Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 09:17:29 -
[1] - Quote
With the topic of force multipliers in the forefront of our thoughts with the November expansion looming, the lack of restrictions on Cynosural Field deployment brings an issue equal if not greater to the forefront of mine. While off-grid boosting is a force multiplier that's being addressed, the rapidity and flexibility with which jump beacon placement is allowed highlights what I see as a balance issue.
While a booster can bring to the field some multiplication of already present pilots, a cynosural field allows an existing engagement to receive force multiplication far greater than a 1.0 multiplier on already present pilots without pilots being immediately present in the system or nearby/adjacent systems. The system itself isn't intrinsically broken, but the ease and flexibility with which it is leveraged brings a level of uncertainty to engagements far in excess of anything else in the game. (This brings a certain level of combat-aversiveness to anyone in space where a cynosural field can be lit.)
The issue that is most prevalent to me is a lack of counterplay to cynosural fields as a mechanic while keeping in mind that there is an awesome level of Fun involved in the Hotdrop O'Clock behavior and how it can turn the tide of existing engagements. Currently, one pilot can, with the application of a few units of Liquid Oxygen, effectively be a 200-man gank squad. Primarily, the issue arises from the instantaneity of Cynosural Field gameplay. A single ship can play both tackle and DPS far in excess of the power of one pilot in local and zero pilots in adjacent systems while expecting no reasonable counter to their behavior. In the span of five or six seconds, a single ship can approach, tackle and cyno, bridging an overwhelming force from light-years away. The only counter itself is a system-wide cynosural field jammer, which only applies to nullsec and doesn't apply to covert cynos.
The issue is most visible regarding covert ops ships, making one hostile in local statistically more dangerous than two or three. A ship capable of fitting a covert cyno can pop up next to a battleship, tackle and bridge in multiple ships far greater in strength than the target at a minimum of risk. The only vulnerability they experience is the ship lighting the cyno, which has to wait a minute or so, and the other ships involved that need only wait for their target to be destroyed before cloaking and becoming invulnerable. One player is effectively allowed the strength of however many friends they have, mainly because there is no time for the attacked pilot to react. In my mind, that's like having a frigate with a 200,000 damage alpha, just as long as there's a few people slaved to that ship somewhere else in New Eden. Hotdropping small targets is so prevalent because it's easy to do and carries a minimum of risk for all attacking parties.
Counterplay Proposal: Give cynosural field generators some amount of wind-up and prevent module activation during it, as if the ship had cloaked or entered a starbase forcefield. Giving cynosural fields so much as a ten or thirty second wind-up would prevent a one-man gank squad and apply a modicum of risk to bringing so much force into a system without the use of stargates. |
Tabyll Altol
Breaking.Bad Circle-Of-Two
172
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 09:38:50 -
[2] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote:With the topic of force multipliers in the forefront of our thoughts with the November expansion looming, the lack of restrictions on Cynosural Field deployment brings an issue equal if not greater to the forefront of mine. While off-grid boosting is a force multiplier that's being addressed, the rapidity and flexibility with which jump beacon placement is allowed highlights what I see as a balance issue.
While a booster can bring to the field some multiplication of already present pilots, a cynosural field allows an existing engagement to receive force multiplication far greater than a 1.0 multiplier on already present pilots without pilots being immediately present in the system or nearby/adjacent systems. The system itself isn't intrinsically broken, but the ease and flexibility with which it is leveraged brings a level of uncertainty to engagements far in excess of anything else in the game. (This brings a certain level of combat-aversiveness to anyone in space where a cynosural field can be lit.)
The issue that is most prevalent to me is a lack of counterplay to cynosural fields as a mechanic while keeping in mind that there is an awesome level of Fun involved in the Hotdrop O'Clock behavior and how it can turn the tide of existing engagements. Currently, one pilot can, with the application of a few units of Liquid Oxygen, effectively be a 200-man gank squad. Primarily, the issue arises from the instantaneity of Cynosural Field gameplay. A single ship can play both tackle and DPS far in excess of the power of one pilot in local and zero pilots in adjacent systems while expecting no reasonable counter to their behavior. In the span of five or six seconds, a single ship can approach, tackle and cyno, bridging an overwhelming force from light-years away. The only counter itself is a system-wide cynosural field jammer, which only applies to nullsec and doesn't apply to covert cynos.
