Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Cyno jammers were supposed to force hostiles into sub capital combat.

---

Originally by: Zeph Solaris

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Cyno jammers were supposed to force hostiles into sub capital combat.

---

ftfy.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Why is it possible to jump bridge capitals into a system while the system is cyno jammed? Cyno jammers were supposed to facilitate sub capital combat however using jumpbridges a sub capital fleet is left to take on a heavily armed POS in a system where the defenders can deploy titans and motherships (as well as carriers and dreads) in almost complete safety.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Well this is interesting. You have to make a post to support the topic: So we have to get 11,000 posts to force an issue.

Ah ha ha ha ha ha

---

Originally by: Papa Ina

---

Well the motion to discuss has one reps backing. Let's pretend to have meaningful discussion about it for 7 days. Seriously, is there anybody that can make an argument against it?

---

Originally by: nlewis

---

jammers are the meatshield [Bob] wish their pets were

---

Originally by: Moridrex

---

While I see the issue, how would blocking your own cap ships jumping into the system stop you from simply manufacturing and holding cap ship blobs in the system? The attacker will still face the same cap force if it was already there just waiting for pilots to get in.

---

Originally by: Siona Windweaver

---

Edited by: Siona Windweaver on 22/05/2008 15:52:01
While It's certainly intresting to think cyno jammers as double edged swords, i don't support this issue.

If you think about it in character, you should have some info (such as cyno jammer frequencies or something) about your systems, its your alliance space afterall. Deploying capitals in YOUR space is logical both in gameplay and RP view.

Edit: Goons started to make threads to fit their needs i see, with multiple account posting/supporting and all that...

---

Originally by: nlewis

---

jammers are the meatshield [Bob] wish their pets were

---

Originally by: Yorda

---

Clearly a module that creates a cyno between two points should work next to a module that prevents cynos from being made. This makes perfect RP sense.

---

Originally by: Galactic Overlord

---

From what I've seen, goons are the only ones that have actually been able to legitimately test this mechanic fully on the field of battle, therefore they should know what they are talking about.

---

Originally by: Swamp Ziro

---

i am downs

---

Originally by: Jade Constantine

---

Edited by: Jade Constantine on 22/05/2008 15:26:15

Well yes, in order to FORCE an issue into formal CSM discussion you need X amount of support. But in order to convince a CSM representative to take up and advocate the issue for formal CSM voting to the agenda you simply need to make some good arguments and have a public discussion for seven days.

Anyways on this issue of course yes. It makes no sense that you can jump bridge capitals into a cyno-jammed system.

---

Originally by: cimmaron

---

I do not agree, there needs to be advantages in defending your home space/territory. As it stands right now, the Lagfest that is fleet battle is absurd, the OP's suggestion would only make it worse, again, not supported.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Cyno jammers were supposed to facilitate sub capital combat however using jumpbridges a sub capital fleet is left to take on a heavily armed POS in a system where the defenders can deploy titans and motherships (as well as carriers and dreads) in almost complete safety.

---

Originally by: Lord WarATron

---

Edited by: Lord WarATron on 22/05/2008 21:59:15

I Disagree. The Cynojammer is not supposed to facilitate sub capitals, it was to remove the old trench warfare of POS battles where people would reinforce your system with dreads while you sleep then dock up 50 jumps away in perfect safety when you got a gang going. It made a mockery of Dreadnaughts since they could be used risk free.

Now with a Cynojammer which is easaly disabled in 5-10 mins, a attacker has to keep his capitals in system, therefore seiges of a system end in a couple of days insted of lasting months of Alarm Clock ops. This is because as soon as the attacker leaves the system, he is going to have a uphill struggle to incap the jammer for a 2nd time while pos's are being repaired.

Since nobody in eve has yet camped a single Jammer 24/7 365 days a year, anyone fleet with a good tactic can find a 10 minute window to incap the cynojammer and then cyno their capitals in.

The whole point of the jammer is to force capitals to stay in system and hence, encorage capital fights insted of risk free Dreadnaught usage as well as reduce month long timezone wars where people only win because someone messes up stront timer on a pos..

---

Originally by: Lord WarATron

---

I Disagree. The Cynojammer is not supposed to facilitate sub capitals, it was to remove the old trench warfare of POS battles where people would reinforce your system with dreads while you sleep then dock up 50 jumps away in perfect safety when you got a gang going. It made a mockery of Dreadnaughts since they could be used risk free.

Now with a Cynojammer which is easaly disabled in 5-10 mins, a attacker has to keep his capitals in system, therefore seiges of a system end in a couple of days insted of lasting months of Alarm Clock ops. This is because as soon as the attacker leaves the system, he is going to have a uphill struggle to incap the jammer for a 2nd time while pos's are being repaired.

Since nobody in eve has yet camped a single Jammer 24/7 365 days a year, anyone fleet with a good tactic can find a 10 minute window to incap the cynojammer and then cyno their capitals in.

The whole point of the jammer is to force capitals to stay in system and hence, encorage capital fights insted of risk free Dreadnaught usage as well as reduce month long timezone wars where people only win because someone messes up stront timer on a pos..

---

Originally by: CCP Casqade

---

Please refrain from making assumptions on game mechanics and then presenting them as facts before testing them yourself.

---

Originally by: Vaal Erit

---

Originally by: Lord WarATron

---

I Disagree. The Cynojammer is not supposed to facilitate sub capitals, it was to remove the old trench warfare of POS battles where people would reinforce your system with dreads while you sleep then dock up 50 jumps away in perfect safety when you got a gang going. It made a mockery of Dreadnaughts since they could be used risk free.

Now with a Cynojammer which is easaly disabled in 5-10 mins, a attacker has to keep his capitals in system, therefore seiges of a system end in a couple of days insted of lasting months of Alarm Clock ops. This is because as soon as the attacker leaves the system, he is going to have a uphill struggle to incap the jammer for a 2nd time while pos's are being repaired.

Since nobody in eve has yet camped a single Jammer 24/7 365 days a year, anyone fleet with a good tactic can find a 10 minute window to incap the cynojammer and then cyno their capitals in.

The whole point of the jammer is to force capitals to stay in system and hence, encorage capital fights insted of risk free Dreadnaught usage as well as reduce month long timezone wars where people only win because someone messes up stront timer on a pos..

---

You make some good points, Lord WarATron. I'll give this a shot. What is the point of "keeping capitals in system" Cap fleets I've seen usually stay in one system until it is conquered, caps are logged out in system because they are not needed until a POS comes out of reinforced. Does it matter that the caps log off in that system or fly back to a friendly system and log off there? Not really, what matters far more is the reinforced timer, that's the key.

---

Originally by: Lord WarATron

---

The key point is that in the past, people would reinforce whole regions of POS hoping to catch a incorrectly timed one then run away. The defenders would repair in their prime. This made capital fights a joke since there was nothing forcing people to use capitals against each other and forced weeks of alarm clock ops to take over systems that people would defend. And if the Smaller alliace defended one system in a alarm clock op, the attackers would attack another system since there was nothing forcing them to commit capitals.

This is why people called for a cynojammer. A Module that would force the attacker to commit capitals insted of playing risk free hopscotch with POS wars.

Now with Cynojammers, the attackers cannot cyno 50jumps away and dock up safely, they have to stay in system and lock it down for a couple of days otherwise the defenders will repair the jammer and get back in again. If the Defenders want to use caps/supercaps to defend their pos, then the agressors will have no choice but to use capitals for epic capital fights or risk doomsday.

This is good for the smaller alliances since they can take over systems in a couple of days insted of months of POS alarm clock wars which only larger alliances are good at doing. Problem has never been Cynojammers, its been people who used the old tactic of risk free dreadnaughts who are unhappy that they have to risk their capitals now. After all, its a seige and ships will be lost on both sides. It is not some lvl4 where you can rambo without loss.

---

Originally by: nlewis

---

jammers are the meatshield [Bob] wish their pets were

---

Originally by: "Reticenti"

---

Oh, one note to Scius, you have made Goons and BoB agree on something. Good job.

---

Originally by: Akelorian

---

I disagree with the op, and the whole slew of goon alts on this matter. Like war stated, without cynojammers fights would be weeks of alarm clock ops, another useless topic like the multiple titans in system one.

---

Originally by: Lord WarATron

---

...

---

Originally by: Yorda

---

tl;dr you're ******** stop posting.

---

Originally by: CCP Casqade

---

Please refrain from making assumptions on game mechanics and then presenting them as facts before testing them yourself.

---

Originally by: Ryntrax

---

This mechanic is a bonus of sovereignty in multiple systems. As you should have the advantage in your own system.

---

Originally by: Ryntrax

---

This mechanic is a bonus of sovereignty in multiple systems. As you should have the advantage in your own system.

---

Originally by: Draygo Korvan

---

But now how does a smaller alliance take a cynojammed system in the first place when it requires a few hundred battleships if the pos is manned?

---

Originally by: Lord WarATron

---

Edited by: Lord WarATron on 28/05/2008 11:38:58

Originally by: Draygo Korvan

---

But now how does a smaller alliance take a cynojammed system in the first place when it requires a few hundred battleships if the pos is manned?

