These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
#321 - 2012-08-03 14:48:56 UTC
Gate guns should do scaled damage based on NUMBER OF SHIPS ON GRID!

That would wreck havoc to large gate camps while promoting small scale warfare.. even god forbids ... SOLO PVP!!!!!!!
Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#322 - 2012-08-03 14:50:34 UTC
Seishi Maru wrote:
Gate guns should do scaled damage based on NUMBER OF SHIPS ON GRID!

That would wreck havoc to large gate camps while promoting small scale warfare.. even god forbids ... SOLO PVP!!!!!!!


you bears are just hilarious

I has all the eve inactivity
Blackfiredaemon
Space Men
#323 - 2012-08-03 14:51:42 UTC
Throwing my support behind not implementing this ****.
Capitol One
Blue Canary
Watch This
#324 - 2012-08-03 14:52:14 UTC
Bullz3y3 wrote:
Great! Now take it the rest of the way and make below -0.5 unable to dock in empire. Want to be a pirate? No empire space for you. Also no recycling of low security alts, or at least a month wait with a lockout while waiting to biomass it.


If you wanted to go that way, then it would make more sense to base it off the current system of Faction police shooting you based on sec status.

Players with -2.0 or worse will be attacked in 1.0 systems
Players with -2.5 or worse will be attacked in 0.9 systems
Players with -3.0 or worse will be attacked in 0.8 systems
Players with -3.5 or worse will be attacked in 0.7 systems
Players with -4.0 or worse will be attacked in 0.6 systems
Players with -4.5 or worse will be attacked in 0.5 systems

So basically change "will be attacked" to "can't dock"
Bloutok
Perkone
Caldari State
#325 - 2012-08-03 14:52:48 UTC
I love it.

Standing now means something.
Prez21
D-sync
D-sync.
#326 - 2012-08-03 15:02:10 UTC
Im not really sure what to make of this, after reading most of this thread all ive seen is idiots who dont understand how this will affect pvp telling others to HTFU while not even listening to what others post about how this will affect gameplay as a whole. One argument i noticed was people saying that when sentry guns were first introduced, they was introduced to stop people camping gates, but with the evolution and changes to ships in eve they have become a little redundant at thier jobs, but couldnt the same be said for level 4 missions? These werent meant to be ran solo but we all know that most people do.

Ok last start, point 1, people who believe these changes will encourage more people to go into low sec are wrong, why would they? The rewards are marginally better at much a greater risk and most people who stay in high sec do so because of the almost risk free style of play it allows and the ok rewards with minimal effort. So first thing ccp needs to look at is the risk vs rewards of all the areas of eve. Null sec is generally a lot safer for isk making than low sec and the rewards are much higher. High sec is virtually risk free and has very good rewards that can be done solo, how is this right? Why should one person be able to make really good isk solo with virtually no risk? This all needs changing.

Gate camping is often seen by many as a poor excuse for pvp and is just pirates or other so called pvpers ganking noobs etc but gate camps often lead to some of the best pvp. The problem most people have in this game is that they dont want to do anything properly, they dont want to work as a team, they dont want to scout systems, they dont want to form well set up fleets to kill these gate campers, they want risk free isk that they can get solo. Any decently set up corp could live very comfy in any area of eve but most people arent willing to put the effort in.

To get more people in to low sec CCP needs to address the rewards available in these low sec areas. Its so much easier for any newly formed alliance or growing corp to go rent 0.0 systems from any of the major power blocs and make isk that way then to live and grow in low sec until they are strong enough to forge their own path in 0.0 or any other areas of EVE.

I would really like to see CCP decrease the rewards in high sec, not by lots just enough to encourage people to look at alternatives, Increase low sec rewards, give people, corps and alliances a reason to live there. Change missions, make the higher level missions harder but more rewarding but where you will need a group. Decrease npcs in missions but make them act and work like small fleets like in pvp, make them smarter, this way low se mission runners could fit there pve ships like they would for pvp so they would be ready to fight if any hostiles warped in on them, make the npcs pick out any targets of oppurunity so they might shoot the new hostiles on the field. I know alot of people complained about missions in low sec because there pve fits were to easy to be ganked by hostiiles, this could help with that
Tarra Nobilii
Doomheim
#327 - 2012-08-03 15:07:37 UTC
If this proposal is true, it is terrible. Of all the things needing fixed, this would not be a high priority from my perspective. Rather than adjust gate gun damage, as indicated in some of these posts...how about doing something regarding hotdrops. Bridging in 20 Megas, multiple caps, or some other composition is a major buzzkill for 'normal pvp'; referencing those who fly around with bait cynos. Such activity, while completely within the rules, is something that greatly discourages pvp in low sec areas. For starter corps, just entering low sec, it is challenging to get a 'foothold' when they are brutally crushed by the power of Titans.

Overall, this proposal seems to be a consistent theme in recent history, where there is a quiet push to get all veteran players to nul. I do not like nul, I dont want to live in nul, and would appreciate a 'sandbox' experience where I can call a region my home (low, high, or nul). The key component of this is the ability for me to choose. Altering rules for a desired result simply annoys the hell out of some veteran players. I agree with all of the prior comments; this will simply get veteran players to find ways to adapt. Again, we can only speculate at the intent of these changes...but I see no point in encouraging carebears to enter low sec who have no interest in (or ability in) pvp. If you want the risk-reward payoff...altering gate guns (in this proposed way) is not consistent with this paradigm. Low sec people are already penalized by their sec status (unlike most nul sec and wormhole residents), denying us access to high. The low sec income is rather poor as well. It is the small gang and hunting that makes it a unique experience and fun.
Virgil Travis
Non Constructive Self Management
#328 - 2012-08-03 15:11:04 UTC
Generals4 wrote:
Maybe this is a plan to get more people in FW? Afterall we can shoot folks in low without getting a sec status hit or going gcc.


They'd better learn quickly then that not everybody in low sec is interested in FW, it's one part of the game and not something we should have to do so we can get the best out of low sec.

Unified Church of the Unobligated - madness in the method Mamma didn't raise no victims.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#329 - 2012-08-03 15:22:51 UTC
Has it even been revealed what this was intended to "fix" in the first place? Was it titans smartbombing gates, or lowsec having a "low population", or ... what? Greyfail has said it was just a "spitball idea" but what prompted you to start generating these ideas in the first place? What exactly do you think the issue is?
Othran
Route One
#330 - 2012-08-03 15:24:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Othran
This isn't going to get more people in low-sec.

Nor will it cause more people to stay in low-sec.

If the issue is high<->low gates then make the gates regional-sized gates.

Without large bubbles regional gates require significant effort to camp due to the size of the gate radius.

It is obviously possible to catch everything that comes through a regional gate but its a lot harder to KILL everything that comes through. In addition if you setup to catch/kill everything then more options exist for breaking up your camp.

Ramping sentry gun DPS will do bugger all to stop camps, it never has before and it won't now.

Use of carriers in low-sec is fine, there's plenty counters to that, lost count of the number of carriers I've seen die in low-sec.

Use of supers/titans in low-sec isn't fine, better off addressing that ****. If you can't build it in low-sec then you cant use it in low-sec should be the rule of thumb. That won't happen though.
Sunrise Omega
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#331 - 2012-08-03 15:25:29 UTC
Hiyora Akachi wrote:
Just do this at the .4 High sec entries and leave the rest of the guns as they are.

Less people will Rage n' Unsub because they have to go hunting.


There definitely needs to be a more gradual entry into low-sec rather then 0.5 = nice and fluffly, 0.4 = you can get ganked right as you enter. I wouldn't mind seeing a boost in the number of sentry guns at the gates on the border systems, gradually wearing away to no guns at all in 0.0. This already happens somewhat, but even in 0.4, the number of guns on the gate or the DPS they do is simply not enough to make it a less risky entry point.

But in 0.3, 0.2 and 0.1 systems? Those guns should stay as-is.

The number of guns on the gate should be reflective of what the gate links to. A 0.5-0.4 gate should have more guns on the 0.4 side then a 0.4-0.3 gate.

Let the NPCs join the arms race that has been going on ever since scaps/titans were added.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#332 - 2012-08-03 15:27:05 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...


25% and 75% are far too rounded numbers to ever be taken seriously as real... Stop nut hugging ccp and realize that this is a deplorable idea at best, at worst it's an obvious concoction of true mongoloids.
Karl Planck
Perkone
Caldari State
#333 - 2012-08-03 15:27:08 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Has it even been revealed what this was intended to "fix" in the first place? Was it titans smartbombing gates, or lowsec having a "low population", or ... what? Greyfail has said it was just a "spitball idea" but what prompted you to start generating these ideas in the first place? What exactly do you think the issue is?


prompted?

1) code was open to touch for the first time in a very long time so they thought about how they would poke it.
2) Wanted to discourage gate camping (which apperently is fine in every form except at a few lowsec gates)
3) wanted to increase "active" fights on gates

I has all the eve inactivity
Mag's
Azn Empire
#334 - 2012-08-03 15:31:49 UTC
lol

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Strider Hiryu
Insane Shadow Boxers
#335 - 2012-08-03 15:33:45 UTC
Virgil Travis wrote:
Generals4 wrote:
Maybe this is a plan to get more people in FW? Afterall we can shoot folks in low without getting a sec status hit or going gcc.


They'd better learn quickly then that not everybody in low sec is interested in FW, it's one part of the game and not something we should have to do so we can get the best out of low sec.


I 100% agree with this post.
My first PVP experience were with FW.
It was great!
Now I am a pirate.
Sure FW needs a buff, but CCP have gone in the wrong direction of making FW lowsecs big reward.
FW should not be the focus of lowsec.
Piracy should be.


The one thing that pisses me off about this stupid idea is:

We have 2 gangs:
1 pirate gang camping a gate
1 anti pirate gang that wants to bust up the gate camp

Both gangs being equal, who will win?
The anti pirate gang will, because they have sentries on their side.

Why does CCP want to reward un-orangised, lazy, childish, immature scrubs with this stupid game mechanic changes?
Is it their goal to drive away long term loyal players?


How about fixing the bounty system before coming up with ******** **** like this!
Muad 'dib
State War Academy
Caldari State
#336 - 2012-08-03 15:37:34 UTC
If this sheer craziness goes ahead, i do hope ccp plan to RAPIDLY boost the means to fix sec stat in low sec.

Risk vs reward? seems a bit broken with this stuff, esp the auto shoot outlaws weather gcc or not <- OMG so stupid

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.
Brewlar Kuvakei
Adeptio Gloriae
#337 - 2012-08-03 15:40:15 UTC
If CCP want to put people in Low sec they need to increase the rewards not decreases the risk. Allow bigger pay outs for low sec ded and missions. To be fair doing PVE in low sec is much more dangerous than Null sec so why does null get a greater pay out?

In null you can sit behind bubbles in a cyno jammed system where as in low anyone can enter you mission/ded and tackle you.
Skippermonkey
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#338 - 2012-08-03 15:43:26 UTC
So you want more players in losec?

The majority of players in this game are risk averse, the riskier the activity, the more reward is expected to even consider doing it

How about you slightly lower hisec mission income from bounties and increase the bounties on rats in losec.

This makes sense as you seem to want to move pvp away from the gates and into the belts and celestials.

Give people more reasons to actually want to be in losec

COME AT ME BRO

I'LL JUST BE DOCKED IN THIS STATION
Hammer Borne
Doomheim
#339 - 2012-08-03 15:44:20 UTC
Strider Hiryu wrote:
...*snipped*

Why does CCP want to reward un-orangised, lazy, childish, immature scrubs with this stupid game mechanic changes?


Maybe because their attitude isn't as ****** as yours? Emotional posts and temper tantrums didn't get you far with mommy and it won't help much here either.

Using terms like "Scrubs" only shows your extreme lack of maturity toward fellow players.
Bullz3y3
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#340 - 2012-08-03 15:44:42 UTC
You shouldn't have a way to rapidly fix sec status. You committed a crime. Just like allowing pirates to dock in ANY empire sec, it shouldn't happen. Go base in null and travel to low for raids. Like you want hi sec dwellers to do. Its lazy and stupid that a empire would let you camp gates in their territory.