EVE Search - Sticky:[Oceanus] Cyno Exclusion Zone around starbases

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Oceanus] Cyno Exclusion Zone around starbases

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 780	Posted - 2014.09.17 23:51:00 - [1] - Quote I'm curious if this is actually a good idea. The giant cyno exclusion zone has a lot of seriously strange effects, like a titan bumped out of a pos being absolutely boned because it can't cyno in help. Have you considered allowing any cyno to be lit within that zone, but you still land outside it (a mechanic you clearly already have since you implemented it as a fallback) and what's the downside of just doing that instead of this exclusion zone?
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 796	Posted - 2014.09.18 12:17:00 - [2] - Quote Yun Kuai wrote: Retar Aveymone wrote: I'm curious if this is actually a good idea. The giant cyno exclusion zone has a lot of seriously strange effects, like a titan bumped out of a pos being absolutely boned because it can't cyno in help. Have you considered allowing any cyno to be lit within that zone, but you still land outside it (a mechanic you clearly already have since you implemented it as a fallback) and what's the downside of just doing that instead of this exclusion zone? edit: basically I'm wondering if there's additional intended effects I'm not seeing, it's hard to tell what was intended and what was not with this change (besides ending pos bowling). Learn to read. It said it would spawn you outside the range. So you can cyno on top of your poor Titan, but you may just land 25km from it i suggest next time you attempt to seem smart you actually do the reading and don't ever try to correct me again you idiot: CCP Fozzie wrote: After this change, cynos will not be lightable within 25km of the forcefield edge. If for any reason a cyno is active within 25km of a forcefield (if the cyno was lit before the password was entered for instance) then any ships jumping to that cyno will appear within 5km of a point that is a minimum of 25km from the forcefield (instead of appearing around the cyno).
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 796	Posted - 2014.09.18 12:25:00 - [3] - Quote Worrff wrote: Nice to see the prompt responses from Fozzie addressing the points raised here. Oh wait......... You mean while he would be asleep?
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 797	Posted - 2014.09.18 13:35:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: I've been in meetings with the CSM all morning, and amongst all the topics we did some further discussion around this change taking the public feedback into account. The conclusion of the discussion was satisfactory for all parties. YOU TEASE
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 797	Posted - 2014.09.18 13:56:00 - [5] - Quote I think it would help if we knew what the intended goal here was - obviously part is to fix the pos bowling exploit, but this change seems more far-reaching than you'd need for that and it seems like you're aiming at something else as well. It's hard to tell if this is a good change and make any useful feedback without knowing that.
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 798	Posted - 2014.09.18 15:59:00 - [6] - Quote Promiscuous Female wrote: if only there was some sort of capital ship that could haul 150k+ m^3 and could fit an MWD no time to figure out how to play the game, too busy replacing "you" with "u" in my posts busy busy busy
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 800	Posted - 2014.09.18 16:43:00 - [7] - Quote Skia Aumer wrote: Parthannun Solette wrote: so now you cant get an rorq to jump close to an forcefield anymore and so possibly get killed because it takes ages to move the thing Because Rorquals dont have warp drives. My feedback: I dont like the fix, it reduces situation awareness when fighting at POS grid. Also, carriers delegating fighters at field edge can feel safer now. random proposal: for the purposes of drones and YOUR targeting, while in the exclusion zone you count as in the pos shields (so you can be shot at, but not shoot) kills shield-hugging which is a dumb mechanic problematic side effect is it kills unbonused ships from being able to rep pos or pos mods (and since nothing has a bonus to hull reps, ends hull repping) hrmm, may need to rethink that
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 801	Posted - 2014.09.18 17:18:00 - [8] - Quote True Payne wrote: You know! I have been playing since 2006 and this is the worst idea CCP has ever came up with! Now every Super/Capital/JF/Roqs will be very vulnerable when jumping in. So now that ohsht cyno means nothing just inside that Exclusion zone!!! How about CCP makes Titans itself have that Exclusion Zone*... Your putting a lazy Band-aid on the Problem. Stop Screwing the rest of eve with these pointless fixes.. Ships being vulnerable on jump-in isn't a bad thing. Stop acting like a wormholer. It's more if this exclusion zone actually leads to good gameplay that I'm not sure about, this is a really odd change given the only goal that's been publicly stated which makes me think there's more Fozzie is aiming at.
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 801	Posted - 2014.09.18 17:22:00 - [9] - Quote Kismeteer wrote: Will this apply to online and offline pos? Or is a POS bubble necessary to get cyno protection? this is answered in the original post, go read it (only applies to a forcefield, not a stick)
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 802	Posted - 2014.09.18 17:31:00 - [10] - Quote Serotta wrote: Why not make is so the pos shield modifies the ship's properties so that a ship of the same class outside the pos shields would not be able to bump the ship inside the pos shield far enough for it to leave the pos shields. At the same time the pos shields would buff up the ships acceleration, agility, or whatever.. so the ship still flies the same inside or outside of the pos shields. because there is no such aoe effect anywhere in eve's coding and doing that would probably cause the servers to crash over and over again?

Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 802	Posted - 2014.09.18 17:54:00 - [11] - Quote Drak Fel wrote: Actually, the pos shield already creates an area of effect. You don't take damage when you're in one. You can't activate most modules when you're in one. This would just add more affects to the same aoe radius that already exists. the pos shield most certainly does not create an area of effect and you can absolutely take damage inside a pos shield (as the many people who have been killed by missiles fired before they were in the shield but hit after can tell you) - you merely cannot be targeted what you're asking would be to change the physics and stats of a ship based on where it is in the solar system, something that does not exist at all to the best of my knowledge in eve's code and would have to be written from scratch
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 806	Posted - 2014.09.18 19:42:00 - [12] - Quote Dirk MacGirk wrote: Drak Fel wrote: You should really make it so that you can still light a cyno withing 25km but ships jumping in land beyond 25km. Capitals/Supers/Titans in the 25km deadzone will not be able to light a cyno to even attempt to save themselves if they are tackled in between. Very legitimate point here, unless it is somehow covered by this part of Fozzie's remarks: "If for any reason a cyno is active within 25km of a forcefield (if the cyno was lit before the password was entered for instance) then any ships jumping to that cyno will appear within 5km of a point that is a minimum of 25km from the forcefield (instead of appearing around the cyno)." Not sure how else a cyno could be active if it is a dead zone, unless it's referring to a cyno that is lit and coasts or is bumped into the dead zone. pos was not online when the cyno was lit, so there was no forcefield creating a barrier, then the pos came online
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 808	Posted - 2014.09.18 20:11:00 - [13] - Quote I have no fundamental problem with ending jumping to docking rings (though you'd need to do some thinking about if jump freighters would need a corresponding buff of some kind), but it seems silly to extend the discussion that far without figuring out what the goals are here.
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 808	Posted - 2014.09.18 20:52:00 - [14] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: Retar Aveymone wrote: I have no fundamental problem with ending jumping to docking rings (though you'd need to do some thinking about if jump freighters would need a corresponding buff of some kind), but it seems silly to extend the discussion that far without figuring out what the goals are here. I know people wont like it but IMO. Only tech 1 freighters should be able to hold regular non packaged items. I would the make jump freighters have a 4million m3 sma instead. If you want to import items up the 0.0 pipe from jita then you should need an escort fleet like in 2007. freighter ops were stupid as all ******* hell in 2007 and have gotten no better since plus the thing that carries packaged ships already exists, it's called a carrier
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 808	Posted - 2014.09.18 20:54:00 - [15] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: Jf are some of the most important components of 0.0 empires yet they do not generate content and do not die that often outside of low/high sec... the content that does exist in 0.0 exists only because of jump freighters, and although there's little content in killing or saving them they are a necessary factor in any other content
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 808	Posted - 2014.09.18 21:06:00 - [16] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: Retar Aveymone wrote: MeBiatch wrote: Jf are some of the most important components of 0.0 empires yet they do not generate content and do not die that often outside of low/high sec... the content that does exist in 0.0 exists only because of jump freighters, and although there's little content in killing or saving them they are a necessary factor in any other content so you are saying that the current stagnation of null sec is contributed threw safe logistics and if this was changed would act as a paragim shift in the way 0.0 works? i am saying what i posted, not whatever nonsense you understood logistics that exist in a way that permits transport of goods to and from highsec in volumes and effort levels that only jump freighters can supply is an absolute necessity for any content in 0.0 you can tweak the safety in which they do so (though that is an increase in effort and can cause issues if not balanced) but the idea of going back to freighter ops is one of those mind-bogglingly stupid ideas only ever put forth by people who have never been on a freighter op
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 808	Posted - 2014.09.18 21:09:00 - [17] - Quote it also requires a stupendous amount of poor thinking to think that freighter ops would benefit the little guy we could do freighter ops: the various small groups we fight who live in npc null could not (and would quickly run out of stuff)
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 808	Posted - 2014.09.18 21:24:00 - [18] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: dude back in 07 were the most fun i have had ni 0.0 doing freighter ops. and no having basically risk free logistics does not lead to fun. By making JF logistics risky will be great for 0.0... for 1 it will incentify players to have local hubs instead of just jita. and 2 it will generate heck loads of content for pirates and null sec players... its really a win win. I just think its rather ironic that a 0.0 sov guy would claim that 0.0 logistics should be less risky then high sec. man if the most fun you had in 2007 was freighter ops i hope you got the mental health treatment you needed because that's just a horrible life to be living, a completely pleasureless year is a sign something is seriously wrong i have had to organize and attend freighter ops recently - short ones, relatively speaking - and every bit of it sucked. there were no redeeming features whatsoever. you cannot simply rely on local hubs because the eve economy is set up to require trading: ice, moon minerals, and regular minerals are regional. you simply must import low-ends, non-regional moon minerals, and the non-local isotopes at a bare minimum. that's not even including other stuff like datacores, faction mods, deadspace mods, decryptors and the like that all must be imported from somewhere else but aren't as big volume-wise crius made it a lot more managable to do local production so the need for JFs is (hopefully) dwindling somewhat - I know we've turned from a net importer of t2 ships to a net exporter. but that doesn't mean we can survive without logistical lines to empire: you end jfs and we'll move to torrinos and supply ourselves with npc freighters like i said i've got no fundamental opposition to making jfing somewhat riskier by making it no longer possible to cyno onto docking rings, but the idea of freighter ops as the standard for logitics is madness
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 808	Posted - 2014.09.18 21:50:00 - [19] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: I'm not going to point fingers but I found this announcement hilarious after a mass petition was submitted a week ago for shenanigans involving bumping your own cyno carrier into your pos shields for lulz. I guess I'm lulzing now. you know i suspect the actual impetus was the bowling titans out of pos, not cyno carriers using a trick that's existed since 2007
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 808	Posted - 2014.09.19 00:05:00 - [20] - Quote oohthey ioh wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: (if the cyno was lit before the password was entered for instance) then any ships jumping to that cyno will appear within 5km of a point that is a minimum of 25km from the forcefield (instead of appearing around the cyno). am i the only one read it? no, but im going to bet you were the only person who misinterpreted it in whatever way you just did

Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 810	Posted - 2014.09.19 12:29:00 - [21] - Quote Arya Regnar wrote: CCP screwed WH guys over and added basically same type of mechanic. About 3% of them liked it. CCP does same thing to null. THIS MUST BE CHANGED, WE MUST SAVE NULLSEC. we're not all SOMEONE HAS MOVED MY CHEESE aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa the vast majority of the response is positive, there's just a minor tweak to the idea to eliminate some odd and probably unintended effects necessary (or some explanation of the goals so we can suggest changes that meet those as well) if we were wormholers this thread would be 100 pages of unsub threats and poorly spelled ranting instead of a lot of "good idea! just needs a tweak"
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 815	Posted - 2014.09.19 15:22:00 - [22] - Quote Ranger 1 wrote: Any time you bring that fleet into a POS you're going to have to take an extra (unprotected) jump to get inside the POS shields, which adds a layer of vulnerability (albeit a small one). As a small first step, it's a good one.... hopefully not the last one. Good game play comes from activities being risky, not from activities being easy... and right now it is far too safe and easy to move a cap fleet (or jump freighter) anywhere you like. The only time you'd ever do this would be if there were simply no lowsec stations that you could route through whatsoever, because you'd much rather jump to a docking ring (perfect safety) and dock up to recap. For supercaps, yeah i suppose you have to warp instead but who the **** slowboats a titan instead of warping it into the pos - I sure don't, if my titan is getting cynoed anywhere it's getting cynoed so that I can mwd-warp into the pos (which you can do pretty close to the pos by having a bookmark/alt on the other side you warp to at 100km) instead of take 30s or more to slowboat.
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 815	Posted - 2014.09.19 15:28:00 - [23] - Quote Ranger 1 wrote: For those that claim they never got a fight transporting goods back and forth to null in a freighter op either: 1: Never actually did one. 2: Did one or two, got bored halfway through and logged off (conveniently forgetting to mention that part). 3: Had opponents so wimpy at that time you wouldn't get a good fight no matter what you did. Time to stop listening to your lazy industry pilots. If you want to have more fun, let CCP start interjecting some of the risk back into null sec daily activities. We have organized and ran two large freighter ops relatively recently. It was unfun crap for all involved, and naturally because we were moving huge, expensive **** we made very, very sure there would be no fights whatsoever. All of the nullsec empires have been doing freighter ops on and off because we have to in order to get outpost upgrades or large ihub upgrades. We still haven't had any interesting content and anyone who thinks they ever were fun hasn't done one since 2007 and has their memories of what they actually were utterly addled by the tendency to remember only the interesting stuff and forget the soul-crushing drudgery.
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 817	Posted - 2014.09.19 17:11:00 - [24] - Quote I do not believe that a single Goonswarm freighter op since Dominion forced nullsec to start doing them again (for ihubs and upgrades) has ever generated a fight. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 817	Posted - 2014.09.19 21:26:00 - [25] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: Dude there was a major difference between 07 and 14. Back then you would be attacked and harassed. But with the game mechanics today with power projection and blue doughnut there is no incentive to attack a freoghter op. Chances are peeps interpreted the op as bait. I think with proper changes to powwr projection and occupancy based sov those boring ops would be fun like they once were making power projection harder makes it harder to attack a freighter op, not easier. our power is in place before the op starts, to **** with us you've got to get there when you find out about it our overriding goal with any freighter op is the freighters not be shot at and we will organize them to ensure this happens, as will anyone else. it is much EASIER to attack a freighter op now, not harder
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 819	Posted - 2014.09.19 22:11:00 - [26] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: Primary This Rifter wrote: The biggest issue I have with this is that the exclusion zone prevents cynos from being lit at all, instead of just allowing it but placing incoming ships 25+km. Titans dying without being able to bring in backup after being bumped out is less content generation than a titan being bumped out and bringing a fleet in to help. Imo titans were never meant to be used solo. You deserve to die if you don't travel with friends. titans were designed with the idea they were so expensive only a handful would ever exist (lawl)
Retar Aveymone GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 829	Posted - 2014.09.22 18:00:00 - [27] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Like I said before, we incorporated the feedback from this thread last week and discussed a modified version of the plan with the CSM. We're now ready to announce the results. In this new version of the plan, you will be able to activate the Cyno Field Gen module anywhere outside the shields, but if the ship lighting the cyno is within 25km of a starbase forcefield, the actual beacon will appear at least 25km away from the forcefield. Ships jumping to the cyno field will appear around that beacon 25km away instead of beside your ship. The OP has been updated. Thanks for the feedback and keep it coming. that makes sense - so hostiles will know where people will be popping out of a cyno inside the exclusion zone instead of having to guess better solution than the one commonly proposed here, I like it

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.