These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

Hot drops and gate camps = lame pvp.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#141 - 2013-02-03 13:47:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Arduemont
Jealousy Asques wrote:
Stuff about not liking hot drops.


You sir, are in luck (I'm assuming your a sir).

Because there is already a solution to your problem. Don't like hot drops and gate camps? Then do your PvP in highsec or in WHs. All problems resolved.

This game is as varied as it is for a reason. If there is an element of PvP you don't like about a particular area of space, then move somewhere else where that element isn't present. People enjoy hot dropping, and frankly you can come out on top of being hot dropped fairly easily if your savy. Don't go asking CCP to change the space that it can happen in because there are already alternatives for you. Quit bitching, and start using your brain.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#142 - 2013-02-04 17:46:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Fon Revedhort
Arduemont wrote:
Jealousy Asques wrote:
Stuff about not liking hot drops.


You sir, are in luck (I'm assuming your a sir).

Because there is already a solution to your problem. Don't like hot drops and gate camps? Then do your PvP in highsec or in WHs. All problems resolved.

Did you personally use to stick to deadspace areas prohibiting MWD activation back when the game was all about nano? You must got really mad when The Great Nano Fix actually happened and made the game playable for all Big smile

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Apoc Baltar
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#143 - 2013-02-04 18:42:34 UTC
Jealousy Asques wrote:
Harry Inskipp wrote:
In all the history of mankind and warfare, there have been very few occurrences of "fair" PVP. The Huns, the Mongols, the *****, the Allies, the U.S. Cavalry. The all won battles through the use of unfair tactics. Also when Seal Team 6 took out Bin Laden they did a hot drop that was incredibly unfair.

So don't expect anything different in imagination-land.



So... We should just introduce a new ship. A Death-Star that was designed with no exploitable vulnerabilities (stupid vader!) and can warp around the galaxy annihilating planets and fleets at will. It's just another mechanic like hot dropping, and we shouldnt limit how people play, right?

You have to draw the line somewhere, and hot dropping is just too easy. At least make the cyno take longer to set up, and limit the number of ships that can come through. They could still "chain-cyno" and get just as many people there, it would just take longer, not *blink* +40 ships pew pew *blink* empty space + debris.


Have you even seen Star Wars?
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#144 - 2013-02-04 18:54:03 UTC
DrunkenNinja wrote:
I agree with you on some points OP.
The game is definately still amazing and fun, but over emphasis on gatecamps and the abundancy of "hotdrops" and other mechanics could use a tweak.

tweak it somehow and in a few months people would complain about something else.


"fairness" and "pvp honesty" is all nice and dandy, but you people forget about how risk-adverse humans are. there will always be someone who brings a gun to the knife fight.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#145 - 2013-02-04 18:57:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Cearain
Jealousy Asques wrote:
I generally love pvp games, the more hardcore the better, but I've lost interest in EVE... The extent of nullsec pvp is pretty much what the title says. Hot drops as far as I'm concerned are pretty much game breaking, a very cheesy, lame and over-used tactic. The hot droppers can pick their fights for very little risk and it almost always results in one sided battles. How do they contribute to epic space battles, what this game should be about? They don't. In intermediate/newb friendly corps one hot dropper capable ship shows up in your system and everyone is told to dock up for safety. Can't risk your precious kill boards! How fun is that? It's not!

At the very least there should be a limit on how much mass or the number of ships that can hot drop through one cyno field (3-4 cruisers, 2 battleships/ 1 carrier maybe at most), and they should not be able to escape by the same method (or log out for that matter) for a very long time.

Hisec war-dec pvp where hotdrops can't happen is alot more fun and fair, but very few people do it. Established pirate corps & pros do it, and other intermediate corps run and hide from it.

Even in hisec though pvp is largely about gate camps. I don't see them as quite as lame as hot-dropping, but it's still pretty weak, and boring 95% of the time if you're the one doing it. I don't know what would have to change to fix this dynamic but I think the game would benefit from some mechanic that reduced the need to camp gates, and the effectiveness of it. Right now the game feels more like a bunch of narrow hallways and bottlenecks rather than deep space.

Imo jumpgates should be done away with entirely except for possibly jumping from region to region. With bottlenecks removed, scanning could possibly be made more effective and accessible to everyone (not just a dedicated scanning ship, though those should still have an advantage) to make it easier to find fights. IE people shouldnt have to give up a hardpoint to be able to scan people down.

I certainly don't know everything, and maybe these are bad ideas, but I do know that the title of my thread sums up the game for me.


Gate camps and hot drops are indeed lame and a good reason not to pvp in null sec.

Go to faction war space and fight in and around plexes. You don't need to be in faction war to do this and actually you will get more fights by not joining fw, but still fighting in the plexes.

No hotdrops in plexes. Cant camp plex gates. No gate guns or sentry guns in or outside the plexes. Just excellent small scale pvp.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#146 - 2013-02-04 19:00:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Grimpak
Jealousy Asques wrote:
You have to draw the line somewhere, and hot dropping is just too easy. At least make the cyno take longer to set up, and limit the number of ships that can come through. They could still "chain-cyno" and get just as many people there, it would just take longer, not *blink* +40 ships pew pew *blink* empty space + debris.


let me break that mechanic for you:


5 cynos pop up.

well yeah you counter with a "but you should limit the number of cynos per grid!"

sure, but how will you limit it?
you'll make it only one per grid independently of whoever is on grid? exploitable. one side pops up a cyno on grid and now you just artificially blocked capital access to your enemy. pretty much borderline unbalanced exploit there.
you'll make it only one per corp per grid? bring another corp to light up a 2nd cyno.
you'll make it only one per alliance per grid? bring an npc alt or an out-of-alliance to light up a 2nd cyno.

there, broke your suggestion.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Whitehound
#147 - 2013-02-04 19:51:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Grimpak wrote:
Jealousy Asques wrote:
You have to draw the line somewhere, and hot dropping is just too easy. At least make the cyno take longer to set up, and limit the number of ships that can come through. They could still "chain-cyno" and get just as many people there, it would just take longer, not *blink* +40 ships pew pew *blink* empty space + debris.


let me break that mechanic for you:


5 cynos pop up.

well yeah you counter with a "but you should limit the number of cynos per grid!"

sure, but how will you limit it?
you'll make it only one per grid independently of whoever is on grid? exploitable. one side pops up a cyno on grid and now you just artificially blocked capital access to your enemy. pretty much borderline unbalanced exploit there.
you'll make it only one per corp per grid? bring another corp to light up a 2nd cyno.
you'll make it only one per alliance per grid? bring an npc alt or an out-of-alliance to light up a 2nd cyno.

there, broke your suggestion.

It may need something like an anti-cyno ship or an anti-cyno bubble to create an area in space where a cyno can not be lit. It seems unfair to me when 0.0 sov mechanic allows alliances to set up cyno blockers for entire systems, and in low-sec everyone gets trolled by 0.0 alliances with hot drops and where no one has got an option to prevent against it. Especially young alliances will first practise hot drops on low-sec gangs before daring it anyone in 0.0. Low-sec gets bend over more than it is reasonable.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#148 - 2013-02-04 20:37:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Grimpak
Whitehound wrote:
It may need something like an anti-cyno ship or an anti-cyno bubble to create an area in space where a cyno can not be lit. It seems unfair to me when 0.0 sov mechanic allows alliances to set up cyno blockers for entire systems, and in low-sec everyone gets trolled by 0.0 alliances with hot drops and where no one has got an option to prevent against it. Especially young alliances will first practise hot drops on low-sec gangs before daring it anyone in 0.0. Low-sec gets bend over more than it is reasonable.



yes but, if you notice, hard caps in this game usually leads to hard-to-close exploits.

atm anti-cyno ships would only be sorta balanced if they shut down cynos on the grid (or system) for everybody, and that means you, your enemy and any 3rd, 4th or 5th party or anybody else that decides to join the fray. beyond that, the only way to limit anything in this game is to make it less desirable, for example, yon olde nerfhammer.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right
Whitehound
#149 - 2013-02-04 21:09:25 UTC
Grimpak wrote:
yes but, if you notice, hard caps in this game usually leads to hard-to-close exploits.

atm anti-cyno ships would only be sorta balanced if they shut down cynos on the grid (or system) for everybody, and that means you, your enemy and any 3rd, 4th or 5th party or anybody else that decides to join the fray. beyond that, the only way to limit anything in this game is to make it less desirable, for example, yon olde nerfhammer.

They should not have given cyno jammers to 0.0 folks, because it makes 0.0 partially saver than low-sec, which is inconsistent with the level of security (high > low > null).

An anti-cyno ship would then have an area of effect of perhaps 75km simply to avoid a hot drop right into the middle of a fleet where otherwise everyone just bumps into everyone and it is a total chaos. Being able to define a small strategic area where your own fleet can sit save from a direct hot drop might already be enough to make this more interesting.

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#150 - 2013-02-05 13:48:51 UTC
Whitehound wrote:

An anti-cyno ship would then have an area of effect of perhaps 75km simply to avoid a hot drop right into the middle of a fleet where otherwise everyone just bumps into everyone and it is a total chaos. Being able to define a small strategic area where your own fleet can sit save from a direct hot drop might already be enough to make this more interesting.

It's really ironic how you propose a tool which will be of a greater availability for larger gangs and fleets while the thing suffering most is small-scale PvP.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Morganta
The Greater Goon
#151 - 2013-02-05 15:28:03 UTC
getting dropped on is fun

got a t1 cruiser fleet into a 3-way and then got dropped by both eve uni and PL in the same fight over the weekend in egg
great times were had

I see nothing wrong with it, it just sucks you have to schlep to lowsec or sov to get in on the fun

really, you bears gotta get into the action, solo dieing to gate camps is silly when you can lern 2 fly and get into a good pvp corp
its not rocket science, its not fps, hell, Michael J Fox could probably pvp like a baws and you know he has issues...
Whitehound
#152 - 2013-02-05 21:09:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Whitehound wrote:

An anti-cyno ship would then have an area of effect of perhaps 75km simply to avoid a hot drop right into the middle of a fleet where otherwise everyone just bumps into everyone and it is a total chaos. Being able to define a small strategic area where your own fleet can sit save from a direct hot drop might already be enough to make this more interesting.

It's really ironic how you propose a tool which will be of a greater availability for larger gangs and fleets while the thing suffering most is small-scale PvP.

Think before you post!!

What you just wrote is true for almost anything in EVE. Weapons, e-war, ships, ... Roll

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Mike AntHunt
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#153 - 2013-02-05 21:37:47 UTC
Jealousy Asques wrote:
The hot droppers can pick their fights for very little risk and it almost always results in one sided battles. How do they contribute to epic space battles, what this game should be about? .


You obviously haven't heard of any successful small gang pvp corporations. Corporations like SPDR and alliances like rooks and kings are two examples. If you are in a corporation that can utilize ships to their advantage, even with small numbers and facing a massive enemy force, the gang can come out on top. It takes training, practice ( including death ) and people with the balls to go out there and lay it all on the line. If you want to experience good PvP, find the right corporation. Do your research on them before joining them. Everyone has the same tools available to them. It's how you use those tools that determines wins. Not numbers.
Lord LazyGhost
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#154 - 2013-02-06 09:06:48 UTC
Make gates jump u to a random part of the system. Could also do that for cynos 2 would stop the installation hot drop of death at the same time
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#155 - 2013-02-06 09:15:13 UTC
Revman Zim wrote:
Looking at the kill that supposedly started this thread, I am going to guess that it was a Black Ops fleet drop.

Having participated in those fleets in the past, I can say that they are not easy. You have to scout a system and find a target. That target has to be STUPID enough to stay in one spot (even though our scout shows in local) long enough for the scout to decloak, pop a cyno and for all of us to jump in, point, scram, kill and GTFO before the calvary is called.

Skill intensive, nerve wracking, long waits for small rewards, exhilirating when it works out.

But the key is the target has to be STUPID.






P.S. You were killed in NULLSEC. There is this place with rainbows, unicorns and NO CYNO's.. it is called HISEC.






"Long waits for small rewards"

Tell me, who is the winner in that engagement?


Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Moonasha
Orcses and Goblinz
#156 - 2013-02-06 09:27:52 UTC
Jealousy Asques wrote:
How do they contribute to epic space battles, what this game should be about?.


found your problem. Eve isn't about epic space battles. It's about pvp. Epic space battles are one part of that.
Kashmyta
HC - gizmos Gizco
#157 - 2013-02-06 10:29:55 UTC
Jealousy Asques wrote:


waa waaa waaaa

.


Why are you so angry? I don't know what is more annoying, your post or this song?

click
Whitehound
#158 - 2013-02-06 10:47:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Whitehound
Moonasha wrote:
Jealousy Asques wrote:
How do they contribute to epic space battles, what this game should be about?.


found your problem. Eve isn't about epic space battles. It's about pvp. Epic space battles are one part of that.

Take a look at this picture.

If you see nothing wrong with that then it is because you lack imagination.

Battles do not have to be like this - a ball of ships. It is in fact the most boring scenario a space battle can have. There is no formation and no tactics in there. Everyone simply jumps onto one spot and the one with the most ships wins.

Being able to avoid hot drops even if only within a small radius would open up the fights for new tactics where range, speed and agility of ships come into play again.

It is then no surprise when smartbombs have become one of the top damage dealers in such fights. What happened to falloff, optimal range and tracking of turrets, the range of missiles, etc.? All these attributes have no meaning at this point.

Take a second look at the picture. You still think this is fine?

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#159 - 2013-02-06 11:05:22 UTC
Whitehound wrote:
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Whitehound wrote:

An anti-cyno ship would then have an area of effect of perhaps 75km simply to avoid a hot drop right into the middle of a fleet where otherwise everyone just bumps into everyone and it is a total chaos. Being able to define a small strategic area where your own fleet can sit save from a direct hot drop might already be enough to make this more interesting.

It's really ironic how you propose a tool which will be of a greater availability for larger gangs and fleets while the thing suffering most is small-scale PvP.

Think before you post!!

What you just wrote is true for almost anything in EVE. Weapons, e-war, ships, ... Roll

And that's why you want to widen the gap even further instead of just addressing the mechanics itself?

The concept of one ship providing equal flat bonuses to a small gang and to a fleet is flawed from the beginning. Happily, most ships provide % benefits.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Whitehound
#160 - 2013-02-06 11:18:38 UTC
Fon Revedhort wrote:
And that's why you want to widen the gap even further instead of just addressing the mechanics itself?

The concept of one ship providing equal flat bonuses to a small gang and to a fleet is flawed from the beginning. Happily, most ships provide % benefits.

You have no idea what you are talking about. You have again posted some meaningless phrase of no content and have stopped making a connection to what is being said here.

Stop with the whining and think before posting!

Loss is meaningful. Therefore is the loss of meaning likewise meaningful. It is the source of all trolling.