These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Planned lowsec sentry "fix" - you guys serious?

First post First post First post
Author
Ooiit
Smack gypsy
#281 - 2012-08-03 12:19:21 UTC
I do not think this change is a good idea at all. And there is also something really wrong with wanting this change to discourage gate camping. It does exactly the opposite! The only thing you'll be encouraging with increasing gateguns is bigger camps or people only focusing on killing smaller targets on the gates (because after all they wont have time to pop that well tanked battleship with only 2 or 3 guys or engage another fleet). This change would just remove nearly all possibilities of good fights in lowsec and instead increase hauler ganking.

It's also very laughable that they come up with the triage carrier as an example. Hardly anyone ever puts a carrier or other capital on a gate in lowsec. This is not a problem in the game at all and does not need to be fixed. If you do happen to be in the rare place to see a carrier on a gate just tell a bigger alliance about it and i'm pretty sure those pirates will think twice about doing that after their carrier gets hotdropped.

As a pirate that loves flying with only 2 or 3 people max at a time the gate guns are fine as they are. They limit my target selection and force me to run at times. It would suck to have the guns increased to battle camping and at the same time totally destroy any chance small groups have at finding fights in low sec.
Ulmagod
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#282 - 2012-08-03 12:25:02 UTC
Here is a typical reason why this change has been proposed.

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Tee+Kay
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Kuromugi
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Endureth

These leet pilots sit on the Amamake/Osoggur gate in their Loki's and Tengu's with almost instalock abilities and kill everything that comes through the gate. Like shooting fish in a barrel. Adapt you say, get a fleet up and bait them you say. Well they have thought of that, they have an Orca with them at zero on the gate. If anything remotely dangerous happens, they dock on the Orca and it jumps to high sec.

They are getting wonderful KB stats but what are they really achieving? Making low sec inaccessible for casuals and noobs that's what.

They sit on that gate for a few hours most evenings going ctrl click on their overview with their guns cycling every few minutes. Must be hilarious fun and then they have the analysis of their killboard stats later. Wow I can't wait to be that good.

It is a shame, cause generally I'd be against this change, but when you've got people doing this you can see where CCP are coming from.

+1 to this change.
Ivan En'Vec
Zacharia Explorations Group
#283 - 2012-08-03 12:25:52 UTC
Quote:
Gate guns in low sec were put there for a reason and were never intended to be perma-camped. Over time the ships improved and now they can be. Mostly all the guns do now is pop new players that don't understand the aggression mechanics.

This makes folks have to look for fights in the belts or other areas of the system instead of lazily sitting at a gate waiting for hapless victims.

There you go, explanation provided.

Issler


I'm a long time low sec resident, and I'd really urge you to rethink this change. Looking for fights in astroid belts is not a particularly viable alternative because the rewards in those belts are so low that nobody except noobs regularly rat in them and allow themselves to get caught - and then you're still in a cycle of "elite PvPers" picking on noobs.

I don't think there's a single pirate out there who hasn't gone to bust up a gate camp. Fights can be hard to find in low sec - camped gates provide the rest of us who want fights with sitting duck targets who you can gather easy and near perfect intel about. This is a major source of PvP for the small gang FC who wants to fight another fleet and NOT be forced to pick off random industrials.

The most dedicated of us out here will find a way around it anyway - sensor boosted tornado fleets outside of sentry range and the like. This change might allow more people from high sec through, but they'd still be met by pirates swarming any location worth visiting. As it is, I don't think you'll see a significant increase in people coming into low sec because there's simply not much reason - the isk opportunities are not overwhelming. If you add a bunch of high value locations to low sec to get more people to go there, you're going to see pirates swarm to those locations and camp them. (And if you made those uncampable as well, why not just bring in concord too?)

Hans Jagerblitzen, we need you in this thread!
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#284 - 2012-08-03 12:28:29 UTC
Ulmagod wrote:
They are getting wonderful KB stats but what are they really achieving? Making Amamake inaccessible for casuals and noobs that's what.


