These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Cyno Brainstorm 2

Author
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#21 - 2014-03-06 23:06:29 UTC
Jessica Danikov wrote:
If you restrict the cyno bandwidth, the first wave dropped can just all have cynos (in big fleets you normally have redundancy anyway). The end result is added complexity with no practical change- a waste of effort. I guess the real question is what root problem are you actually trying to solve?[SNIP].


but if you then prevent a ship that's just utilized a jump bridge from lighting a cyno for, oooooooh, 60-300s, depending on balance..... maybe make that number dependent upon the number of ships or tonnage that just jumped through with it..... that COULD make some interesting mechanics.....

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.

Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#22 - 2014-03-06 23:25:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
Jessica Danikov wrote:
If you restrict the cyno bandwidth, the first wave dropped can just all have cynos (in big fleets you normally have redundancy anyway). The end result is added complexity with no practical change- a waste of effort. I guess the real question is what root problem are you actually trying to solve?[SNIP].


but if you then prevent a ship that's just utilized a jump bridge from lighting a cyno for, oooooooh, 60-300s, depending on balance..... maybe make that number dependent upon the number of ships or tonnage that just jumped through with it..... that COULD make some interesting mechanics.....


No it wont. It means the first people into system win. Maybe none of you remember when potential fleet fights ended before they began 90% of the time because jumping into system via a gate with 500 people on the other side was suicide and titan bridging in all too often resulted in a BSOD, but it blew. It was terribad. Travel 20 jumps manually, get to ingate, leave because there are 300 alpha maelstroms on the other side.

Remove the ability for a titan to rapidly shove an entire fleet in through a cyno into a system and you are forced to either show up way earlier than the other guy, or attempt to go in through a gate. The gate option is pure suicide in modern fleet combat where there may be 1k+ people sitting on the other side at their preferred range ready to kill you as you jump in, as well as the gate being bubbled for 150km in every direction.

Let's not go back to those days. Plz no....
Kapytul Gaynez
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2014-03-06 23:32:19 UTC
Sounds like you are using one broken mechanic to justify another. Needing to shove 1 billion pilots into a system for every Sov warfare event is broken and so is Titans crawling 1 meter out of a forcefield, bridging and then crawling back in completely safe the whole time.
Johann Rascali
The Milkmen
Sedition.
#24 - 2014-03-06 23:32:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Johann Rascali
Even if you do initially bridge a horde of cyno ships in to light a swath of new cynos, the logistics of jumping certain amounts of people to each cyno as their mass limits burn out would still cause disruption and delay in the process, instead of dumping the entire fleet in guns-hot to begin with. (Not to mention the repeated menu use with the pressure on to move quickly might just result in a higher accidental Jump To -> rate...)

A moderate distance limit between active cynos (if a "mass-spent but still module-active" cyno still counts as active) could be entertaining; then your cynoball would have to blossom before they lit.

Blanking signatures doesn't seem to work, so this is here.

Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#25 - 2014-03-06 23:35:34 UTC
Kapytul Gaynez wrote:
Sounds like you are using one broken mechanic to justify another. Needing to shove 1 billion pilots into a system for every Sov warfare event is broken and so is Titans crawling 1 meter out of a forcefield, bridging and then crawling back in completely safe the whole time.


Perhaps. But until the base mechanic that gives an incentive to packing 2k people in a system for defense is fixed, we need a way to quickly shove our own 2k into system as well.

And titans don't even need to leave the POS shield, you just have to be within 2500M of them in order to catch the bridge.
General Guardian
Perkone
Caldari State
#26 - 2014-03-07 01:54:21 UTC
Some really good points being made so far, thanks guys.

Jessica Danikov wrote:
If you restrict the cyno bandwidth, the first wave dropped can just all have cynos (in big fleets you normally have redundancy anyway). The end result is added complexity with no practical change- a waste of effort. I guess the real question is what root problem are you actually trying to solve?

I like the idea of balancing cynos/bridges/jumping for travel and into combat seperately, so the idea of different types of cynos seems right to me fundamentally. The differentiating aspects can be discussed elsewhere.


This increased complexity as well as having to use multiple titans or black ops is the entire point, it would require far more effort and resources to dump mass numbers on field at once.

Roland Cassidy wrote:
Thank you for mentioning redundant cyno's on the first wave. I was hoping someone would note that...

Just to mess with your minds a bit though, isn't bringing essentially a wormhole generator through a wormhole a little close to dividing by 0 for anyone else? Suddenly new EVE gate.

That said. I don't think I'd be adverse to cyno's requiring Crusier hulls to be fit... I'll have to pass that idea around a bit.


I would much prefer a Cyno manticore or hauler than a cyno Proteus with 300k ehp and 20km + scram.

