open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked Cyno Jammers & Jump Bridges
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]

Author Topic

UnitedStatesOfAmerica
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
Posted - 2008.06.22 13:39:00 - [211]
 

Meh, supported to give reps a chance to talk about it.

Jade Constantine
Gallente
Jericho Fraction
The Star Fraction
Posted - 2008.06.26 16:38:00 - [212]
 


This was a huge topic of discussion and covered a while range of subjects. We were able to ask "Is this supposed to work this way?" (ie are you supposed to be able to jump bridge capitals into a cyno jammed system) and the answer was "Yes."

CCP did intend it to work this way and it was supposed to represent defense advantage and give the defenders capital superiority.

They came back and asked us? Do the CSM think its current balanced and should defense advantage be lessened and we all (pretty sure) answered "no" its not balanced, and the cyno-jammer/jump bridge situation needs to be looked at as a high priority since its not improving 0.0 warfare and is currently very unreasonable in the current state of the game.

Venomoose
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
Posted - 2008.07.03 12:23:00 - [213]
 

agreed

Avon
Caldari
Versatech Co.
Raiden.
Posted - 2008.07.03 13:55:00 - [214]
 

Without mechanics to promote defence there will never be any 0.0 player run empires, just PvP groups shuffling around the map.

We should be looking at ways of forcing combat to the borders of claimed empires, and restricting the ability of offensive forces to project their power directly at what should be the softer civilian hearts of empires.
It is exactly the lack of this type of structure which discourages players from making the move to 0.0.

In order to facilitate defence, freedom of movement of defending forces around their borders is something that needs to be in place, but not to the point where an alliance can border off an area of space disproportionate to it's size and ability.
Borders should be somehow expanded to accomodate growing numbers, rather that claiming vast swaithes of space and hoping to fill them.

That is a concept for the clever people to get their teeth in to, not paltry changes to an existing mechanic.
Jump bridging caps in to cyno jammed systems isn't really an issue at all.
The jump bridge network is in itself attackable and cyno jammers can be taken down by moderate sized forces in minutes.

This isn't an issue that should be changed in isolation either. If it was considered as part of a more widespread review of space claiming mechanics then it may have some merit, but as it stands it seems more like a cry for help than an issue of balance.
It isn't undefeatable, but it requires a concerted effort - isn't that what attack should be about?

Rexy
DarkStar 1
Posted - 2008.07.03 14:48:00 - [215]
 

ridiculous i say

Gaogan
Gallente
Solar Storm
Sev3rance
Posted - 2008.07.03 20:09:00 - [216]
 

These devices were added to allow defenders the advantage they deserve and prevent the 4 am blitzkrieg attack, and they have done this very well. The REAL argument those complaining about them have is that they allow one alliance to defend against an equal size or smaller alliance launching a blitzkrieg attack at 4 am, which is of course, exactly what they are supposed to do.

If a significantly larger alliance were to seriously attack an entrenched defender, then they can easily take down the jammer in minutes, bring in their caps, and lock the system down completely until the towers are dead. The only people these proposed changes would benefit are smaller hit and run instant gratification types who are frustrated that they can't defeat a larger enemy by setting their alarm and launching one quick attack.

If a SERIOUS and WORTHY attacker needs SOME way ( other than the 4am blitz ) to bring capitals to the fight, then let them gain control of the system long enough to set up their own tower and let pos mounted cyno generators punch through jammers, and allow the attacker to online one without sov ( though it should take several hours to do so, giving the defense the chance for a counter attack ).

Siebenthal
Posted - 2008.07.15 13:46:00 - [217]
 


Batolemaeus
Caldari
Free-Space-Ranger
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.07.15 15:15:00 - [218]
 

Imo, the problem is not the cynojammer, it's the combination of capitals quickly coming to help a cynojammer getting shot down. With current game mechanics, the capitals will prevent any offensive if not done with an extreme blob of subcapitals and ewar to stop both the capitals spidertanking and the cynojammer from working.

The individual mechanics are only partly broken. Bring them together, and they will multiply, resulting in the huge lagfest capital superblobs of todays alliance warfare. The whole thing is broken, and jumpbridges, cynojammers and capital fighter-lagbombs play important parts in it.

To be perfectly honest, i absolutely hate carriers, motherships and titans. Their introduction ruined 0.0 warfare..

Having that said, i think the cynojammer+jumpbridging capitals-mechanic needs to be addressed. As a first step, don't allow capitals to use jumpbridges, thus fixing a part of the problem.

Vehlin
Black Viper Nomads
Nut Up Or Shut Up.
Posted - 2008.07.17 08:33:00 - [219]
 

My personal view:

Should ALL capitals be allowed to us JBs? I would say no. If you were to prevent Motherships and Titans from utilising a JB network you would vastly neuter the big complaint about Titan blobs in cynojammed systems. If the defenders were limited to normal caps things would be a BIT more balanced.

The reason I'm in favour of not killing the whole mechanic is Capital Industrials. If you can't move a JF or Rorqual around cynojammed space you might as well not have them. Any change made to prevent capital blobs needs to remember that not all caps are offensive.


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only