Fixed it for you. Lowsec is perfectly accessible. Amamake is still accessible from multiple gates. If you're crying about poor rookies who fly blind and then die, why don't you go tell them to stop flying blind? The map is not that hard to use. Look, it's literally as easy as do this, but in reverse.
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#285 - 2012-08-03 12:32:58 UTC
Fal Dara wrote:
being an empire carebear, i can fully see the reasoning for this.

they're trying to get more people into low sec, be that for industry, incursions, mining, etc... but no one goes there because of gate campers and station campers.

yes, anyone with a few months in eve, and the intent to go low sec, knows how to avoid a majority of these camps, but that they're there in the first place, and you have to dedicate the fittings onyour ship simply to avoid getting killed, ruins it. these people lock down low sec to anyone who would use it for a useful purpose... it's just a dead zone... in fact, it's worse than null (i can go through the majority of null anyday, but low sec is ALWAYS camped).

for CCP, this is not a move for tears of lazy pvpers (because they ARE lazy, they spend hours on a gate), but a move to get industry/exploration/mining/incursion fleets into low for production.... which for now is shut off, since any ship going through needs a fit to survive the gate, rather than get there fit to do a job.

i like the change...

and it has the effect of pushing those who want to pvp in low sec, to actually TRY. they will have to have skills to LOOK for people.

chances are, with this change, MORE people will go low sec. ... sure, the gate campers and lazy pvprs will be upset, but that will easily be offset with people who find low sec easier to enter and exit for profit.... in carebear ships ... which are easy to kill ... when you find them.

babies. get off the gates and go look around.



No.. almsot no one goes to low sec because there is almost NO REWARD. You make less isk than high sec, worm space or 0.0. FAR FAR less isk.

Low sec must get the BEST belt ratting. Also the guns damage scaling shoudl be based on the NUMBER OF SHIPS ON GATE!!!!
Gabrielle Lamb
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#286 - 2012-08-03 12:37:03 UTC
Wouldn't the easy answer here be to give gate guns crazy lock times and ewar immunity? Aka it would take say 15 seconds to lock a BS, 22 to lock a BC, 30 to lock a Cruiser, 45 to lock large frigs / destroyers and 60 to lock a ceptor?
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#287 - 2012-08-03 12:38:02 UTC  |  Edited by: sYnc Vir
Ooiit wrote:
Words about Makke


I ask, knowing the answer, but anyway I ask.

So whats stopping you and a dozen or so friends moving into to makke and stomping out this pirate infestation? If these leet pvp'ers are only good for ganking and run from a fights and are lazy.Then a well drilled group can stomp them out in no time.

Like a most things in eve, if a system you use is populated with people that kill you, you have a choice.

1 - Use another system
2 - scout and look for a time its clear
3 - Grab some friends and fight them


Or right eve-o forums.

4 - ***** about it and do nothing and expect someone else to take care of the problem.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.

Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#288 - 2012-08-03 12:40:09 UTC
christ, so i read up to mid-page 13 and just couldn't take it anymore. I am nervous to even write a real opinion on this subject this far into the thread but here we go.

When I first came about this my instant fear was that two things would happen. First, traffic in lowsec would dramatically decrease because of fast tackle + gank ships. However, that fear is apperently unwarrented. I was giving bears way to much credit in assesing risks as every Bear in here has said "hahahaha gate campers, suck it." Of course everyone in lowsec knows this will only make ganking easier, especially to ships that normally could survive (cloaking ships). Cloakly hualers, cov ops, sb's, mwd-cloak, none of it is going to work if they reduce sentry damage upon initial gcc.

So cool, traffic will see a sharp spike from the initial bear traffic followed quickly by the same traffic there is now after all the bears diaf.

The other concern was the gangs. Small fleet engagements. Its what got me to stay in lowsec after i moved there. As other people have said this will completely stop all forms of pirate small gang engagements. I could explain this in detail if its necessary, but to anyone that is involved in the decision process it should need explaining.

The removal of small gangs WILL, mark my words, remove the retention of lowsec pvpers. Less gf's, many of which happen on gate, means people will at best move out of the area.

