These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

A petition to CCP Greyscale on Sentry Mechanics (Please Read)

First post First post First post
Author
Tara Read
Doomheim
#1 - 2012-08-03 06:48:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Tara Read
Alright I normally don't get involved in the gripe fests that surround game mechanics. Personally I've played Eve off and on since 2004 with a few breaks here and there and seen many changes come to New Eden. Some for the better some for worse, but overall I must hand it to CCP they've kept me coming back for more with new opportunities and changes.

Eve to me has always basically been be whatever you want. Want to fight for a faction? Done. Want to make billions or risk losing it all in a Wormhole? Done. Research? Done. Be part of some conglomerate of null sec knuckleheads (grin) Done.

Myself Piracy has always been a dark lust. Preying upon those fool enough to step into the depths of unlawful space has been one of the main reasons why I love this game. Low sec to me has always been home. It's also where I have made some very good friends and seen some of the brightest players in Eve come and go over the years.

Yet today the announcement by CCP Greyscale stating Sentry Gun changes has me more than worried. This move could potentially destroy what is left of any activity in Low Sec. We all know the saying: Low Sec is dead. Why do you ask? Much of the traffic that was coming into low sec was due profit that was still viable a few years back.

Now with the major null sec alliances keeping a vice grip on any and everything it has shown that low sec is nothing but old news except sadly for systems you pass through on your way to null or back into high sec. For those of us still around it's still home.

Here is what was quoted by CCP Greyscale in the minutes released yesterday:

CSM minutes wrote:
CCP Greyscale moves on to explain his work on sentry guns. Sentry guns will now shoot anyone with a criminal flag, suspect or otherwise. Sentry guns will also start with smaller amounts of damage, and ramp up with time. Ideal tuning will be to where triage carriers will die at around 4 1/2 minutes. This way, if you want to use triage carriers in lowsec on gates you can, but you must commit to the cycle for a length of time before starting your reps, if you want to deactivate triage before the sentry guns kill you and jump out. CCP Greyscale also points out that another goal is to make it so that the first couple of hits won't kill an interceptor immediately, enabling a quick tackle, and then a warp out.


What does this mean? Essentially it is led up to interpretation but anyone "suspect" hence anyone with negative sec status will essentially be fired upon in low sec. GCC no longer becomes applicable and fights on gates now will be reduced to under 5 minutes or until all aggressor's are destroyed.

This also means that while traveling through Low Sec even without GCC someone would potentially be fired upon. This also means that Sentries will simply be untankable even with different persons sharing the aggression during a fight.

It effectively stops any combat after 5 minutes for the aggressor and further kills any sort of decent fight that may be had off a gate except for a quick gank and run which really isn't a decent fight anyways,

I personally feel this is a tremendous mistake not only due to Sentry mechanics, but how such mechanics will force players OUT of Low Sec permanently to either high sec or for many of us the unappealing systems in Null.

I understand some here may only see this in terms of Gatecamps. However it not only effects camps but the very combat mechanics that will now have to be dealt with in Low Sec putting anyone with low security status at a dismal disadvantage during a fight which would eventually end in a loss after 4 to 5 minutes regardless.

With such mechanics in place it has already been discussed by myself and others in my alliance that if such changes were indeed implemented we'd have no desire to move out to Null to conform and would most likely unsubscribe.

Many of us who live in Low Sec have played this game for far too long to see the last bit of what makes this game fun to us essentially twisted and contorted into a region that will now truly be "dead".

I beseech CCP Greyscale and others to rethink these mechanics not only for the players who call Low Sec home, but also in regards to the future limited combat in Low Sec which would thus make it truly unfavorable and unwanted.

If these changes do go into effect I for one will be unsubscribing all three of my accounts and simply moving on. It's not worth my time and money to be forced into regions of Eve I feel are hardly fun or appealing.