Lucine Delacort wrote:
If the goal is to nerf bridging without removing it all together, why not just make it so the Titan has to jump through at the end of bridging?


I don't really want to nerf bridging, just adjust the ability to dump too many people at once, on the same spot, jumping the titan through at the end would destroy bridging almost entirely which isn't the idea.

Anhenka wrote:
No it wont. It means the first people into system win. Maybe none of you remember when potential fleet fights ended before they began 90% of the time because jumping into system via a gate with 500 people on the other side was suicide and titan bridging in all too often resulted in a BSOD, but it blew. It was terribad. Travel 20 jumps manually, get to ingate, leave because there are 300 alpha maelstroms on the other side.

Remove the ability for a titan to rapidly shove an entire fleet in through a cyno into a system and you are forced to either show up way earlier than the other guy, or attempt to go in through a gate. The gate option is pure suicide in modern fleet combat where there may be 1k+ people sitting on the other side at their preferred range ready to kill you as you jump in, as well as the gate being bubbled for 150km in every direction.

Let's not go back to those days. Plz no....


It doesn't necessarily mean the first in the system will ALWAYS win, but it does give more power to the people who actually live in those systems, what is wrong with that? They live there, they should have an advantage. Large alliances with a simple cyno chain and a few titans can project power anywhere in eve in virtually minutes. If you slow this ability down many smaller alliances will be able to hold space of their own much more effectively, because they actually live in the area.


General Guardian
Perkone
Caldari State
#27 - 2014-03-07 02:05:06 UTC
Johann Rascali wrote:
Even if you do initially bridge a horde of cyno ships in to light a swath of new cynos, the logistics of jumping certain amounts of people to each cyno as their mass limits burn out would still cause disruption and delay in the process, instead of dumping the entire fleet in guns-hot to begin with. (Not to mention the repeated menu use with the pressure on to move quickly might just result in a higher accidental Jump To -> rate...)

A moderate distance limit between active cynos (if a "mass-spent but still module-active" cyno still counts as active) could be entertaining; then your cynoball would have to blossom before they lit.


Yes the logistics and coordination of it would require far more effort the bigger your fleet is, meaning greater strategy and brain power would be involved in mass sov fights.

Large coalitions with hundreds of Titans won't be hindered quite as much, it just means they would be required to actually use more resources more often, and more tactfully. And hey they have the isk and resources, it's their right to have that power.

I think slowing down the feed of pilots in to a single system would have a positive effect on server lag also.

Kal'el Nirukhi
Spartan Industries
#28 - 2014-03-07 20:39:26 UTC
f.e.
- 2 types of cynos: Combat cyno and travel cyno
combat cyno: instant jump on activation possible, cyno only usable by pilots within 1LY, 5 minute cycle ,5 units LO to activate, extra
isotope usage depends on amount of ships jumping ( 4 units per inty , 8 for a cruiser, 10/ bc , 12/ BS, 20/cap)

travel cyno: spool up time after activation: The cyno must burn 1 min before it can be used. can be reduced to 40s with skills
for the rest no difference to the current cyno.


Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#29 - 2014-03-07 20:56:56 UTC
Kal'el Nirukhi wrote:
f.e.
- 2 types of cynos: Combat cyno and travel cyno
combat cyno: instant jump on activation possible, cyno only usable by pilots within 1LY, 5 minute cycle ,5 units LO to activate, extra
isotope usage depends on amount of ships jumping ( 4 units per inty , 8 for a cruiser, 10/ bc , 12/ BS, 20/cap)

travel cyno: spool up time after activation: The cyno must burn 1 min before it can be used. can be reduced to 40s with skills
for the rest no difference to the current cyno.

Ahh... No. 1 LY? You don't fly any capitals do you? Or any Blops. There are many systems out there which are not even within 1LY of ANY other system.

Travel cyno is no huge deal. There is nothing in either idea to address the "issue" of force projection across the galaxy, it just makes it impossible to cyno into a hostile system.

Just a return to whoever is willing to show up first and camp gates wins. (And that does not necessarily mean the defenders, the aggressive side has been known to show up hours and hours in advance just to make sure they are in first)

What is it about this topic that makes it so even those with no experience in the subject come out of nowhere to post their idea without any understanding of the effects?

Kash Nirukhi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2014-03-08 03:14:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Kash Nirukhi
The 1LY is an arbitrary number. Just have some reduced range . can be 5 f.e.

don't focus on the numbers, think of the idea.

1 gank cyno,
- insta jump
Reduced cycle time ( f.e. 2 min)
Reduced range ( f.e. 5 LY)
Variable fuel usage: depends on how much jumps through ( this will limit blobfests by fuel cost or cargo size of cyno ship)


1 travel cyno

- Spool up time 40-60s
- 10 min cycle
- no range limitation
- fixed fuel cost


1 ly range is indeed way to limiting; what else is wrong with this idea?
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#31 - 2014-03-08 03:34:55 UTC
I like the idea of a cyno using cap.

What I mean by this is that for every x amount of mass that goes through the cyno, y amount of cap is spent.

Once the cyno ship runs out of cap, no other ships can pass through. until the cyno ship gets more cap.

This would add a unique way to prevent a rookie ship from instantly cynoing in a full 250 man battleship fleet, yet give neuts and cap transfers a way to manage a cyno ships ability to cyno.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.

Kash Nirukhi
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2014-03-08 03:39:11 UTC
Hopelesshobo wrote:
I like the idea of a cyno using cap.

What I mean by this is that for every x amount of mass that goes through the cyno, y amount of cap is spent.

Once the cyno ship runs out of cap, no other ships can pass through. until the cyno ship gets more cap.

This would add a unique way to prevent a rookie ship from instantly cynoing in a full 250 man battleship fleet, yet give neuts and cap transfers a way to manage a cyno ships ability to cyno.



good idea!
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#33 - 2014-03-08 04:41:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Any cyno changes made independently of sov changes that deters massive defensive fleets still needs to be made with the understanding of how fights work on a sov war level.

Cyno changes that prevent another fleet from entering a camped system with ease in a non cynojammed system result in fights that don't happen, because the logistical inability to quickly get enough people into system to have a reasonable fight means that you either need to try and form up hours and hours in advance to make sure you are first in system (completely unfun) or don't form up at all (no fun there, for either side).

This is a game, the PvP'rs are here to PvP. Changes without clear purpose that deter fighting on a large scale due to giving one side an overwhelming advantage, or because the logistical effort required to get a fleet into a system multiplying by a factor of 10 or more, are inherently toxic to the game, especially to smaller groups without dozens of titans.

Even a very low mass limit won't prevent a mass limited instant combat cyno from bridging 40 cruisers (5ish BS's of mass) on top of a roaming gang. It won't prevent covops cloaky campers from Blopsing 20 frigates onto a ratter (just a few cruisers of mass). If spoolup travel cynos without mass limits still exist, It wont prevent a 250 man carrier fleet crossing 8 regions in under an hour.

All it does is make actually getting into a system to have a fight harder once you get there, and far far harder to bring in caps or supcaps to desirable locations on a grid. It won't make titan bridge hotdropping any harder. It either restricts Blops to bridging only bombers and Asteros (plenty of dps to kill any ratter), or it establishes a mass high enough to not matter much, permitting you to bring the usual BO gang mix.

These cyno changes still do nothing to address the main issue of jump drives and titan bridges, which is fast paced travel across the universe. The ability to quickly titan bridge people into a combat system from within a single bridge interval has never been an issue when discussing balance choices as it is not perceived to be unbalanced by the vast majority.

But if anyone has any arguments for exactly why inhibiting fights while not changing the toxic parts of jump drives is a good idea, I'd love to hear them. If all you are whining about is how cloaky campers ruin your day by threatening to blops your ratting ship, well, CCP has been ignoring you for years, I don't doubt they will continue to do so.
General Guardian
Perkone
Caldari State
#34 - 2014-03-08 05:27:07 UTC  |  Edited by: General Guardian
Anhenka wrote:
Any cyno changes made independently of sov changes that deters massive defensive fleets still needs to be made with the understanding of how fights work on a sov war level.

Cyno changes that prevent another fleet from entering a camped system with ease in a non cynojammed system result in fights that don't happen, because the logistical inability to quickly get enough people into system to have a reasonable fight means that you either need to try and form up hours and hours in advance to make sure you are first in system (completely unfun) or don't form up at all (no fun there, for either side).

This is a game, the PvP'rs are here to PvP. Changes without clear purpose that deter fighting on a large scale due to giving one side an overwhelming advantage, or because the logistical effort required to get a fleet into a system multiplying by a factor of 10 or more, are inherently toxic to the game, especially to smaller groups without dozens of titans.
Even a very low mass limit won't prevent a mass limited instant combat cyno from bridging 40 cruisers (5ish BS's of mass) on top of a roaming gang. It won't prevent covops cloaky campers from Blopsing 20 frigates onto a ratter (just a few cruisers of mass). If spoolup travel cynos without mass limits still exist, It wont prevent a 250 man carrier fleet crossing 8 regions in under an hour.

All it does is make actually getting into a system to have a fight harder once you get there, and far far harder to bring in caps or supcaps to desirable locations on a grid. It won't make titan bridge hotdropping any harder. It either restricts Blops to bridging only bombers and Asteros (plenty of dps to kill any ratter), or it establishes a mass high enough to not matter much, permitting you to bring the usual BO gang mix.

These cyno changes still do nothing to address the main issue of jump drives and titan bridges, which is fast paced travel across the universe. The ability to quickly titan bridge people into a combat system from within a single bridge interval has never been an issue when discussing balance choices as it is not perceived to be unbalanced by the vast majority.

But if anyone has any arguments for exactly why inhibiting fights while not changing the toxic parts of jump drives is a good idea, I'd love to hear them. If all you are whining about is how cloaky campers ruin your day by threatening to blops your ratting ship, well, CCP has been ignoring you for years, I don't doubt they will continue to do so.


Well thought out post, although covert cynos weren't being discussed as yet.

Let's ignore the spool timer as that wasn't part of my post, and go with the mass limit idea here in regards to large sov battles. Let's propose that in much the same way a node will be reinforced before an upcoming fight, the mass limits will be raised or removed on that node. How this mechanic would be explained to the role players who want everything to make sense, I don't care, but if there is a desparate need to drop 1000 domis and 300 archons all at once because the other fleet already has 1000 maelstroms in system, this would be the only way to do it with this particular mass limit idea.

Power projection would still be slowed down somewhat to actually get to that system, and Titan bridges in general outside of large sov battles would still be limited.

As for the Capacitor idea, this would be too easily countered with neuts I think. a full rack ashimmu can dry up a cruiser on lock, and we'll probably see more ashimmus in use after the rebalance.
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#35 - 2014-03-08 17:41:23 UTC
General Guardian wrote:


As for the Capacitor idea, this would be too easily countered with neuts I think. a full rack ashimmu can dry up a cruiser on lock, and we'll probably see more ashimmus in use after the rebalance.


This is where cap boosters can come in when lighting the first cyno.

Now imagine you had a half dozen people designated in your fleet as the beserkers from Lord of the Rings Two Towers. They are equipped with a cap xfer and a back up cyno and feed cap to the current cyno to get the rest of the fleet in. You also bridged a ceptor to ensure that the carrier you are hotdropping doesn't get away.

Yes during this time your fleet might not get a chance to take the bridge. However it also gives the roaming fleet a chance to counter a cyno that was just lit on their fleet.

The capacitor way to limit mass would be a much better approach then having a flat, this cyno on x ship can only bridge y mass every 5 minutes. It would also mean that you don't need 5 titans to bridge an entire fleet because you need a cyno for every wing.

I could even see the implementation of a rig that increases the mass per cap ratio if this mechanic would see the light of day.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.

General Guardian
Perkone
Caldari State
#36 - 2014-03-09 06:44:45 UTC
Or how about, if high sec empires were divided by low sec as per that other proposal, just have these low sec systems/pipes cyno jammed.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#37 - 2014-03-09 07:02:06 UTC
General Guardian wrote:
Or how about, if high sec empires were divided by low sec as per that other proposal, just have these low sec systems/pipes cyno jammed.


Whoa, talk about combining multiple bad ideas into one. Impressive.
General Guardian
Perkone
Caldari State
#38 - 2014-03-09 07:57:22 UTC
Why don't you give us one of your long and drawn out analytical explanations as to why it's a bad idea.

It's "Features and Ideas Discussion" not "Features and ideas opinions"
Oxide Ammar
#39 - 2014-03-09 08:10:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Oxide Ammar
General Guardian wrote:
Since Cynos are still a hot topic.


Since when it was hot topic ? did I miss Dev Blog or whine thread somewhere ?Ugh

Lady Areola Fappington:  Solo PVP isn't dead!  You just need to make sure you have your booster, remote rep, cyno, and emergency Falcon alts logged in and ready before you do any solo PVPing.

Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#40 - 2014-03-09 08:12:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
General Guardian wrote:
Why don't you give us one of your long and drawn out analytical explanations as to why it's a bad idea.

It's "Features and Ideas Discussion" not "Features and ideas opinions"


Why bother when there is a 67 page massive threadnaught where people have hundreds of different reasons and explanations about why it is a bad idea, then magnify it all by preventing the use of JF's to travel between them by cynojamming everything?

I'm certainly not going to have anything to contribute that has not already been said in the previous 1300 posts.

But the TLDR: This is a game, and dividing highsec into smaller sections with significant travel inhibitors by forcing manual hauling through lowsec is anti-fun.

You can argue all sort of "Emergent markets" and "Revitalizing lowsec" lines, but in the end everyone who currently stays out of lowsec will still stay out of lowsec, and just stick to their little chosen quarter of EVE.
Previous page123Next page