You think lowsec is dead now? wait until after this change. The bears will realise there isn't really anything worth doing in lowsec that warrents them moving out of high. the pirates will leave. FW will suffer as pirates add a lot of spice to their activities.

All that will remain is a few small groups with fast tackle and alpha to kill the bears stupid enough to make the attempt.

I am not even for an a change with an attempt at moderating it. Look at how slowly CCP changes or iterates on any feature. If this goes through, it will do so with insufficient consideration, it will disregard any feedback from the test server forums, and then at best take 6 months to get a tweak to make it a viable change.

CCP i am all for crimewatch changes but for the love of god let this one go.

Lastly, I am utterly appalled by reaction of the CSM on this matter. While i appreciate isslers participation in this thread, his ignorance of what this will cause is astounding. Even the representatives, one of which i voted for, show a complete lack of understanding of the lowsec ecosystem.

If you want my feedback on a what should be changed, please tell me specifically what the CSM and CCP think the problem the is

I has all the eve inactivity

Gabrielle Lamb
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#289 - 2012-08-03 12:42:15 UTC
Seishi Maru wrote:


No.. almsot no one goes to low sec because there is almost NO REWARD. You make less isk than high sec, worm space or 0.0. FAR FAR less isk.

Low sec must get the BEST belt ratting. Also the guns damage scaling shoudl be based on the NUMBER OF SHIPS ON GATE!!!!


I agree with this, not that it should get the best belt ratting but it does deserve a huge buff. IMO the best would be to give lowsec "easy" rats (frigates, cruisers, battlecruisers) waaay oversized bounties. So that it would be the best spot to rat in for those with "weak" ships. Aka a HAC like Vagabond or a Drake/Hurricane being allowed to make as much ISK per hour as a battleship would ratting in nullsec. Despite having lower DPS
Ooiit
Smack gypsy
#290 - 2012-08-03 12:42:29 UTC
sYnc Vir wrote:
Ooiit wrote:
Words about Makke


I ask, knowing the answer, but anyway I ask.

So whats stopping you and a dozen or so friends moving into to makke and stomping out this pirate infestation? If these leet pvp'ers are only good for ganking and run from a fights and are lazy.Then a well drilled group can stomp them out in no time.

Like a most things in eve, if a system you use is populated with people that kill you, you have a choice.

1 - Use another system
2 - scout and look for a time its clear
3 - Grab some friends and fight them


Or right eve-o forums.

4 - ***** about it and do nothing and expect someone else to take care of the problem.


I think you quoted the wrong person, ye?
CCP Greyscale
C C P
C C P Alliance
#291 - 2012-08-03 12:51:58 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Sure, I'll make a note to have another look at this and get some more player feedback when we start finalizing the designs.


Quoting myself. This is a spitball idea that we shared with the CSM, not a final design.
Pinstar Colton
Sweet Asteroid Acres
#292 - 2012-08-03 12:52:59 UTC
It all depends on the timing.

The current problem is that pirates can't fly anything smaller than a BC in low simply because of gate guns. I can see pirates, if the gate guns take awhile to ramp up, flying destroyers. If a bigger ship warps in, they are fast enough to warp out... if a smaller ship warps in, they can tackle, gank and GTFO before the gate guns ramp up enough damage to pop them.

In the cat-and-mouse game that is low sec, there is no shame in learning to be a better mouse.

Ulmagod
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#293 - 2012-08-03 12:53:32 UTC
Kuehnelt wrote:
Ulmagod wrote:
They are getting wonderful KB stats but what are they really achieving? Making Amamake inaccessible for casuals and noobs that's what.


Fixed it for you. Lowsec is perfectly accessible. Amamake is still accessible from multiple gates. If you're crying about poor rookies who fly blind and then die, why don't you go tell them to stop flying blind? The map is not that hard to use. Look, it's literally as easy as do this, but in reverse.

You talking to me bro?

I'm explaining why CCP are doing this, not whining about it.

Check my BattleClinic stats, this character is a scouting alt, and yes I've died to these guys and in doing so I've saved my main from an expensive loss. But I think it sad that I can't run this camp in a Slasher because they are that fast locking and insta pop me before I can even rev up. Yet if I was to bring something capable of taking them down they use what I consider an exploit with the Orca to make themselves impossible to kill.

