| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ephemeron
The Dirty Dozen
   |
Posted - 2011.01.10 20:29:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Ephemeron on 10/01/2011 20:28:51
Something has to be done about the cyno mechanics. 3 seconds is not enough warning, the hostile forces are unscoutable - no game mechanic exists to know who's coming from where.
We need some sort of mobile cyno jammer at least for very limited short ranges such as 25 km
Adding strong random factors in combat breaks tactics and strategy - I hope someone in CCP office is smart enough to figure that out.
|
Ephemeron
The Dirty Dozen
|
Posted - 2011.01.10 20:41:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Bobbeh
Not supported, As i have never supported changes to cynos that would make it Nigh impossible to Hot drop people. The whole goal of a hot drop is Pick a ship with good tackling skills throw a Cyno on it, and then Find something to drop.
I strongly believe that the proper strategic way of hot dropping should be off-grid. Cyno your forces on another grid, then warp in your force on target.
That would be most fair way, allowing all sides in the conflict to adjust their strategy accordingly.
Failing that, some other limitation in teleportation speed is in order.
If you seriously believe that the current status quo is fair, you just have no proper understanding of what balance means in strategy games. And this IS a strategic thing we are talking about.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.11 21:34:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Juliette DuBois
You could make cyno ship invulnerable for 15 seconds to compensate if people are worried they get popped before anyone can come through.
If you want to go that route, then activation of cyno should automatically deactivate all warp scrambling and web modules.
So you can't have a single ship scrambling the target and hot dropping at same time
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.11 22:32:00 -
[4]
Bobbeh, arguing for the status quo is futile. Unless CCP are completely brainless when it comes to game balancing, they will introduce some kind of new feature or a nerf to hot drop mechanic.
You'd do more for your cause if you tried to push a proposal with minimum shift from the current system. Arguments for keeping things as is will just be ignored.
Compromise.
As example, I have always been very much against The Great Nano Nerf, but even at the time of debate, I did support some limited nerfing, I recognized that the status quo was a problem, just didn't agree with the radical solutions.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.12 02:07:00 -
[5]
Quote:
i've already said my compromise would be making it so that if you scram a ship it cant activate a cyno gen
That wouldn't stop anybody, short of clumsy or sleepy people.
It would be just like with cloak. When a new ship enters your overview, you cannot possibly lock it before it activates cloak (unless he's unable to activate it due to proximity). It would be exact same thing with cyno - people would always be able to activate before even the fastest inties could finish lock, much less activate scramble.
That solution would be acceptable only if warp scrambling a cyno ship blocked everyone from using the cyno. Then the timing wouldn't be an issue.
Also, I am pretty sure that most reasonable people would agree that current hot dropping mechanic is broken due to it being so easy and instant - timing is the key factor. It's just too damn fast. If you see no problem with that in a strategy/tactics game, then you just don't have a good feel for what strategy/tactics games are. I guess it's one of those things that you either get it, or you don't.
Even tho my opinion of CCP is very low right now, I still believe they have somebody in their office who's capable of understanding game balance issues. That's all it takes, 1 person over there to be able to understand. Then we'll have some kind of solution and all we have to do is propose the most reasonable ideas.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.12 04:24:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Ephemeron on 12/01/2011 04:25:16
Bobbeh, "fairness" doesn't come into question at all. I'm all for hardcore PvP and I know that real PvP is unfair, and that's the way it's supposed to be.
The real issues with cynos are:
1) too fast
2) too easy
3) unscoutable/unpredictable
That sums it up in most basic form. Has nothing to do with fairness, has everything to do with game balance. Do you want to play FPS where each player has option to activate a nuclear bomb and wipe out all opposition instantly? can you imagine what that would do to game servers?
Do you want to play chess where each player has ability to turn the pawn into a queen at any given turn (lets say based on dice roll), not just when the pawn reaches end of the board? Who cares about fairness, think of what that does to the game. It immediately loses vast portion of its strategy and tactics potential.
In same way, the ease, speed, and unpredictable randomness of hot drops takes away huge part of strategic and tactical planning.
Small random factors in games are good, they add to the game. Large random factors are bad, they destroy the game. And I'd say that the potential to get 100 people with motherships instantly materialize out of thin air, in any given situation, is a pretty damn huge random factor.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.12 19:05:00 -
[7]
I don't think further arguing is going to add much to the discussion. The main points of concern have been presented.
We need to know - does CCP "get it"?
If they don't, no point trying to propose ideas.
If they do, we can start picking the best ideas and get support for them.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.12 19:56:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Horizonist
I'm not sure, I think Bobbeh et al have presented many good arguments against it, while you and others have argued well for. I believe the issue needs a good debate, with respect given to all opposing views, so that we can weight the pros and cons, and overall implications, in a fair and balanced way. It is indeed a major aspect of nullsec PvP (and indeed logistics in general) that we are talking about, and it needs careful scrutiny and consideration due to the wide implications any changes to it would have.
Personally, I abide by my original proposition - I think it needs changing. I do not believe this would ruin it for either those who use it as a means of logistics, nor do I think it would invalidate it as a crucial element of fleet warfare.
I just don't want this to play out like the Nano Nerf discussions - over 100 pages of debate on the issue, mostly rehashing the same arguments over and over again.
Numerous ideas proposed.
No sign of life from CCP
Then months later - CCP announces a radical solution that NOBODY called for. All those 100s of pages with ideas worthless. And as result the game got worse than before.
It could easily happen with cyno mechanics. CCP can just announce out of the blue that they got some bright new idea that changes everything and only radicals on 1 side support it.
We need better understanding of what CCP believes - what they see as problem and what they think is fine. There's been enough discussion already to at least get that.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.12 20:40:00 -
[9]
also Bobbeh, nobody is trying to eliminate hot drops as valid game tactic. Those who do are just trolling.
All moderate ideas merely shift the timing and placing of the hot drop, with net gain of 20-40 seconds.
As far as strategic hot dropping goes - with numerous people on both sides, they'd hardly be effected at all. The most significant change in tactics would occur on the small scale, when small/fast gangs are being dropped by large/slow gangs. And even then, people would still be able to execute hot drops successfully, they will just need to put a little more effort and thought into it.
So it's wrong to defend cyno mechanics in a way that assumes we are trying to get rid of it. That's not what we are arguing.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.12 22:53:00 -
[10]
Quote:
The problem with putting the counter on the cyno instead of the caps is that combat cynos will not work then.
Oh please, what a cop out.
ECCM is a counter to ECM. Does ECM still work?
Warp Core Stabilizer is a counter to Warp Disruptor, does warp disruptor still work?
A hardener and armor rep is a counter to weapon damage. Do weapons still work?
All a cyno counter can do is provide a chance for the other side to win, and chances to win are more dependent on player skill and preparedness.
|
Ephemeron
Lubricous
Rebel Alliance of New Eden
|
Posted - 2011.01.13 21:37:00 -
[11]
if a cyno is lit off grid, the fastest way for anything larger than inty to get to it and open fire is about 20 seconds. And that's for short warps.
So if that type of delay is acceptable for regular fleet movements - warping between POS's, between gates. Why is it suddenly a no-way for caps? caps shouldn't be faster than sub-caps
As for on-grid cynos, in combat situations, unless you are lighting it right in the middle of a big hostile blob, you can easily survive 20 seconds. Just your standard Drake would do.
I'd say that 15 second delay between cyno and teleportation plus a cyno jammer module of limited range would be optimal way to bring balance to the whole cyno mechanic. It would fit well with other elements of EVE game design.
|
| |
|