

CCP Logibro

C C P

C C P Alliance



461







Posted - 2014.10.01 16:43:00 - [1] - Quote

Changes are coming to how long distance travel works in EVE Online. If use jump drives, then this is an important dev blog for you. Find all the details from CCP Greyscale and the Nullsec working group here. CCP Logibro // EVE Universe Community Team // Distributor of Nanites // Patron Saint of Logistics



@CCP_Logibro



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2611







Posted - 2014.10.01 16:50:00 - [2] - Quote

Can supers use gates after this change?

Yes.



Does this make it too difficult for new pilots to get out into 0.0?

Yes, it probably does. We are going to look at this tomorrow to try and make this easier.



Is the balance for Black Ops final?

No. Please give feedback!



The math about the minimum jump timer is inconsistent in the blog, right?

Yes, it is, I'll fix it as soon as I have time, thread's moving too fast atm!



Very large fatigue values will take a loooong time to decay, is this too much?

Possibly yes, we'll have a look at this.



CCP Fozzie

C C P

C C P Alliance



11375







Posted - 2014.10.01 16:54:00 - [3] - Quote

Looking forward to getting this significant next step for Nullsec released!



Big thanks to the whole CSM for their help with this process so far and the good work I know they'll continue to do as we consult with them going forward. Game Designer | Team Five-0

https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie

http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/



ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

ISD Community Communications Liaisons



3386







Posted - 2014.10.01 17:46:00 - [4] - Quote

Removed a post with racist speech. Please keep it civil. Thank you. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2619







Posted - 2014.10.01 17:51:00 - [5] - Quote

Preface: this is a big change. Yes, the way you play now is, as it relates to things touched by these changes and to varying degrees, no longer going to be viable. If that wasn't the case, these changes wouldn't be worth making in the first place.



This isn't a business-as-usual tuning pass, this is redefining what jump drives are *for* in this game.



Literally Space Moses wrote: Have you considered the rather long distances between regions? I haven't actually checked the numbers, but I can imagine some regions being nigh impossible to assault, just because no capital ships can actually jump far enough to reach them, or can only reach one or two systems.



e: can caps even reach the drone regions via jump drives after this change?



Yes, we have. The 5 LY range was chosen after looking at gaps between regions. 5 allows you to cross many of them. The larger gaps, such as some of the drone region jumps, were never going to be crossable with any of the range of ranges we'd be comfortable with. In some cases yes, this will lead to gate bottlenecks for capitals, and the geography of these areas will become very significant, yes.



(BRT-OP to C-4D0W is 2.52 LY)



X ATM092 wrote: JFs and Rorqs are getting a 90% reduction to fatigue for obvious reasons, they're logistical ships not a part of power projection which are likely to be doing a lot of back and forth. However you need to add regular freighters to that list because you don't need a jump drive to get jump fatigue, being bridged gets it too. Please add, I'm reasonably sure it's an oversight but if it's not then it needs some explaining.



We'll have a look at the consequences of this.



Retar Aveymone wrote: I need to do the math on this, but the range change to Rorqs/JFs seems like a massive nerf if they're also getting the 5LY max treatment (which does not make sense given the blog says the intent is not to nerf them). Are they?



Yes, they are. The blog says the intent is not to nerf them too hard, not to not nerf them at all.



Retar Aveymone wrote: The abolition of podjumping makes it massively difficult for our newbies to join us in Deklein. Has any thought been put into that?



Yes, but it's a thing we're still not happy with the state of. We're going to discuss this specific issue more tomorrow, with the aim of coming up with a reasonable solution that deals with the newbie use case without opening the door to more general problems. Stay tuned for more info.



Sentient Blade wrote: Nobody in their right mind would move a capital through a gate when you can get tackled by a frigate when it takes until christmas to get a lock on them to launch drones and defend yourselves.



I'm sure people will find a solution to this.



Angelique Duchemin wrote: So I'm trying to work out the math here. Even at 90% reduction. A Jump freighter would be looking at a 15 minute cooldown after its third jump wouldn't it?



1.88 minutes after jump 3, assuming 5-LY jumps. (At least assuming I'm looking at the right spreadsheet...)



Lydia Maulerant wrote:



Quote: After a jump is complete but before your fatigue is increased, you gain a jump cooldown timer. The length of this timer is a number of minutes equal to your jump fatigue (before being increased by that jump!), and you are unable to make another jump of any kind until this timer expires.

Which suggests that the cooldown should be zerAnd later...

Quote: His first jump, of 4.85 LY, takes him to U-TJ7Y. Because he has no fatigue before the jump, he gains a minimum-length jump cooldown timer: 1 minute, plus 4.85 minutes for the distance travelled, for a total of 5.85 minutes, First, I think I'm reading an inconsistency in the blog post.Which suggests that the cooldown should be zerAnd later...



Good catch. I'll fix that in a bit; should always have minimum-length timer, but it's not specified correctly.



Erasmus Phoenix wrote: Are you planning on having supercarriers and titans jump gates, or only normal capitals?



Yup, all ships in the game will be able to use gates after this change. (Masterplan is looking into gate-warping physics to tidy up the way large ships land in relation to the gate.)



Alain Colcer wrote: If you are using arbitrary tools to limit jump mechanics, Why not make it a capacitor depletion?



A short jump uses a small ammount of capacitor, and reduces very slightly your cap regen for a small ammount of time.

A long jump uses a fair ammount of capacitor, and drastically reduces your cap regen for a longer ammount of time.



Making it a risky proposition to cross the galaxy (unless you first secured the exit point), yet a safe one to make short jump for defensive deployment. Wouldnt that make more sense?



The simple implementation with cap regen is loose, in that you can have people cap boost you along the way. We had a more involved cap-based solution that locked off a portion of your cap after jump, so you couldn't get the cap requirements because some of your cap couldn't fill up, but we decided it was a little too gimmicky and didn't get to the heart of the problem cleanly enough. When we're working with player motivation we generally want to leave things as wide-open and interesting as possible; in the few cases where we feel the need to work against player motivation, we try to make the fix map as closely to the exact desired outcome as possible, because wiggle room will be exploited.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2625







Posted - 2014.10.01 18:15:00 - [6] - Quote

The Cue wrote: Will warp speeds be adjusted? Capitals warp exceptionally slow as it is.



Will supers and titans be able to jump through gates or only capitals? I like the idea that supers are totally restricted by jump fatigue while capitals can project themselves farther.



Probably not, no.



Yes, all ships.



Noelle Civire wrote:

How about just take jump fatigue and give blackops a bonus obviating most of it? How about make a cyno have a mass limit? How about limit the distance of an "apex force" by further increasing fuel consumption and making jump fuel optimizer mods available as lowslots for all capitals? Make parties have to dump their fuel mods to refit & deal with jump fatigue & deal with multiple fleets/cynos due to mass limits. Coupled together it creates a logistic nightmare for large entities to move without hurting smaller entities.



How about you freaking measure twice and cut once? For once CCP.. measure twice and put some thought into this. I don't mean 4-6 weeks. I mean 2-3 months before you change the game. Don't experiment. Don't blame it on the blogs or the player base you used as a base line. Don't wait to see how the "meta shifts." Do the real work before you release something.



- Black ops is a thing we're still mulling

- Cyno mass limits mean the alliance willing to create the most cyno alts wins, this is not a good thing to incentivize.

- Things like fuel use and mods and the like are soft limits that don't actually solve the problem, they just make it more expensive*

- Refitting in a cap fleet is pretty trivial even witohut mobile depots

- There's not that more to measure - we've had a good long think about this, we think it's the right thing to do, but EVE is a sufficiently complex system that there's no way to know what the outcome is without shipping it to TQ, and a few extra months of theorycrafting won't change that fact, unfortunately.



Needmore Longcat wrote: Can we buy PLEX to make the timer go down faster? Or make in-app purchases on a mobile application?



No.



Coreemo wrote: Also, the whole "fix" to deathcloning is a really bad idea. We need SOME way to quickly deploy to a hot area that requires it.



Why? (Serious question.)



Insidious wrote: getting the general gist of this it hurts the little guy a bit too much



*Every* controversial change hurts the little guy too much. It's good that all the big guys are there to look out for them.



Nova Fox wrote: So...



1. Jump Ship

2. Clone Exits Ship

3. Fresh Clone Enters Ship

4. Jump Ship

5. Exited Clone Body Jumps Home

6. Rinse Repeat Until destination.



The actual logistics of doing this for a reasonable range of target systems are sufficiently involved that we do not expect it to happen in practice.



Alekseyev Karrde wrote: How closely have you considered the impact of the jump shock stacking to primarily black-ops PVP groups? Those pilots will be taking black ops bridges from target to target accruing high amounts of the jump penalty.



When I think of power projection problems, small gang black ops bombers and recons are not the kind of thing I think of.



It's still a thing we're looking at; further discussion on this topic is something we're interested in.



Erasmus Phoenix wrote: Hang on... I just did some maths on your devblog example...



After jumping those 17.5 light years in 4 jumps, your example person has 706.74 jump fatigue... Unless I'm doing my maths wrong, it's going to take almost FIVE DAYS for that penalty to go away again.



