These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#101 - 2012-08-02 23:42:08 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Now to be fair, there needs to be a lot more known about how it would get implemented. We don't know the way the gate resets for example so until we see a more detailed blog or it is actually on the test server we don't really even know what we are arguing about.
Sure we do: we're arguing about an attempt to move combat off gates and onto… nowhere, because there is no reason for those fights to happen anywhere else.

We're also arguing about what the actual problem is. What is this solving? Why is it a problem to begin with? Is this a good solution for whatever the problem is? That last one might be subject to implementation details, but the others aren't.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#102 - 2012-08-02 23:42:42 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:

If it really was mostly fleet "A" waits for fleet "B" to come by that would be great. More often than not its lazy fleet "A" sitting on the gate and killing industrials and the odd single ship passing through. For every true "looking for the good fight" I see 10 "woot! ganked your hauler, now to swim in your tears" encounters.


I really don't care about the whole gate camp part - though I actually like crashing gate camps with my old high sec PVE alt. But nerfing AAAAAALLLLLLLLLL engagements in low sec to the point that they just won't happen is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

It's just flat stupid.

Quote:

This won't solve everything but it will make a capital living at a gate less common and will change the dynamics of places like Rancer. I live in low sec and deal with gate camps every day so I know a little about the experience. I like this idea and hope CCP goes through with some form of it.


I can't even remember last time I saw a capital on a gate. Oh wait, yes I can. It was 12-18 months ago...

-Liang


It still happens where I operated regularly.

As for baby/bathwater, lets wait and see what the details are because I think it could be put in place in a manner that still allows the types of roaming fleet engagement you seem to feel need to start at a gate.

Issler
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#103 - 2012-08-02 23:43:22 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:

See, that was a great response. You shared your reasons for your opinion. I would argue that it sounds like you are going to have be a lot more mobile to avoid the guns escalating but you'd still be able to roam for a while to a gate and then start a fight, that you should be able to finish up before the guns become a problem. As I just posted in another response the devil will be in the details and we need to know those before we can really decide if this is a good thing or not.

Issler


Not really, we already have enough information to know that any kind of engagement beyond a simple many vs one gank isn't really feasible. It just takes too long to get the fight and conclude it when there's even a moderate number of ships on the field. We're talking about it taking out TRIAGE CARRIERS before the point when most engagements wrap up. Roll

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Jim Era
#104 - 2012-08-02 23:44:50 UTC
When gate camps are no more, there will be tons of stupid carebear miners in low sec belts that you can all gank freely.

-when I get an aneurism will CCP buy me a new clone?

Wat™
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#105 - 2012-08-02 23:44:55 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
I've been asking for progressively stronger gate guns in low sec for years. This is a great change that is long overdue!

I also agree with the person that suggested that the gun progression is slower as you go into lower sec.

Can't wait to see it CCP!

Issler


I like the change except for the part about it starting weaker. Why make it easier than before to tackle people zoning into low sec? Now unless you're a cloaky, you will be pointed and blasted before you can escape. And even if you're a cloaky, odds are you'll be blasted.
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#106 - 2012-08-02 23:45:05 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Oh, and…
Issler Dainze wrote:
I've been asking for progressively stronger gate guns in low sec for years. This is a great change that is long overdue!
…good, then you can explain why this would in any way be a good change.


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


This change will not prevent them from being perma-camped. The camps will just work like this: alts in T1 'attack frigs' (Executioner, Slasher, etc.) sit at a gate and the rest of the gang (which can now fly smaller ships, and which can now fit more for gank vs. tank) sit just off-grid. The alts are rotated (they don't need to be biomassed for rotation; dual-boxing their sec status up is enough ... assuming they'll even lose sec status under the coming system) so that they can sit permanently at the gate. Smart-bombing battleships in Rancer can sit off-grid and only warp to the gate when they see a pod incoming.

It would be no easier to get into lowsec (although it's already damned easy; why don't you support NPE changes that teach people the game so that they'd know this?), but what would happen is that impromptu, temporary camps for known fleets or specific targets would be hampered enormously. Low sec status, which is only a badge of "I live in lowsec and pvp ever", would become such a nuisance that the people who aren't perma-camping specific systems would abandon the space.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#107 - 2012-08-02 23:46:52 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
Now to be fair, there needs to be a lot more known about how it would get implemented. We don't know the way the gate resets for example so until we see a more detailed blog or it is actually on the test server we don't really even know what we are arguing about.
Sure we do: we're arguing about an attempt to move combat off gates and onto… nowhere, because there is no reason for those fights to happen anywhere else.

We're also arguing about what the actual problem is. What is this solving? Why is it a problem to begin with? Is this a good solution for whatever the problem is? That last one might be subject to implementation details, but the others aren't.


So there are going to be all manner of reasons being added to low sec to get folks into the system. Like new mining options, like new FW activities, like who knows what since CCP seems to want to get folks to try out the more dangerous side of Eve. There are the things you can find and fight. You can't deny the argument that at some point early in Eve CCP put guns at the gates to keep people from hanging out and popping people there. I think they are back to thinking that now and I support them getting the original mechanism re-calibrated.

So unless your position is that there shouldn't have ever been gate guns there in the first place, which is a whole other argument you need to explain why in they form they are in now they are working as intended.

Issler
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#108 - 2012-08-02 23:48:18 UTC  |  Edited by: sYnc Vir
Increasing damage over time will only lower the number of fights in losec. Its a bad idea, that will lead to less fight. I maybe wrong, but as a Pirate I like to be the one that starts the fleet fight on a gate. I don't want to wait for some nuet to agress, then be the only ass in my fleet shooting him cause no one else has been agressed yet.

Gate Guns are fine, Classic Case of, Not Broke so Brake it.

Edit: New fleet tactic, jump gate warp to belt one, hope the guys in system follow even though local just told them if they have a chance or not. Totally increasing pvp with this change,RollRoll

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#109 - 2012-08-02 23:48:41 UTC
Karl Planck wrote:
Alara IonStorm wrote:
I would just prefer it if they made 0.4 to High Sec Gates WTFBBQ and lowered them in increments so the farther down in Sec you get the less dangerous they are. Then actively display the Sec where the gate you are jumping through to leads on the overview.

Perhaps increase the number of 0.3 - 0.2 systems as well.


the thing is this change WILL NOT AFFECT GATE CAMPS. It will just force a change in tactics (bouncing)


Easy enough to fix. Have the guns remember you and scale down damage based on the time you're away.
I'll still let you have several gate fights per day, and eliminate the failures that sit at a gate all day popping noobs.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#110 - 2012-08-02 23:50:32 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:

So there are going to be all manner of reasons being added to low sec to get folks into the system. Like new mining options, like new FW activities, like who knows what since CCP seems to want to get folks to try out the more dangerous side of Eve. There are the things you can find and fight. You can't deny the argument that at some point early in Eve CCP put guns at the gates to keep people from hanging out and popping people there. I think they are back to thinking that now and I support them getting the original mechanism re-calibrated.

So unless your position is that there shouldn't have ever been gate guns there in the first place, which is a whole other argument you need to explain why in they form they are in now they are working as intended.

Issler


I'm pretty sure they're working as intended because I've gotten that exact response from petitions about gate guns. Lol Now the question is whether the design spec needs adjustment.... (hi Grayscale, see I can speak gobbldeygook too!)

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#111 - 2012-08-02 23:51:08 UTC
sYnc Vir wrote:
Increasing damage over time will only lower the number of fights in losec. Its a bad idea, that will lead to less fight. I'm maybe wrong, but as a Pirate I like to be the one that starts the fleet fight on a gate. I don't want to wait for some nuet to agress, then be the only ass in my fleet shooting him cause no one else has been agressed yet.

Gate Guns are fine, Classic Case of, Not Broke so Brake it.


They aren't fine. What good do they do anyone now? When they were introduced you couldn't camp them. Now you can. So either your argument is there shouldn't have ever been gate guns in low sec or you have to agree they are NOT working as intended.

Issler
Shayla Sh'inlux
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#112 - 2012-08-02 23:51:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Shayla Sh'inlux
As a solution to mindless Rancer camping, it's a great idea. As an ex-pirate I applaud the effort to move people away from sitting on gates forever just to get some cheap kills. However, destroying low-sec roaming is not worth it.

Something needs to be done, really. It makes no sense for CCP to develop all kinds of awesome content for lowsec when nobody goes there to experience it. One of the huge obstacles to actually try and play in lowsec is the fact that most common routes into lowsec are camped a lot of the time. Yes, there are ways around and no, it's not hard to get and live into lowsec if you're somewhat experienced, but most folks trying out lowsec will have their trip end after the first jump.

That said, it would make way more sense to make the sentry guns' strength depend on the amount of kills in a given solar system during the last x days or hours. That way, you can't reliably camp the same gate but will keep proper lowsec PvP intact.
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#113 - 2012-08-02 23:52:35 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
You can't deny the argument that at some point early in Eve CCP put guns at the gates to keep people from hanging out and popping people there. I think they are back to thinking that now and I support them getting the original mechanism re-calibrated.


I always assumed that the gate guns were there to make it easier to fly through lowsec with a travel fit or a frig, because it limited what could tackle you. And it's actually the case that lowsec is very easily entered and flown through right now, for that reason. But this change, targeted at like two systems in the entire game, comes with an encouragement for using interceptors as tacklers at lowsec gates.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#114 - 2012-08-02 23:53:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Issler Dainze wrote:
You can't deny the argument that at some point early in Eve CCP put guns at the gates to keep people from hanging out and popping people there. I think they are back to thinking that now and I support them getting the original mechanism re-calibrated.
No, but I can (and do) argue that what they intended then might not be particularly relevant now, as years worth of gameplay has been created around this mechanic. Right now, they provide support fire for the defensive party, and while it might not seem like much, if you've lived in lowsec you will have seen the aggression dance at some point: each side goading the other to shoot first so they take the gate guns… if the guns were pointless, that dance would never happen.