Please sign below if you agree.
Alara IonStorm
#2 - 2012-08-03 06:54:09 UTC
/Signed.
Serena Serene
Heretic University
#3 - 2012-08-03 06:57:10 UTC
Is it sure "suspect" really means all people with a negative security status? Or could it have to do anything with changes to how "criminal flagging" works? I read about such a thing a while ago and now I'm not sure about the terminology here.
Tara Read
Doomheim
#4 - 2012-08-03 06:59:36 UTC
Serena Serene wrote:
Is it sure "suspect" really means all people with a negative security status? Or could it have to do anything with changes to how "criminal flagging" works? I read about such a thing a while ago and now I'm not sure about the terminology here.


It is up to interpretation and has such a grey area which is what worries me. There has been no in depth details on what "suspect" actually is which could very well mean security status.

The very fact that sentries would be able to break anything up to and including a triage carrier in 5 minutes makes this even more unacceptable.
Tara Read
Doomheim
#5 - 2012-08-03 07:00:16 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
/Signed.


Thanks.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#6 - 2012-08-03 07:00:32 UTC
Can my Domi, be allowed to fit a few of those into it?

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne

Pipa Porto
#7 - 2012-08-03 07:07:20 UTC
Tara Read wrote:
Serena Serene wrote:
Is it sure "suspect" really means all people with a negative security status? Or could it have to do anything with changes to how "criminal flagging" works? I read about such a thing a while ago and now I'm not sure about the terminology here.


It is up to interpretation and has such a grey area which is what worries me. There has been no in depth details on what "suspect" actually is which could very well mean security status.

The very fact that sentries would be able to break anything up to and including a triage carrier in 5 minutes makes this even more unacceptable.


"Suspect" is their new, wide reaching Crimewatch replacement for aggression flags.

The "Suspect" flag is pretty terrible for other reasons, but having crazy-strong sentry guns shooting you for looting the field or helping your friend who's been attacked while looting the field is adding extra terrible on top of the terrible that it brings to HS combat.

EvE: Everyone vs Everyone

-RubyPorto

Tara Read
Doomheim
#8 - 2012-08-03 07:11:06 UTC
Pipa Porto wrote:
Tara Read wrote:
Serena Serene wrote:
Is it sure "suspect" really means all people with a negative security status? Or could it have to do anything with changes to how "criminal flagging" works? I read about such a thing a while ago and now I'm not sure about the terminology here.


It is up to interpretation and has such a grey area which is what worries me. There has been no in depth details on what "suspect" actually is which could very well mean security status.

The very fact that sentries would be able to break anything up to and including a triage carrier in 5 minutes makes this even more unacceptable.


"Suspect" is their new, wide reaching Crimewatch replacement for aggression flags.

The "Suspect" flag is pretty terrible for other reasons, but having crazy-strong sentry guns shooting you for looting the field or helping your friend who's been attacked while looting the field is adding extra terrible on top of the terrible that it brings to HS combat.


So they essentially replaced aggression timers with a blanket reasoning to shoot you. Interesting how they thought this would bring more people to low sec. Missioners sure but combat wise? Hardly.
Alice Saki
Nocturnal Romance
Cynosural Field Theory.
#9 - 2012-08-03 07:13:00 UTC
...I already get enough hassle from the Navy in Highsec, Do we really need this?

FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - Currenly rebuilding gaming machine, I will Return.

Eternal Error
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2012-08-03 07:18:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Eternal Error
/signed even though this doesn't really affect me


Pipa Porto wrote:


"Suspect" is their new, wide reaching Crimewatch replacement for aggression flags.

The "Suspect" flag is pretty terrible for other reasons, but having crazy-strong sentry guns shooting you for looting the field or helping your friend who's been attacked while looting the field is adding extra terrible on top of the terrible that it brings to HS combat.

This. Given his recent track record of proposed changes, I wouldn't count on CCP Greyscale formulating a reasonable reply. His posts in threads about the crimewatch changes were awful.

