve (POS based soverignty and associated logistics) the 'nerf' is actually very reasonable.
Going to require a period of adjustment for the people who have never lived without them, but somehow I think they'll muddle through.

In the mean time, lets hope (and lobby for) CCP making the industrial side of null the first thing to be addressed out of the 'long term' items, so the Jita withdrawal symptoms are cut as short as possible.

Vaju Katru
Posted - 2011.05.11 09:09:00 - [15]
 

Its common knowledge that nullsec is safer then highsec, this is huge problem. Nullsec, Null Security, No Existent Security, Void Security, Zero Security, Nada Security, Rien Security whatever you call it, the only security that should exist in these areas should be provided by players, not by game mechanics, and last time I checked, jump gates are not players.

Also another big problem with jump gates, they make the universe a small place, being in the far outer regions should have a meaning, instant travelling shouldn’t be possible. It should always be a difficult task to travel in/out o nullsec, with the distance involved and the dangerous around it, players should have to plan convoys for logistics; fleet travelling would be fun and challenging again.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2011.05.11 09:53:00 - [16]
 

Edited by: Furb Killer on 11/05/2011 09:53:48
Did you just put convoys and fun in the same sentence? LOL.

This will not result in more small gang pvp, short term it will result in more ganks, long term just in more high sec lvl 4 mission runners (you can claim what you want, it is alot safer in high sec than in 0.0).

This will not result in smaller NAPs, it will result in larger NAPs (by making it much harder to get caps in cynojammed systems it is harder to defend against an opponent that outnumbers you, simple solution: make sure you outnumber the opponent, NAP more).

This will not make it easier for smaller entities to get going in 0.0, for the large entities JB expenses are only a small part of the bill, much smaller than the ammount spend on supercap production. Small entities will spend alot more relative on JBs, and now they need many more JB systems for roughly the same network, so a much steeper increase in total cost than large entities.

This is an indirect boost to supercaps.

And what it is all about for CCP most likely, in the end it even more forces you to have several accounts, either to run missions in high sec or cyno alts to just transport more with jump capable ships and less with JBs (and **** new players who dont have caps).


Apparently this is all offset by some new ideas of CCP that are supposed to be not total crap, which is doubtfull if CCP has the idea, but they will come some time in the 'future'. I expect it right after iterations on FW, storefronts, and a PI that resembles anything close to what CCP promised. In other words, that can take many years before it comes.


Edit: not that CCP has any clue about 0.0 with their causality model made by a 3-year-old, but luckily we got WIS coming Rolling Eyes

Vincent Jarjadian
Posted - 2011.05.11 17:10:00 - [17]
 

what i really want to know from the CSM... is if CCP made them aware of these changes.

or if this was another time when they have not even consulted.... if this is the case... what is the CSM even for? if CCP doesnt seem to use it...

hopefully someone in the CSM will comment soon.

Lucy Cadelanne
Posted - 2011.05.11 22:47:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Wolodymyr
Edited by: Wolodymyr on 10/05/2011 21:39:18
OK so lets think of what would actually change if jump bridges went away.

1. It'd be harder to ship in everything from Jita which would force people to actually mine and manufacture in their space. Honestly I don't like how the majority of the materials that are used in null are harvested under the protective blanket of concord.


The full daily production capacity of all conquerable 0.0 is enough to let a full 250 Maelstrom fleet shoot T2 ammo for a bit over an hour (most other ships use more ammo), the other 99.75% of the 0.0 population won't have ammo that day. So no, nerfing jbs isn't going to make the littlest difference in how much ammo is imported from Jita. If CCP wants nullsec to be more independent they need to boost its production capabilities.

Two step
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2011.05.13 14:57:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Vincent Jarjadian
what i really want to know from the CSM... is if CCP made them aware of these changes.

or if this was another time when they have not even consulted.... if this is the case... what is the CSM even for? if CCP doesnt seem to use it...

hopefully someone in the CSM will comment soon.


As I said somewhere in that terrible, terrible blog comment thread, we were told about the changes before the blog went up. Some folks on the CSM were in favor, some were opposed. We did get some changes made, mostly in the timing of when it would go live and the expanded fuel bay.

Contrary to some popular belief, we don't get veto power over what CCP wants to do. We do give them our opinions, and sometimes they listen and sometimes they disagree.

Personally, I think this change was a good thing, people whining about not being able to move around 0.0 in perfect safety makes me Rolling Eyes


 

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