The issue is most visible regarding covert ops ships, making one hostile in local statistically more dangerous than two or three. A ship capable of fitting a covert cyno can pop up next to a battleship, tackle and bridge in multiple ships far greater in strength than the target at a minimum of risk. The only vulnerability they experience is the ship lighting the cyno, which has to wait a minute or so, and the other ships involved that need only wait for their target to be destroyed before cloaking and becoming invulnerable. One player is effectively allowed the strength of however many friends they have, mainly because there is no time for the attacked pilot to react. In my mind, that's like having a frigate with a 200,000 damage alpha, just as long as there's a few people slaved to that ship somewhere else in New Eden. Hotdropping small targets is so prevalent because it's easy to do and carries a minimum of risk for all attacking parties.
Counterplay Proposal: Give cynosural field generators some amount of wind-up and prevent module activation during it, as if the ship had cloaked or entered a starbase forcefield. Giving cynosural fields so much as a ten or thirty second wind-up would prevent a one-man gank squad and apply a modicum of risk to bringing so much force into a system without the use of stargates.
Easy counter would be reduce the activation timer of the mobile cyno inhibitor from 2 min to 3 sec. Traveling would be still uneffected, because this module works only ongrid (200km) and there are plenty of workarounds. Plus this module will seen some uses.
|
Rivr Luzade
Viziam Amarr Empire
2766
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 12:51:18 -
[3] - Quote
Personal opinion: The counter to Cynos are baiting and preparation, not spoolup timers and restrictions.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
3435
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 12:53:46 -
[4] - Quote
A rapidly growing trend lately seems to be: Nerf one play style so another does not need to change.
If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
|
Cade Windstalker
597
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 13:06:25 -
[5] - Quote
I think your post here is pretty much describing the point of a Cyno...
If you're a miner you're getting a significantly buffed Rorqual that will eat small bomber gangs, and a PANIC button that gives you up to seven and a half minutes for help to arrive. If you're not then oh well, the person with more stuff wins. Have you considered bringing your own Cynos? |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 23:20:37 -
[6] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:A rapidly growing trend lately seems to be: Nerf one play style so another does not need to change.
I understand this, but the unfortunate effect of things as they are now is that PVE in null and low is pushed far into the high end of risk while retaining a much lower proportionate reward. If you're five systems deep into controlled space a single frigate shouldn't be as much of a risk as a 15-man gang regardless of what skills are being leveraged.
What changes to nullsec or even lowsec PVE would benefit those taking that risk while not marginally changing how cynos work? It's a big deal that force recon doesn't show up on D-scan yet a Punisher can be holding an entire fleet in its back pocket that it can disgorge faster than one can undock or login that it can easily drop on top of a target that it is tackling itself. I understand and respect the important function of a cyno to be an existing engagement changer (people on field in a bubble or tackled, engaged in combat that either side might win), but not as a tool to prevent a meaningful engagement from ever happening in the first place. |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 23:32:16 -
[7] - Quote
Cade Windstalker wrote:I think your post here is pretty much describing the point of a Cyno...
If you're a miner you're getting a significantly buffed Rorqual that will eat small bomber gangs, and a PANIC button that gives you up to seven and a half minutes for help to arrive. If you're not then oh well, the person with more stuff wins. Have you considered bringing your own Cynos?
Miners are definitely getting both the short and long end of the stick in the upcoming changes. Cyno and counter-cyno is a legitimate strategy and an invulnerability period definitely gives time to leverage a counter-fleet before a black ops fleet can chew through a target and cloak back up. The forgotten party is those in null and low working the ISK faucets that keep the game running in tandem with hisec ratters (missioners are just glorified ratters; we don't talk about mining missions). They don't get the benefit of an invulnerability period while each individually risking more than the individual miner in a fleet under a Rorqual while pushed by game mechanics to operate solo else risk losing something in the average realm of 33% of their profits working with a copy of themselves. (Though ratting mechanics and their hostility to teamplay are an entirely other forum post on their own.) Even if they weren't pushed to work solo, two battleship or equivalent ship-cost pilots wouldn't be able to do much against a fleet that materializes out of nowhere, instantly, even with a hot-and-ready response team ready to deal with whatever minor threat would normally carry a cyno. The behavior of the mechanic is entirely reactionary and someone gets lost in the mix. There's no time in any other situation than a Rorq op to muster an appropriately powerful fleet to bring counterplay into the equation.