What the hell.



Your maths are correct.



Toriessian wrote: Can CCP just give a clear yes/no on whether or not eviscerating the Black Ops fleet doctrine is intended? I've trained 3 accounts specifically to support running and doing the logistics for these fleets.



I don't want to waste my time/breath if the black ops drop is being mechanically removed from the game.











Not a primary goal, no. See above re discussing this further. We don't want to give BO a carte blanche, but there is a reasonable balance to be struck somewhere.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2636







Posted - 2014.10.01 18:32:00 - [7] - Quote

Chainsaw Plankton wrote: Chinicata Shihari wrote:



Spreadsheets are good for the mind



yes that is 2.43 millennium. I know you wouldn't do this but just to show the factsSpreadsheets are good for the mind https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IjH2JyeTd0suTC43REymnoiD2TF70HxbkRWqNtJjqds/edit#gid=0 yes that is 2.43 millennium.



sooo tl;dr: in this blog, CCP doesn't understand exponential growth? sooo tl;dr: in this blog, CCP doesn't understand exponential growth?



The maths here are a fundamental part of the design.



KIller Wabbit wrote: I'm having problems with the .1 wording as related to JF's. What would be the max JF LY range?



5 LY.



X ATM092 wrote: It is theoretically possible to compound the fatigue up into years of jump delay with fewer than a dozen actual jumps, simply by not allowing the fatigue to decay between each early jump but rather jumping as soon as possible. After the first few days of decay make little difference because the decay is linear and the increase in fatigue is multiplicative. If you wanted to you could completely incapacitate a character with this, for example selling a titan toon on the bazaar which is disallowed from jumping for years.



Your decay formula needs to be modified to reduce a percentage of the total fatigue per hour, rather than a fixed amount.



Edit: I calculated 6VDT to VFK by Aeon to take a little over 7 months if you jumped as soon as possible each time (obviously it would take less time if you waited for the fatigue to decay to 0 after each first jump).



Reducing fatigue multiplicatively as a general rule works in the wrong direction for what we want - it means high fatigue decays faster than low fatigue, whereas if anything we want the opposite. We may need to introduce some kind of "overtime" decay past a certain point though, to keep it under control.



The Slayer wrote: Chinicata Shihari wrote:



Spreadsheets are good for the mind



yes that is 2.43 millennium. I know you wouldn't do this but just to show the factsSpreadsheets are good for the mind https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IjH2JyeTd0suTC43REymnoiD2TF70HxbkRWqNtJjqds/edit#gid=0 yes that is 2.43 millennium.



Just to play Devils Advocate here a bit if you wait out the fatigue timer instead of just the jump timer you can run this exact route in around 14 hours.



Just to play Devils Advocate here a bit if you wait out the fatigue timer instead of just the jump timer you can run this exact route in around 14 hours.



Yup, there's a lot of smart optimization opportunities here.



Antoine Jordan wrote:

what are the primary differences between cyno alts not being OK, and jump alts being OK, except that a jump alt requires more than 30 days of training?



a) Jump alts don't scale in a way that makes them actually practicable (one per ship per 10LY), and b) pilots are generally a stronger limiting factor than ships.



TheButcherPete wrote: I facepalmed consistently while reading this entire thing. So instead of making it rather difficult to respond should space come under attack by foreign forces, you make it take literally hours.



Currently, YA0 to F2O is 57ly, according to dotlan. This route would take... hours.



Also don't just say it like "poof jump fatigue exists now" make some bullshit but thought out excuse like "the wormhole generated by Jump Drives has become less stable as of late, due to heavy previous use"



or some bullshit like that.





Yes, it would take an awful long time. That's intentional.



We're working on weaving these changes into the ongoing narrative.



Irya Boone wrote: retardation at his best here ... really low sec doomsday? so messing with lowsec to help 0.0retards?



or you could just :



Reduce titan bridge range

Reduce numbers /mass of ships per bridge....

Titan bridge only if titan more than 50km from station/stargate/Pos...

And for null sec make stations destructible !!! and make dynamic stellar systems ( the star would eventually die someday) and the planets /moons with it.

( you solve 2 problems at once , moon goo dispersion, and renting.



The problems in low sec are mostly the guns on stargates /stations ( i get it for stations but why guns on stargate?



Make FW missions /anomalies only doable in cruisers+size ships and for fw plexes ... remove novices and small plex and let only cruiser size and BC size and BS+ size plex.



And most important thing Reduce or remove titan bridge in low sec (departure and arrival)



But please not this !! you will only allow nullsec blocks to come in lowsec with 5 titans and rollover the place



Just to make sure everyone's aware, doomsdays can't be fired at subcaps.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2647







Posted - 2014.10.01 18:54:00 - [8] - Quote

Sentinel Eeex wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:

Retar Aveymone wrote: The abolition of podjumping makes it massively difficult for our newbies to join us in Deklein. Has any thought been put into that?



Yes, but it's a thing we're still not happy with the state of. We're going to discuss this specific issue more tomorrow, with the aim of coming up with a reasonable solution that deals with the newbie use case without opening the door to more general problems. Stay tuned for more info.

Yes, but it's a thing we're still not happy with the state of. We're going to discuss this specific issue more tomorrow, with the aim of coming up with a reasonable solution that deals with the newbie use case without opening the door to more general problems. Stay tuned for more info.



I really know very little about sov mechanics, but if I take your station and don't revoke your clone contracts (assuming that's possible), how exactly are you going to leave that station? I really know very little about sov mechanics, but if I take your station and don't revoke your clone contracts (assuming that's possible), how exactly are you going to leave that station?



...good point. Adding to the to-look-at list!



TerminalSamurai Sunji wrote: I'm just curious, if the plan is to reduce power projection, and the ship is what's being limited in jump range, why is the timer being attached to the pilot and not the ship? IE if a titan gets jumped, put the 'fatigue' timer on the actual ship. I'm not suggesting this as a fix, just that attaching a 'jump fatigue' to a character doesn't make much sense to me, where as I could understand a ships drives having to 'cool down' before re using them.



Can the current game mechanics allow a timer to be attached to a ship?





Reasoning here is that in most cases, pilots are a bigger bottleneck than ships - building a carrier chain to move your cap pilots around is simpler and more cost-effective than building an alt chain to move your carrier around. We could put a timer on both, but we'd rather keep it simple (plus it's really hard to persist things on ships that get repackaged).



As to the "fatigue" thing, there should be some more story coming out about this, but the word "fatigue" should give a pointer as to how we're going to explain it!



Obsidian Hawk wrote: How about this CCP Greyscale



Change the decay from 0.1 to 0.25. That is still a reasonable rate and will still keep capitals roaming slowly.



Rather than a 5 day cool down timer on some it will change it to about 2 days. Which is still a big hit to capital jumping...... But not as severe.



Dont go full blown harsh, do more like a kick to the shins and stepping on feet.



Tuning the decay is definitely something we're open to.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2659







Posted - 2014.10.01 19:01:00 - [9] - Quote

Hendrick Tallardar wrote:



You state that



Quote: Black Ops ships will have their range unchanged, but will otherwise get all the described changes. This also keeps the range of their jump portals unchanged. We donGÇÖt feel that Black Ops range needs adjustment right now.



Which in turn implies that a Black Ops ship will have the same factor for the cool down timer for a capital ship. While I agree with the sentiment that a cool down timer for all jump capable ships is acceptable (since you plan to implement it), the ratio is problemeatic.



Without getting too ~lore~ heavy (because seriously **** that ****), a Blops are more or less battleship class ships but with the neat jump portal feature. As a result, Blops ships are the size of a battleship, which is a fraction of the site of the capital. Why does the same length of cool down apply to the Black Ops ship that is applied to the Capital ship?



Shouldn't the Black Ops ship receive a, slightly, shorter cool down time & factor (I don't know the right ~math word~)?



Let's use something simple because, frankly, I'm dumb when it comes to math.



For the sake of this example let's use the currently proposed system and look at the cool down. Capitals and Blops ships share the same "1 + LY" fatigue. So for example, a Blops & Capital moving 4.85 LY (post change implementation) both have a cool down of 1 + 4.85, or 5 minutes 51 seconds.



They're two different sizes, two different masses and so forth. Why can't the BLOPs have a factor of say "0.75 + LY" as opposed to "1 + LY" that the capital ships receive?



In the provided example the jump that takes 4.85 LY would take the BLOPs ship 5 minutes 36 seconds to be able to jump out of system. This allows for the BLOPs ship to do it's typical "get in, get out" strategy that has become a staple of the intended use for the class, while also applying the proposed cool down timer changes.