You say don't jump blind - so what am I supposed to do? Use a scouting alt to scout the gate for my scouting alt? Idiot!
Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#294 - 2012-08-03 12:56:33 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Sure, I'll make a note to have another look at this and get some more player feedback when we start finalizing the designs.


Quoting myself. This is a spitball idea that we shared with the CSM, not a final design.


that is great to hear, it sounding like something that was set in stone from teh way the minutes worded it

I has all the eve inactivity

Din Chao
#295 - 2012-08-03 12:59:39 UTC
Isalone wrote:
Gatecamps - those aren't the problem, people who won't learn/adapt are.

Guess you'll have to adapt.
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#296 - 2012-08-03 13:01:04 UTC
Ooiit wrote:
Silly stuff


I did but shh, maybe no one else will see.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.

sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#297 - 2012-08-03 13:03:19 UTC
CCP Greyscale wrote:
CCP Greyscale wrote:
Sure, I'll make a note to have another look at this and get some more player feedback when we start finalizing the designs.


Quoting myself. This is a spitball idea that we shared with the CSM, not a final design.


Get a wet wipe, as it will end most of losec pvp. Honestly, if you wanted to do anything to make camping harder just add a couple more guns.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#298 - 2012-08-03 13:07:26 UTC
Ulmagod wrote:
Here is a typical reason why this change has been proposed.

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Tee+Kay
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Kuromugi
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Endureth

These leet pilots sit on the Amamake/Osoggur gate in their Loki's and Tengu's with almost instalock abilities and kill everything that comes through the gate. Like shooting fish in a barrel. Adapt you say, get a fleet up and bait them you say. Well they have thought of that, they have an Orca with them at zero on the gate. If anything remotely dangerous happens, they dock on the Orca and it jumps to high sec.

They are getting wonderful KB stats but what are they really achieving? Making low sec inaccessible for casuals and noobs that's what.

They sit on that gate for a few hours most evenings going ctrl click on their overview with their guns cycling every few minutes. Must be hilarious fun and then they have the analysis of their killboard stats later. Wow I can't wait to be that good.

It is a shame, cause generally I'd be against this change, but when you've got people doing this you can see where CCP are coming from.

+1 to this change.


You know how you fix this? Make it so you cant dock your ship into an orca/capital if you have GCC. It's a very simple fix that doesn't horribly break so many other types of engagements.
Ulmagod
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#299 - 2012-08-03 13:20:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Ulmagod
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Ulmagod wrote:
Here is a typical reason why this change has been proposed.

http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Tee+Kay
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Kuromugi
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Endureth

These leet pilots sit on the Amamake/Osoggur gate in their Loki's and Tengu's with almost instalock abilities and kill everything that comes through the gate. Like shooting fish in a barrel. Adapt you say, get a fleet up and bait them you say. Well they have thought of that, they have an Orca with them at zero on the gate. If anything remotely dangerous happens, they dock on the Orca and it jumps to high sec.

They are getting wonderful KB stats but what are they really achieving? Making low sec inaccessible for casuals and noobs that's what.

They sit on that gate for a few hours most evenings going ctrl click on their overview with their guns cycling every few minutes. Must be hilarious fun and then they have the analysis of their killboard stats later. Wow I can't wait to be that good.

It is a shame, cause generally I'd be against this change, but when you've got people doing this you can see where CCP are coming from.

+1 to this change.


You know how you fix this? Make it so you cant dock your ship into an orca/capital if you have GCC. It's a very simple fix that doesn't horribly break so many other types of engagements.

I would actually be in favour of that, but it wouldn't fix the main problem described. It would perhaps make it 1% more dangerous for these pilots. An enormous effort would still be required to actually catch these people. An effort beyond noobs and casual players. Their only choice is to test with a scouting alt and then go around if these people are there.

Before people wade in bitching about my tears etc. Just stop and think what problem CCP are trying to tackle and what they hope to achieve. They want to stop this moronic gate camping and get people into the belts, plexs and anomolies where it is hoped fighting will actually be more likely to occur, where probers will be useful. Where noobs can actually get into low sec and have a bit of fun before going splat, instead of jump in BLAM. Clone bay. WTF. I'm never going to low sec again.
Goremageddon Box
Guerrilla Flotilla
#300 - 2012-08-03 13:21:00 UTC
Lord Maldoror wrote:
For whatever reason, Rooks and Kings don't gate camp much. Twos and threes fly through our home system all day and we tend to only form up if there's a proper fleet around. But in regard to this, some things I'm wondering:

- How would a fleet get home? Let's say we go and engage 80 Maelstroms or Tengus on a POS in low sec, with 30 Navy Apocalypse and triage carriers. If we win, we have to fly back. But our generally 0.0-based enemies, with hi-sec status, could then simply bridge tacklers in front of our fleet. If they tackle one faction BS, only he can aggro back. If the whole fleet aggresses, and then triage carriers drop to rep him, we'd have less than a triage cycle to kill the 0.0 fleet before the gate guns kill us.

- Essentially, that would mean we'd have to carrier jump back, using an alt on a cheap clone to jump in a carrier to store the faction BS, pass the carrier to the HG slave clone, who then jumps it home. We could do that but not all alliances would have players financially placed to all have multiple capital alts.

- What happens in a fight on a gate? We regularly put multiple capitals on gates and not to camp but rather to engage fleets of 0.0 alliances returning from Tech moon sieging and such-like. Their sec-status will be good, so we already take gate gun aggro and are likely to be vastly outnumbered in the fight.

Now you might argue that since RnK have low sec status we're the bad guys and since the powerbloc fleet have 5.0 status they deserve to be immune to us jumping them. However, is Eve really always as simple as that? Does it reflect the emergent gameplay of Eve? It's always a matter of perspective, of course. But, for example, do Goons even want to be 'the good guys'? I think they want to be good bad guys, so to speak (at least some of the time). Isn't it a little odd that Rooks and Kings, with our occasional bursts of e-honour, would not be able to jump them in low sec?

In this sense, there's more to Eve than a sec status.


- If you consider the changes, a lot of great low sec fights would no longer happen. For example, in this fight we engaged a CFC camp that was escorting freighters. Although they had 100 guys, including supercapitals, they were after all not flashy and so we were taking gate gun fire to intervene.

If you consider this fight, we were engaging with many triage on a gate against White Noise and co., who had been baiting with capitals and Abaddons. The general talk of the channels was that they were looking for trouble and we felt obliged to spring the trap. But although they were seen as the 'predatory' 0.0 block members who'd come to the region, they were not flashy and no local group would have the sec status to have engaged them under the new changes.

If you consider this fight, we would have been unable to go home by gate after killing all the Maelstroms, due to being flashy and vulnerable to counter-drop. Ironically, that fleet had come specifically to the area to fight us for the experience of it, an invitation we'd no longer be able to accept under the new guns.

And that's just glancing through a page or two of Failheap's Low sec thread, the largest thread on the battle report forum.


- There was recently a four-way fight in Black Rise that involved Shadows of the Federation dreads, Snuff Box carriers, Wolfsbrigade dreads, Only For Fun supers, Fatal Ascension dreads, NCdot supers, X13 carriers and dreads and a number of other parties. This all took place on a gate.

Rooks and Kings attended with a Pantheon fleet, which survived intact. Now, under the new changes, aside from the fact that there would be no chance of survival (certain death can be romantic sometimes), there is a broader issue: the 'low sec alliances' would not be able to attend a party like that in their home.

SOTF, Snuff Box, Wolfsbrigade, Only For Fun and co. all have players who were taking gate gun aggro in that fight. I can understand home territory not 'boosting' groups or offering an advantage but why would all these groups be made unable to fight against 0.0 capitals in their back yard?


I'm not against increasing low sec traffic but surely there are fairer ways - e.g. spawning faction police on the low sec side of high sec gates after a certain period of time, or making special warp core stabs against insta-locking HICs, or preventing an Orca jumping a gate when carrying aggression timer ships, etc.


why would ccp take this away.

quoted for truth