These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
APEX Conglomerate
#761 - 2012-08-12 19:42:33 UTC
I actually brought up this idea a while back. My iteration of this idea, however, was just on the highsec/lowsec border gates. We need to get more people in low sec doing stuff so we can kill them when they are doing stuff, but we are so bloodthirsty we kill them before they can get in...

http://www.altaholics.blogspot.com

Shadow Cartel
#762 - 2012-08-12 21:15:30 UTC
Cloora wrote:
I actually brought up this idea a while back. My iteration of this idea, however, was just on the highsec/lowsec border gates. We need to get more people in low sec doing stuff so we can kill them when they are doing stuff, but we are so bloodthirsty we kill them before they can get in...


This is not true I'm afraid. I'll give you an example, theres a highsec entrance in our home system but we almost never bother camping it partly because camping is boring as hell and partly because the main users are ninja PI'ers who are using our pocos anyway, why slaughter our cashcow for a single killmail.

Pirates - The Invisible Fist of Darwin

you're welcome

#763 - 2012-08-12 21:33:41 UTC
What difference does it make if both parties are outlaws (lower than -5 sec status)?

If you can engage an outlaw without gate guns interfering then most of the arguments around not engaging rival fleets on gates are moot!

I fly frigs almost exclusivly and often engage other pirates on gates. All it does is provide a location.

However if the gates engage any and all active combatants on a gate then that would break the gate fight mechanics too much.

Safer travel in LS is a good thing as it will bring more HS players into LS. By osmosis more HS players would be temped to mine/mission/rat in LS is they can get into their target area of ops easier.

Hence more targets for pirates.

PVP between consenting PVP'er (ie flashy reds) would happen just as it does now.

Whatever the change I will adapt my game to suit new mechanics and keep blowing stuff up.

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.

Caldari State
#764 - 2012-08-12 21:36:46 UTC
this does not promote low sec.

Existing guys suffer, new guys feel comfortable and safe till a few months and sec loss later hate it too?

stupid ideas are totally stupid.

this is so far from sanity its beyond insanity, its unsanity.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.

Caldari State
#765 - 2012-08-13 05:36:33 UTC
TL;DR This is a half-baked bad idea, which will not have the intended effect even if revised carefully. Trollbears will claim wall-of-text = massive tears. Extra content for out-of-context quoting included.

Read through half the thread, some thoughts, and hopefully some counter-arguments to the myths constantly perpetuated by the trollbears in here (paraphrased since I can't be bothered to quote/unquote):

*Background: Our alliance is all about solo->small gang->escalation fights (if we have enough people on). We gatecamp on the rare occasion if no one can be bothered to go on a roam and there aren't any targets around, total camp time per camp is around 1 hour MAX.*

Myth 1&2: "(1)This will encourage more people to go into lowsec, (2) if the rewards in lowsec are boosted at the same time."
Fact: The risk-averse playstyle you see a lot of in highsec means that any rewards would have to be SIGNIFICANTLY boosted before it could draw PARTIALLY risk averse players. If that happened, what would happen to the rewards between high/low/null? The risk averse players would still not venture into lowsec because, they're just not cut out for facing challenges in general (no offense, your choice of playstyle is as valid as any others). Overall result: No significant increase in people going to lowsec.

Myth 3: "This will discourage gate camping."
Fact: Gate camping will still happen. The only form of gate camping affected is perma-smartbombing battleships sitting at gates for hours. Actually, this doesn't really happen, since most smartbombing pirates have scounts and only really warp to their smart bombing bookmarks when a target is spotted 1-2 jumps away. Overall result: Gate camping (in a different form) still occurs.

Myth 4: "This will discourage ganking."
Fact: It doesn't matter what arbitrary time limit CCP set, be it 4.5 minutes or 30 minutes. Ramping up the gategun damage just means people will try to kill their targets as fast as possible, either by bringing more people, or using sniping + insta locking setups. Either way, the gates will be harder to get through, not easier, and there will be a rise in ganking. Overall result: Increase in ganking and instant death for people entering lowsec.

Myth 5: "Pirates will have to work for their kills now." / "Pirates will have to scan down their targets now"
Fact: Currently, pirates use a scout alt on all gates leading into their system. In fact the only fail gatecampers that don't use alt scouts are probably us Lol The scout alts will still be in use, the only difference is the tackle and damage ships will be different (see above). As for scanning out mission runners etc in lowsec, the problem is, there WON'T be any new players doing those activities that aren't there already (see 1, 2, 3 & 4 above). The players that can survive in lowsec currently will still survive (if they can get past instalocking alpha gatecamps, and the players that could have survived won't even make it past the first ceptor that sneezes at it. Overall result: No change from current, most likely decrease in targets regardless.

Myth 6: "This will shift fights from gates to belts/planets."
Fact: The reason why fights currently occur on gates, is due to the fact that EvE PVP relies on chokepoints. If pirate vs PVE player, what reason does the PVE player have to go to any belt or planet? Mining? Would you enter a random lowsec without friendlies to mine? For fleet flights, I'd say 90% of the gang fights I've been in have occured when one gang ran into the other on a roam, and this typically happens at gates. I'd wager that the chances of 2 roaming gangs running into each other at planets are pretty remote currently (baiting aside). Overall result: Fights won't even start to begin with.

Myth 7: "This will encourage more (good) fights"
Fact: Ganking will be encouraged, especially if fights have to be over in a prescribed amount of time due to the aggressing party being guaranteed a loss after a certain period (see 4 and 6 above). In my book, "good fights" are not over in 30 seconds as some CSM member seems to think. Most fights I considered "good fights" have lasted at least 10-15 minutes, with some up to 1-2 hours. This happened on gates more often than not. With the proposed changes, this will be impossible. This results in an overall DECREASE in lowsec PVP.

Myth 8: "This will give new players a chance to experience lowsec without getting shot to pieces at the first jump"
Fact: New players that want to experience lowsec CAN already do so, by flying disposable, agile, small ships. They even have a chance of surviving in cruisers if they prepare themselves with some knowledge on how to dodge gatecamps, how to identify hostiles, how to scout etc. Under the proposed changes, the new player can kiss his frigate goodbye to the instalocking ceptor. Even a newbie with covops cloak will NOT survive a proper camp, unless freakily lucky. Overall result: Less new players are willing to go into lowsec.

Myth 9: "More people would go into lowsec if they spawned randomly after jumping"
Fact: I have to agree with this one, since it would be almost impossible to kill anyone, unless said person was flying around in a ship with an align time >20 seconds. Proponents of this aren't seriously suggesting that the whole system be blanketed in probes are you? The only way anyone would agree to this is if mission runners had to probe down their missions over the whole constellation, and oh yeah, the NPC with the mission item? It spawns randomly too. Those asteroid belts? Sure, probe down one veldspar roid, mine it, probe the other 9999999999 down one by one. Might as well not label the gates and let's probe those out too. Roll

Sorry for the wall of text, lunch meeting got canceled and I have nothing better to do at work for now.


#766 - 2012-08-13 06:00:02 UTC
lollerwaffle wrote:
Myth 9: "More people would go into lowsec if they spawned randomly after jumping"
Fact: I have to agree with this one, since it would be almost impossible to kill anyone, unless said person was flying around in a ship with an align time >20 seconds. Proponents of this aren't seriously suggesting that the whole system be blanketed in probes are you? The only way anyone would agree to this is if mission runners had to probe down their missions over the whole constellation, and oh yeah, the NPC with the mission item? It spawns randomly too. Those asteroid belts? Sure, probe down one veldspar roid, mine it, probe the other 9999999999 down one by one. Might as well not label the gates and let's probe those out too. Roll

W-Wormholes?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

#767 - 2012-08-13 08:35:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Conrad Lionhart
If you want to bring more carebears into low sec, you have to exponentially increase the mission rewards in low sec. Give them a huge incentive to move there.

Bigger PI resources, bigger ISK reward from missions, better ores, etc.
Amarr Empire
#768 - 2012-08-14 14:12:16 UTC
Thread cleaned of more off topic and troll posts. Please post responsibly in future, thank you - ISD Type40.

[b]ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

#769 - 2012-08-22 01:44:15 UTC
...Ive had fights that lasted an hour on lowsec gates against pies and as being a pie. They were great.
They wouldnt have happened with higher sentry fire.

A fight in eve happens when both sides think they can take the other on, with minimal losses; noone likes to get new ships.
If the outcome is to uncertain, the fight wont happen. Unless one side gets the drop on the other or catches it through manouvering. Usualy as one side is moving through a gate. Also thats a tactic, catch a few stragglers to turn the main group around to get the fight. Hopefully still with minimal losses on your side. Usualy at a gate.
With this a pie force cant even force a high security group of the near perfect safety they'll have at the gates.

Lets take em! Send the bait in, get them aggressed. Rest gogo swoop down and lets kill what we can in 4 minutes before we cant offset gategun fire!
Oh? They cynoed a triage in that can rep them np. Lets drop our own to even the odds. What you say cant rep us because you'll die in 4.5/10/15/20 minutes mark a gcc triage dies and we are unlikely to be able to break their triage down with what we have in that time? Balls, guess our bait just died. Nice gank highsecers! Great fight.

Lowsec will never warrant the risk for true highsec dwellers unless they'll profit enough each time they undock to buy a new ship, 99 times in a row. And with profit margins like that, the low security people will be profetering madly so cant have that. Whats this? Tie the profit margin to sec status so -5 get only 10% of the payout? Np. Got my +5 sec alt right here.

Frigates under gateguns... waiting for the scout nextdoor to give the go for it to warpdown from its pounce ontop the gate. The rest of the horde warping down shortly after. The prey is tackled and made to debris. The fleet returns to its pounces, but now its Heinrichs turn to be initial ceptor tackle since he didnt gcc.

Introduce a new resource only in lowsec? the low security people will take it. They'll be forced away from it if its profitable enough by nullsec blobs that'll want it. If its just right, it might make one or two highsec alliances try to move into an area for profits. But why should they be in lowsec (The pies will try to get one or two of them when they are isking. And if you just try to fight at gates vs the pies where they now stand no chance, why should they bother to come? Maybe they'll have three guys dedicated enough to go recon in a system near 24/7 for a week or two but thats more like work) when nullsec is out there? Fresh and sharp always needing more cannonfodder in exchange for free ship replacements the land of great blobs and no meaning are.









#770 - 2012-08-22 01:47:28 UTC
Tammarr wrote:
Introduce a new resource only in lowsec? the low security people will take it. They'll be forced away from it if its profitable enough by nullsec blobs that'll want it. If its just right, it might make one or two highsec alliances try to move into an area for profits. But why should they be in lowsec (The pies will try to get one or two of them when they are isking. And if you just try to fight at gates vs the pies where they now stand no chance, why should they bother to come? Maybe they'll have three guys dedicated enough to go recon in a system near 24/7 for a week or two but thats more like work) when nullsec is out there? Fresh and sharp always needing more cannonfodder in exchange for free ship replacements the land of great blobs and no meaning are.

Mm, nice. If ccp gives you something too yummy, the blobs will beat you up.

Pie ... cake... pie...

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

Minmatar Republic
#771 - 2012-08-22 03:14:21 UTC
I like everything but the ramp up time... 5 mins with gcc near a gate and you die with a capital? bad. this means a BC will die in like 40seconds, meaning for the few 1v1 encounters on gate you won't have enough time to break the drakes tank ect.

I like the suspect shooting thing, now having low sec means even more just make the ramp up damage time longer then 5mins. and maybe as someone else said, depend on the ship class. you can do more damage to caps with guns but do little to t2 frigs.
#772 - 2012-08-22 03:37:34 UTC
Hold on a sec... that said

""CP Greyscale moves on to explain his work on sentry guns. Sentry guns will now shoot anyone with a criminal flag, suspect or otherwise. ""

That didn't say anything about GCC, it said a 'criminal flag' - so if you are red ( you know -4.5 sec status) you'll get shot at on every single stinkin gate you go to!?!?

This is so awful an idea, I don't have enough profanity in my vocabulary to express myself.
#773 - 2012-08-22 04:53:06 UTC
lollerwaffle wrote:
Myth 9: "More people would go into lowsec if they spawned randomly after jumping"
Fact: I have to agree with this one, since it would be almost impossible to kill anyone, unless said person was flying around in a ship with an align time >20 seconds. Proponents of this aren't seriously suggesting that the whole system be blanketed in probes are you? The only way anyone would agree to this is if mission runners had to probe down their missions over the whole constellation, and oh yeah, the NPC with the mission item? It spawns randomly too. Those asteroid belts? Sure, probe down one veldspar roid, mine it, probe the other 9999999999 down one by one. Might as well not label the gates and let's probe those out too. Roll

Sorry for the wall of text, lunch meeting got canceled and I have nothing better to do at work for now.

... unlabelled gates that have to be probed out, that sounds kind of familiar.

Wormholes ?!


Wait wait, let's pull out the remove/delay/nerf local threads. Now for lowsec ~~~

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

#774 - 2012-08-22 05:11:57 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
lollerwaffle wrote:
Myth 9: "More people would go into lowsec if they spawned randomly after jumping"
Fact: I have to agree with this one, since it would be almost impossible to kill anyone, unless said person was flying around in a ship with an align time >20 seconds. Proponents of this aren't seriously suggesting that the whole system be blanketed in probes are you? The only way anyone would agree to this is if mission runners had to probe down their missions over the whole constellation, and oh yeah, the NPC with the mission item? It spawns randomly too. Those asteroid belts? Sure, probe down one veldspar roid, mine it, probe the other 9999999999 down one by one. Might as well not label the gates and let's probe those out too. Roll

Sorry for the wall of text, lunch meeting got canceled and I have nothing better to do at work for now.

... unlabelled gates that have to be probed out, that sounds kind of familiar.

Wormholes ?!


Wait wait, let's pull out the remove/delay/nerf local threads. Now for lowsec ~~~

Nah there are stations in Lo-sec it would never be the same Lol

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

#775 - 2012-08-22 06:02:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Katalci
Syphon Lodian wrote:
Don't fight at gates.

lol

don't get out of highsec much, do you?
#776 - 2012-08-22 07:09:02 UTC
I see a lot of posts regarding "bringing bears to lowsec" via some resource or payout.

Whether or not this works has to depend on what the payoff is.


One of the reasons why missioners do not go to lowsec is because they are are the same kinds of missions that you have in highsec, with only a difference in payoff.

Some say making the payoff huge will help, but I think it will be a measure in frustration.

The unavoidable fact is that people run missions alone. Not because they "want to", but mainly out of circumstance. Not everybody is a basement-dweller who has all day to play MW while waiting for a fleet to form up (herding cats). So that time you get, usually scarce time, is for many just enough for a mission, if they don't have to move stuff or equiip a new ship.

Now that last part I will digress on: "equip a new ship". Even is a player can muster up enough Stockholm Syndrome to LIKE being ganked, their next session, short as before, will be all taken up putting a new ship together.

So the problem with lowsec and the lure to go there is much related to the fact that it's the same mission as high sec, the same time-consuming profile, and such, partaking the option to salvage the wrecks, gives a higher payout.

God help you if you get a lowsec mission with a "mission item".

The "fly around and kill all the rats" that can take way more time than it takes to get scanned down and tackled, without an option for loot and salvage, does not make it attractive.

Sure there's always the "well, stay aligned, HTFU, etc", but does the mission get finished? Like I say, time. It's more about time than having balls or being "leet". A lot of players dont' have time to put up with the kill everything that moves crowd, or even some legitimate pirates (an extremely rate player these days - that sort you can reason with).

Lowsec missions need to be different if they are to be of any value to bring out players. They might need to be based more on time and strategy than "take a while to kill all the rats, profit?".

Right now the only such missons are exploration escalations, where you hit the site, kill some officer or elite spawn, and run. I go into lowsec all of the time for such missions because I know that I will only be in the site for roughly 1 - 2 minutes. I have run off with faction modules just as the gank patrol was warping in. Careful tactics and DPS win the day, not having to wait hours for fleet, join corp, deal with drama, etc.

Change the lowsec missions to be more about specific actions where skills can be geared towards making it take less time as such you get it done and get out before the tackle boat arrives, and things will change.

Otherwise nothing will change, and lowsec can continue to be the conquered space that it is, where people kill everything that moves, and then complain on the forums about a lack of targets.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

WE FORM V0LTA
#777 - 2012-08-22 11:44:13 UTC
lollerwaffle wrote:
TL;DR Truth, wallsized


This.

Gate camps aren't a problem.

People in NPC corps making new players believe in DEADLY LOWSEC gate camps are the problem. Misleading and scamming new players in NPC corps should be a bannable offense.

.

Shadow Cartel
#778 - 2012-08-22 12:55:35 UTC
o/ Hello again pod people.

Just wanted to stop by and give you a brief update, after speaking with CCP Greyscale about the gate gun changes in great detail, he's once again assured me and the CSM that this gate gun idea was just an idea he was toying with, and not something that is definitely in the pipeline for development. After the flood of player feedback as well as my own urging for him to reconsider this, its no longer an idea that is being pushed forward anyways. I'll be monitoring his work on GCC, sec status, and crimewatch in general as we move futher into Winter, but as of right now the gate gun idea has stalled.

The minute that status changes - I'll let the community know as soon as possible so we can continue "the resistance". But in the meantime, there's not much to fight against because this doesn't appear to be moving past the idea stage, thanks to all who have spoken up.

CPM0 Chairman / CSM7 Vice Secretary

#779 - 2012-08-22 12:56:09 UTC
remove lowsec.

make it all wormhole, make all of eve wormhole. and goat cheese!

North Korea is Best Korea

WE FORM V0LTA
#780 - 2012-08-22 12:58:54 UTC
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
o/ Hello again pod people.

Just wanted to stop by and give you a brief update, after speaking with CCP Greyscale about the gate gun changes in great detail, he's once again assured me and the CSM that this gate gun idea was just an idea he was toying with, and not something that is definitely in the pipeline for development. After the flood of player feedback as well as my own urging for him to reconsider this, its no longer an idea that is being pushed forward anyways. I'll be monitoring his work on GCC, sec status, and crimewatch in general as we move futher into Winter, but as of right now the gate gun idea has stalled.

The minute that status changes - I'll let the community know as soon as possible so we can continue "the resistance". But in the meantime, there's not much to fight against because this doesn't appear to be moving past the idea stage, thanks to all who have spoken up.


Thanks Hans & Greyscale!

<3

.

Forum Jump