Five weeks after the Cradle of War update rewrote how Ansiblex jump bridges work, r/Eve cannot stop arguing about it. Did it break the big nullsec blocs? Did it fix force projection? Or did nothing change except the number of gates in a fleet's route? This week three threads put the question back at the top of the front page, and the answers are more interesting than the memes.
What actually changed
The rules come from the 24.01 patch notes, entry 2026-09-22.1, and we covered the headline in our Cradle of War patch notes article. The short version, as written in the notes:
Ansiblex jump bridges now run on capacitor: 1,250 TJ in total, recharging about 200 TJ per hour, so roughly 6.25 hours from empty.
The cost of a jump depends on how far the endpoint is from the owning alliance's capital system. Zone 1 (0 to 5 LY) is free, Zone 2 (5.1 to 10 LY) costs 2x, Zone 3 (10.1 to 15 LY) 6x, Zone 4 (15.1 to 20 LY) 9x and Zone 5 (beyond 20 LY) 15x. Jumping toward the capital is cheaper than jumping away from it.
Per jump, the base cost runs from 1 TJ for capsules, shuttles, haulers and freighters up to 19 TJ for Marauders and Rorquals.
Only the alliance that holds sovereignty in the system where the jump starts can use the bridge, and ACLs can no longer grant access to pilots outside the owning alliance.
Capital ships can no longer use Ansiblexes. Rorquals, freighters and jump freighters still can.
Tenebrex Cyno Jammers drop from three per system to one.
Later notes added a few details. On 13 October the developers documented something that had been left out of the original notes: changing an alliance's capital system triggers a 30-day cooldown, and losing the capital means 30 days without one. During that time every zone counts as Zone 5 for Ansiblex costs.
"This is the end...?" Not so fast
On 21 October a player asked on r/Eve whether the predicted fall of the great empires was happening yet (thread, 72 comments). The replies mostly said no. Veterans pointed out that the big powers existed long before Ansiblexes did. Others described how the blocs adapted: titan bridges, alliance-only fleets because outside pilots cannot use the bridges, and in one reply, a switch to command carriers. Another commenter summed up the practical effect as a dozen jumps to start a fleet instead of about four.
Two days later a rant titled "No change will get rid of blocs" became one of the week's most followed threads, with 98 comments and more than 40 hours in the top 25 of the subreddit. The author argues that every null-focused patch brings a prediction of collapse and that blocs always remain. The replies split. Some want to attack the numbers themselves, with smaller corporations and alliances or tighter limits on standings. Others answer that Ansiblexes are the only lever that Fenris Creations can realistically pull on force projection. This is a player argument, not a result, and it should be read that way.
The earlier verdicts
The first weeks produced very different readings, and they are still worth putting side by side:
A week-one analysis from a nullsec player listed fights that were "noticeably more contained", reinforcements that were less reliable and small gangs that survived longer inside coalition space. The same post called routing around the bridges "horrendous" and asked for a one-hour recharge instead of six.
A thread titled "Ansiblex nerf failed to nerf projection" from late September argued the opposite, citing large blocs still hitting lowsec residents. Another commenter there predicted that sovereignty upgrades in some systems would decay as people stopped bothering to maintain them; a reply doubted that the examples showed it.
On 13 October someone asked for "stories of conquest since the Ansiblex changes" with obvious sarcasm. The replies were mostly anecdotes about small gangs catching ships, and one said it "hasn't made much of a difference so far" beyond longer fleet trips.
Smaller alliances raised a different problem: an October thread on force projection from a 500-pilot null alliance said a 3,000-pilot neighbour could still place an Ansiblex next door and drill every system, with few tools to make that costly.
None of these is data. Read together, they say the same thing: the change made movement slower and less predictable, but no one has shown that sovereignty is changing hands because of it.
Quality of life and rough edges
The complaints that keep coming back are about the interface, not the balance. On 22 October a player asked for route planning that lets you filter by Ansiblex zone, and for the zone to be shown in the "show info" window rather than only after warping to the bridge (thread). Commenters noted that some alliances put the zone in the bridge's name, and several thought the request was a pure interface improvement that should not be blocked by any "no tuning" stance. In that thread one commenter quoted what they presented as a statement from a developer: no changes for at least six months to see the real impact. We could not find that statement in the patch notes or the forum feedback thread, so treat it as unconfirmed.
Meanwhile a video posted on 26 October shows the sharp end of the new rules: a player who did not realise that a bubbled Ansiblex blocks the jump and lost a hold worth 8 billion ISK (video, thread). The patch notes do not mention bubbles, so this is the player's account of what happened.
What to watch
Fractured Skies lands on 10 November, with the new Navy attack battlecruisers, and players are already arguing about how those will interact with the projection meta. Whether the map really moves will show up in sovereignty changes, not in threads. If sov starts changing hands, we will cover it.
Tags: EVE Online, Ansiblex, Cradle of War, nullsov, force projection, nullsec blocs, r/Eve, Fenris Creations, patch notes, sovereignty
Sources