It all comes back to the fundamental question: what is the problem? Why is it a problem? How does this idea solve that problem?

“They're there for a reason” doesn't answer that — it just raises the question of what the reason is.

Quote:
What good do they do anyone now? When they were introduced you couldn't camp them.
I really have to question that. They do good to the defenders right now. When did the “uncampability” (yes) stop? What caused it? And again, more to the point: so what if you can camp them? Why is that a problem?
Eternal Error
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#115 - 2012-08-02 23:54:34 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
sYnc Vir wrote:
Increasing damage over time will only lower the number of fights in losec. Its a bad idea, that will lead to less fight. I'm maybe wrong, but as a Pirate I like to be the one that starts the fleet fight on a gate. I don't want to wait for some nuet to agress, then be the only ass in my fleet shooting him cause no one else has been agressed yet.

Gate Guns are fine, Classic Case of, Not Broke so Brake it.


They aren't fine. What good do they do anyone now? When they were introduced you couldn't camp them. Now you can. So either your argument is there shouldn't have ever been gate guns in low sec or you have to agree they are NOT working as intended.

Issler

They aren't "perfect" but they are "fine." Wasting resources on gate guns would be a monumental act of stupidity.

Changing them in the way suggested in the minutes would be even worse.
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
#116 - 2012-08-02 23:54:37 UTC
lol holy **** ccp is ********

lets not let carriers go into triage on a gate

its no fun when you get a cap fight going in lowsec

Not today spaghetti.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#117 - 2012-08-02 23:54:48 UTC
Shayla Sh'inlux wrote:
As a solution to mindless Rancer camping, it's a great idea. As an ex-pirate I applaud the effort to move people away from sitting on gates forever just to get some cheap kills. However, destroying low-sec roaming is not worth it.

It would make way more sense to make the sentry guns' strength depend on the amount of kills in a given solar system during the last x days or hours. That way, you can't reliably camp the same gate but will keep proper lowsec PvP intact.


See, that is exactly the kind of refinement that may be the way to make this a great idea. It was the point I was trying to make that once we see how it is intended to be implemented some feedback can result in something that gets gate guns back to doing what they were put in place to do but still allows PvP in a manner that suits the pirates the live there.

Issler
Zenos Ebeth
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#118 - 2012-08-02 23:54:53 UTC
I think this will encourage blobbing , as fleets that want to attack another fleet on a gate/station will have to kill it within X minutes or die horribly to sentries. So the logical conclusion will be to bring more people to kill the targets more quickly.

Also , i really don't see why people would fight on belts and planets , mining in low sec is not worth it , same for ratting , you are much better off finding yourself a deserted null sec system and doing it there. Only people that WANT to fight will be in the belts.

Also to people who think camps will be gone: insta locking ceptors on gate with fleet in a just out of grid BM ready to warp , nothing is going to change. If anything , it's going to make it harder for noobs in frigates/destroyers to get in lowsec due to getting killed by small gank ships that can now survive sentries long enough to get kills.

What will happen in FW if you are a -10 ? You will get shot to bits by sentries in front of stations and gates while fighting the ennemy militia. And this despite not having any GCC...

Bad posts are not welcome on these forums.  -CCP Falcon
Kuehnelt
Devoid Privateering
#119 - 2012-08-02 23:56:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Kuehnelt
Tippia wrote:
and while it might not seem like much, if you've lived in lowsec you will have seen the aggression dance at some point: each side goading the other to shoot first so they take the gate guns… if the guns were pointless, that dance would never happen.


Aye. A gang I was with flew an Orca through lowsec once, trying to get some pirates to engage. They refused to bite :-(
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#120 - 2012-08-02 23:57:16 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
sYnc Vir wrote:
Increasing damage over time will only lower the number of fights in losec. Its a bad idea, that will lead to less fight. I'm maybe wrong, but as a Pirate I like to be the one that starts the fleet fight on a gate. I don't want to wait for some nuet to agress, then be the only ass in my fleet shooting him cause no one else has been agressed yet.

Gate Guns are fine, Classic Case of, Not Broke so Brake it.


They aren't fine. What good do they do anyone now? When they were introduced you couldn't camp them. Now you can. So either your argument is there shouldn't have ever been gate guns in low sec or you have to agree they are NOT working as intended.

Issler


You can only camp them with logi, which means PEOPLE not a person camping. MMO players working together. You can not perma tank gate guns forever and still be effective in a fight without logi for long.

If you think you can, fair enough, you're so clearly wrong, but fair enough your opinion. Add 2 more to every gate. In my opinion removing the ability of -10 players to engage in fleet fight on gates in losec is bad for losec.

You can't have a fleet fight if the pirate fleet can't all engage together. They are just gonna leave and no ones going to get any fun.

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