Now, I'm not a math wiz and openly admit I'm probably missing something but figured I would ask. CCP,You state thatWhich in turn implies that a Black Ops ship will have the same factor for the cool down timer for a capital ship. While I agree with the sentiment that a cool down timer for all jump capable ships is acceptable (since you plan to implement it), the ratio is problemeatic.Without getting too ~lore~ heavy (because seriously **** that ****), a Blops are more or less battleship class ships but with the neat jump portal feature. As a result, Blops ships are the size of a battleship, which is a fraction of the site of the capital. Why does the same length of cool down apply to the Black Ops ship that is applied to the Capital ship?Shouldn't the Black Ops ship receive a, slightly, shorter cool down time & factor (I don't know the right ~math word~)?Let's use something simple because, frankly, I'm dumb when it comes to math.For the sake of this example let's use the currently proposed system and look at the cool down. Capitals and Blops ships share the same "1 + LY" fatigue. So for example, a Blops & Capital moving 4.85 LY (post change implementation) both have a cool down of 1 + 4.85, or 5 minutes 51 seconds.They're two different sizes, two different masses and so forth. Why can't the BLOPs have a factor of say "0.75 + LY" as opposed to "1 + LY" that the capital ships receive?In the provided example the jump that takes 4.85 LY would take the BLOPs ship 5 minutes 36 seconds to be able to jump out of system. This allows for the BLOPs ship to do it's typical "get in, get out" strategy that has become a staple of the intended use for the class, while also applying the proposed cool down timer changes.Now, I'm not a math wiz and openly admit I'm probably missing something but figured I would ask.



Black ops balance is something that's definitely still open for discussion. Thanks for this post :)



Fonac wrote: You've nerfed rapidly deploying over vast distances to a complete impossibility.





Hopefully, yes.



Grendell wrote:



Are there plans to make them dockable or are you only looking to give them the ability to go through gates. Will Chribba, Dark and I be un-employed in the near future? Question regarding supers.Are there plans to make them dockable or are you only looking to give them the ability to go through gates. Will Chribba, Dark and I be un-employed in the near future?



Nope, no current plans.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2670







Posted - 2014.10.01 19:06:00 - [10] - Quote

Ranamar wrote: Nobody seems to have commented on this, so...

When you say 5LY range, is that JDC V range?

Training JDC V sucks. Can I convince you to reduce the multiplier on the JDC skill and increase the base jump range on capitals to compensate?



Also, am I reading things correctly that the orange (no jump activation) timer gets set to whatever the blue (jump fatigue) timer says when you jump? (with it bottoming out at 1 minute) That seems like a nice, easy explanation that doesn't require any math beyond "Your jump fatigue gets multiplied after your jump." If it's not that, it really needs a better explanation.



5 LY at max skills. Skill balance is a thing we need to look at at some point, for sure.



Orange timer gets set to essentially 10% of the blue timer on jump, otherwise fatigue is always 0 when you jump. We're trying to make sure that it's clearly explained in the tooltips.



Makari Aeron wrote: As it stands, I believe this plan, while interesting is going to kill off T2 production in EVE, especially nullsec. There is no possible way to move large quantities of moongoo easily anymore.



It's going to have a significant impact, to be sure, and that's something we need to keep an eye on. At the same time, though, people built T2 ships and modules before jump freighters existed, so we're somewhat skeptical of the argument that that T2 construction is impossible without JFs.







CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2670







Posted - 2014.10.01 19:14:00 - [11] - Quote

Cr Turist wrote: how about a fixed cool down timer for capital jumps say 5-10 mins. forget this silly 5ly thing and all this other madness your talking about. its quick its easy it makes sense.



To hit our target of being faster to gate-warp than to jump, and our benchmark of 3m/LY for gate-warping caps around, for a 17 LY carrier jump the cooldown would need to be 51 minutes.



Jenn aSide wrote:



Reducing the number of hot drops in a game whose economy depends on ships going boom is not and never can be a good thing. CCP is making a bad move here, it remains to be seen how long after it's implemented for this to sit in with them. I expect 'un-nerfs' within 6 to 12 weeks of this change.





That logic also suggests that giving ships a 10% chance to explode every minute would be a good change. I don't wholly trust that logic.





CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2691







Posted - 2014.10.01 19:38:00 - [12] - Quote

Ripard Teg wrote: Haven't had time to read all 34 pages to see if anyone has already brought this up:



If this change goes in, please make jump-cloning incur jump fatigue at some (likely greatly reduced) level.



The goal: to prevent super-large, super-rich alliances from just building caches of capitals/supers at various NPC 0.0 or low-sec staging points around the galaxy, and just getting to them by jump-cloning (and in so doing, avoiding jump fatigue).



Jump cloning is not a thing we want to touch more than we can help at this point, it's a larger topic.



Yes, caching is going to be something of a thing, but the amount of caches you need to get good coverage of the bulk of the cluster is large (somewhere on the order of 1 per region), and the effort involved in restocking them is distinctly non-trivial.



Tribal Trogdor wrote: About caps jumping gates:



1) Carrier gate camps - If they sit 0 on gate, they have more than enough subcap killing potential along with enough RR potential to wait out 60 seconds of aggro if needed. This wouldn't be so bad in null as there are bubbles to keep them on the other side, but in low, how is this to be countered? Breaking a fair amount in under 60 seconds would take a fair amount of dreads, which have to siege and get stuck for 5 minutes, while the carriers are only stuck for 60. If the carriers jump out via the gate, they can align out, blap anything that might be sat on the other side to stop them (as most are stuck next door and the real DPS cant follow) and dock up. Even in null though, the dreads are still stuck out of the fight, unless of course they burn to the gate, jump in, and hope the archons hadn't reapproached in the time O.o



2) Cyno Jammers - Drop cyno next door, warp to gate, jump in. Kinda kills the point of it, yea?



- If you can get tackle on the other side, capitals generally take a while to get back to the gate. It ought to be manageable.



- There's still probably tactical advantage in forcing the enemy cap fleet to jump in through a gate.



Hendrick Tallardar wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: [

Black ops balance is something that's definitely still open for discussion. Thanks for this post :)





No problem.



I don't like the exponential factoring in given the problems with cool down time others expressed. However if a set system is to be put into place, there needs to be a benefit to using a Black Ops ship. As it currently stands, there is none as it is penalized the same as a Capital ship.



Please consider this when discussing with the CSM about these changes and number balances. I wouldn't go so far as to say that BLOPs should be half the Capital ship cool down factor, but it's certainly worthy of having smaller cool down than a capital. No problem.I don't like the exponential factoring in given the problems with cool down time others expressed. However if a set system is to be put into place, there needs to be a benefit to using a Black Ops ship. As it currently stands, there is none as it is penalized the same as a Capital ship.Please consider this when discussing with the CSM about these changes and number balances. I wouldn't go so far as to say that BLOPs should be half the Capital ship cool down factor, but it's certainly worthy of having smaller cool down than a capital.



Yup, we'll look into this.



Rowells wrote: some questions:



Is there expected to be a noticeable impact on isotope usage as some players opt to use gates?

Is it correct to assume that in some circumstances(for instance using regional gate from tenal to cobalt edge) the projection has increased (not overall)? < terribly worded question

Will you consider allowing us to condense the timers in the top right corner slightly? That thjing is going to be very full for a lowsec pirate with jump fatigue/cooldown/NPC aggro/Player Aggro/Weapons timer etc.

Do you expect there to be a increase in capital uasage as cyno alts are no longer required?

On that note how many cyno alt accounts do you expect to be unsubbed/repurposed?

Will there be a follow up capital ships/module tune up or rebalance soon or is that undetermined yet?





Player related questions:

Who else is going to run dread roams after patch?

How many killmails do you expect to see with inertia stabs in the lows?

Anyone can think of really out-of-the box things you can or will do with a capital after patch?



- It seems somewhat likely, yes. We'll keep an eye on isotope usage.

- Yes, in some cases access to gates makes cap movement easier; we think on average it works out as a reduction, though.

- The proliferation of timers is something we're looking at, yes.

- Over small distances, it's possible, yes. The range of use cases is sufficiently diverse that it's hard to be sure, though.

- Not sure, they're less needed in some scenarios (using gates), but more needed in others (need more to travel a given number of LY)

- I don't have info on capital balance timelines currently, sorry (everyone else has gone home)



Good questions, thanks for the post :)



Retar Aveymone wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:

It's going to have a significant impact, to be sure, and that's something we need to keep an eye on. At the same time, though, people built T2 ships and modules before jump freighters existed, so we're somewhat skeptical of the argument that that T2 construction is impossible without JFs.



They used carriers, which were longer range than current JFs. JFs were introduced with the carrier nerf (before then, you'd load up iterons in your carrier and it effectively held ~200km3) T2 production has never existed in any serious amount without long-range jump capability, as you'll find in the short period between Castor and Cold War (dreadnaughts can haul) there was very little t2 manufacturing (no invention, t2 expensive as all ******* hell and everyones poor). They used carriers, which were longer range than current JFs. JFs were introduced with the carrier nerf (before then, you'd load up iterons in your carrier and it effectively held ~200km3) T2 production has never existed in any serious amount without long-range jump capability, as you'll find in the short period between Castor and Cold War (dreadnaughts can haul) there was very little t2 manufacturing (no invention, t2 expensive as all ******* hell and everyones poor).



Yup, true, although if memory serves the optimal setup was mammoth+hoarder. I've also seen it done with mundane freighter convoys in the past. It'll be harder, for sure, but let's not get ahead of ourselves and say that this change makes getting moon mins to empire *impossible*.