Bringing one's own cyno is also a misguided belief of counterplay, since someone going into enemy space with the intent of cynoing a fleet atop a tackled target needs their backup to only wait a matter of minutes. An appropriate counter-response would require the same number of people to wait without playing the game for hours on the off-chance someone fits a fleet in one of their highslot modules. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Escalating Entropy
10773
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 23:44:03 -
[8] - Quote
You could... you know... bring someone along in a fast locking, high alpha ship to nuke the cyno ship. I hear that Stealth Bombers, Cov-Ops, and T1 Frigs fitted with cloaks and cynos are REALLY squishy!
Or alter your tactics from "slow, tanky, efficient" to something that keeps your ships going faster than 700 m/sec (because no cloaking capable ship can activate a prop mod while cloaked).
How did you Veterans start?
|
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 00:00:43 -
[9] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:You could... you know... bring someone along in a fast locking, high alpha ship to nuke the cyno ship. I hear that Stealth Bombers, Cov-Ops, and T1 Frigs fitted with cloaks and cynos are REALLY squishy!
Or alter your tactics from "slow, tanky, efficient" to something that keeps your ships going faster than 700 m/sec (because no cloaking capable ship can activate a prop mod while cloaked).
These suggestions massively reduce the profitability and thus reward of taking the risk of using ships for PVE in nullsec. Using your avoidance strategies all the time balances the risk/reward of doing PVE in hisec towards a much greater modifier than that in nullsec which pushes the risk far above the reward despite taking less risk. Regardless of how squishy cyno ships are. The entire cyno drop to alternate ship lock and tackle is in the realm of about four seconds. Ships that can undertake PVE sites in nullsec or low generally can't lock in that time period. Forcing players into using a specific ship to favorably operate in null or low goes against the sandbox nature of the game. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Escalating Entropy
10773
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 00:36:18 -
[10] - Quote
Quote:These suggestions massively reduce the profitability and thus reward of taking the risk of using ships for PVE in nullsec. Using your avoidance strategies all the time balances the risk/reward of doing PVE in hisec towards a much greater modifier than that in nullsec which pushes the risk far above the reward despite taking less risk. Boo. Hoo.
If you want to do things solo, then you have to accept that a group of people (using teamwork) can stomp on you. You already have local (can see hostiles as soon as they enter system). You already have cyno jammers (prevents normal cynos from.working). You have a system full of people that can come to your aid (and if they don't or won't you may want to consider a new alliance). You have a plethora of tactics and tools at your disposal to increase your safety.
Have you considered that your personal risk-to-reward ratio is actually the problem and probably in need of adjustment?
How did you Veterans start?
|
|
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
164
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 00:48:43 -
[11] - Quote
Cynos are not a force multiplier. They're a teleportation device to get more actual forces.
This is not at all similar to off grid boosts, where one pilot disproportionately enhances others in a generally risk free manner.
All a cyno does is puts more people on grid, but their force strength is not disproportionate to their risk.
Your complain seems to be that local and scans are made less reliable as a free intel source because of cynos. To which I reply this is a healthy part of the game. If local was 100% accurate it would be virtually impossible to force anyone to commit to a fight because the warpout mechanics in EVE are extremely generous when it comes to mitigating risk. |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 01:18:12 -
[12] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Quote:These suggestions massively reduce the profitability and thus reward of taking the risk of using ships for PVE in nullsec. Using your avoidance strategies all the time balances the risk/reward of doing PVE in hisec towards a much greater modifier than that in nullsec which pushes the risk far above the reward despite taking less risk. Boo. Hoo. If you want to do things solo, then you have to accept that a group of people (using teamwork) can stomp on you. You already have local (can see hostiles as soon as they enter system). You already have cyno jammers (prevents normal cynos from.working). You have a system full of people that can come to your aid (and if they don't or won't you may want to consider a new alliance). You have a plethora of tactics and tools at your disposal to increase your safety. Have you considered that your personal risk-to-reward ratio is actually the problem and probably in need of adjustment?
-Groups of people: Sure, a group of people stomping a single person is fair. A single person bringing in a larger group easily and instantaneously asks a player to assume every solo pilot not native to a system has backup zero systems away more than capable of destroying you. This is not conductive to gameplay. -Local tells you that there's one enemy, which mechanically should mean that you and your five friends could deal with it, easy, especially if there's no-one adjacent or within three jumps. -Often blops drops can complete their job unless you're piloting a seriously bling fit faction ship in the amount of time it takes appropriate response to warp from ready point (functionally impossible perfect universe assumption) on-grid. At that point they're warped off and unscannable. Little to no risk, especially since a covert ops ship has all the opportunity to size up the opponent. -Cyno jammers do not prevent covert cynos from working and prevent friendly operation as much as unfriendly operation. Definitely not a home field advantage. Other discussion. -A plethora of tactics and tools. Moreso there's the opportunity to warp off any time someone who's not blue enters the system. This isn't a solution to a frigate having five battleships fitted in a highslot.
-I'm not balancing a personal risk-to-reward ratio. I'm balancing the risk of a ship capable of destroying NPCs versus the reward of such activity versus the omnipresent risk of a single ship, worth about two to fourty million ISK taking you down with little to no risk to itself. That's simply not possible in hisec and there's far less risk for reward that's slightly less than average in null.
You're defending an attack strategy without counterplay by positing simply not being there in the first place as its counterplay. |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 01:32:31 -
[13] - Quote
PopeUrban wrote:Cynos are not a force multiplier. They're a teleportation device to get more actual forces.
This is not at all similar to off grid boosts, where one pilot disproportionately enhances others in a generally risk free manner.
All a cyno does is puts more people on grid, but their force strength is not disproportionate to their risk.
Your complain seems to be that local and scans are made less reliable as a free intel source because of cynos. To which I reply this is a healthy part of the game. If local was 100% accurate it would be virtually impossible to force anyone to commit to a fight because the warpout mechanics in EVE are extremely generous when it comes to mitigating risk.
I agree that a certain level of uncertainty is healthy. You never know how an opposing ship is fitted. The level of uncertainty that instantaneous travel brings effectively makes it a force multiplier. As I've said, that one frigate can be any number of ships. Uncertainty sits between it being a single ship to it being any combination of ships that can fit into a fleet minus the bridging ship and the endpoint. That's 253 ships of uncertainty. Behind a single ship. This implies that your threshold of uncertainty within a battle against a single ship is is acceptable far beyond fittings or even a maxed out booster ship off-grid. Sufficient force at such easy demand becomes indistinguishable from raw power fitted to a ship within the realm of a single engagement.
As it is, it's difficult to get someone to commit to a fight because of that extreme disparity in force that a single ship is allowed to hold. The attacker holds a distinct advantage because they're the only ones who can feasibly leverage that force. It is insanity to imply that everyone in an alliance is in a fleet with a cyno fitted sitting next to a bridging ship aside from the person being attacked, simply waiting for that person to be attacked. People have their own agendas. There needs to be income for PVP to happen and people play EVE to have fun, not wait for something to happen, whether it be in station for a hostile to leave system or somewhere combat is assured not to happen waiting for something to happen elsewhere which has an equal chance not to happen.
Even if a fight lies within that acceptable "maybe I can kill this" range, being supported not just by someone off-grid risking nothing but being supported by any number of people within five light-years that a pilot being attacked has no feasible method to predict. If one is being engaged by a Moa, they can safely assume it's going to be using a turret weapon of some kind, with an obvious bias towards blasters or rails, depending on which engagement range it is choosing. Seeing it on D-Scan on either side gives the other an opportunity to determine whether this is an engagement to avoid or to risk. EVE is moving towards an objective-focused method of PVP because it gives someone something more to fight over than simple bragging rights or a killboard score. Anyone saying that fighting as a small or large group is less fun than trading ganks might entertainment to be cheaper and easier to come by in another kind of game entirely. Perhaps one with a difficulty slider. |
Elenahina
Agony Unleashed Agony Empire
1384
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 03:10:35 -
[14] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote:
-Groups of people: Sure, a group of people stomping a single person is fair. A single person bringing in a larger group easily and instantaneously asks a player to assume every solo pilot not native to a system has backup zero systems away more than capable of destroying you. This is not conductive to gameplay. -Local tells you that there's one enemy, which mechanically should mean that you and your five friends could deal with it, easy, especially if there's no-one adjacent or within three jumps. -Often blops drops can complete their job unless you're piloting a seriously bling fit faction ship in the amount of time it takes appropriate response to warp from ready point (functionally impossible perfect universe assumption) on-grid. At that point they're warped off and unscannable. Little to no risk, especially since a covert ops ship has all the opportunity to size up the opponent. -Cyno jammers do not prevent covert cynos from working and prevent friendly operation as much as unfriendly operation. Definitely not a home field advantage. Other discussion. -A plethora of tactics and tools. Moreso there's the opportunity to warp off any time someone who's not blue enters the system. This isn't a solution to a frigate having five battleships fitted in a highslot.
-I'm not balancing a personal risk-to-reward ratio. I'm balancing the risk of a ship capable of destroying NPCs versus the reward of such activity versus the omnipresent risk of a single ship, worth about two to fourty million ISK taking you down with little to no risk to itself. That's simply not possible in hisec and there's far less risk for reward that's slightly less than average in null.
You're defending an attack strategy without counterplay by positing simply not being there in the first place as its counterplay.
Your whole argument really seems to be centered around an idea of fairness that really isn't applicable to Eve itself. Eve, moreso even than real life, is not fair. It is not generous or forgiving. It rewards the most prepared, and part of that preparation might be having friends on tap to drop on someone.
Eve is like an addiction; you can't quit it until it quits you.
Also, iderno
|
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 04:08:35 -
[15] - Quote
Elenahina wrote: Your whole argument really seems to be centered around an idea of fairness that really isn't applicable to Eve itself. Eve, moreso even than real life, is not fair. It is not generous or forgiving. It rewards the most prepared, and part of that preparation might be having friends on tap to drop on someone.
It is, however, unfeasible. What's going to keep those friends on tap to drop on someone while you're producing ISK? A cut of the profits? It would be a pittance and far greater in the long-term for each of those people to pursue other avenues of ISK making. It would, again, favor high-security space for making ISK. There is a fairness in game balance, and all game mechanics have a counterplay. ECM, ECCM, sensor dampening, sensor boosting. Damage, tank. Warp, warp disruption.
There is no other mechanic in EVE that affords so much advantage for such a minimal extra amount of effort. |
Fandarel Falkener
Zentarim Off The Reservation.
4
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 05:23:34 -
[16] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote:
It is, however, unfeasible. What's going to keep those friends on tap to drop on someone while you're producing ISK? .
There are people that drop for KMs. You know, those guys that call themself PvP's. And if no one bothers to defend the miners of a null-sec alliance then you should maybe look for new friends/alliance |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18364
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 05:28:37 -
[17] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote:
These suggestions massively reduce the profitability and thus reward of taking the risk of using ships for PVE in nullsec.
And yet when I put forwards a plan to make the barges able to defend themselves miners used the argument of bringing combat ships the baby sit them.
Its almost as if miners don't want to have any options for defense. |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 05:30:35 -
[18] - Quote
Fandarel Falkener wrote:
There are people that drop for KMs. You know, those guys that call themself PvP's. And if no one bothers to defend the miners of a null-sec alliance then you should maybe look for new friends/alliance
PVPers still need to make ISK somehow; that's something you can't ignore. Dropping for a KM is easy. One waits for an hour at maximum. Defending a miner is easy if that miner doesn't die in the amount of time it takes to warp on-grid and as long as the force that's there faster than someone could gate-to-location isn't overwhelming to the defensive force, which would very likely need to include battleships. Which warp slow as **** when your timeframe is measured in sixths-of-a-minute. My point is that it's mechanically impossible to defend these people and everyone is busy making the point that one's alliance or friends should be able to defend, ignoring the fact that all these situations are balanced so massively in favor of the attackers. |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 05:44:01 -
[19] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
And yet when I put forwards a plan to make the barges able to defend themselves miners used the argument of bringing combat ships the baby sit them.
Its almost as if miners don't want to have any options for defense.
Barges are fantastic in their implementation so far, but even then mining ships are some of the cyno problem on their own. The Prospect gets covops cloak while having a signature as small as an interceptor as well as the ability to light covert cynos. There's literally no specialization to cynosural field deployment beyond a hislot module and a cargohold larger than a noobship.
