Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.04.08 22:58:00 -
[61]
Quote: why do you need a game mechanic change that has exactly one real effect--the hot dropped ship will appear just out of smartbomb range. Really? An entire design process for that?
The goal is that the hot dropped ships should appear outside of scramble range.
That means that the bait tackle can not be effective cyno and would need another person with cyno. And the the ships exiting cyno would not be in immediate tackle range of the victim and require at least minimal maneuvering effort.
In EVE tackle range is roughly 25 km, not counting overheating and specialized ships. And that range plays key role in the whole design of EVE PvP.
|
Wrayeth
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 03:05:00 -
[62]
I'll throw my backing behind the introduction of a HIC module that, when activated, prevents cynosural field activation within 30km. This module should function in both lowsec and nullsec.
In regards to covert cynosural fields, I'm on the fence as to whether or not to allow their activation within the cyno disruption field. (They can be activated in cynojammed systems, after all.) I'm leaning towards "yes", but I also have Black Ops 5, so I may be biased.
Also, I own a dreadnought and a carrier, so I'm not just posting this as a non-capital pilot who's never hotdropped before. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!" |
K'racker
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 04:22:00 -
[63]
this is eve and anything in game will be used in the most innovative ways, many times things the developers do not foresee.
not all cynos are 'hot drops'. what if i'm bringing my rorq or JF thru, popping a cyno at a station so the indy ships appear in dock range.
onoes there's a cyno 'jammer' on the field. there's hostile (de cloaking in a black ops..bridging sb gang thru..mass log-on of reds..fast hac gang enters system..use your imagination..etc.)
crap my xx bill ship and it's xx bill cargo were jumped through 25 km off the station due to the cyno jammer thingy.. ---> boom
i'm not putting anyone in this thread down, only trying to show that a simple change can have consequences beyond what was intended, and need to be well thought out, from more than one person's perspective.
|
Koshs SC
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 12:13:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Ephemeron
Quote: why do you need a game mechanic change that has exactly one real effect--the hot dropped ship will appear just out of smartbomb range. Really? An entire design process for that?
The goal is that the hot dropped ships should appear outside of scramble range.
That means that the bait tackle can not be effective cyno and would need another person with cyno. And the the ships exiting cyno would not be in immediate tackle range of the victim and require at least minimal maneuvering effort.
In EVE tackle range is roughly 25 km, not counting overheating and specialized ships. And that range plays key role in the whole design of EVE PvP.
fit a mwd on your ships, and theres no way a carrier can keep you pointed long enough to kill you.
|
Cameron Freerunner
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 14:48:00 -
[65]
There are other unforeseen consequences. One common problem for hot drops is the bubble. It can be death to stealth bombers and other sub-BS ships if they jump to a cyno that is inside a bubble. They have to immediately start getting out of the bubble before a counter-drop/counter-strike. By putting this new module on a bubble shooter, the cyno can actually take advantage of the displacement and the SBs/fleet will drop OUTSIDE the bubble. Thanks! You just made our job easier.
Depending on the fitting limitations of the module (and here we start talking about design issues, because limiting it to one ship type comes with a whole host of balance issues), if a recon pilot can mount a cyno AND a displacer, he guarantees that the fleet jumps in outside of the bubble. What happens when more than one displacer module is activated in close proximity? For example, a cluster of ships all pop the displacer module so that there is slight overlap to the fields. Will that mean that you jump into the system outside the original field? Or will you keep getting bumped further and further out to the edge of all the fields?
So now the issue is web/scram? Its still just a variation on a theme. There are plenty of tactical solutions to the problem. There is still no need for game mechanic redesign. |
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 17:18:00 -
[66]
Quote: Depending on the fitting limitations of the module (and here we start talking about design issues, because limiting it to one ship type comes with a whole host of balance issues), if a recon pilot can mount a cyno AND a displacer, he guarantees that the fleet jumps in outside of the bubble. What happens when more than one displacer module is activated in close proximity? For example, a cluster of ships all pop the displacer module so that there is slight overlap to the fields. Will that mean that you jump into the system outside the original field? Or will you keep getting bumped further and further out to the edge of all the fields?
There seems to be some misunderstanding about how the proposed cyno jammer will work.