EDIT: To clarify, if either the proposed sentry changes or the suspect changes go through as currently planned, I will be unsubscribing. It's not that the changes affect what I do that much, but both of these changes make it abundantly clear which direction Greyscale/CCP are taking the game, and it is not the direction that I came to know and love over the past five years. Additionally, both of these are horrendous examples of "it isn't broken, let's break it." The fact that you are wasting serious development time on crap like this given the current state of game balance (and other proposed changes like the POS revamp that are much more important and have more support) absolutely blows my mind.
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Initiative Mercenaries
#11 - 2012-08-03 07:20:36 UTC
/signed

Ps.: I have no problem spending my money on another Game CCP.

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP

Alara IonStorm
#12 - 2012-08-03 07:20:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Tara Read wrote:

So they essentially replaced aggression timers with a blanket reasoning to shoot you. Interesting how they thought this would bring more people to low sec. Missioners sure but combat wise? Hardly.

I don't know about bringing missioners. I mean since there is a ramp up that can't even off a Ceptor to start they will still be grabed at gates by positive sec tackle and have a bunch of guys just off grid warp in and gank them quick. Sides that the same probing mechanics and all still apply. I don't really see any extra safty to Missioners, Newbie Explorers and other easy ganks. They will still get the brunt of it in the 8 or so different ways I thought of to screw them over in the first 10secs after I read about this mechanic.

I have seen a Triage Archon camping a gate before. We just finished offing their first Navy Geddon in a Faction BS Fleet they had when it dropped in and our fleet could not break their tank so we warped out. We lost the fight with casualties because they had a Superior force which is what is supposed to happen. Nothing that could be thought of as anything but a fleet fight albeit lopsided (EVE) would be better off if that Archon wasn't there. The lone Gank victem would have died to those ships anyway.

This seems to IMO just lessen real fights and play into the hands of swift gankers popping little guys. Perhaps this is CCP's replacement mechanic for the gankers who lost out on the Barge Buff. UghShockedLol
Ana Fox
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2012-08-03 07:22:00 UTC
A petition to CCP Greyscale on Sentry Mechanics .

Maybe better "A petition to CCP Greyscale STOP MAKING WOW OUT OF EVE ".

CCP Greyscale start playing game a bit?Your changes to any in EVE are just sign that you don't have clue what you are doing.
You want to prevent blobing on gates and in same time you are killing solo pvp almost fully in low sec.

WTF is that CCP Greyscale?You want to make game so dumb that you get more subs or what ?Blizzard did that and guess what ,you have many player that couldn't play **** easy game migrated to EVE.And now you want to do same to EVE.

Go to Blizzard man and we wish you luck .Or if nothing try to play this game for moment and have some idea what you are doing.And that is safe heaven for all people in high sec and null to be as much stupid as they want.Why ? Cause both areas are carebear heavens nothing more nothing less.If you thing real pvp is get moon goo and make 1000 ships and put 999 mindless guys with one that "know" something ,than I am sad to say this was once nice game.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2012-08-03 07:24:22 UTC
If capitals on gates is a problem (personally I've never seen any capitals camping lowsec gates) then the most logical step would be to add citadel torpedo launchers that only target capitals.
Tara Read
Doomheim
#15 - 2012-08-03 07:28:41 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
If capitals on gates is a problem (personally I've never seen any capitals camping lowsec gates) then the most logical step would be to add citadel torpedo launchers that only target capitals.


I've only seen a Moros once off a Low Sec gate and we just about killed it. No serious Pirate is going to risk a capital off a gate with titan bridge's and the like around.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#16 - 2012-08-03 07:29:09 UTC  |  Edited by: TheGunslinger42
A statement from greyscale that may be to the detriment of the game

I am surprised!

