| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
LoveKebab
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
   |
Posted - 2008.07.31 07:55:00 -
[1]
I wont be oryginal here. Cyno jammers are shit. Basicly each given alliance that hold 0.0 space can cyno jamm entire region without much trouble. Put a tower up, go do something fancy for few weeks, w8 for sov 3 to kick in and install a cyno jammer.
This already went to far imo. Cyno jammers aint working they way they should. It would be IMHO ok if cyno jammers could be only installed in systems that have outposts in it. Putting up an outpost mean u can get sov lvl above "2". I see no problem in having cyno field generators in every system so u can jump caps without much trouble but come on, jamming entire 0.0 is not what ppl should do and seeing yet another jammer in following system makes me sad. Ppl should be aware that if they move their cap ship outside of station they are vournable to any attacks from other caps (mean hotdrop...)
0.0 space is not High sec and there should be a free travel through it. Each time u open cyno it's popping on map, u are vournable to attack for some time (allign time for caps, cap rechrge etc).
Pls CCP look into this, and also fix covert cyno generators cuz atm they are useless. Excelent idea whould be to allow them to pop in cynojammed systems tbh - black ops aint the ships that can kill jammer very fast or other caps if that matters and also not many ppl fly them + caps cant jump to covert beacons.
|
Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
Imperial Servants
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 09:48:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: LoveKebab
0.0 space is not High sec and there should be a free travel through it.
Only if you yourself can enforce it. See, 0.0 is free for all. If someone camps a gate, they deny you travel. So what is the difference between camping a gate and putting up a cyno jammer? One denies conventional travel, the other jumping travel, but both deny travel.
|
LoveKebab
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 11:30:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Only if you yourself can enforce it. See, 0.0 is free for all. If someone camps a gate, they deny you travel. So what is the difference between camping a gate and putting up a cyno jammer? One denies conventional travel, the other jumping travel, but both deny travel.
it takes 5 minutes to kill the camp and at least 1-2days to kill cynojammer along with pos ...
especially when it's being placed on a deathstar which gonna pop shitloads of battleships durning a try to take cynojammer out ... and GL doing it in 10 systems in a row 1by1...
Besides ppl are usually camping the same systems and it's not that u have like 1 person per system and ur travel is totally denied. Comparing 2 totally diferent things is silly.
Having cynojammers in every single system on the way to destination is making this game kinda like Tower Defence in W3 ;p. damn maze :(
|
Hortoken Wolfbrother
Amarr
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.07.31 14:05:00 -
[4]
Cyno jammers are ******ed at is. Put them at a pos, which is basically a ball of support fleet death when done right, allow defenders to use caps and super caps, and allow them to be up everywhere. They really need to X- out some of those things. Make it so cyno jammers have to be attached to stations, that forces them to bring a fleet to defend instead of relying on a poses dps. Make it so cyno jammers dont recieve remote assistance while under fire, that makes the help of caps and supercaps limited to only an offensive role. I didnt think this through terribly long, but its pretty obvious ccp didnt think through cyno jammers terribly long either.
|
NerfMyBarge
|
Posted - 2008.08.01 17:26:00 -
[5]
LoveKebab is whining because Pure have put up cynojammers in the cosmos constellation where LoveKebab makes a living. His living is done by camping the cosmos plex so noone else can clear it more then once per day and if there is noone around he cleares it over and over and over. Then he cyno in his mothership in an old DEEP safespot to pick up the loot. Nothing breaking eve policy but plex-squatting is kind of lame :P
|
LoveKebab
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.01 20:14:00 -
[6]
i should've made this thread with my alt cuz i was pretty sure some1 gonna mention that sooner or l8er. Tho it's not about that i can or can't jump with capital to the place u mentioned. I dont even use caps as my last one died in Catch. Mom is not mine.
Cyno jammers are broken and they are not working the way they should, there is no doubt about that...
|
Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
|
Posted - 2008.08.01 23:13:00 -
[7]
1) Make cyno jammers prevent capital ships coming in even via jump bridges (or other means, not sure what works there - cyno generators?).
2) Give cyno jammers an onlining delay of seven days.
This turns the module into a fortification module that you don't just switch on and off. You set up your fortress system, you online the cyno jammer, and then it's the way it is, and it better be good. You can have capitals for defense there, but you won't be able to use them anywhere else (and get them back to the system), and you can't quickly move in your own capitals for defense.
Allowing covert ops cynos in jammed systems seems useful to me, too, but blackops need more fixes than that (fuel consumption etc.)
