These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Is Risk-Free Lowsec/Nullsec Travel Appropriate in EvE???

Author
Lilliana Stelles
#41 - 2012-06-25 21:19:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Lilliana Stelles
Would you seriously use a jump freighter if it didn't offer any advantage for the cost? The thing about cyno-capable ships is that they're expensive. The parts are expensive, they're unusable in high-sec (so you're not avoiding war decs), and you pay a ton for fuel. Their only advantage is safety.

Eve may be a 100% PVP environment, but it's also an economic simulator. Risk vs. rewards, and risk vs. cost come into play heavily with any sort of transportation. While nothing can be 100% safe, anything can be 99.9% safe if you're willing to pay for it.

Edit:

If you're asking for balance, cynos should be made more expensive, not more risky.

Not a forum alt. 

SmilingVagrant
Doomheim
#42 - 2012-06-25 21:28:11 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
ElQuirko wrote:
http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=11911041

/thread


A carrier km hardly means cyno travel is risky....

Ratting in a carrier... Risky
Cynoing a carrier to a POS.... Risky....
Cynoing a carrier onto a station.... Not Risky....


Depends on the station actually.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2012-06-25 21:29:54 UTC
No more or less appropriate then it is for highsec
Russell Casey
Doomheim
#44 - 2012-06-25 21:33:07 UTC
Beekeeper Bob wrote:
I can fly thru low-sec risk free in a pod, or cloaky.




instalock HAC/smartbombing BS say hi.
Tarsus Zateki
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2012-06-25 21:57:41 UTC
Given that we continue to successfully kill Jump Freighters jumping into close proximity with stations I don't see what the problem is. Perhaps you should get better at Eve-Online if you're unhappy that Jump Freighters aren't willingly committing suicide against your gank fleets.

You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world.

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#46 - 2012-06-25 21:58:38 UTC
Lilliana Stelles wrote:
Would you seriously use a jump freighter if it didn't offer any advantage for the cost? The thing about cyno-capable ships is that they're expensive. The parts are expensive, they're unusable in high-sec (so you're not avoiding war decs), and you pay a ton for fuel. Their only advantage is safety.

Eve may be a 100% PVP environment, but it's also an economic simulator. Risk vs. rewards, and risk vs. cost come into play heavily with any sort of transportation. While nothing can be 100% safe, anything can be 99.9% safe if you're willing to pay for it.

Edit:

If you're asking for balance, cynos should be made more expensive, not more risky.


Are you suggesting that the insta-travel across many, many systems itself isn't benefit enough to use a capital cyno travel, and that they need to be able to jump directly into the dock range of a station to be worthwhile? Because I really don't think this is true!!!

Also, increasing the cost of a cyno, thereby increasing the cost of jumping might be a more acceptable alternative. Right now, cyno modules on disposable noobships costs less than 3m to replace. This is fairly insignifcant in today's EvE economy. However, if the actual cyno module itself were a 25m isk (IMO not enough) or 50m isk (a decent price) or heaven forbid a 100m isk (over the top, but probably good for the game), then I'd concede that the risk in cyno travel manifests as a risk to the cyno ship, which is no longer trivial.

It's really a balance I seek.... Currently the price for traveling from station to station via cyno is a negligilbe 3m isk + fuel per trip (in additon to the x billion for the cyno capable ship).

I'm not convinced increasing the cost of a cyno is ideal, but, depending on the cost of the cyno, it's definitely an option. Something tells me that this may undermine Blackfrog moreso than my recommendation, but perhaps not...
Tarsus Zateki
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#47 - 2012-06-25 22:02:02 UTC
Actually you're really only upset that you can't freely gank these ships like you can other haulers. You're not content with the number of helpless targets you kill already.

You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world.

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#48 - 2012-06-25 22:18:10 UTC
Tarsus Zateki wrote:
Actually you're really only upset that you can't freely gank these ships like you can other haulers. You're not content with the number of helpless targets you kill already.


We could compare PvP records, PewPew motivations, and **** sizes all we want... and I'm confident I can hold my own... That's not what this is about....

The question is: Is it appropriate that cyno travel allows safe travel directly from station to station with pragmatically NO RISK to your ship and no threat of any significant loss????

IMO, it is not...
Tarsus Zateki
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2012-06-25 22:28:54 UTC
Your opinion is wrong.

You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world.

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#50 - 2012-06-25 22:30:29 UTC
Tarsus Zateki wrote:
Your opinion is wrong.

That sounds like rumour or hate mongering or some such.

Where's ISD Stensson when you need him?

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

Rek Seven
Galactic Deep Space Industries
Warped Intentions
#51 - 2012-06-25 23:09:47 UTC
This is a good point.

Without the ability to cyno jam in low sec, JF's can pretty much jump around risk free.

CCP should of stuck with the plan to allow the faction warfare guys to control cyno's in low sec. Yes, some alliances might have gotten angry and come out of null sec to fcuk with the FW guys, or they could simply negotiate with them. Either way it would have created more depth to gameplay and player interaction.

It's this fear of player reactions and lack of confidence in their ideas that stops CCP from making dramatic changes to existing content like FW and the bounty system.
Lilliana Stelles
#52 - 2012-06-25 23:15:28 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Also, increasing the cost of a cyno, thereby increasing the cost of jumping might be a more acceptable alternative. Right now, cyno modules on disposable noobships costs less than 3m to replace. This is fairly insignifcant in today's EvE economy. However, if the actual cyno module itself were a 25m isk (IMO not enough) or 50m isk (a decent price) or heaven forbid a 100m isk (over the top, but probably good for the game), then I'd concede that the risk in cyno travel manifests as a risk to the cyno ship, which is no longer trivial.