First, I completely agree that such a module should not be restricted to a specific class ship - just as the cyno generator is unrestricted.
Activation of the cyno jammer would block any ship from jumping to the cyno within distance. Even if the cyno was lit before the jammer is activating, a carrier in another system would try to jump but get message like "cyno is jammed, can't perform jump"
This module in no way allows ships to jump in 25~ km from the target cyno.
|
Guillame Herschel
Gallente NME1
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 18:08:00 -
[67]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Quote:
FC: "Now, warp to Titan at POS, right click on his ship, and select Jump. Primary on the other side is..."
Real hard. I was sweating just typing that out.
Where do they fire sale "Titan at POS" kits? I want to buy 3 at the price of 2 or something.
They seem to be selling them in Syndicate. I was in a gang of bored FW pilots who went to 0.0 on an impromptu roam one day last month. Huzzah Federation hot dropped a fleet on us. I mean, come on. It's drop-dead easy if those guys can do it.
All but one of us got away.
-- Nah, that's just my Asperger's kickin' in.
|
Cameron Freerunner
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 18:24:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Ephemeron Activation of the cyno jammer would block any ship from jumping to the cyno within distance. Even if the cyno was lit before the jammer is activating, a carrier in another system would try to jump but get message like "cyno is jammed, can't perform jump"
That doesn't make it better, that makes it worse. An entire drop fleet thwarted by a frig with a module. That makes my previous comments doubly relevant. The proposed module is completely out of balance when examined in the context of fleet warfare. All to get out of scram/smartie range of a carrier that MIGHT drop on you. This proposal seems to arise out of a sense of self defense, but the offensive uses to which it could be put would put an end to cyno's in fleet warfare. Imagine an entire fleet of ships fitted with those modules. Now throw them into a fleet fight vs a fleet that uses titans/moms/carriers. See the problem?
If the real issue, as one poster proposed, is that players feel like there should be somewhere, like losec, to fight without cyno bait ships, why not simply propose that losec get the hisec 'no cynos' treatment and be done with it. But then you're going to get resistance from all the JF pilots who have to route through losec to get where they are going. The losec players don't seem to be examining how this module would affect things in nosec. I'm by no means putting down small gang warfare, but it is very, very different from full scale fleet warfare.
To me, it seems like a lot of players feel like they should be able to engage random ships they know nothing about without consequence. Your first stop should be battleclinic to find out if the bait pilot is associated with carrier kills. While you're there, you should go system by system (the ones you work over anyway) and look at all the recent kills. If you see carrier activity, you need to engage with caution or move on to other hunting grounds. I don't know what else to say about this. There are so many ways to handle it, you could write an entire manual on it.
Anyway, its been a fun discussion. Its great to see people conversing instead of trolling/insulting. Fly safe! Or dangerously. Whatever trips your trigger. |
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 19:08:00 -
[69]
It is a pretty good idea provided the required module can not be fitted on any old hull. Make it sufficiently hard to fit and perhaps add a range/fuel/fitting bonus to one hull or another (T3 frigate sub-system perhaps?).
Would primarily "protect" against the limited hot-drop, the crap seen on gates/stations perpetrated by bored capital pilots and their alts and the more and more common Titan bridge from low-sec POS onto cruiser gangs *sigh*
I do not really see the large cyno-ins, the ones requiring all that time and ice and what not, as really being affected much at all except for the ones that insist on dropping out 5m from a target. If the ship fielding the module could be easily identified it might be something for a small strike team to do prior to a mass-jump (assassinations are always fun )
Here's an idea to make it a game of tag: - Anti-Cyno has similar effect as cyno, ship immobilized for the duration .. or maybe slowed to a crawl. Maybe even disallow RR in a similar way as is done with HICs. - Cyno can not be popped within field - goes without saying. - If field is deployed on top of an existing cyno the cyno instantly cycles off allowing cyno ship to reposition (anti-cyno "stuck" as above, but initial drop averted).
Another potential balancing point; dependent on what fitting reqs are used, make cynos popped by the dedicated ships (ie. Combat Recons) immune to counter. Note: Would automatically exempt covert cynos since they can only be fitted on specific ships.