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.08.01 23:16:00 -
[8]
And increase module price. Having hydra suicide jump haulers with cyno jammers inside hoping to get at least one into system = priceless...
|
LoveKebab
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 00:52:00 -
[9]
and if u take the fact that cynojammer has 1/2 hp of LARGE POS ppl should probably start shooting pos with their BS than cynojammer cuz it's just waste of time tbh
jammers should have HP of normal pos module (guns for example) not some amound taken from ass...
|
Wil Stryker
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 06:55:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Wil Stryker on 02/08/2008 06:56:09
When a POS goes into reinforce warp disruptor's and webifiers etc go off line as there is no cpu. I always thought that a cyno jammer should use a combination of both.
This would mean that when the POS is put into reinforcement the Jammer is off line until the POS has been repaired to 50% shields.
This would mean the attackers have the element of surprise to take out the jammer, but the reinforce timer allows the defenders time to organize a defence fleet for the system.
I also believe that if a system is Cyno jammed then the jump bridge should not allow capitals to move from system to system.
Capitals are too large to use normal jump gates so why should they be allowed to use a jump bridge.
|
Zonemann
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 11:42:00 -
[11]
whaaa, mommy i cant jump into my plex constellation to pick up my farming goodies which i deny everybody else.
Theres nothing wrong with cynojammers, alliances work hard to keep there space, if ya want it down bring a fleet to do the job, put some effort into doing things and stop crying nerf this, that cause it doesnt fit your playstyle.
0.0 is for alliances or corporations who take the time and effort to keep it.
|
LoveKebab
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 12:04:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Zonemann
0.0 is for alliances or corporations who take the time and effort to keep it.
i feel sorry for u tbh, if u cant see cynojammers being way to unbalanced vs other pos mods (mean they have to much hp, cost is to small, can be placed in any system with sov3 that dont have a station it it) than u are an idiot, sir...
|
Karbowiak
Caldari
coracao ardente
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 12:24:00 -
[13]
Cyno jammers _ARE_ too powerfull atm.
Being able to cynojam an entire region is stupid - not only does it hamper the fundamental thing in EVE, freedom to do whatever - it also hampers any sort of attack on a hostile entity.
The fact that YOU have to take down the jammer with a ton of battleships, while shrugging off the dmg off the tower (which incase its a deathstar which it normally is) is near impossible
And put in a mom or two, or 5 carriers to remote rep the jammer - and you can't do jack shit. And which alliance CAN'T field 5 carriers these days?..
Face it, cynojammers are flawed, and would be better off GONE from the game.
But if that happened alot of alliances would lose space, because they are weak and don't deserve to be in 0.0 anyway..
|
Tahaki Sheratu
Sentience.
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 12:26:00 -
[14]
While I'm not disagreeing...I agree fully, but do you really think we needed another post about this? 
|
Tynk Muris
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 13:57:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Tynk Muris on 02/08/2008 13:58:00
The greed for power and dominance is apparent in these posts. However it is not CCP's vision for THEIR game.
Quote:
But if that happened alot of alliances would lose space, because they are weak and don't deserve to be in 0.0 anyway..
CCP is trying to get more people into 0.0. The cynojamers are allowing those who you would deny, a chance to gain a foot hold and attempt to build the power you desire. If everything that allowed new corps that are not ready, in your opinion, to be in 0.0 was removed, the game would become stale with only the long lived alliances and corps throwing themselves at each other. Stagnation breeds death, in this case it would be of the game. So yes, I understand your point, you view it as over powered, but that same thing allows for new life to move into the 0.0 systems you wish to claim as your own. The fact that the powerful alliances are also able to use the devices is just something that you will have to deal with.
So what it comes down to is very simple.
The new alliances are trying to get a foothold into something you want. They use cynojamers to protect their investment that you wish to destroy. Adapt and over come, or lay down and die.
Tynk
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 17:09:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Tynk Muris
Edited by: Tynk Muris on 02/08/2008 13:58:00
The greed for power and dominance is apparent in these posts. However it is not CCP's vision for THEIR game.
Quote:
But if that happened alot of alliances would lose space, because they are weak and don't deserve to be in 0.0 anyway..
CCP is trying to get more people into 0.0. The cynojamers are allowing those who you would deny, a chance to gain a foot hold and attempt to build the power you desire. If everything that allowed new corps that are not ready, in your opinion, to be in 0.0 was removed, the game would become stale with only the long lived alliances and corps throwing themselves at each other. Stagnation breeds death, in this case it would be of the game. So yes, I understand your point, you view it as over powered, but that same thing allows for new life to move into the 0.0 systems you wish to claim as your own. The fact that the powerful alliances are also able to use the devices is just something that you will have to deal with.
So what it comes down to is very simple.
The new alliances are trying to get a foothold into something you want. They use cynojamers to protect their investment that you wish to destroy. Adapt and over come, or lay down and die.
Tynk
Actually you are quite wrong. While weak alliance can deploy cyno jammer if someone wants it will kill it anyways (weak alliances cant defend em neways). Thus cyno jammers only make strong alliances stronger. Plus are annoying on multiple levels (from having way too much hp, to needing to kill em twice when sieging = killing large pos with battleships to being to cheap and semi-spammable).
|
Matrixcvd
Caldari
Rionnag Alba
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.08.02 17:18:00 -
[17]
reduce HP on cynojammers, on all anchorables, and station services, and towers as well... less to take down, less to rep back up. nuff said, i dont know why this has not been implemented yet its just ridiculous at this point. anything that takes to do in this game needs to be reduced/diminished. Time allows large numbers of pilots to get together and should be frowned upon by decreasing effort with regards to SOV
|
Damned Force
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.08.04 09:01:00 -
[18]
Just 3 changes:
1. Long onlining and offlining time, like some days, so the system holder need to think about to switch off or on.
2. Absolute exclude incoming capitals. No capital enterence in a cynojammed system, no enemy, no friendly, no with jumpbrdge....
3. If stay by a POS, the CPU/PGU req should be so high, that the pos should have just minimal defense and so the system holder need to defend with a fleet
|
Nemtar Nataal
Demonic Retribution
Un-Natural Selection
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 17:55:00 -
[19]
I will give you that there is a problem with cyno jammers, actually there is a general problem with the way sovereignty warfare is conducted however, i find it funny that its people from the alliance that use to camp sevrel of the high value Cosmos complexes with there super caps that are complaining about this jammers and not the people who are actively participating in and conducting sovereignty warfare who are making this complaints.
However the problem still stands and its a general problem, where the core of the problem is that its posible to AFK your way to sovereignty.
The right solution to you problem is to remove the sov counter from POS's and give individual players actual influence in the sov process by having the actions that the player conducts in the system count towards sovereignty.
just like you gain your security standing from ratting, you could earn your alliance sov points by mining and conducting pvp/pve in the solar system in question.
Having players individual actions count towards sov would most likely solve a large part of the 00 inaccessibility that we are experiencing this dayes.
However having cyno jammers confined to station systems is just ludicrous most alliance would want to work hard towards achieving sov in special systems. Lets take R64 moon systems, they are a prime example of where a alliance would want to invest additional time to maintain the cyno jammers.
One thing though that a alliance wouldnt do was to deploy a outpost to defend the moons as that station would then stand and help the next alliance occupie that system. It is plain stupid to suggest that there should be implement game mechanics that would force players/corp/alliance to invest in infrastructure that could not be moved/removed again. Infrastructure that could/would ultimately benefit your enemies more then you.
|
jaybo34
Caldari
Mentis Fidelis
Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2008.08.08 18:04:00 -
[20]
Originally by: LoveKebab
I wont be oryginal here. Cyno jammers are shit. Basicly each given alliance that hold 0.0 space can cyno jamm entire region without much trouble. Put a tower up, go do something fancy for few weeks, w8 for sov 3 to kick in and install a cyno jammer.
This already went to far imo. Cyno jammers aint working they way they should. It would be IMHO ok if cyno jammers could be only installed in systems that have outposts in it. Putting up an outpost mean u can get sov lvl above "2". I see no problem in having cyno field generators in every system so u can jump caps without much trouble but come on, jamming entire 0.0 is not what ppl should do and seeing yet another jammer in following system makes me sad. Ppl should be aware that if they move their cap ship outside of station they are vournable to any attacks from other caps (mean hotdrop...)
0.0 space is not High sec and there should be a free travel through it. Each time u open cyno it's popping on map, u are vournable to attack for some time (allign time for caps, cap rechrge etc).
Pls CCP look into this, and also fix covert cyno generators cuz atm they are useless. Excelent idea whould be to allow them to pop in cynojammed systems tbh - black ops aint the ships that can kill jammer very fast or other caps if that matters and also not many ppl fly them + caps cant jump to covert beacons.
well when i was in tri we took down multiple faction fitted cyno jamming towers so I really dont see why ur *****ing. Or has tri gone soft ?
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |