These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#201 - 2012-08-03 03:16:24 UTC
Bayram Blacklion wrote:
this is bullshit ccp might as well kill the whole pirate comunity,and the only people who like this are probaly all FW anyways.

Nah, I do FW and I'm (obviously, as can be seen from my posting) completely against this. But then again, I'm not one of those "farm Amarr sites with a TLF alt" people, so I guess my opinion doesn't matter anyway.

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
Freya Hrondulf
Beyond Frontier
Pandemic Horde
#202 - 2012-08-03 03:19:00 UTC
So now low sec, safe haven for those with low sec status, will no longer allow these individuals to engage in station or gate combat nor can they deploy bubbles to catch people in warp.

Low sec residents are now limited to what... trying to catch one of the three eve lowsec miners in a belt and challenging people to honor duels at planet one?

Thank god they can still take part in carrier gate camps - the bread and butter of lowsec pvp.
Danny Diamonds
Fabricated Reality
#203 - 2012-08-03 03:20:15 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again.

P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh Lol



According to the numbers presented in that same CSM...

Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game.

If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority...
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#204 - 2012-08-03 03:21:38 UTC
Danny Diamonds wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again.

P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh Lol



According to the numbers presented in that same CSM...

Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game.

If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority...

The only problem with that logic (or lack of) is that without the pvp, this game wouldn't exist at all.

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
Natasha Mendel
Doomheim
#205 - 2012-08-03 03:21:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Natasha Mendel
Bayram Blacklion wrote:
all i see here is ccp trying to prevent pirate corps from gatecamping, which is for example my major income all they do is to help pve'ers and blobs.


You guys actually try and make money off lowsec PvP?

Finally, been wondering where all the real pirates are.


Danny Diamonds wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again.

P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh Lol



According to the numbers presented in that same CSM...

Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game.

If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority...


Because the majority is always right?

There's this thing called mob rule. And it happens a lot, and societies have made bad decisions because of it.
Virgil Travis
Non Constructive Self Management
#206 - 2012-08-03 03:24:42 UTC
Freya Hrondulf wrote:
nor can they deploy bubbles to catch people in warp..


They can't do that in low sec now

Unified Church of the Unobligated - madness in the method Mamma didn't raise no victims.
Danny Diamonds
Fabricated Reality
#207 - 2012-08-03 03:29:28 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Danny Diamonds wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again.

P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh Lol



According to the numbers presented in that same CSM...

Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game.

If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority...

The only problem with that logic (or lack of) is that without the pvp, this game wouldn't exist at all.



That's strange, it seems that would only impact 25% of current playerbase in drastic ways. I merely echoed (as best i could from memory) the numbers mentioned. Are you denying that only 25% of players responded with PVP as a reason for playing the game?

It amazes me at the lengths the handful of forum trolls go to try and convince everyone (including CCP) that they are the only ones who know the "truth". Same 5 turds every time too.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#208 - 2012-08-03 03:30:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Danny Diamonds wrote:
According to the numbers presented in that same CSM...

Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP.
…except that they're referring to this study, which measures what first got people interested in EVE, not what they like doing in the game. The study over what people like in the game shows that 75% enjoy PvP (see here for a cleaned-up version) — more than any other activity.

Those that enjoy PvP outnumber the ones who dislike it by a factor of 7:1… so yes, listening to that majority would probably be a good idea.

Oh, and for the record, notice how in that “what got you started” poll, PvE didn't even make the list — it's collected into the “other” category and is thus less relevant to new players than the Mac client. Blink
Tamiya Sarossa
Resistance is Character Forming
#209 - 2012-08-03 03:30:56 UTC
This is pretty poor reasoning - inties being able to tackle on lowsec gates will make lowsec more inhospitable, not more friendly, and only enhance the choke-point nature of gates. Frigs/cruisers used to be able to roam in relative confidence - this change will wholly remove that ability. Experienced players can still get by with mwd-cloak, so it's new players that will get the shaft here. Really don't understand the logic.

I'm not inherently opposed to ramping up damage, but there's gonna be a lot of shenanigans with pinning down gcced guys and letting sentries do the work, and in either case the ability of sentries to keep light tackle off gates shouldn't be nerfed too much.

Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
Senpai's Afterschool Anime and Gaming Club
#210 - 2012-08-03 03:31:40 UTC
Danny Diamonds wrote:
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Danny Diamonds wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again.

P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh Lol



According to the numbers presented in that same CSM...

Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game.

If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority...

The only problem with that logic (or lack of) is that without the pvp, this game wouldn't exist at all.



That's strange, it seems that would only impact 25% of current playerbase in drastic ways. I merely echoed (as best i could from memory) the numbers mentioned. Are you denying that only 25% of players responded with PVP as a reason for playing the game?

It amazes me at the lengths the handful of forum trolls go to try and convince everyone (including CCP) that they are the only ones who know the "truth". Same 5 turds every time too.

What would happen if those 25% suddenly disappeared from the game?

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
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#211 - 2012-08-03 03:37:09 UTC
Danny Diamonds wrote:
It amazes me at the lengths the handful of forum trolls go to try and convince everyone (including CCP) that they are the only ones who know the "truth". Same 5 turds every time too.
So there's you… and who are the other four?

You see, the rest of us don't try to convince anyone else that we know the truth — we just quote CCP's own numbers.

Those numbers show that 75% of players in EVE enjoy PvP and that PvE is less important to the game than owning an Apple computer is.
Freya Hrondulf
Beyond Frontier
Pandemic Horde
#212 - 2012-08-03 03:38:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Freya Hrondulf
Virgil Travis wrote:
Freya Hrondulf wrote:
nor can they deploy bubbles to catch people in warp..


They can't do that in low sec now


I know. Just emphasizing how few options there will be for pirates trying to pvp in lowsec.
Gritz1
Ice Fire Warriors
#213 - 2012-08-03 04:03:55 UTC
RABBLE RABBLE.

Also, this is not good what so ever. I could see low sec getting worse...
Bunolagus
NIPTO
#214 - 2012-08-03 04:12:32 UTC
What is the point of gate guns if they can be tanked? Highsec should be the place that Concord responds if someone fires on you. Lowsec should be the place where you can be fired on without Concord responding. And Nullsec should be the place where there is well, no security.

I would spend far more time running missions in lowsec if were not for gatecamps and station camps. Gatecamps are just not worth my effort to deal with. Station camps are ridiculous.

I understand there is risk in going to lowsec, but if that risk isn't reasonably manageable why should I bother?

It seems to me the purpose of sentry guns is to prevent pirates from shooting fish in a barrel. I welcome anything that breaks the bottle neck. Eliminate gatecamps and stationcamps in lowsec and I will spend most of my time there knowing that at any time I can get attacked without Concord's assistance.

The same people who lock down systems seem to be the same ones that complain about a lack of targets. If you want to lock down a system, move to null where systems were intended to be locked down.
Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#215 - 2012-08-03 04:12:42 UTC
Karl Planck wrote:
Klown Walk wrote:
I like it.


why do you like it, I am trying to understand Greyscale's reasoning

Let me help you.

DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#216 - 2012-08-03 04:14:36 UTC
Bunolagus wrote:
What is the point of gate guns if they can be tanked?
…so they should be removed from highsec, I suppose, since highsec gate guns are quite easy to tank.
Suqq Madiq
#217 - 2012-08-03 04:20:41 UTC
If only there was a way to have a cloaky neutral or OOC alt on one side of a gate and a fleet of pirats on the other side in a near-gate safe outside the grid and/or sentry gun range. Then, when the cloaky spots incoming targets, said fleet of pirats could warp to the gate and engage said targets.

However, I do realize that this is slightly more complicated than parking a Disco BS near the gate then rolling your face on your F1 key at the drop of a dime and that Pirats may actually have to work for a living and that's just not fair. Please reconsider CCP. Think of the Pirats.
Kiagon Fiero
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#218 - 2012-08-03 04:24:00 UTC
Bunolagus wrote:
What is the point of gate guns if they can be tanked? Highsec should be the place that Concord responds if someone fires on you. Lowsec should be the place where you can be fired on without Concord responding. And Nullsec should be the place where there is well, no security.

I would spend far more time running missions in lowsec if were not for gatecamps and station camps. Gatecamps are just not worth my effort to deal with. Station camps are ridiculous.

I understand there is risk in going to lowsec, but if that risk isn't reasonably manageable why should I bother?

It seems to me the purpose of sentry guns is to prevent pirates from shooting fish in a barrel. I welcome anything that breaks the bottle neck. Eliminate gatecamps and stationcamps in lowsec and I will spend most of my time there knowing that at any time I can get attacked without Concord's assistance.

The same people who lock down systems seem to be the same ones that complain about a lack of targets. If you want to lock down a system, move to null where systems were intended to be locked down.




You need to read the thread. These changes are going to make it easier for pirates to kill your PVE ship. You will be dead before the gate guns become an issue.

They are only going to discourage two gangs of PVP ships from enganging each other.
Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#219 - 2012-08-03 04:24:33 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Fal Dara wrote:

babies. get off the gates and go look around.


When two fleets are roaming, the most likely engagement place is on a gate.

-Liang

CCP don't play their own game, how could we expect them to know this?

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.
Chicken Pizza
One-man Armada
#220 - 2012-08-03 04:28:06 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
What would happen if those 25% suddenly disappeared from the game?


They wouldn't, just like every other whiner who threatens to unsub but is magically still playing.