Addendum: Personally still more in favour of making the fuel cost for any jump into low-sec stupidly high (except for J.Freighters/Coverts) to limit the impact of 0.0 fail-trains on low-sec life
Good idea if done right and restricted enough so as to not adversely (at least minimize) affect the much loved capital slug-fests.
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.04.09 19:14:00 -
[70]
Edited by: Ephemeron on 09/04/2010 19:15:49 Well, I am concerned about the mobility of the cyno jammer.
When people open cynos, they become immobile, and if a portable cyno jammer can also be fitted on any ship, it should have severe penalty to movement once activated - probably become immobile just like cyno gen ship. That would make things fair.
As for a single frig preventing a huge fleet from cyno jumping into system - well, a single frig can also make a huge fleet appear in the system. So how is that not balanced out? Space is pretty big, so if some starts a 25km radius bubble, move out of the way to light your cyno. You can do it from safe spot, from friendly POS, or simply when the enemy is 30+ km away. Even if they have the mobile cyno jammer, it would take them 5+ seconds to get in range and activate it, enough for the insta-jumping fleet to enter.
Once mobility issues are addressed, things seem to balance out quite nicely.
Quote: It is a pretty good idea provided the required module can not be fitted on any old hull.
One of my major gripes is that the cyno generator can be fitted on any old hull, even cheap disposable t1 frigs. I would be more than happy to restrict cyno jammer to a specific class of ships, provided that the cyno generator is also restricted to specific class of ships.
Fair is fair.
|
|
K'racker
Minmatar Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2010.04.10 13:58:00 -
[71]
3 possible modules have been discussed.
1. cyno 'displacer', which moves jump-in point 25 km. from cyno generator. 2. cyno 'jammer', which blocks a cyno from opening, immobilizing the jammer. 3. cyno 'collapser', which closes a cyno, immobilizing the ship using it.
no two encounters are exactly alike, but game changes must take all conceivable into consideration. example a battleship being used as bait, and a cloaker hunting it:
1. attacker decloaks, points and webs bait. bait opens cyno, hot-dropped fleet appears 25 km. away. bait may not die, depending on incoming dps, and how fast the carriers jumping in can get remote reps on it. but the attacker will nearly always have time to escape.
2. attacker decloaks, points and webs bait, jams cyno. bait ship may live if it has mwd fitted, and the attacker doesn't have a scram fitted to keep it in range. attacker is safe from hot-drop, but may lose kill, if webbed, scrammed, target bs, with mwd shut down, can move 25 km. before exploding.
3. attacker decloaks, points and webs bait. bait ship opens cyno, coming to a complete stop. attacker collapses cyno, immobilizing himself, but preventing hot-drop. bait can live if webbed, scrammed, target bs, with mwd shut down, starting from zero speed, can move 25 km. before exploding.
i think a little more thought needs to be put into these modules, so far only the safety of the attacker, and the demise of using bait ships at all, is nearly guaranteed. it becomes even more one-sided, if you have a wingman (or alt) to be the jammer, leaving the dps ship fully mobile to dictate range and hold point.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.10 15:10:00 -
[72]
Originally by: K'racker Valid concerns
If one party is using a bait ship how do you tell which side is the attacker and why concern oneself about the baits survival?
The scenarios you describe is exactly what that the idea is trying to address, the lame hot-drop on a handful of targets/bait-ship. It would have marginal effect in bubble-land where most every system is jammed anyway but a huge impact in low-sec fighting which is the objective. The whole idea of deploying capitals against sub-caps is insane, would be equal to carpet bombing an entire city block to kill a lone sniper (or similarly exaggerated response).
The low-sec hot-drop is a major killjoy for everyone except the ones who conduct them (a minority I assure you). One can still have carrier support but has to be in place in system before hand to perform a regular warp if a jammer is expected.
If it disrupts the PvP wannabes that can't win against anything larger than a HAC without capital support then I am all for it.
As for the specific scenarios (2 and 3, not a fan of the displacement thing), why would a bait ship that just received a swift kick to its plans not warp off or jump a gate once the initial tackler immobilizes itself?
|
Athena Silk
FW Inc Important Internet Spaceship League
|
Posted - 2010.04.10 15:28:00 -
[73]
I do think a cyno needs some kind of counter. A lot of people in this thread seem to think that only one thing ever comes from a cyno: Smart-bombing carriers. But clearly, they've never gone into an "even" fight only to have 3 RR Carriers hot drop to start repping to the enemy fleet. Or even better, 3 RR Carriers and 50 RR BSs Titan bridged on top of them. There's no possible way to scout it, and no warning aside from the few seconds between a cyno going up and the enemy jumping in (usually accompanied by a crap-tonne of lag as 50-odd pilots appear on grid at once), and the fact is that most alliances and a lot of corps seem to be able to afford to do this any time they want. Currently, a cyno is "Press button, receive win", with the only response being "do it back, but bigger" or "GTFO".
I like the idea of the mobile cyno disruptor being a script for a Heavy Interdictor. Range should be based on HIC skill (ideally with a max-skilled pilot getting 30-50k range on the anti-cyno bubble), and pilots warping to a cyno that's in the disruption bubble should appear anywhere within 150km of the cyno (ie anywhere from 0km to 150km in any direction). RR BS fleets will find themselves spread out and unable to support each other until they regroup (most likely needing to warp off and back again), Carriers will often find themselves out of rep range for their fleet, and so forth.
A disruptor like that would probably need some kind of drawback, though, maybe something similar to what a cyno ship suffers from: Immobile and unable to receive friendly help (shield, armour, cap, etc) while the disruptor is active (keep the disruptor cycle as long as a current bubble cycle)?
This way, you have an easily identifiable ship class that carries the disruptor, and some fairly severe drawbacks to actually activating said disruptor, but it's on a ship class that's already fairly tanky.
Disruptor Vs Covert Cynos I'm unsure about. I'd lean towards "unaffected", because that's basically the whole point of Covert Cynos, but you could also argue for it still being disrupted.
How this would affect Jump Freighters and other logistics is something that might need to get looked into, but in the end it may just come down to you needing scout your JF a little more carefully.
|
Xiang Jiao
|
Posted - 2010.04.10 23:48:00 -
[74]
I am enjoying the banter and fruitful discussion. Instead of adding new balancing issues with more modules, let's think about why nerfing local chat is a good idea (i.e. make it function like w-space). It will enforce better tactics in all aspects of the game. Capitals would be much more hesitant to jump blindly on top of fleets when an ambush may await them. Recon will actually take some skill. Jumps and kills per hour will start to become very meaningful stats. |
frognugget
UK Freedom Fighters
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 03:58:00 -
[75]
Edited by: frognugget on 11/04/2010 04:06:49 How about the cyno jammer targets the cyno itsself and consumes fuel for each attempted jump it blocks, simultaneously the cap ship that attempted to jump has a 30 sec cooldown b4 it can attempt to jump again(insert sci-fi bs for why).
In addition the cyno ship consumes fuel for each successful jump.
so sure your frig can jam the cyno, but it can only stop 2 attempted jumps, and sure your frig can light that cyno but only 2 caps can get through.
im not gonna pretend to be a numbers guy so im not gonna throw out any hypothetical fuel ammounts ect
so the fleet doing the hot drop can light multiple cynos if they feel like it, while the fleet that is getting hot dropped can field multiple cyno jammy thingies. probly limit 1 cyno or cyno jammer per ship?
there also the issue of alts/neutrals spamming cyno jammer things so agression stuff would have 2 be worked out.
edit-however this would create an issue for large alliances moving cap fleets around with huge volumes of fuel bein used, so a ship with bonuses to cyno fuel use may be necessary
also not sure about industrials being able to use the cyno jammer any thoughts?
|
genette devo
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 05:26:00 -
[76]
lowsec toughguys crying about uneven fights, priceless. ponder that next time you are doing a 10 ship gangbang on a gate
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 06:53:00 -
[77]
Originally by: Xiang Jiao I am enjoying the banter and fruitful discussion. Instead of adding new balancing issues with more modules, let's think about why nerfing local chat is a good idea (i.e. make it function like w-space). It will enforce better tactics in all aspects of the game. Capitals would be much more hesitant to jump blindly on top of fleets when an ambush may await them. Recon will actually take some skill. Jumps and kills per hour will start to become very meaningful stats.
Removing local won't solve the issue at hand. If the hot-dropper also does the necessary recon then you are back to square one with one side being completely unable to predict or anticipate anything in advance. Does the map tallies actually work now? last time I used it there was a significant delay making it pretty much useless as an intel tool.
[Offtopic] Removing local would at present mainly benefit people with less than honourable intentions. It has to be balanced with some other way of knowing what is coming (time consuming scan perhaps) without having to resort to alts, spies and large gangs to maintain a semblance of safety. I am generally against removing local in high-/low-sec due to RP reasons unless it would enhance gameplay significantly which is not the case as it stands. For null-sec some kind of local control for a sovereignty holder would make sense but might further buff defensive efforts and by extension encourage even larger blobs .. either way, different topic entirely.[/Offtopic]
Originally by: genette devo lowsec toughguys crying about uneven fights, priceless.
What does that make you then? Ponder that as you accept the same mission for the umpteenth time in high-sec
|
Cartheron Crust
Krazny Oktyabr Revolyutsiya Asomat Drive Yards
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 07:05:00 -
[78]
Don't just "half ass" it with a different script for a HIC. A new type of ship that uses the second tier BC hulls. Who doesn't want a T2 Hurricane? |
Zybane
Amarr the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 18:38:00 -
[79]
I love the idea of a HIC or new ship or module to put up a low-sec anti-cyno (and covert cyno) disruptor of say 30km range.
When your gang is on a gate or out roaming, there is absolutely no counter to being hotdropped or titan bridged. There is no counter to it, which is why it needs balancing. The only thing you can do is escalation, and most low-sec corps and alliances don't have the resources to have dozens of people standing by waiting for a counter hot-drop.
All the hot-drop does is allow the blob to win, just like every other time in Eve PvP. I've been hot-dropped too many times to count. Do you tink the hot-droppers are interested in a real fight? No, they bridge in/drop 2-3 times+ their opponents in order to get enough dps to kill one or two ships quickly.
It's actually sad really that so much effort is put into only getting a kill or two. All the cyno hot-drop/titan bridging does is hurt small scall PvP even more by encouraging blobing.
|
Baneken
Gallente Aseveljet Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 19:31:00 -
[80]
Edited by: Baneken on 11/04/2010 19:36:11 Simple fix to this issue would be making ships cost fuel based on their size as in one super cap or maybe two (in volume) and your cyno Arazu would run out of fuel in cargo. With this you could still cyno in other smaller ships but you would have to use something bigger (usually slow) non-tackler (and usually non cloaker) ship for your Friday nights '5 carriers vs. drake = gang bang' scenario. This would also give actual role for black ops as they would be only cloakers with large enough fuel bays to cyno in more then 2-3 super caps at a time.
edit: Other solution would be to give all ships coming though cyno the same draw backs as non covert ops have now when they come out of cloak i.e. targeting delay, cannot jump/bridge/cloak anything for 2 minutes. Covert ops would unaffected by this 'cyno delay'.
|
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 21:07:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Baneken ........
A reverse bridge type of thing. Would make capital battles almost impossible to setup since you'd need tons of cyno ships just to get the big dogs on the field. Could be solved by adding security status of system being jumped to as a multiplier, thus essentially exempting null-sec while practically requiring a hauler in 0.4 systems (which often have the camped high-sec borders).
Personally more partial to a simpler system sec. multiplier on fuel consumption for all jumps. Would make having capitals "living" in low-sec a drain on the wallet and discourage the drops. Could even abuse the existence of the fuel bay to make two consecutive 0.1-0.2 jumps impossible without refuelling.
Delay on warp/cloak/dock/bridge action after cyno could have some "happy" side-effects in the low-sec transit systems where carriers come and go on stations all day, as long as sieging and offensive action was not delayed that is
|
Ephemeron
Retribution Corp. Initiative Associates
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 21:31:00 -
[82]
I really don't think Baneken's fuel idea is the way to go. It's much more radical than the cyno jammer and jump delay ideas, and would have very little impact on small gang hot drops while having huge impact on large scale fleet battles.
The whole point of this thread is to provide some counters against people hot dropping their carriers on 1-5 ship roaming gangs, where small guys have no chance.
|
genette devo
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 21:49:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
Originally by: Xiang Jiao I am enjoying the banter and fruitful discussion. Instead of adding new balancing issues with more modules, let's think about why nerfing local chat is a good idea (i.e. make it function like w-space). It will enforce better tactics in all aspects of the game. Capitals would be much more hesitant to jump blindly on top of fleets when an ambush may await them. Recon will actually take some skill. Jumps and kills per hour will start to become very meaningful stats.
Removing local won't solve the issue at hand. If the hot-dropper also does the necessary recon then you are back to square one with one side being completely unable to predict or anticipate anything in advance. Does the map tallies actually work now? last time I used it there was a significant delay making it pretty much useless as an intel tool.
[Offtopic] Removing local would at present mainly benefit people with less than honourable intentions. It has to be balanced with some other way of knowing what is coming (time consuming scan perhaps) without having to resort to alts, spies and large gangs to maintain a semblance of safety. I am generally against removing local in high-/low-sec due to RP reasons unless it would enhance gameplay significantly which is not the case as it stands. For null-sec some kind of local control for a sovereignty holder would make sense but might further buff defensive efforts and by extension encourage even larger blobs .. either way, different topic entirely.[/Offtopic]
Originally by: genette devo lowsec toughguys crying about uneven fights, priceless.
What does that make you then? Ponder that as you accept the same mission for the umpteenth time in high-sec
I make most of my money in losec, I just don't cry when I lose, i figure out what went wrong and modify my approach, I don't go out and cry about the tactic somebody used to take me down. I actually like pirates they make things interesting and keep some of my competition away. If you lose, figure out a way to win, If you can't, well....I'm sure there are other things you are good at.
|
SuperNova221
Ragnarok Rising THE SPACE P0LICE
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 22:36:00 -
[84]
I think it's safe to say the whole issue could be fixed by making the cyno's a large blue thingy like it used to be.
Or, if that isn't possible, a quantum waveform like in Homeworld. Fixing the effect will totally balance this.
|
Zorno
|
Posted - 2010.04.11 23:02:00 -
[85]
Are people really too lazy/stupid to adapt tactics when trying to attack bait? It's not really my thing to teach people to pvp but if you die to a cyno Drake you are doing it wrong.
|
Zybane
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 00:29:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Zorno Are people really too lazy/stupid to adapt tactics when trying to attack bait? It's not really my thing to teach people to pvp but if you die to a cyno Drake you are doing it wrong.
Let's hear your amazing tactics master Yoda. I am sure no-one in this thread has ever thought of such incredible tactics such as you could espouse! Of course there are ways to limit/minimize the effects of the bait-hotdrop. Unfortunately they are severely detrimental to the small gang in low-sec while keeping the hot-drop I-win button unchanged.
|
Dimitryy
Gallente Ever Flow Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 00:42:00 -
[87]
Supporting Anti-cyno mod for the hictor, can think of lots of cool ways it can be used as well, and it could really make the hictor come into its own. ------------------------------------------
Jack Blackstone > Dimitryy I hope you die. |
Zorno
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 00:56:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Zorno It's not really my thing to teach people to pvp.
Have fun getting ganked.
|
KillUJim
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 02:01:00 -
[89]
Hotdropping is part of the game.
But i do like the idea of a module for a hic that can jam cyno's within a short radius. I Feel this would add a great new dynamic to the game, especially if a bubble and a mobile cyno jam could not be used at same time. A Mobile cynojammer is something i can see being used in low-sec, and 0.0, small gang, and large capital engagements, maybe an offensive measure after you have moved your entire fleet in you can cynojam the battlefield, giving you the advantage untill your cynojam is gone. This is something that would require fast reaction and something pilots could excell at and pilots could totally Muck up, life fail bubblers, fail cyno jammers. |
Baneken
Gallente Aseveljet Sev3rance
|
Posted - 2010.04.12 07:56:00 -
[90]
A cyno jammer bubble with same variations in size as we have with regular bubbles ? Sounds good to me. Likely needs a special restriction of not not having warp bubble and cyno bubble in same space so you can't double bubble someone's bait ship. ?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |