These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
#521 - 2012-08-05 03:00:25 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:

Or perhaps they can warp next to you, scram and then web you.


Now I am mad that I didn't think of this brilliant proposal! X

Maybe we could also bridge them?
Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#522 - 2012-08-05 03:29:47 UTC
Ensign X wrote:

I disagree that traffic won't increase. I've played with a lot of noobs and chat with them on a daily basis and the most cited deterrent for them avoiding lowsec are the gate camps. They believe, either because of what they've been told or what they've fallen victim themselves, that the prevalence of gate camps in lowsec means that solo travel is essentially nullified or becomes very limited in where and how you can travel.

I do agree that Ineffectual sentry guns and their poor design is the issue, however I believe the design is outdated as well rather than just straight up poor. I don't believe sentry guns were designed with the intent of ships being able to permanently tank them. Battleship level EHP obsoletes sentry guns when used by pirates who park on gates and roll their face across their keyboard anytime they see a gate flash. A mechanic as suggested that would force people to consider sentry gun damage into their strategy or force them off-grid on occasion is good, solid design.

If you stop making it so easy for pirates to farm every noob who dares leave highsec I have no doubt that lowsec traffic will increase.


I'd much rather teach the noobs about how to get around lowsec safely than make the game easier just because they're too afraid to come out here. Eve is a tough game, where we hold players responsible for learning not only the rules, but also the pilot tricks and techniques they need to survive. Often times, those lessons are learned through a good hard podding, and that's good stuff.

This idea that solo travel is nullified is utter hogwash. Sorry, but it's true. I've lived in and around Amamake, arguably the most dangerous system in EVE, and I not only travel solo, I haul valuable materials, move fitted ships for war, and even pod from place to place. This is made possible using my two favorite ships (Prowler and Mastodon, now with even more beautiful artwork than ever) and some common sense bookmarks and scanning techniques - not to mention cloaks, interceptors, and yes, even warp core stabilizers. Don't let ANYONE ever make you feel guilty for fitting these, folks - if you're actually just looking to travel. (You PvP-ers that fit them are bunch of cowards. Grow up and fit something that will let you kill more ships). I'd also like to add that I *rarely* ever use scouts anymore, I'm just far too lazy. I do most of my movement with one account. Low sec is incredibly safe if you know what you're doing, even in pirate-infested territory and Faction Warfare strongholds.

My point is, I've always felt the gate guns need to be LESS restrictive in many ways. What excited me about the summit proposal was the enabling of more frigate use on gates, not the OMGDEATHOFALLPVP potential many here fear. I was more excited just to hear that they were still serious about examining sentry fire, and I knew full well I'd have my work cut out after the summit, first in talking with you all here about Greyscale's proposal, and seeing if we can come up with something much better to propose to CCP instead.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Hans Jagerblitzen
Ice Fire Warriors
#523 - 2012-08-05 03:37:38 UTC
Templar Nato wrote:

Perhaps the changes would bring more risk adverse people into Low sec, however, what's the point? We can't shoot them on the gates and we can't shoot them on stations, meaning we'd have to probe people down doing whatever it is they're in low sec for ... certainly not the fleet-based roaming PvP I currently enjoy. I also don't understand what's up with these seemingly hundreds of gate camps in low sec people are talking about. I can think of maybe 4 systems that are regularly camped with any sizable force. If you don't like that, use your intelligence and the ships you're already provided in Eve to either find an alternate route, or break through the camp. Asking for a game mechanic to act as a crutch is pretty sad.


Exactly. What people don't realize is that until CCP does something radically different to make low sec space valuable, our major resource that entices players to live out here is the PvP itself.

I'm all for bringing more industrialists and such into lowsec, but not by making it more cuddly. I think things like increasing industry speed in upgraded Faction Warfare systems makes fare more sense. Those that are looking to maximize profits WILL figure out a way to survive out here if there's money to be made, regardless of the danger that lurks about.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

Tiberius Sunstealer
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#524 - 2012-08-05 04:08:04 UTC
I would like to say that sentries are currently working as intended but I don't know as they eliminate entire ship classes because they are instapopped or popped after a few seconds but these changes are not the fix that is needed for this issue. What is the point of triage carriers when 30 seconds to the end of your triage cycle you are popped from sentry guns? There isn't and we have the frigate problem only reversed.

I think that CCP (at this point in time) should be fixing lowsec as a whole by adding more reasons for people to go there except for casual PvPers then focusing on problems like sentry guns and undock games.
Ensign X
#525 - 2012-08-05 04:08:59 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
[I've always felt the gate guns need to be LESS restrictive in many ways. What excited me about the summit proposal was the enabling of more frigate use on gates


You would propose that the bar be raised for people wishing to travel or operate in lowsec? Less restrictive gate guns and more frigate use on gates would destroy the ability for anything without a cloak or a full rack of warp core stabilizers to operate in Lowsec.
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#526 - 2012-08-05 04:15:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Ris Dnalor
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Ensign X wrote:

I disagree that traffic won't increase. I've played with a lot of noobs and chat with them on a daily basis and the most cited deterrent for them avoiding lowsec are the gate camps. They believe, either because of what they've been told or what they've fallen victim themselves, that the prevalence of gate camps in lowsec means that solo travel is essentially nullified or becomes very limited in where and how you can travel.

I do agree that Ineffectual sentry guns and their poor design is the issue, however I believe the design is outdated as well rather than just straight up poor. I don't believe sentry guns were designed with the intent of ships being able to permanently tank them. Battleship level EHP obsoletes sentry guns when used by pirates who park on gates and roll their face across their keyboard anytime they see a gate flash. A mechanic as suggested that would force people to consider sentry gun damage into their strategy or force them off-grid on occasion is good, solid design.

If you stop making it so easy for pirates to farm every noob who dares leave highsec I have no doubt that lowsec traffic will increase.


I'd much rather teach the noobs about how to get around lowsec safely than make the game easier just because they're too afraid to come out here. Eve is a tough game, where we hold players responsible for learning not only the rules, but also the pilot tricks and techniques they need to survive. Often times, those lessons are learned through a good hard podding, and that's good stuff.

This idea that solo travel is nullified is utter hogwash. Sorry, but it's true. I've lived in and around Amamake, arguably the most dangerous system in EVE, and I not only travel solo, I haul valuable materials, move fitted ships for war, and even pod from place to place. This is made possible using my two favorite ships (Prowler and Mastodon, now with even more beautiful artwork than ever) and some common sense bookmarks and scanning techniques - not to mention cloaks, interceptors, and yes, even warp core stabilizers. Don't let ANYONE ever make you feel guilty for fitting these, folks - if you're actually just looking to travel. (You PvP-ers that fit them are bunch of cowards. Grow up and fit something that will let you kill more ships). I'd also like to add that I *rarely* ever use scouts anymore, I'm just far too lazy. I do most of my movement with one account. Low sec is incredibly safe if you know what you're doing, even in pirate-infested territory and Faction Warfare strongholds.

My point is, I've always felt the gate guns need to be LESS restrictive in many ways. What excited me about the summit proposal was the enabling of more frigate use on gates, not the OMGDEATHOFALLPVP potential many here fear. I was more excited just to hear that they were still serious about examining sentry fire, and I knew full well I'd have my work cut out after the summit, first in talking with you all here about Greyscale's proposal, and seeing if we can come up with something much better to propose to CCP instead.



that last bit. yea that one. I'm all for allowing frigates to fight at gates, but that could be accomplished by adding a simple delay before sentry guns begin to fire.

It's a trojan horse, however, inside of which is hiding the gate gun boost that allows them to take out TRIAGE fit carriers!

So, does it ramp up indefinately? Would 12 Triage Carriers remote repping each other be able to spider tank the guns or would that cause them to power up to the point that they blow us all back thru the eve-gate to Earth? If they do manage to tank the sentries in some fashion would this be deemed an exploit?

And what about sniping ships? Now you can comfortably snipe gate-traffic while sitting outside sentry-gun range. Is this being considered as part of the equation at all, or will we simply nerf the non-sniping-capable battlecruisers at low sec gates?

It's silly. The whole thing.

I still think there's no need for gate guns in low sec period. Stations fine, but not at gates.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#527 - 2012-08-05 04:19:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Ris Dnalor
Ensign X wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
[I've always felt the gate guns need to be LESS restrictive in many ways. What excited me about the summit proposal was the enabling of more frigate use on gates


You would propose that the bar be raised for people wishing to travel or operate in lowsec? Less restrictive gate guns and more frigate use on gates would destroy the ability for anything without a cloak or a full rack of warp core stabilizers to operate in Lowsec.



live in lowsec for awhile. Then you'll laugh at your own post. Unless of course your description of "operate" means to go for months without ever dying. Dying is a part of living in lowsec. That's not a problem, that's a good thing.


Now, there should be better rewards to help offset that risk, but that risk should never ever ever be taken away. and it should be more common, not less.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Ensign X
#528 - 2012-08-05 04:34:56 UTC
Ris Dnalor wrote:
live in lowsec for awhile. Then you'll laugh at your own post. Unless of course your description of "operate" means to go for months without ever dying. Dying is a part of living in lowsec. That's not a problem, that's a good thing.

Now, there should be better rewards to help offset that risk, but that risk should never ever ever be taken away. and it should be more common, not less.


I have lived in Lowsec for most of the past 9 months. I've run into and chatted on occasion to a number of your fellow R1FTAs. I appreciate what you and your kind do, but we have different viewpoints on the same subject based on separate experiences. It happens. In my sandbox, Lowsec exists for it's riches to be exploited by skilled pilots. In your sandbox, Lowsec exists to blow **** up.
Y'nit Gidrine
Virtues Corporation
Paragons Of Virtue
#529 - 2012-08-05 04:56:39 UTC
Well, hopefully this change will bring in enough people to low sec to make it lively again.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#530 - 2012-08-05 05:11:45 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
In my sandbox, Lowsec exists for it's riches to be exploited by skilled pilots. In your sandbox, Lowsec exists to blow **** up.
Your sandbox is very strange… there are no particular riches in lowsec to be exploited — that's the whole problem. Solve that, and the rest will come on its own.
Ensign X
#531 - 2012-08-05 05:21:26 UTC
Tippia wrote:
there are no particular riches in lowsec to be exploited


I beg to differ, but we can agree to disagree. I'm not saying Lowsec couldn't use some love, it sure as hell could, but there's plenty of reward already there for those who are willing to seek it out.
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#532 - 2012-08-05 05:23:55 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
I disagree that traffic won't increase. I've played with a lot of noobs and chat with them on a daily basis and the most cited deterrent for them avoiding lowsec are the gate camps. They believe, either because of what they've been told or what they've fallen victim themselves, that the prevalence of gate camps in lowsec means that solo travel is essentially nullified or becomes very limited in where and how you can travel.

I do agree that Ineffectual sentry guns and their poor design is the issue, however I believe the design is outdated as well rather than just straight up poor. I don't believe sentry guns were designed with the intent of ships being able to permanently tank them. Battleship level EHP obsoletes sentry guns when used by pirates who park on gates and roll their face across their keyboard anytime they see a gate flash. A mechanic as suggested that would force people to consider sentry gun damage into their strategy or force them off-grid on occasion is good, solid design.

If you stop making it so easy for pirates to farm every noob who dares leave highsec I have no doubt that lowsec traffic will increase.


see I might agree it's just most lowsec isn't camped. If most lowsec entrances were camped then hell yes sentries would need a fix but from what I've seen nearly every lowsec gate is empty. hell a bunch of 0.0 entry gates are empty too. the other weekend I jumped into m-oee8 and p3en-e and neither was camped. oh and did I mention I went through a whole bunch of lowsec to get there?

where are you talking to these noobs anyways? can you tell them to get their heads out of their asses and press f10?

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter

Nexus Day
Lustrevik Trade and Travel Bureau
#533 - 2012-08-05 05:56:52 UTC
Here is an idea, let's base this on economics. A sentry gun would be there to protect the gate and trade through it. No decent corporation would maintain a space station that wasn't profitable. So let's keep things the way they are with sentry guns and Concord but do the following.

Each station will have a "break even" for commerce. If the station doesn't maintain a certain level of trade it is closed. The gate will remain but all space traffic will be re-routed away from the "dead" system.

That or you could instead have Concord show up in force, essentially making the system hi-sec, to figure out why trade has stopped. Once trade is re-eastablished they would go on their merry way.

Whatever happens please stop referring to lol gankers/gate & station campers as PvPers. They are not looking for a fight, the "versus" part of the term.
Y'nit Gidrine
Virtues Corporation
Paragons Of Virtue
#534 - 2012-08-05 06:12:02 UTC
Chainsaw Plankton wrote:
Ensign X wrote:
I disagree that traffic won't increase. I've played with a lot of noobs and chat with them on a daily basis and the most cited deterrent for them avoiding lowsec are the gate camps. They believe, either because of what they've been told or what they've fallen victim themselves, that the prevalence of gate camps in lowsec means that solo travel is essentially nullified or becomes very limited in where and how you can travel.

I do agree that Ineffectual sentry guns and their poor design is the issue, however I believe the design is outdated as well rather than just straight up poor. I don't believe sentry guns were designed with the intent of ships being able to permanently tank them. Battleship level EHP obsoletes sentry guns when used by pirates who park on gates and roll their face across their keyboard anytime they see a gate flash. A mechanic as suggested that would force people to consider sentry gun damage into their strategy or force them off-grid on occasion is good, solid design.

If you stop making it so easy for pirates to farm every noob who dares leave highsec I have no doubt that lowsec traffic will increase.


see I might agree it's just most lowsec isn't camped. If most lowsec entrances were camped then hell yes sentries would need a fix but from what I've seen nearly every lowsec gate is empty. hell a bunch of 0.0 entry gates are empty too. the other weekend I jumped into m-oee8 and p3en-e and neither was camped. oh and did I mention I went through a whole bunch of lowsec to get there?

where are you talking to these noobs anyways? can you tell them to get their heads out of their asses and press f10?

TO be honest, the low-sec/0.0 border systems have ALWAYS been barren compared to the 0.0/high sec border systems. hence "Get the pod, get the pod!"
Strider Hiryu
Insane Shadow Boxers
#535 - 2012-08-05 06:39:08 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
Templar Nato wrote:

Perhaps the changes would bring more risk adverse people into Low sec, however, what's the point? We can't shoot them on the gates and we can't shoot them on stations, meaning we'd have to probe people down doing whatever it is they're in low sec for ... certainly not the fleet-based roaming PvP I currently enjoy. I also don't understand what's up with these seemingly hundreds of gate camps in low sec people are talking about. I can think of maybe 4 systems that are regularly camped with any sizable force. If you don't like that, use your intelligence and the ships you're already provided in Eve to either find an alternate route, or break through the camp. Asking for a game mechanic to act as a crutch is pretty sad.


Exactly. What people don't realize is that until CCP does something radically different to make low sec space valuable, our major resource that entices players to live out here is the PvP itself.

I'm all for bringing more industrialists and such into lowsec, but not by making it more cuddly. I think things like increasing industry speed in upgraded Faction Warfare systems makes fare more sense. Those that are looking to maximize profits WILL figure out a way to survive out here if there's money to be made, regardless of the danger that lurks about.


Faction warfare is not the answer. Why should FW get all the goodies and the pirate be left feeding off their scraps?

Ensign X wrote:
I've played with a lot of noobs and chat with them on a daily basis and the most cited deterrent for them avoiding lowsec are the gate camps. They believe, either because of what they've been told or what they've fallen victim themselves, that the prevalence of gate camps in lowsec means that solo travel is essentially nullified or becomes very limited in where and how you can travel.


Key words: They believe
Xen Solarus
Furious Destruction and Salvage
#536 - 2012-08-05 07:23:45 UTC
Yeah so basicly selfish players, who don't care about improving eve as a whole, looking to protect their source of easy kills that queue nice and single file for your death-camp. And you're against more targets coming into low-sec because....... you'll actually having to go and look for them in system? Is that pretty much the basis for all of this whining from low-sec pvp "pros"? I've yet to hear a decent argument for why this change would be a bad thing. Whining and threatening to unsub don't count btw. Cool

Man you guys must really, really suck at pvp if all you can do is alpha the first fool that pops through a gate. I'm guessing directional scanners and probes must be something you don't need at all. I'm guessing its been a long, long time since you've had to look for your prey.

The whole point is to repopulate low-sec, and making it safer for people move to low and null. Opening the door, and making it harder for there to be a fleet waiting, doesn't change their vunerablility. The only difference is that they'll be in system collecting stuff. So more targets, but no-longer just as simple as turning up at a gate and blasting everything tasty that comes through.

OMG HOW UNFAIR IS THAT!!!!

Post with your main, like a BOSS!

And no, i don't live in highsec.  As if that would make your opinion any less wrong.  

flakeys
Doomheim
#537 - 2012-08-05 08:02:04 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
Yeah so basicly selfish players, who don't care about improving eve as a whole



As long as low-sec is not changed drastically the only ones who spent their time fully there will be FW , pirates and the occasional lvl4 missioner.I haven't seen many complaints about low-sec gatecamping from these 3 parties in the past year.The only ones complaining are people who don't know how easy it is to avoid these camps in the first place.

So tell me who is selfish here in his/her complaints , the ones living there or the one who occcasionally needs to go through low-sec because they can't be arsed to make the 10 jumps high-sec extra or the wormhole/null guy who needs a quick in and out of low to get to his end destination?Because this change is made for the travellers not the inhabitants.

Want to change it in the good way for all involved?Then fix the damned reason to even go to low-sec in the first place by adjusting the rewards gained in it.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
#538 - 2012-08-05 08:07:35 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
Yeah so basicly selfish players, who don't care about improving eve as a whole, looking to protect their source of easy kills that queue nice and single file for your death-camp. And you're against more targets coming into low-sec because....... you'll actually having to go and look for them in system? Is that pretty much the basis for all of this whining from low-sec pvp "pros"?

Man you guys must really, really suck at pvp if all you can do is alpha the first fool that pops through a gate. I'm guessing directional scanners and probes must be something you don't need at all. I'm guessing its been a long, long time since you've had to look for your prey.

The whole point is to repopulate low-sec, and making it safer for people move to low and null. Opening the door, and making it harder for there to be a fleet waiting, doesn't change their vunerablility. The only difference is that they'll be in system collecting stuff. So more targets, but no-longer just as simple as turning up at a gate and blasting everything tasty that comes through.

OMG HOW UNFAIR IS THAT!!!!

Stop assuming that people go to low-sec for anything but a shortcut to get to their destination in safe space. Aside from the pirates themselves, and their FW bros; but then again, these people know how to deal with gate camps anyway.

If people don't die in gate camps, they won't die at all, because they're not there to stay in the first place. Why? Because there's no reason to.

I killed my last guy in a low-sec belt sometime around 2006.

Xen Solarus wrote:
I've yet to hear a decent argument for why this change would be a bad thing. Whining and threatening to unsub don't count btw.

Yeah, you'd have to read the thread for that, and that would require much more work than just skimming through the first page, wouldn't it?


I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Mag's
Azn Empire
#539 - 2012-08-05 08:19:00 UTC
Ensign X wrote:
Ris Dnalor wrote:
live in lowsec for awhile. Then you'll laugh at your own post. Unless of course your description of "operate" means to go for months without ever dying. Dying is a part of living in lowsec. That's not a problem, that's a good thing.

Now, there should be better rewards to help offset that risk, but that risk should never ever ever be taken away. and it should be more common, not less.


I have lived in Lowsec for most of the past 9 months. I've run into and chatted on occasion to a number of your fellow R1FTAs. I appreciate what you and your kind do, but we have different viewpoints on the same subject based on separate experiences. It happens. In my sandbox, Lowsec exists for it's riches to be exploited by skilled pilots. In your sandbox, Lowsec exists to blow **** up.
You seemingly are unwilling to see our side, one bit. Sure there are some that come simply to kill, but many many pirates are there to make ISK. It's our livelihood.

What this idea does, is remove a large swatch of that livelihood. Ransoming. That's one of the main reasons for camping gates.
That's not an improvement of low sec riches at all. Not for anyone.

A sandbox is a sandbox is a sandbox.

You mention smartbombing battleships. Answer me this, how should you transport expensive very low sized items?
Should this be done in a BR, A covert ops, a T3 covert, a shuttle or a noobship? What ship?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Mag's
Azn Empire
#540 - 2012-08-05 08:22:20 UTC
Xen Solarus wrote:
Yeah so basicly selfish players, who don't care about improving eve as a whole, looking to protect their source of easy kills that queue nice and single file for your death-camp. And you're against more targets coming into low-sec because....... you'll actually having to go and look for them in system? Is that pretty much the basis for all of this whining from low-sec pvp "pros"? I've yet to hear a decent argument for why this change would be a bad thing. Whining and threatening to unsub don't count btw. Cool

Man you guys must really, really suck at pvp if all you can do is alpha the first fool that pops through a gate. I'm guessing directional scanners and probes must be something you don't need at all. I'm guessing its been a long, long time since you've had to look for your prey.

The whole point is to repopulate low-sec, and making it safer for people move to low and null. Opening the door, and making it harder for there to be a fleet waiting, doesn't change their vunerablility. The only difference is that they'll be in system collecting stuff. So more targets, but no-longer just as simple as turning up at a gate and blasting everything tasty that comes through.

OMG HOW UNFAIR IS THAT!!!!
The ignorance in that post is staggering.

I will say well played sir, you trolled us all.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.