Let’s talk cynosural beacons. As of now - this module is used on almost every ship type available in the game. The effectiveness cost of using that is pretty much the same on ANY ship type. I believe this is amazingly wrong, creates an atmosphere where there are no significant downsides of having it fitted on non-specialized vessels and boosts the “umbrella” gameplay and the number game which we have in null-sec today.
However, there might be a cure! The idea is simple - limit the amount of ships that can jump a beacon based on the ship type.
Cynosural Field Generator allows N mass to pass through (just like a wormhole), based on the ship type that lights the beacon
Once the mass limit has been exceeded - the ship is free from beacon penalties, but can not light another cyno until the module reloads normally.
Cynosural Field Generator can not be used on capitals and super-capitals. You need a sub-cap on the field to call in caps
Recon ships should have significant bonus to the mass that can pass. Recon ships can light a beacon in the range of Mobile Inhibitor with a strong penalty(i.e. completely removes the mass bonus). This makes this ship type more important again in it’s original role
Rorqual and Orca can fit Cynosural Field Generator as a role bonus
As an effect of this change - I see that the possibility to summon reinforcements remains, however it will require better sub-cap grid control and sub-cap participation. As well as gives the attacking side an opportunity to “secure” the grid.
Also, does not really affect the normal fleet movement ops and fleet-fights as you just need more sub-cap cynos or stage the fleet a little bit in advance.
Now dear forums, please explain me why this will fail.
No. Absolutely not. If there is a Mobile Cyno Inhibitor or any other cyno inhibitor, standard cynos should never be possible to be lit within the effect range. Supers and Rorqs are already safe enough as it is. They do not need more safety by circumventing the only way to prevent the super umbrella from immediately responding to a threat.
yeah, i know that. But did you miss the part which says “no cynos on supers and dreads” + the mass limit idea(which is the more important part)?
If the mass that cyno allows to put through a given cyno allows to field 5-10 supers then ofc the inhibitor bonus should not be a thing. But if we are talking about 2-3 dreads that can jump with a non-recon cruiser/frigate lit cyno then this an option that can be discussed.
most of the cyno-related proposals are just shout outs about completely removing cynos. I don’t think cyno should be removed and on the contrary - want to introduce some new gameplay built AROUND the cyno
And similar ideas have popped up recently in several other threads as well, and they always gets shot down, so there’s no need to continue discussing it here.
(I’m not trying to be a jerk here, and I apologize if I’m coming off that way, but repeating the same discussion over the same ideas is generally non-productive.)