---

The Brige is the only thing giving Smaller alliances a chance. E.G

Large alliance vs Large Alliance
Large Alliance kills cynojammer in 3-5 minutes and keeps capitals in system untill Sov Drops. Using a bridge or not makes no difference since jammer will be down far too quickly to matter.

Small alliance vs Large Alliance
Small Alliance kills cynojammer in 10-15 minutes and keeps capitals in system untill Sov Drops. Using a bridge or not makes no difference since jammer will be down until sov drops

Large Alliance vs Small Alliance
Large Alliance kills cynojammer in 3-5 minutes and keeps capitals in system untill Sov Drops. Using a bridge or not makes no difference since jammer will be down far too quickly to matter.

Cowardly Alliance vs Small Alliance

Cowardly alliance does not want to risk dreads so attacks Jammer. Jammer will be down in 3-5 minutes then the cowardly alliance removes all capitals out of harms way after reinforcing all pos. The Small alliance can put the jammer back up and bring capitals in via bridge to defend against the large alliance attack to remove pos's when they leave reinforced.

Point

The point is simple. The bridge ability does not effect Large alliances at all since Jammer is down in 3-5 mins making any benifit of bridges useless. It only effects the "Risk Free Capital" alliances using cowardly tactics and only harms the Small Alliances who try to defend against the cowardly alliances.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Why is it possible to jump bridge capitals into a system while the system is cyno jammed? Cyno jammers were supposed to facilitate sub capital combat however using jumpbridges a sub capital fleet is left to take on a heavily armed POS in a system where the defenders can deploy titans and motherships (as well as carriers and dreads) in almost complete safety.

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

Cynosural Field Generators that can quickly bring capital ships to the battlefield; and Cynosural Field Jammers to prevent them from coming in.

---

• Non combat capital ships (Freighters, Rorquals) and sub-capital ships aren't changed.


• Instead of preventing capitals from using jump bridges, I'd recommend having them limit there use with a cooldown, meaning that combat capitals could only use a jump bridge every X minutes.

Originally by: Conrad Rock

---

This idea is very much counter productive to large 0.0 alliances, and yet you have some big alliances voting here for it because they are simply honest in the way game mechanics should work.

A cyno jammer is to prevent capital jumps into a system, friendly and hostile. Currently that is broken because the jump bridge, which really wasn't intended for capital ships, makes it possible for friendlies.

If you want to bring friendly capitals in, then you have to offline it for a few minutes. The mechanics are there to make that possible and FAIR. That's how it was intended.

The current broken way allows easier defending for big 0.0 alliances and prevents smaller groups of doing any harm to big 0.0 infrastructure.

---

Originally by: Windjammer

---

Not apporved. Advantage should always go to a defender. Strategically it always has in warfare. Defenders have dug in, fortified their position, set down roots, invested resources in time and material to make what they hold profitable and defensible.

The high number of goons supporting this issue should speak for itself regarding the style of play the OP hopes to support. Goons defeat by using larger numbers of pilots. For the most part they hold few systems compared to their size. They prefer to rip up others rather than take systems to hold and develope for themselves. Weakening the defensive capabilities of those they attack would be nice for them. Also, of course, they've been instructed to support this issue.

The OP's suggestion would have made the BoB/goon war a little easier for the goons, huh.

---

Originally by: Goumindong

---

Well this is interesting. You have to make a post to support the topic: So we have to get 11,000 posts to force an issue.

Ah ha ha ha ha ha

---

Originally by: Windjammer

---

Not apporved. Advantage should always go to a defender. Strategically it always has in warfare. Defenders have dug in, fortified their position, set down roots, invested resources in time and material to make what they hold profitable and defensible.

The high number of goons supporting this issue should speak for itself regarding the style of play the OP hopes to support. Goons defeat by using larger numbers of pilots. For the most part they hold few systems compared to their size. They prefer to rip up others rather than take systems to hold and develope for themselves. Weakening the defensive capabilities of those they attack would be nice for them. Also, of course, they've been instructed to support this issue.

The OP's suggestion would have made the BoB/goon war a little easier for the goons, huh.

---

Originally by: Waterfowl Democracy

---

Thanks for the alt post. Also you might want to check a Sov map, "goons" have far from a few systems.

---

Originally by: Sworn Absent

---

You really hate goons, huh? Shame you fail to realise this isn't just about goons.

It will effect goons, just as it will effect everyone else (if anything changes). Maybe if you actually read the thread, you would see all the support from people in other space holding alliances...