Anthar Thebess wrote: Question to CCP Greyscale,

Can each Region get new gate connection to nearest NPC space , and NPC null space not connected to lowsec space at any point will get new gate connection to nearest lowsec space.



From my own yard.

Paragon Soul will get new gate to Stain.

Stain will get gate to some lowsec.



Similar situation in other regions.

Thank you for your answer.



I love those changes!



Staging in hostile space is definitely a thing we want to lo...



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2721







Posted - 2014.10.01 19:52:00 - [13] - Quote

Reitora wrote:



Good move Let me see if I understand correctly... CCP is attempting to end the way it gave him the best publicity in years ... the capital Battle of B-R5.Good move



Yup, that's one of the goals. It was great for us publicity-wise, but we feel the paradigm of "no cap fights unless they're guaranteed to hit 10% TiDi" is bad for you guys.



Blaqsunshine wrote:





Just sayin... While you are at it, make it where I can unanchor my POS and fly it around and jump through gates as well..Just sayin...



Sure.



Summer Isle wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Does this make it too difficult for new pilots to get out into 0.0?

Yes, it probably does. We are going to look at this tomorrow to try and make this easier.

Make it so you can only change stations if your clone is currently an Alpha clone, but you can only upgrade your clone if you're currently in the station with it. A new character, still in their Alpha clone, could jump into nulsec without difficulty (or anywhere, for that matter), but an older character will either have to sacrifice some SP, or will have to hoof it the long way. Make it so you can only change stations if your clone is currently an Alpha clone, but you can only upgrade your clone if you're currently in the station with it. A new character, still in their Alpha clone, could jump into nulsec without difficulty (or anywhere, for that matter), but an older character will either have to sacrifice some SP, or will have to hoof it the long way.



Interesting idea.



Bort Malice wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:

A major goal of this change is to make you not take your supercap that sort of distance on a regular basis. If the changes are making you say "OK, I'm never taking my super long distances ever again", that means they're actually working.





So why for the love of god are things that ARENT SUPERCAPS being affected!? So why for the love of god are things that ARENT SUPERCAPS being affected!?



Because another major goal of this change is to make you not take your non-super cap that sort of distance on a regular basis.



MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote: bp920091 wrote: Congratulations CCP, you've made Stain and just about every single NPC 0.0 region uninhabitable.





I like the general thrust of the devblog, but the above is a valid response. Stain will be unreachable without going through sov,

Curse/Thukker will mean going through an oft-camped gate, and Venal will be seriously awkward (Lonetrek > midpoint in the Pure Blind mordus systems, then a jump into a non-station system in southern Venal).

I like the general thrust of the devblog, but the above is a valid response. Stain will be unreachable without going through sov,Curse/Thukker will mean going through an oft-camped gate, and Venal will be seriously awkward (Lonetrek > midpoint in the Pure Blind mordus systems, then a jump into a non-station system in southern Venal).



Everything old is new again.







CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2726







Posted - 2014.10.01 19:58:00 - [14] - Quote

Theodoric Darkwind wrote: Somebody was nice enough to make a spreadsheet showing how absurd this change is (that somebody was not me).





Just to go from Deklein to Delve would create a jump cooldown of 2700 YEARS!!



This basically stands to make capital pilots become useless basically forever after a certain amount of jumps.



If anyone manages to actually get their cooldown that high, I will personally ensure that a developer manually resets it to 0. Or I would, except it'd take 778 years' worth of cooldowns to get it that high, and I'd probably be dead by then.



MonkeyBusiness Thiesant wrote: Tenguboi wrote:

2- You touch Capitals but you dont have the intestines to mess with the CFC jumpbridge network so you dont nerf CFC power Projection





Jump fatigue affects people taking bridges from what I understood. Jump fatigue affects people taking bridges from what I understood.



Yup.



Rowells wrote: is there any concern for seiged dreads hugging gates and then jumping at all or is this moot? Not that I don't like it but I'm curious.





Should be treated the same way as stations. I'll double-check tomorrow that it's set up correctly.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2726







Posted - 2014.10.01 20:02:00 - [15] - Quote

Burneddi wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:

Summer Isle wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Does this make it too difficult for new pilots to get out into 0.0?

Yes, it probably does. We are going to look at this tomorrow to try and make this easier.

Make it so you can only change stations if your clone is currently an Alpha clone, but you can only upgrade your clone if you're currently in the station with it. A new character, still in their Alpha clone, could jump into nulsec without difficulty (or anywhere, for that matter), but an older character will either have to sacrifice some SP, or will have to hoof it the long way. Make it so you can only change stations if your clone is currently an Alpha clone, but you can only upgrade your clone if you're currently in the station with it. A new character, still in their Alpha clone, could jump into nulsec without difficulty (or anywhere, for that matter), but an older character will either have to sacrifice some SP, or will have to hoof it the long way.



Interesting idea. Interesting idea.

You'll have to change SP loss mechanics if you do this, because as they stand that's a false choice; no one will ever pick the SP loss.



Getting podded in an Alpha clone if you have a few dozen million SP means you lose 2-3 weeks of training. That's more than "some SP", and no one will ever pick that option voluntarily. You'll have to change SP loss mechanics if you do this, because as they stand that's a false choice; no one will ever pick the SP loss.Getting podded in an Alpha clone if you have a few dozen million SP means you lose 2-3 weeks of training. That's more than "some SP", and no one will ever pick that option voluntarily.



Yup, in practice I wouldn't expect anyone to use it, but it gives a fairly straightforward way to cap the ability to use this sort of technique to genuine new players only. I'm not saying we'll do it, I just think it's an interesting suggestion to consider :)



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2726







Posted - 2014.10.01 20:21:00 - [16] - Quote

Rowells wrote: The jb timer thing reminded me, will caps be able to use jbs as well as gates?



Not in the current plan, no, but that's reasonably easy to change.



Two step wrote: Has any concern been given to show players what their cooldown/fatigue would be *before* they jump? Perhaps a tooltip on the timer showing the max possible cooldown after a 5LY jump?



We intend to both tell you in the tooltip what your post-jump cooldown will be, and also hopefully in the context menu etc when you actually execute the jump. Because the cooldown is based on your pre-increase fatigue, it's not variable based on distance traveled. (I think this is true, I've been in this thread for three hours and my brain is hurting a little.)



Forlorn Wongraven wrote: CCP Greyscale: Will jump fatigue cool down while an account is unsubbed? Because when **** hits the fan and I jump as soon as possible because my spacebros need help my super won't be able to jump again for a cpl of months and i cba to keep an account just subbed for that?!



No plans to restrict it from decaying while unsubbed currently.



Callic Veratar wrote: I have a couple proposals, not sure if anyone has mentioned them, but this thing is growing faster than I can read...





The rather than decay scaling by just light years, have it scale by light years * hull decay factor. Building this in from day 1 has a bunch of advantages. If titans and super carriers still project to easily, the factor can be bumped up from 1.0 to 1.1. Every ship will be affected because of jump portals and jump bridges. It makes sense that a carrier has a 1.0 factor, but if a black ops has 0.1, why not let all the recons and covert ops ships also be 0.1. The average frigate should be 0.2 or 0.3. Cruisers 0.4 and battleships 0.6.



Moving a fleet of big ships around rapidly is hard, but smaller ships can be moved more easily. With this change, jumping an interceptor is the same as jumping a titan. Make jumping the interceptor as efficient as gating an interceptor.





Capability to do this is built into the system already, that's how we're special-casing jump freighters.



Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote: CCP GREYSCALE



I love all of this- but one qualm I have with it is the length fatigue can extend to- I feel like there should be some hard limit to prevent players from having to wait absurd amounts of time to use a jump drive again- nothing of significande, maybe maye the maximum a week or around there.



Still- I love all of this!



Keep it comin'- this will be great I love all of this- but one qualm I have with it is the length fatigue can extend to- I feel like there should be some hard limit to prevent players from having to wait absurd amounts of time to use a jump drive again- nothing of significande, maybe maye the maximum a week or around there.Still- I love all of this!Keep it comin'- this will be great



Yup, this is a thing we might end up doing.



Xorth Adimus wrote: It will mean people with massed capitals already in system will always win, travel with a cap fleet /sub cap fleet large enough to counter this will be so epicly tedious, that noone will bother.



Massing all your capitals in one system becomes a fairly major strategic decision after these changes; if they're there, they're not somewhere else.







CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2739







Posted - 2014.10.01 20:28:00 - [17] - Quote

Rroff wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:



Rowells wrote: is there any concern for seiged dreads hugging gates and then jumping at all or is this moot? Not that I don't like it but I'm curious.





Should be treated the same way as stations. I'll double-check tomorrow that it's set up correctly. Should be treated the same way as stations. I'll double-check tomorrow that it's set up correctly.



I'd assume you can hug gate or siege/triage fully aligned to the gate from about 50km, deagress, exit triage/siege cycle and jump and assuming the gate hasn't been backstopped with bubble spam (which encouraging would be a very bad thing) then jump to an exit cyno and most times escape.

I'd assume you can hug gate or siege/triage fully aligned to the gate from about 50km, deagress, exit triage/siege cycle and jump and assuming the gate hasn't been backstopped with bubble spam (which encouraging would be a very bad thing) then jump to an exit cyno and most times escape.



If you're attacking a dread sitting sieged on top of a gate and you don't have tackle in place on the other side by the time his cycle is over, I'm not sure you really deserve the kill tbh.



Dave Stark wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Yes, but it's a thing we're still not happy with the state of. We're going to discuss this specific issue more tomorrow, with the aim of coming up with a reasonable solution that deals with the newbie use case without opening the door to more general problems. Stay tuned for more info.



remote installation of jump clones. given certain criteria. remote installation of jump clones. given certain criteria.



Yup, that's another way into it.



Solitary Pal wrote: My first thought was "Oh no they let that cretin Greyscale loose again"



My second thought was "They're changing fundamental gameplay? HOW DARE THEY" rage rage rage



I then stopped and realised "Wow these changes are hugely beneficial to me and most people for many reasons"



I'm now very excited to see how this plays out, good fights for all!



Thanks... I think?



Scarlet Intelis wrote: Mizhir wrote: Scarlet Intelis wrote:

D: Sorry small alliances with one or two Titans. Large alliances with 50 Titans can continue to throw toons into the battle, but you have to deal with your one Titans cooldown and jump fatigue while they just switch to another Titan.





Like those two titans would have stood any chance against the massive superfleet of the large alliance. Like those two titans would have stood any chance against the massive superfleet of the large alliance.



You're misunderstanding. What I'm saying is with the cool down timer for moving toons through a Titan's Jump Portal, alliances with a small number will be impacted for more than alliances with a larger number. While 1 Titan is cooling down, a larger alliance will just use another. Small groups don't have that option.

You're misunderstanding. What I'm saying is with the cool down timer for moving toons through a Titan's Jump Portal, alliances with a small number will be impacted for more than alliances with a larger number. While 1 Titan is cooling down, a larger alliance will just use another. Small groups don't have that option.



Titan pilot doesn't get fatigue for other ships using their bridge.



Alekseyev Karrde wrote: @Greyscale Thanks for taking a second pass at Black Ops. You might want to consider a JF-style role bonus for reducing the jump shock for black ops bridged ships (with numbers appropriately tweaked) as a starting point.



I also want to echo a suggestion earlier in this thread to consider expanding the size of carrier SMA. For small PVP groups like ours where assembled+rigged ships are the majority of our logistics and most of the non-personal hauling is done by the same 3-4 carriers a little help there would go a long way.



We'll have a look at that.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2754







Posted - 2014.10.01 20:38:00 - [18] - Quote

Ncc 1709 wrote: Will cyno jammers stop caps jumping in through your gate?



Nope, that's what bubbles are for.



Ripard Teg wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Ripard Teg wrote: If this change goes in, please make jump-cloning incur jump fatigue at some (likely greatly reduced) level.



The goal: to prevent super-large, super-rich alliances from just building caches of capitals/supers at various NPC 0.0 or low-sec staging points around the galaxy, and just getting to them by jump-cloning (and in so doing, avoiding jump fatigue).



Jump cloning is not a thing we want to touch more than we can help at this point, it's a larger topic.



Yes, caching is going to be something of a thing, but the amount of caches you need to get good coverage of the bulk of the cluster is large (somewhere on the order of 1 per region), and the effort involved in restocking them is distinctly non-trivial. Jump cloning is not a thing we want to touch more than we can help at this point, it's a larger topic.Yes, caching is going to be something of a thing, but the amount of caches you need to get good coverage of the bulk of the cluster is large (somewhere on the order of 1 per region), and the effort involved in restocking them is distinctly non-trivial.

k, as long as you recognize that the number of regions where fights actually occur is going to be a fairly low number, particularly initially and particularly given the terrain you're introducing to the game. Back of the envelope calcs suggest you could get quite good coverage of the hot areas with caches in five areas: central Derelik, Delve, north-central Lonetrek, central Heimatar/southern Metropolis, and Tash Murkon. Putting a couple hundred carriers and dreads in these five locations is quite doable for the largest alliances. Putting caches in every region is unnecessary and pointless since...



As a side effect, this change also makes the north and northeast much more easily defensible since the systems in that area are both isolated from convenient low-sec patches and quite spread out geographically. Again, my back of the envelope calc suggests that much of Deklein is going to be three jumps from Pure Blind. Under this new system, that's a lot. And that's a short jaunt compared to trying to hunt in Outer Passage or Cobalt Edge. k, as long as you recognize that the number of regions where fights actually occur is going to be a fairly low number, particularly initially and particularly given the terrain you're introducing to the game. Back of the envelope calcs suggest you could get quite good coverage of the hot areas with caches in five areas: central Derelik, Delve, north-central Lonetrek, central Heimatar/southern Metropolis, and Tash Murkon. Putting a couple hundred carriers and dreads in these five locations is quite doable for the largest alliances. Putting caches in every region is unnecessary and pointless since...As a side effect, this change also makes the north and northeast much more easily defensible since the systems in that area are both isolated from convenient low-sec patches and quite spread out geographically. Again, my back of the envelope calc suggests that much of Deklein is going to be three jumps from Pure Blind. Under this new system, that's a lot. And that's a short jaunt compared to trying to hunt in Outer Passage or Cobalt Edge.



Initially, that wouldn't surprise me. How it plays out over the medium term is a more interesting ballgame. We'll see how it goes and adjust as necessary.



Kat Ayclism wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:



Irya Boone wrote: words



Just to make sure everyone's aware, doomsdays can't be fired at subcaps. Just to make sure everyone's aware, doomsdays can't be fired at subcaps.

Why not- after this? (Serious question) Why not- after this? (Serious question)



Because I took the ability to do so away from them almost exactly three years ago, and the reasons for doing so still hold :)



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2754







Posted - 2014.10.01 20:43:00 - [19] - Quote

Tenguboi wrote: CCP Greyscale can you confirm this will affect anchroed jumpbridges too?



Yes, it will.



Two step wrote: A couple more questions (and thanks for replying to my first comment):



1) In the past you guys have said that CCP will be attempting to measure the effects of changes that have been made to evaluate the change. What criteria will you be using to measure this change? What measurable things will you be looking at to decide if this change was good or bad?



2) POS jump bridges are supposed to be a reward for holding space. Shouldn't there be some sort of reduce fatigue from using them vs using a titan bridge? Otherwise, why would sovholding alliances build and pay for them?



1) Don't have that to hand atm.



2) "Supposed to be"?



If an alliance wants to rip down all its bridges and just use titans, best of luck to them.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2787







Posted - 2014.10.01 21:07:00 - [20] - Quote

Gilbaron wrote: Quote: Yes, caching is going to be something of a thing, but the amount of caches you need to get good coverage of the bulk of the cluster is large (somewhere on the order of 1 per region), and the effort involved in restocking them is distinctly non-trivial.



It's cute how you think that we can't/wont do that.



This is nothing but a massive nerf to attackers. I have always been a fan of your game design ideas and decisions. But this is complete and utter bullshit that goes exactly in the opposite direction of where things should go. We need things to attack that are not sov. Not reasons to not attack anything at all. It's cute how you think that we can't/wont do that.This is nothing but a massive nerf to attackers. I have always been a fan of your game design ideas and decisions. But this is complete and utter bullshit that goes exactly in the opposite direction of where things should go. We need things to attack that are not sov. Not reasons to not attack anything at all.



We know you *can*, if you apply yourselves. The intent is that you will find that you don't *need* to and you actually don't *want* to either.



Lord Mantus wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:



Does this make it too difficult for new pilots to get out into 0.0?

Yes, it probably does. We are going to look at this tomorrow to try and make this easier.





Basically we didn't fully think of all the things this would effect before suggesting it, but who cares. Basically we didn't fully think of all the things this would effect before suggesting it, but who cares.



Nope. Decided it was better to get feedback from players as early as possible, rather than trying to spot all the awkward cases ourselves and release a blog at the last minute. So far, it seems to be working.



David Magnus wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Tenguboi wrote: CCP Greyscale can you confirm this will affect anchroed jumpbridges too?



Yes, it will.



Two step wrote: A couple more questions (and thanks for replying to my first comment):



1) In the past you guys have said that CCP will be attempting to measure the effects of changes that have been made to evaluate the change. What criteria will you be using to measure this change? What measurable things will you be looking at to decide if this change was good or bad?



2) POS jump bridges are supposed to be a reward for holding space. Shouldn't there be some sort of reduce fatigue from using them vs using a titan bridge? Otherwise, why would sovholding alliances build and pay for them?



1) Don't have that to hand atm.



2) "Supposed to be"?



If an alliance wants to rip down all its bridges and just use titans, best of luck to them. Yes, it will.1) Don't have that to hand atm.2) "Supposed to be"?If an alliance wants to rip down all its bridges and just use titans, best of luck to them.





On the one hand you have tiericide trying to make no modules worthless, on the other hand you answer that you are ok with making game mechanics useless.



Two Step asks two very decent question here, your answers are a bit scary. On the one hand you have tiericide trying to make no modules worthless, on the other hand you answer that you are ok with making game mechanics useless.Two Step asks two very decent question here, your answers are a bit scary.



OK, let me rephrase that in a more direct way: titans are not a viable replacement for starbase jump bridges for most applications, for the following reasons:

- You need a pair of titans for each link

- They need to be logged on 23/7

- You also need one 23/7 cyno for each link (don't need two because you're daisy-chaining)

- Both bridges and cynos need to be kept perpetually fuelled

- You probably want to take some measures to stop them from being free kills, which adds to the complexity of the operation



For the majority of applications this is not an efficient option vs just using a jump bridge, so we do not believe that jump bridges are "useless" under this system when compared to titans.



Kat Ayclism wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:

Kat Ayclism wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:



Irya Boone wrote: words



Just to make sure everyone's aware, doomsdays can't be fired at subcaps. Just to make sure everyone's aware, doomsdays can't be fired at subcaps.

Why not- after this? (Serious question) Why not- after this? (Serious question)



Because I took the ability to do so away from them almost exactly three years ago, and the reasons for doing so still hold :) Because I took the ability to do so away from them almost exactly three years ago, and the reasons for doing so still hold :)



But now there is an increased susceptibility of them to subcaps- being permabumped when attempting to align to the next gate as an example. If supers traveling via gates should be possible if not preferred, then should they not also now have means to defend themselves?

But now there is an increased susceptibility of them to subcaps- being permabumped when attempting to align to the next gate as an example. If supers traveling via gates should be possible if not preferred, then should they not also now have means to defend themselves?



As I mentioned earlier, there are solutions to this already, and I'm sure people will figure them out.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



2807







Posted - 2014.10.01 21:16:00 - [21] - Quote

OK, I've been sitting in front of this thread for four and a half hours, I need to go home and feed myself and stuff. I'll try and check back in in an hour or two, but otherwise I'll see you all tomorrow!



CCP Nullarbor

C C P

C C P Alliance



842







Posted - 2014.10.01 23:09:00 - [22] - Quote

FYI jump fatigue and jump activation timers will NOT be affected by TiDi. They will also continue running during downtime or while an account is lapsed. CCP Nullarbor //-áExotic Dancer-á// DEVGIFS



ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

ISD Community Communications Liaisons



3395







Posted - 2014.10.02 05:27:00 - [23] - Quote

Removed some off topics post. I will see to it the thread gets a good proper clean in the morning. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Captain

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3017







Posted - 2014.10.02 11:24:00 - [24] - Quote

Marker for self: 11:23.



ISD Ezwal

ISD Community Communications Liaisons



2417







Posted - 2014.10.02 12:53:00 - [25] - Quote

Thread temporarily locked for some cleaning. ISD Ezwal

Vice Admiral

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3044







Posted - 2014.10.02 14:51:00 - [26] - Quote

Aright, just read 100 pages, have some replies.



Poultergoose4 wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: OK, I've been sitting in front of this thread for four and a half hours, I need to go home and feed myself and stuff. I'll try and check back in in an hour or two, but otherwise I'll see you all tomorrow!



Once again, good job! Once again, good job!



Thanks :)



Grookshank wrote:



https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5070585#post5070585



CCP: You want us to live all in one system? As I wrote above, it will be a horror moving subcap fleets *in your own sov* around.CCP: You want us to live all in one system?



We want you to think about exactly which system you live in.



The Ironfist wrote: CCP Greyscale once this is though and we wont or can't get to far away conflicts anymore were will we get our conflict you know content? What are you doing to make sure there will be local conflict? Because right now most nullsec space is not even worth fighting over much less holding it other then for renting it out? Are you going to address the fact that nullsec is especially worthless?



That's a question I'd suggest you ask your leaders, not us.



Rutger Centemus wrote: Lemme guess - you expect people to web supers into warp...?



I expect people to get an escort.



Alice LaMarke wrote: Why dont you come back in four weeks? Your forums page jump timer must be through the roof after reading all this.



Devhax, obviously.



Sheeana Harb wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:

Is the balance for Black Ops final?

No. Please give feedback!





Given the niche of Black Ops (jump in, kill a target and leave as fast as possible), could you please consider the jump cooldown timer affecting overall performance of Black Ops, rather than preventing it from jumping?



Let's say if a pilot is in Black Ops, he can still jump, even with the 'orange' timer, but the timer itself would penalize ship's tracking, damage, resistances, speed, ect? Black Ops usually strike with an overwhelming force, where these penalties don't matter much, but when they are counter-dropped (or when targetting something bigger), the defenders would have an upper hand.





edit:

Hats down for going through with this CCP and I sincerelly hope you will stick with this plan, because the backlash of many null-sec players will be tough.

Personally I like the changes (with the exception of anchored jump bridges) and can't wait to see how they shake up the SOV map.



Well done! Given the niche of Black Ops (jump in, kill a target and leave as fast as possible), could you please consider the jump cooldown timer affecting overall performance of Black Ops, rather than preventing it from jumping?Let's say if a pilot is in Black Ops, he can still jump, even with the 'orange' timer, but the timer itself would penalize ship's tracking, damage, resistances, speed, ect? Black Ops usually strike with an overwhelming force, where these penalties don't matter much, but when they are counter-dropped (or when targetting something bigger), the defenders would have an upper hand.edit:Hats down for going through with this CCP and I sincerelly hope you will stick with this plan, because the backlash of many null-sec players will be tough.Personally I like the changes (with the exception of anchored jump bridges) and can't wait to see how they shake up the SOV map.Well done!



I don't know we'd want to add to the complexity like that, but we're definitely still looking at BO. Thanks for the feedback :)



Rommiee wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: Ncc 1709 wrote: Will cyno jammers stop caps jumping in through your gate?



Nope, that's what bubbles are for.



Nope, that's what bubbles are for.





So you will be retiring cyno jammers from the game as they are now useless ? So you will be retiring cyno jammers from the game as they are now useless ?



If people stop using them entirely then yes, we'll remove them.



Manks Girl wrote: Just reading into a lot of the changes I do have to ask about the Black Ops changes.



It states that the range isn't going to be changed however it will still have the same "effects". Considering the BLOPS can jump further it is going to be penalised and the whole point for black ops is to project itself over different areas/regions undetected. This needs to be thought through a lot more as having to use gates is going to be suicide when potentially jumping into camps due to this jump lag timer.



I would propose the same sort of cool down time as the Rorq/JF or even none at all so at least they aren't nerfed into the floor to literally never being used again.





Yup, this is a thing we're going to evaluate.



Arsine Mayhem wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote: OK, I've been sitting in front of this thread for four and a half hours, I need to go home and feed myself and stuff. I'll try and check back in in an hour or two, but otherwise I'll see you all tomorrow!





Go check reddit. They love the changes over there.



At least you have all the cry babies localized. Go check reddit. They love the changes over there.At least you have all the cry babies localized.



Tell reddit I said hi, and I'll have another read of the comments there once I'm done here :)



Hiply Rustic wrote: What entities are either not seriously impacted or stand to gain from the changes?



And wtf does this even mean?



"We expect the impact of these changes to be emergent, and as a consequence are unpredictable and will take a while to develop on TQ. This plays into our longer-term plans, as youGÇÖll see in a second!"



How can something whose effects you bluntly state you don't know fit in with your long term plans, unless your long term plans are being built on a dart board?



It fits into our longer-term plans because they allow us breathing room to react to how players use these changes in practice before we get to the next phase of changes.



If we can predict the consequences of changes we make, players will be able to (some of you are always smarter than us), and changes that can be predicted are changes that can be solved, and solved problems are boring. If we can know what the exact consequences will be for changes we're making, we've already failed.







CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3055







Posted - 2014.10.02 15:17:00 - [27] - Quote

Ivory Kantenu wrote: You're ENCOURAGING people to not want to deploy by making things into a logistical headache for any force, be it large or small. Small guerrilla warfare is sadly NOT the lifeblood of Null, and this isn't going to help the issue.



In addition, the addition to this to Jump Bridges is just silly. You're basically making it so anything with multiple, large regions will have to wait to defend their space in a hurry?



Yes, and yes. Both deliberately.



BlueJeff Azul wrote:

Wait a second! You make an announcement of this importance , which affects all of 0.0, reduces all the hard work and planning to get to jump ships and you have yet to test this new, and shiny, development? Seriously? Who the heck is your marketing team? Are they aware of your plan to anger paying customers in this fashion?





P.S. RL example of poor marketing: Hey, lets change the formula of Coke and name it New Coke! Great idea! Guess what? New Coke bombed...do a frakkin focus group before ya drop bombs like this crap



This thread *is* our focus group.



Davionia Vanshel wrote: Question is what are the jump ranges for Rorquals and Jump Freighters going to be?



Blog says "Almost all jump-capable ships will have their range reduced to 5 LY after skills" and "Jump Freighters and Rorquals will gain a role bonus: 90% reduction to effective range jumped for the purposes of all these calculations, but will otherwise get all the described changes. This means that, for all the math weGÇÖre doing on this feature, whenever we use the range jumped as a variable we first multiply it by 0.1"



Thing is when I first use the range jumped as a variable I check to see if I can make the jump. If the jump is 10 LY then effective jump range is 0.1 x 10LY = 1LY so that means if the JF has a jump range of 1LY it can make the 10LY jump right? It does say "all the math" which includes checking to see if the jump is in range?



5 LY.



Kel hound wrote:



Since "Tuning the decay is definitely something we're open to." would you be opposed to the idea of changing JDC to adjust the rate of fatigue decay and simply setting all jump drives to the intended 5LY range? Spending 30 - 40 days of character training to be able to jump an extra half-LY is a pretty crappy deal.



This is something we're likely going to consider when we revisit the skills.



Wemyss wrote: I assume nothing here stops a safe log-off?



Correct.



Athryn Bellee wrote: Do I understand correctly, that the way these changes are set up a JDC5 character in a black ops ship will be able to jump farther than the same character in a capital ship? WTF?



Yup, black ops will jump further and warp faster than capitals. Entirely intentional.



Mocam wrote: Lots of questions but I don't think any answers will be forthcoming from this thread. It's turned into a whine, cheer and jeer thread.



It's a shame.



Things like:



- does fatigue persist after being podded?



If not (probably) then the pod-suicide changes make sense. Jump around until your timer fluffs up, suicide to another clone, hop in the capital and keep jumping. That "bypass" would be a problem for fixing "projection".



If so (hopefully not) then those changes make no sense and fatigue will cause a huge problem for cap specialized pilots - they got podded with lots of fatigue on them - time to log out and find something else to do until it fades? Not good.



- if SOMETHING isn't done, cyno jammed systems will completely stop wars being as capitals would all have to come in through a gate to get to the deeper parts of that empire's space.



Any idea how easy it is to setup a "no one will every survive this camp!" type gate block point? TiDi is cool but having how many dozens or hundreds or even thousands of ships pop a gate at the same time to try and fight such a camp...



That's asking to crash the server - just so they can simply *TRY* and run a war? ... Not good.



- Freighters are missing from that listing of lowered fatigue. That's not good and needs addressing. You have to use these to setup certain structures only possible in nullsec (outposts).



- blops changes = "odd" but may change how they are used. What other changes would prevent them from "dust bin" ships?



They don't seem very viable for how they *ARE* used in the future. As such something else would need to be added for them to avoid being junk to clutter up a hangar.



So on and so forth.



It just doesn't seem this thread will be viable for asking such questions and the like.



- Yes, persists after podding

- Yes, gate camps are hard. If they end up being too strong we'll likely add tools to redress the balance, but don't forget that jump drives allow you to switch entry gate very quickly.

- This is a thing we're considering

- Ditto



CA Ambraelle wrote: CCP, have you taken into account the costs in terms of fuel consumption for JF-logistics?



As far as I understand the changes your main intent is to increase travel times.

And you say you do not want to nerv logistics too heavy by introducing that role bonus.



But lets have a look at a logistics route I am flying on a regular base.

Currently it consists of 3 jumps in an almost straight line over a distance of 27 ly consuming 30k of helium isotopes.



Using the dotlan calculator setting jdc to 0 I calculated the route I would have to fly after those changes.

Because there are gaps that I can not cross with a 5 ly max range I will not be able to fly in a straight line any more.

Instead I have to fly a big detour resulting in my new route covering a distance of 54 ly consuming 60k of helium isotopes thus doubling the cost for that logistics operation.



I do not mind the changes and I can live with the longer travel times and all that.

But that cost-factor in my opinion IS the heavy nerv you wrote you would want to avoid.



Is it intended or have you just overlooked that fact?

Maybe reduce the fuel consumption amount for JF as part of the changes or instead of giving them the current...



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3055







Posted - 2014.10.02 15:23:00 - [28] - Quote

Sorry, lost a few from earlier when the forum ate a post



Schmell wrote: Quote: The length of this timer is a number of minutes equal to your jump fatigue (before being increased by that jump!), and you are unable to make another jump of any kind until this timer expires.



Can you clarify this please? Does that mean that if i take a jumpbridge with any ship, i will be unable to jump through gates, or this "jump of any kind" is only about jumpdrives/bridges? Can you clarify this please? Does that mean that if i take a jumpbridge with any ship, i will be unable to jump through gates, or this "jump of any kind" is only about jumpdrives/bridges?



Only about jump drives, jump bridges and jump portals. Gate jumps are never affected.



Schmell wrote: Oh well, another thing just came up.



Apparently you can now roam with carrier, like nidhoggur, which makes around 500m/s on mwd, and with proper fit and implants can warp at 3.89 au/sec (which is higher than warp speed of CRUISERS, not even mentioning lovely handicapped battleships). How the hell you are supposed to counter that in SMALL scale engagements?



IDK, warp speed rigged cruisers? Gimmick fits tend to be awful in the real world, I'm sure someone will find a counter.



Chirality Tisteloin wrote: Exponential growth of fatigue seems to overdo it.



Better use "logistic growth":



At each jump:



If Fatigue < jumpdistance:

Fatigue = jumpdistance + 1

else :

Fatigue += R*Fatigue*(1-Fatigue/K)





The parameter R controls how fast a character exhausts (could be lowered through skills / implants ...?)

(baseline might be R=2)



The parameter K is the "maximum" Fatigue a character can get. (something like 30-45 seems realistic)

Fatigue decays with time as suggested in Dev blog.



Might give designers better knobs to tune than the exponential growth model.



Cheers, Chira.



Nicer tuning options, yes, but we want to keep the math as simple as possible, so people can more easily wrap their heads around it.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3063







Posted - 2014.10.02 15:34:00 - [29] - Quote

School Nickname Worldmonkey wrote: Naturally cap the jump fatigue by way of a Taylor series and a jump counter (n), which resets when the fatigue drops to zero.



Greyscale I'll give you a cookie if you can give me the max possible fatigue (approx.) that can be acquired, in one line.



We're probably just going to put a hard cap on the max fatigue.



As it stands now though, a little under 8000 years.



Retar Aveymone wrote:



Quote: TMC: Does CCP consider it as important that Empire be more "distant" from nullsec space as they do that nullsec should be more difficult to traverse? How does CCP see this interacting with recent developments that makes nullsec less dependent upon highsec industry?



CCP Greyscale: Not especially, no. Obviously the effect here is hugely dependent on how far out into null you live, but we arenGÇÖt explicitly trying to lengthen the Jita<->2R-CRW distance. We do want nullsec to be more self-sufficient in industrial terms, but thatGÇÖs a longer-term project that only somewhat overlaps with the changes weGÇÖre making here.



http://themittani.com/features/ccp-greyscale-long-distance-travel-changes



I mean, you've just changed it from 1 midpoint to 4, a 250% increase in effective 'distance' (time spent traveling) because of the jump freighter range nerf - and that is virtually the only effect of the jump range nerf (the other being making certain NPC sov absolutely inaccessible without midpointing in sov space). How on earth does this makes sense if your goal wasn't to lengthen the distance? This is making me go even more :wtf: over the jump freighter changes:I mean, you've just changed it from 1 midpoint to 4, a 250% increase in effective 'distance' (time spent traveling) because of the jump freighter range nerf - and that is virtually theeffect of the jump range nerf (the other being making certain NPC sov absolutely inaccessible without midpointing in sov space). How on earth does this makes sense if your goal wasn't to lengthen the distance?



Jump length distance has almost no impact on travel time, number of midpoints is largely irrelevant to travel time when fatigue is a factor.



John McCreedy wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:

Rutger Centemus wrote: Lemme guess - you expect people to web supers into warp...?



I expect people to get an escort.

I expect people to get an escort.



Quite frankly you're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think that's the end result of your changes. Pilots will simply adjust and factor in travel time. It may slow down the movement of them, it may stop people rushing across half of Eve to get in on a Super Cap fight, but it won't result in people using gates with escorts.

Quite frankly you're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think that's the end result of your changes. Pilots will simply adjust and factor in travel time. It may slow down the movement of them, it may stop people rushing across half of Eve to get in on a Super Cap fight, but it won't result in people using gates with escorts.



That's fine too.



The Ironfist wrote: CCP Greyscale Do you guys have someone asking the question "is this fun?" during the development process? Just how much time do you think people are willing to spend on a game that is not fun at all. Right now logistics from deep null-sec to empire spaces takes about half an hour. After this change it will be around 7 hours do you really think people are willing to spend that amount of time on a game for literally no progress or reward?



I'm sure this is just a first draft but seriously ask the question is this fun? Will this be fun gameplay? I look forward to your reply.



We ask "is this going to add net positive value to the overall game experience for a sufficient number of players to justify its downsides".



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3077







Posted - 2014.10.02 15:35:00 - [30] - Quote

Keegan Teutorix wrote: CCP Greyscale wrote:



Chirality Tisteloin wrote: Exponential growth of fatigue seems to overdo it.



Better use "logistic growth":



At each jump:



If Fatigue < jumpdistance:

Fatigue = jumpdistance + 1

else :

Fatigue += R*Fatigue*(1-Fatigue/K)





The parameter R controls how fast a character exhausts (could be lowered through skills / implants ...?)

(baseline might be R=2)



The parameter K is the "maximum" Fatigue a character can get. (something like 30-45 seems realistic)

Fatigue decays with time as suggested in Dev blog.



Might give designers better knobs to tune than the exponential growth model.



Cheers, Chira.



Nicer tuning options, yes, but we want to keep the math as simple as possible, so people can more easily wrap their heads around it. Sorry, lost a few from earlier when the forum ate a postNicer tuning options, yes, but we want to keep the math as simple as possible, so people can more easily wrap their heads around it.



because complicated math is so rare in eve? In reality this will all just get put into a tool like dotlan and explained in the three sentences Chira used. This would be no worse (probably far better in fact) than the gun and missile damage formulas and only needs to be understood once you reach a certain level in the game, so a two week old character who is still trying to understand the basics will never see this. You also wouldn't need to calculate this on the fly (again compare to damage formulas), you would plan in advance and have all the time you need to do the math.



The idea of being able to set a maximum fatigue seems reasonable. what purpose does fatigue of more than one or two weeks serve? because complicated math is so rare in eve? In reality this will all just get put into a tool like dotlan and explained in the three sentences Chira used. This would be no worse (probably far better in fact) than the gun and missile damage formulas and only needs to be understood once you reach a certain level in the game, so a two week old character who is still trying to understand the basics will never see this. You also wouldn't need to calculate this on the fly (again compare to damage formulas), you would plan in advance and have all the time you need to do the math.The idea of being able to set a maximum fatigue seems reasonable. what purpose does fatigue of more than one or two weeks serve?



No, because complicated math is already too common in EVE. Sometimes it's necessary. Here, it's not.



Skia Aumer wrote: Skia Aumer wrote:

You are about to make life in nullsec much harder. I dont mean warfare for PVP entities, I mean life for so-called 'citizens', who mine, build, run moon reactions and lose their ships to belt rats. And by 'much harder' - I mean MUCH HARDER, like



Do you have any plans to increase rewards as well?



Because mining 'rich' ice with 17% more isotope contents is not that kind of initiative, and even a 10% material discount at amarr outpost is not at all attractive if you cant export your products to the empire to compete with hisec bears.



So again - why would I go to nullsec except to get shot?

And the ****-storm is not even calming down, but I still need to ask a serious question.You are about to make life in nullsec much harder. I dont mean warfare for PVP entities, I mean life for so-called 'citizens', who mine, build, run moon reactions and lose their ships to belt rats. And by 'much harder' - I mean MUCH HARDER, like before and after Because mining 'rich' ice with 17% more isotope contents is not that kind of initiative, and even a 10% material discount at amarr outpost is not at all attractive if you cant export your products to the empire to compete with hisec bears.

CCP, could you answer this question - I didnt see it was brought up by anyone else, but I believe it's quite important. CCP, could you answer this question - I didnt see it was brought up by anyone else, but I believe it's quite important.



It's on our radar, yes.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3116







Posted - 2014.10.02 17:15:00 - [31] - Quote

Planned new feature to address new player movement:



For players less than thirty days old, once per player corporation joined, and

For all players, once a year



You may push a button in your corp interface (while a member of a player corp and docked) that:

- Moves your medical clone to a station designated by your corporation, and

- Automatically moves you to your medical clone



Exact method of corporations designating target station still being ironed out, but it will involve at the very least being able to designate a default station for all corp members, and will likely be allowed for *any* station with a corp office, regardless of system sec status.





This seems to us like it solves the "I want to recruit people to nullsec" concern, and also gives non-nullsec recruiters an easier way to get genuinely new players to the right location easily.







Thoughts? Pasting this into the FAQ and also trying to get it into the blog proper.



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3129







Posted - 2014.10.02 17:37:00 - [32] - Quote

Charlotte Ginger wrote:

There is no need for this what so ever. Grab a Frig, and FLY



Seriously?



Anything that makes it easier for new players to start doing interesting stuff straight away is a thing that we are interested in supporting :)



Komi Toran wrote:

No: if you're less than 30 days old, one free move per new corp



If you're over 30 days old, one free move per year, corp has nothing to do with it







CCP Darwin

C C P

C C P Alliance



80







Posted - 2014.10.03 00:14:00 - [33] - Quote

KIller Wabbit wrote: I didn't find out until just last week that they weren't allowed to be in null sec. That was a shocker, but did explain a few things.



That statement is not accurate. EVE developers are definitely permitted to play the game in any region on their personal accounts. CCP Darwin -áGÇó-á-áSenior Technical Artist, EVE Online -áGÇó-á-á@mark_wilkins



CCP Greyscale

C C P

C C P Alliance



3229







Posted - 2014.10.03 13:32:00 - [34] - Quote

Terraniel Aurelius wrote: With the maximum jump range being 5 Lightyears, this will no longer be the case for several regions. With the proposed jump fatigue mechanic "very quickly" turns to painfully slowly. Gate camps will become the new standard for "Sov PvP".



I feel as though you have forgotten that we do not play this game in a vacuum. This will reduce the maneuverability of fleets and make them much more predictable. Spies will now eliminate any surprise factors that could have been had. If you think that spies are not a factor, then you have not played this game enough to understand how it works.



Yes, the geography is going to make a lot of difference. Yes, getting the upper hand over the enemy fleet is going to be hard. These are both things that we see as broadly positive.



Letrange wrote: @greyscale @anyFC



Sudden though, could FC's chime in on this?



Would it be possible to add some form of jump fatigue indicator of a fleet and not just the individual pilots? I think that FC's would like to know what the max jump timer and max fatigue (and possible average jump timer and average fatigue with a x/y indicator indicating how many pilots are still part of the average) for a fleet without having to manually ask the pilots in the fleet to yell out how much jump cooldown they have left.



New tab on the fleet panel, some other indicator. Since there's now a cool-down after a jump and it's influenced by fatigue, it may be different for various members of a fleet. Also knowing if anyone still has fatigue going INTO a fleet since this means that parts of the fleet may take longer before they're able to jump than the rest of the fleet.



Also good for normal fleets using bridges since fc's may want to keep "sudden movement" capability of using jump bridges in reserve and knowing how much fatigue is in the fleet as a whole and how much that'll hang up their ability to use the next jump bridge may need to factor into their decision making.



Added this to my "to discuss" list.









OK, I've read every post up to page 200, and we're getting to a point in this thread where there's not a lot of new concerns or suggestions being brought up. There will be future threads (and future blogs) as we tune details, but for now I want to thank you for all of your constructive input, and wish you a good weekend :)



ISD Ezwal

ISD Community Communications Liaisons



2425







Posted - 2014.10.03 16:41:00 - [35] - Quote

Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. If you are perceiving a problem with ISD behaviour on the forum or are disagreeing with the way (your) posts are being moderated, please feel free to read the CCP policies and follow the procedure found under the header 'Complaints'. ISD Ezwal

Vice Admiral

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department



CCP Terminus

C C P

C C P Alliance



1







Posted - 2014.10.06 01:10:00 - [36] - Quote

Eigenvalue wrote:

CCP already said they stopped reading this thread at page 200 because apparently 2 days is long enough for players to think through the changes, discuss, and give feedback. Better than the CSM though!





We are still popping in and reading the thread, but I think what they meant was that we aren't going to be going page by page and responding to every post. People are not going unheard though.





ISD Ezwal

ISD Community Communications Liaisons



2430







Posted - 2014.10.06 17:48:00 - [37] - Quote

I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. Normally I would quote the forum rules but in this case that would be a futile undertaking as I would hit the post character limit before having all the broken rules mentioned. Mind you, I have given this thread a lot of leeway and as such moderated lightly. Would I have done so in a strict manner, a third to half of this thread would have been gone by now.



However, some have gone so far over the line I reported them for review by CCP. Be aware that breaking the forum rules to such severe levels might have further consequences. And for those that have not gone that far, please regard the following as a warning:



1. You must have an active EVE Online game account to post on our forums.



Your forum account is linked to your subscription to the EVE Online service. If you are suspended or banned from the game, you will not be able to post on the EVE Online forums. If you are suspended or banned from the EVE Online forums, your game account will be reviewed and you may also be banned from the game.



One other I would like to mention:



31. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.



CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, GÇ£outingGÇ¥ of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.

Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.











ISD Ezwal

Vice Admiral

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department



ISD Ezwal

ISD Community Communications Liaisons



2448







Posted - 2014.10.08 13:25:00 - [38] - Quote

I have removed some replies to an edited out part of the post they replied to. ISD Ezwal

Vice Admiral

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department



ISD Ezwal

ISD Community Communications Liaisons



2458







Posted - 2014.10.09 12:23:00 - [39] - Quote

I have removed a rule breaking post and those quoting it.



The Rules:

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.



Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated. ISD Ezwal

Vice Admiral

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department