It's really a balance I seek.... Currently the price for traveling from station to station via cyno is a negligilbe 3m isk + fuel per trip (in additon to the x billion for the cyno capable ship).

I'm not convinced increasing the cost of a cyno is ideal, but, depending on the cost of the cyno, it's definitely an option. Something tells me that this may undermine Blackfrog moreso than my recommendation, but perhaps not...


I agree with this as a feasible compromise. After all, unlike the ship using the cyno, the ship lighting it is vulnerable for 5-10 minutes. If the cyno is more valuable, it encourages carriers to stick around and help defend the cyno (giving them an aggression timer), making both the cyno ship and the cap ship more vulnerable.

Not a forum alt. 

Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#53 - 2012-06-25 23:50:15 UTC
Lilliana Stelles wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Also, increasing the cost of a cyno, thereby increasing the cost of jumping might be a more acceptable alternative. Right now, cyno modules on disposable noobships costs less than 3m to replace. This is fairly insignifcant in today's EvE economy. However, if the actual cyno module itself were a 25m isk (IMO not enough) or 50m isk (a decent price) or heaven forbid a 100m isk (over the top, but probably good for the game), then I'd concede that the risk in cyno travel manifests as a risk to the cyno ship, which is no longer trivial.

It's really a balance I seek.... Currently the price for traveling from station to station via cyno is a negligilbe 3m isk + fuel per trip (in additon to the x billion for the cyno capable ship).

I'm not convinced increasing the cost of a cyno is ideal, but, depending on the cost of the cyno, it's definitely an option. Something tells me that this may undermine Blackfrog moreso than my recommendation, but perhaps not...


I agree with this as a feasible compromise. After all, unlike the ship using the cyno, the ship lighting it is vulnerable for 5-10 minutes. If the cyno is more valuable, it encourages carriers to stick around and help defend the cyno (giving them an aggression timer), making both the cyno ship and the cap ship more vulnerable.


^^ There's a really subtle brilliance here... With the upcoming crimewatch changes, the carrier could gain aggression just repping a cyno (and the cyno aggresses)...
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#54 - 2012-06-26 00:05:09 UTC
its sort of bullshit that jump-capable ships are essentially invulnerable but it's not really fixable without changing a ton of mechanics.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Mongo Edwards
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#55 - 2012-06-26 00:12:13 UTC
For most things folks argue that cost isn't a factor for balancing. This case isn't really different. The idea of a spool up timer for jumping that people keep talking about would solve this supposed issue.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#56 - 2012-06-26 00:32:55 UTC
Mongo Edwards wrote:
For most things folks argue that cost isn't a factor for balancing. This case isn't really different. The idea of a spool up timer for jumping that people keep talking about would solve this supposed issue.


Which spool up timer are you refering too?

I don't think a spoolup timer on the cyno beacon would improve anything to the safe cyno travel dilemma, and instead nerfs hotdrops (which I'm not necessarily against....)

A spoolup timer on the jumping ship, where it is vulnerable to attack during the spoolup and can't immediately redock even if attacked, could allow a neutral to camp a capital into station more easily than I'd like... but it would definitely add risk to the currently riskless cyno travel!!

Most poeple argue that cost isn't an apporpriate factor when determining balance. I agree with this in principle.

Despite that, I still think that increasing the "cost" of the cyno ship is still acceptible. The notion is that the risk of traveling by cyno is transfered from the jumping ship to the cyno ship. If you can light a cyno with a ship that's not worth anything, you essentially mitigate all the risks in traveling by cyno. However, if the ship you're lighting the cyno with is a valuable target, then the risk transference isn't complete risk mitigation, which, IMO, makes it much more acceptable.
San Severina
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#57 - 2012-06-26 00:50:06 UTC
Last time I lit a cyno for a new corp member, I waited about 40Minutes in hostile lowsec while he got himself ready, despite being told he was ready to go. lit the cyno & then when the carrier was docked was called a loser for having the cyno slightly outside docking range.
Not even a hint of a thank you.

Needless to say, apart from very close friends, of which I have none, I wont be helping out any capital pilots again.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#58 - 2012-06-26 15:37:30 UTC
San Severina wrote:
Last time I lit a cyno for a new corp member, I waited about 40Minutes in hostile lowsec while he got himself ready, despite being told he was ready to go. lit the cyno & then when the carrier was docked was called a loser for having the cyno slightly outside docking range.
Not even a hint of a thank you.

Needless to say, apart from very close friends, of which I have none, I wont be helping out any capital pilots again.


People get tense and ansi when their precious multibillion ships are put at risk... I think that's one of the major reasons people oppose this so much... no one wants even a little bit of risk for their precious.... and I don't fault them for that sentiment. I just think a little bit of risk is appropriate....
Marconus Orion
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#59 - 2012-06-26 16:15:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Marconus Orion
Tarsus Zateki wrote:
Your opinion is wrong.

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
Weaselior wrote:
its sort of bullshit that jump-capable ships are essentially invulnerable but it's not really fixable without changing a ton of mechanics.

Bring on the fixing to a ton of mechanics I say. Smile
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#60 - 2012-06-26 16:24:49 UTC
Fix please :)

The Tears Must Flow