Ha! Who am I kidding? You're the alt of someone with a chip on your shoulder who has been following every thread that might be related to Goons at all, being as negative and un-constructive as possible. At the same time you try to label us as disruptive. You're not fooling anyone. Stop posting. If you don't want to have a reasonable discussion, don't stop us having one.

---

Originally by: Windjammer

---

Originally by: Sworn Absent

---

You really hate goons, huh? Shame you fail to realise this isn't just about goons.

It will effect goons, just as it will effect everyone else (if anything changes). Maybe if you actually read the thread, you would see all the support from people in other space holding alliances...

Ha! Who am I kidding? You're the alt of someone with a chip on your shoulder who has been following every thread that might be related to Goons at all, being as negative and un-constructive as possible. At the same time you try to label us as disruptive. You're not fooling anyone. Stop posting. If you don't want to have a reasonable discussion, don't stop us having one.

---

My post was about the relationship between attackers and defenders who've had a chance to "dig in". Goons AND BoB are a good example of this and that is why I used them. It's a shame you didn't realize my post wasn't just about goons. I suppose you were in too great a hurry to express your anger.

The recent war between goons and BoB is an ideal example of the two strategies. You had on the one hand, a large attack force bent on demolition. On the other hand you had a well dug in defender. BoB had a large number of systems, well developed, compared to the number of members they had. Goons had few systems, not particularly well developed, compared to the larger number of members they had. Last I checked membership numbers, goons had twice as many members as BoB. BoB's systems are/were in one area. Goons systems are/were spread all over the place.

Bearing the above in mind, the proposed change would benefit the style of play typified by goons and penalize the style of play typified by BoB.

These are not so much negative observations of goonswarm as they are accurate. It's amazing how you lot can recruit for, practice and even brag about a certain style of play and then complain when someone comments on it.

Merely because some of my posts are inconvenient to you does not mean they are negative or unconstructive and that's a really funny accusation coming from a goon. Yeah, yeah, you're right. That last was negative, but you really earned it. Enjoy.

Assuming I have the power to stop your discussion, reaonable or otherwise, is crediting me with far too much ability. However, I truly appreciate the compliment.

Regards,
Windjammer

---

Originally by: Cursive

---

Jade Constantine alt?

---

Originally by: Wrathamon Starfury

---

Way to go folks, you just locked your capitals out of your own systems. So how are you suppose to get your capitals back into your jammed station system? Drop the cyno jammer everytime someone needs to get in to the system??

A jump bridge is just that, a jump bridge. Jump gates do not allow it because the ships are to big to fit through the gate, since jump bridges open a cyno field in open space they fit.

Until there is a way to get friendly capitals back into their cyno jammed systems without dropping jammers everytime at 30 minutes a pop dont change anything.

---

Originally by: Yorda

---

Originally by: Lord WarATron

---

Edited by: Lord WarATron on 28/05/2008 11:38:58

Originally by: Draygo Korvan

---

But now how does a smaller alliance take a cynojammed system in the first place when it requires a few hundred battleships if the pos is manned?

---

The Brige is the only thing giving Smaller alliances a chance. E.G

Large alliance vs Large Alliance
Large Alliance kills cynojammer in 3-5 minutes and keeps capitals in system untill Sov Drops. Using a bridge or not makes no difference since jammer will be down far too quickly to matter.

Small alliance vs Large Alliance
Small Alliance kills cynojammer in 10-15 minutes and keeps capitals in system untill Sov Drops. Using a bridge or not makes no difference since jammer will be down until sov drops

Large Alliance vs Small Alliance
Large Alliance kills cynojammer in 3-5 minutes and keeps capitals in system untill Sov Drops. Using a bridge or not makes no difference since jammer will be down far too quickly to matter.

Cowardly Alliance vs Small Alliance

Cowardly alliance does not want to risk dreads so attacks Jammer. Jammer will be down in 3-5 minutes then the cowardly alliance removes all capitals out of harms way after reinforcing all pos. The Small alliance can put the jammer back up and bring capitals in via bridge to defend against the large alliance attack to remove pos's when they leave reinforced.

Point

The point is simple. The bridge ability does not effect Large alliances at all since Jammer is down in 3-5 mins making any benifit of bridges useless. It only effects the "Risk Free Capital" alliances using cowardly tactics and only harms the Small Alliances who try to defend against the cowardly alliances.

---

I knew BoB had lowered there application requirements, but goddamn that has to be one of the most ******** things I've ever read (and I read GF.com often).

The smaller alliances will never stand a chance against a bigger (even cowardly) alliance. They'll just be outnumbered / outspent and lose horribly. Not to mention they actually have to hold the system for the 30 whatever days it takes to get sov 3.

---