PVE in its current implementation is part of the problem, but even beyond the near-sedentary nature that ISK-making and production shoehorns itself into the cynosural field has no counterplay beyond preventing it entirely, which is detrimental to the space-holders and only works on half the situations it'd be needed in. I'm trying to address the distressing disparage between the amount of effort and resource spent to move ships across space that would normally take half an hour in literally two or three server ticks. For any other use than dropping atop people 'by surprise' who can't get away from the solo pilot bringing far more than its weight class, even if that weight class is a battleship a short five or ten second module-breaking delay before the lighting of a cyno (which is synonymous with the appearance, arrival and travel of said ships) wouldn't disrupt the use of it as an engagement tool other than taking it from a solo PVP tool into a small fleet tool. There's a reason a ship can't fit sixteen different midslot modules or a reason why even interceptors can't land on-grid instantaneously and the application of cynosural fields and its direct analogue to gate usage sans cloak on exit is what I'm saying is broken in its current iteration. Hell, even ships decloaking have a penalty to lock time. It is obvious that CCP intends to have some level of warning to a ship appearing on-grid in order to give a defending pilot some amount of time to react and has avoided touching the mechanical topic of cynosural fields since the implementation of black ops battleships. |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4890
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 06:15:47 -
[20] - Quote
if thee are 250 ships and a titan within 5ly of you and no-on knows they're there, you should probably consider moving to a better alliance. |
|
Tabyll Altol
Breaking.Bad Circle-Of-Two
173
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 08:04:55 -
[21] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Personal opinion: The counter to Cynos are baiting and preparation, not spoolup timers and restrictions.
No the actual counter would be the cyno inhibitor, you only describe the counter to the drop.
The real counter ist the cyno inhibitor which of mysterius reasons need a 2 min start when a cyno needs 0 sec.
So a valid balance would be to make the time the same 2 min or 0 sec (your choise). So the attacker would be forced to bring more than a little frig (if it was 0 sec) and risk only bridging a part of the fleet (0 sec).
And yes a bigger fleet is not always an option. So to make things even same spool up times would be a start. |
GROUND XERO
Rennfeuer Project.Mayhem.
11
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 08:34:46 -
[22] - Quote
here you can find a lot of ideas!
.... |
Rivr Luzade
Viziam Amarr Empire
2770
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 10:18:36 -
[23] - Quote
Tabyll Altol wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Personal opinion: The counter to Cynos are baiting and preparation, not spoolup timers and restrictions. No the actual counter would be the cyno inhibitor, you only describe the counter to the drop. The real counter ist the cyno inhibitor which of mysterius reasons need a 2 min start when a cyno needs 0 sec. So a valid balance would be to make the time the same 2 min or 0 sec (your choise). So the attacker would be forced to bring more than a little frig (if it was 0 sec) and risk only bridging a part of the fleet (0 sec). And yes a bigger fleet is not always an option. So to make things even same spool up times would be a start. I also described the counter to the cyno because a couple of 7B Sin losses will make potential hot droppers and campers reconsider their options and make them hunt elsewhere. No cynos will be lit, until you need to teach them or another group another lesson.
Besides, neither the POS inhibitor nor the mobile inhibitor prevent covert cynos.
UI Improvement Collective
My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
|
PopeUrban
El Expedicion Flames of Exile
164
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 10:44:28 -
[24] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote:PopeUrban wrote:Cynos are not a force multiplier. They're a teleportation device to get more actual forces.
This is not at all similar to off grid boosts, where one pilot disproportionately enhances others in a generally risk free manner.
All a cyno does is puts more people on grid, but their force strength is not disproportionate to their risk.