I honestly don't understand what he's trying to accomplish with the crimewatch crap, the more parts of it that come to light, and the more he explains it, the worse it sounds. It's so utterly abysmal. It seems as though it'll trash highsec combat and completely kill lowsec... oh well, I can always unsub and play a different game
Tara Read
Doomheim
#17 - 2012-08-03 07:34:14 UTC
Ana Fox wrote:
A petition to CCP Greyscale on Sentry Mechanics .

Maybe better "A petition to CCP Greyscale STOP MAKING WOW OUT OF EVE ".

CCP Greyscale start playing game a bit?Your changes to any in EVE are just sign that you don't have clue what you are doing.
You want to prevent blobing on gates and in same time you are killing solo pvp almost fully in low sec.

WTF is that CCP Greyscale?You want to make game so dumb that you get more subs or what ?Blizzard did that and guess what ,you have many player that couldn't play **** easy game migrated to EVE.And now you want to do same to EVE.

Go to Blizzard man and we wish you luck .Or if nothing try to play this game for moment and have some idea what you are doing.And that is safe heaven for all people in high sec and null to be as much stupid as they want.Why ? Cause both areas are carebear heavens nothing more nothing less.If you thing real pvp is get moon goo and make 1000 ships and put 999 mindless guys with one that "know" something ,than I am sad to say this was once nice game.


Piracy is probably the last bastion of what one would call "pvp". I love the small gangs, the people you get to know personally and the role you play. It's not just hit F1 and alpha something with 300 other pilots to prop up your mistake. Sadly Null sec fights quickly turn into a war of attrition where these people think holding "sov" makes you somehow superior.

Small gang warfare and fights are the only thing that pretty much keep me coming back. Well that and the tremendous amount of tears. Oh lord those tears are so so sweet...
Beekeeper Bob
Beekeepers Anonymous
#18 - 2012-08-03 07:36:40 UTC
Just when I thought CCP could not get more ********........Shocked

The ramping up sounds dumb, should have just changed tracking mechanics so that smaller ships would have a chance on the gate, as long as they kept transversal up.
Hitting bigger targets harder is fine...but having the guns attack everyone with negative sec status at once...?? How does that make any sense?

Some of the other ideas are just as crazy, if it's true they are talking about removing POS shields, then Supers are dead, only as matter of time.

Nerf the game into Oblivion CCP, let us know how it works out......

Signature removed - CCP Eterne

Tara Read
Doomheim
#19 - 2012-08-03 07:37:43 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Tara Read wrote:

So they essentially replaced aggression timers with a blanket reasoning to shoot you. Interesting how they thought this would bring more people to low sec. Missioners sure but combat wise? Hardly.

I don't know about bringing missioners. I mean since there is a ramp up that can't even off a Ceptor to start they will still be grabed at gates by positive sec tackle and have a bunch of guys just off grid warp in and gank them quick. Sides that the same probing mechanics and all still apply. I don't really see any extra safty to Missioners, Newbie Explorers and other easy ganks. They will still get the brunt of it in the 8 or so different ways I thought of to screw them over in the first 10secs after I read about this mechanic.

I have seen a Triage Archon camping a gate before. We just finished offing their first Navy Geddon in a Faction BS Fleet they had when it dropped in and our fleet could not break their tank so we warped out. We lost the fight with casualties because they had a Superior force which is what is supposed to happen. Nothing that could be thought of as anything but a fleet fight albeit lopsided (EVE) would be better off if that Archon wasn't there. The lone Gank victem would have died to those ships anyway.

This seems to IMO just lessen real fights and play into the hands of swift gankers popping little guys. Perhaps this is CCP's replacement mechanic for the gankers who lost out on the Barge Buff. UghShockedLol


It will make good fights more and more scarce that is for certain. I could care less if I lose a ship if it's in one hell of a damned good fight.
Hazen Koraka
HK Enterprises
#20 - 2012-08-03 07:40:01 UTC
Oh the Pirate tears, delicious :)

Exploration is Random. Random is Random... or is it?! http://docs.python.org/2/library/random.html

123Next pageLast page