Your complain seems to be that local and scans are made less reliable as a free intel source because of cynos. To which I reply this is a healthy part of the game. If local was 100% accurate it would be virtually impossible to force anyone to commit to a fight because the warpout mechanics in EVE are extremely generous when it comes to mitigating risk. I agree that a certain level of uncertainty is healthy. You never know how an opposing ship is fitted. The level of uncertainty that instantaneous travel brings effectively makes it a force multiplier. As I've said, that one frigate can be any number of ships. Uncertainty sits between it being a single ship to it being any combination of ships that can fit into a fleet minus the bridging ship and the endpoint. That's 253 ships of uncertainty. Behind a single ship. This implies that your threshold of uncertainty within a battle against a single ship is is acceptable far beyond fittings or even a maxed out booster ship off-grid. Sufficient force at such easy demand becomes indistinguishable from raw power fitted to a ship within the realm of a single engagement. As it is, it's difficult to get someone to commit to a fight because of that extreme disparity in force that a single ship is allowed to hold. The attacker holds a distinct advantage because they're the only ones who can feasibly leverage that force. It is insanity to imply that everyone in an alliance is in a fleet with a cyno fitted sitting next to a bridging ship aside from the person being attacked, simply waiting for that person to be attacked. People have their own agendas. There needs to be income for PVP to happen and people play EVE to have fun, not wait for something to happen, whether it be in station for a hostile to leave system or somewhere combat is assured not to happen waiting for something to happen elsewhere which has an equal chance not to happen. Even if a fight lies within that acceptable "maybe I can kill this" range, being supported not just by someone off-grid risking nothing but being supported by any number of people within five light-years that a pilot being attacked has no feasible method to predict. If one is being engaged by a Moa, they can safely assume it's going to be using a turret weapon of some kind, with an obvious bias towards blasters or rails, depending on which engagement range it is choosing. Seeing it on D-Scan on either side gives the other an opportunity to determine whether this is an engagement to avoid or to risk. EVE is moving towards an objective-focused method of PVP because it gives someone something more to fight over than simple bragging rights or a killboard score. Anyone saying that fighting as a small or large group is less fun than trading ganks might entertainment to be cheaper and easier to come by in another kind of game entirely. Perhaps one with a difficulty slider.
You really could have saved yourself the trouble by stating "I think I should be able to count on local to save me from everything."
Again, cynos are not a force multiplier, and a cyno frig carries exactly as much uncertainty as a scout.
I can swarm every gate in your system.
I can set up a logoff trap.
I can do any number of things to get around you being able to reliably predict the number of pilots that may or may not enter the system.
However, the moment those ships enter your grid, they're all limited to the benefits of what is on grid as of Nov 8.
You're arguing for even more reliable lazy free intel as a means of mitigating risk completely ignores all of the existing methods of active intel gathering.
Your argument that "income needs to happen" has nothing to do with what you're asking. Go make income with a fleet if you're that worried about a hotdrop.
Go to a different area of space.
If it's really TOO dangerous at the current moment ******* jumpclone to hisec and do incursions.
The idea that your only option is to dock up every time you see a stranger in local is ridiculous. If that is truly your only option, then your alliance has obviously overextended its ability to adequately secure its space, you are consistantly flying ships above your ability to actually afford, or your level of risk aversion is inappropriate for the space in which you live.
Take your pick.
Offgrid boosts aren't problematic because they add power to a fight. They're problematic because they add UNCOUNTERABLE power to a fight by allowing a pilot to add measurable power, projection, or tank to assets on the field without risking the booster.
A cyno does not do that. It obfuscates your ability to gain usable intelligence about potential threats. It does the exact same job as a jumpgate, it just happens to open that gate nearby. Every one of those ships still requires an active pilot, still requires a hull that can be shot at, and is still succeptible to appropriate force in terms of defense.
It is not the job of the game mechanics to make you safe in your space if your space also allows cynos to be lit. it is the job of your allied pilots. If they can not do the job effectively through diplomacy or force of arms then why do you feel that you deserve to be reaping the income that lower security space provides? That income is elevated specifically because of the risk involved.
I'll say it again: Cynos are not a force multiplier. They are a transportation device. Cynos are not unbalanced. They are a counterbalance to what would otherwise be an entirely too powerful free intelligence. |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 02:24:55 -
[25] - Quote
PopeUrban wrote: Offgrid boosts aren't problematic because they add power to a fight. They're problematic because they add UNCOUNTERABLE power to a fight by allowing a pilot to add measurable power, projection, or tank to assets on the field without risking the booster.
That booster has to be uncloaked. You're ignoring all the parts of an argument that you disagree with, picking out the parts you want to refute and ignoring the rest.
Turning a fight from a 1v1 to a 2v1 or an n+1 fight without the opportunity for a person to act is inherently unfair. There's warp acceleration for a reason. D-Scan is there for a reason. Local is there for a reason. You seem to be campaigning against intelligence gathering you consider 'free' or unfair, yet there's a reason these exist.
Cynos are intended to move a large force with the assistance of a Titan, in secured space, or with the help of a Black Ops Battleship in any space. I agree that Cynos aren't a force multiplier. They're worse than that. A force multiplier, as I've indicated in my previous posts can multiply only what's on field. Cynos are a force incremental. Cynos can increase a force faster than a force multiplier. If you increase the stats of 10 ships by 10 percent across the board (literally impossible, by the way) you have 11 ships. If you have that same boosting ship with a cyno in an active engagement and cyno in 10 ships you've gotten a 100 percent increase, assuming that ship is on-grid (Nov8). There's no active intel gathering method that can show this unless one expects all alliances in EVE to have all other systems owned by all other alliances within five light-years, what else are these alliance members going to be doing? What about blops? You can't even scan them.
What is Cyno's direct module counter? Name an active module in EVE that doesn't have a direct counter. Make a thread about it, because it's definitely not in line with CCP's balance process. A cyno can't be countered by any active module other than smartbombs, which are just simply unfeasible to defend a fleet or solo operation against a module that can bring forces on-field at the same point it stops being invulnerable from warp. |
MortisLegati
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
20
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 02:27:26 -
[26] - Quote
Tabyll Altol wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Personal opinion: The counter to Cynos are baiting and preparation, not spoolup timers and restrictions. No the actual counter would be the cyno inhibitor, you only describe the counter to the drop.
Also cyno inhibitors are hella expensive to be used literally all the time. They're not scoopable. |
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
624
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 04:00:40 -
[27] - Quote
No cynos in wspace, just sayin.
but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
|
Tabyll Altol
Breaking.Bad Circle-Of-Two
173
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 06:04:04 -
[28] - Quote
Rivr Luzade wrote:Tabyll Altol wrote:Rivr Luzade wrote:Personal opinion: The counter to Cynos are baiting and preparation, not spoolup timers and restrictions. No the actual counter would be the cyno inhibitor, you only describe the counter to the drop. The real counter ist the cyno inhibitor which of mysterius reasons need a 2 min start when a cyno needs 0 sec. So a valid balance would be to make the time the same 2 min or 0 sec (your choise). So the attacker would be forced to bring more than a little frig (if it was 0 sec) and risk only bridging a part of the fleet (0 sec). And yes a bigger fleet is not always an option. So to make things even same spool up times would be a start. I also described the counter to the cyno because a couple of 7B Sin losses will make potential hot droppers and campers reconsider their options and make them hunt elsewhere. No cynos will be lit, until you need to teach them or another group another lesson. Besides, neither the POS inhibitor nor the mobile inhibitor prevent covert cynos.
Cov Op-¦s cyno have no counter and need none, the reasons are very well explaned by you. But cyno-¦s (in my opinion) do. And just to bring a larger force is not alway-¦s an option. Not every alliance can buy titans/supers like T2 Ship-¦s.
I stay to my argument cyno = instant --> inhibitor should be the same !
It-¦s not that you were not able to bring more cyno-¦s 200 km radius is not that large !!!! |
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
4897
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 06:26:54 -
[29] - Quote
MortisLegati wrote: Turning a fight from a 1v1 to a 2v1 or an n+1 fight without the opportunity for a person to act is inherently unfair.
See, there's your main issue.
EVE is not fair. It never has been, and if you find yourself in a fair fight then chances are you've both screwed up massively. |
Tabyll Altol
Breaking.Bad Circle-Of-Two
173
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 14:20:39 -
[30] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:MortisLegati wrote: Turning a fight from a 1v1 to a 2v1 or an n+1 fight without the opportunity for a person to act is inherently unfair.
See, there's your main issue. EVE is not fair. It never has been, and if you find yourself in a fair fight then chances are you've both screwed up massively.
It-¦s not about the fairness, it-¦s about balancing, give player a counter to a playstile. And currently the only valid counter for a cyno are cynojammer which need 30 min activation time and 2 min for the mobile.
If i missed a counter please tell me (bigger blob doesn-¦t count, because this is a counter for everything). |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |