These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[PROPOSAL] What happens in lowsec stays in lowsec – Lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP

Author
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#181 - 2012-02-09 16:24:52 UTC
The rules need to be simple. Both the current ones, and the ones I suggested are: you see the target on overview, you see the background color, you know whether the sentries will open up if you shoot. If it depends on where the gate leads, the exact sec status of people involved, or the system sec, it will only cause confusion and frustration. Hell, you'd be surprised how many times I've jumped into highsec by accident.

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644

Plutonian
Intransigent
#182 - 2012-02-09 16:48:10 UTC
Forums ate my post because I was lazy and didn't copy before posting. Evil Short version follows:

Jack Dant wrote:
Raimo's suggestion in the first page would actually fix your problem better: cap sec loss, but keep sentry/gcc mechanics unchanged. Then us proper outlaws keep our chance to get fights without sentries, while gates are safe-ish for everyone else. My problem with that, is that I foresee more standoffs on gates as two gangs dare each other into aggressing first.

While I would personally be fine with Raimo's suggestion, I felt that it was too harsh towards the current pirates. Those who wanted to be flashy red... they'd probably not care. But those who went pirate because there were a lot of targets that day, or due to the FW-aggression-RR mechanics would probably be pissed.

I understand your frustration over gangs meeting at gates and having to jockey to see who gets the guns on 'em. I've never been outlaw, but follow pirate blogs, and I see the stuff you guys deal with. It sucks.

I'm asking that any solution remember the little guys starting out in solo PvP. It is imperative to keep the gates/travel lanes as open and free for them as possible. When I lose a frig to a gatecamp, it's no big deal... I have billions (of isk, not frigs). When the same happens to them, it can be the event that turns them away from solo, PvP, or even Eve itself.

When I have to rat up my SS it's pretty easy. Before it gets too bad I just do some L4's in a Marauder (I can fly them all with perfect skills) and presto! back to fighting in short order. These new guys are generally on level one missions...ugh. They cannot repair their SS as fast.

We need new blood in lowsec, and we have to get those pilots from somewhere. It's probably not going to come from nullsec (and if it does it'd come with cap shipsUgh), so I feel we need to reach out to Empire. And that means keeping things easy for the casual new players.
Plutonian
Intransigent
#183 - 2012-02-09 16:51:42 UTC
Jack Dant wrote:
The rules need to be simple. Both the current ones, and the ones I suggested are: you see the target on overview, you see the background color, you know whether the sentries will open up if you shoot. If it depends on where the gate leads, the exact sec status of people involved, or the system sec, it will only cause confusion and frustration. Hell, you'd be surprised how many times I've jumped into highsec by accident.


I agree completely. Things must be kept as simple as possible.
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#184 - 2012-02-09 19:57:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Bloodpetal
I guess I'm fine with this idea to an extent - I don't think the major issue of gate guns is going to be resolved with a low security cap of -2. All that'll happen is that some people will keep their sec status above 0.0 to get gate guns on their side. I sure will as I live in Low Sec.

I don't think negative sec status should go red. It needs to stay at -5.0. Make the low cap for low sec PVP -2.0 sec status. No "GCC" for being negative until you hit negative 5, as it already is. That alone makes PVP in Low Sec more appealing, but with enough penalties and enough risk for certain things.


Now, what I do like about this is that it stops me from going deep -10 for doing PVP in low sec. And it will promote some fly by weekend high seccers to go into low sec PVP and not feel like they'll suffer severe penalties.

That part of the proposal alone is solid.


Good ideas, I think they're a step in the right direction philosophically.

Where I am.

Zedrik Cayne
Standards and Practices
#185 - 2012-02-09 20:38:29 UTC
I would very much like this immediately.

+1

I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon

Plutonian
Intransigent
#186 - 2012-02-09 21:45:40 UTC
I'm a bit odd... I've always been one of those strange 'fair-fights' type people. But you know what? Even I have my limits. Do it. Push it through. It's going to be amazing. I have a positive sec status. So once the changes are in, here's what I'm going to do:

I will select a ship with good tank and decent scan resolution. I will sit on entry gates into lowsec... I will sit right on the gate at zero. I figure the Jel gate in Egghelende will work nicely.

When Random Joe the Rifter pilot comes through, if he's got a sec status below zero, I'll lock and pop him. BOOM BABY! I camped and didn't even lose any sec status!! If I'm smart I'll have an alt to warp in with a cheap Probe w/cargo expanders and scoop the loot. I'll keep my camping ship safe at zero on the gate... can't lose much that way. Random Joe can watch me loot his wreck as he slowboats back to the gate (he's quite safe... I won't pop his pod because I'm riding on the Gravy Train and have no intention of screwing something this nice up!).

When Bob the Builder jumps in I'll let him pass... he's got a sec status of 2.3

When the guy Rum Runner (SS -0.04) jumps his transport in, I'll see if I can grab that guy. Thank goodness I don't have to worry about sentry guns... I'm the Golden Boy as far as CONCORD is concerned, out doing the Lord's work. Amen and Hallelujah.

Now you're a nasty ebil piwate lurking in the depths of Egghelende system, and you don't like me grabbing up all this choice loot. So you jump in your Jaguar, fling yourself at the gate (hoping you can get some shots in before I jump safely to Empire where you can't touch me) aaannnnddddd..... SURPRISE! I just sit there. Perhaps I mock you in local. Because you cannot attack me without the guns murdering your shiny Jag.

So you say "OK... everyone get in some Hurricanes!" And your group warps to the gate. I simply press the Jump button and I'm gone. You cannot follow me. I'll either move to another entry gate (easy... I don't even require bookmarks as I sit at zero), or go and sort all my loot until you get tired of waiting. Then I'll be back at it.

I'll do the same when your alpha Maelstrom shows up at 80k. Boop! I'm back through the gate and safe. Can't get me!

Hmmm, you think... this isn't working out. Maybe if you get some positive sec status people to engage me. WRONG! If they attack me, they have to be big enough to tank the guns which will be on my side, and that means they'll be somewhat slow. And I can escape at any point. NO ONE can hit me now! I've become the perfect gate camper. I'm making billions and hardly risking anything.

And here's the neat thing: so far I've just been doing it by myself or with an alt. Imagine what I'll be able to accomplish with a couple of friends, also with positive sec status. My only concern is that, after a while, there won't be too many people jumping through with bad sec status... eventually they'll seek out another gate... which means their loot won't go to me, but to someone else doing exactly what I'm doing.

But hey, that means they'll have plenty of time to hang out in Empire and grind their SS up.

I cannot believe all the time I've wasted in Eve running around looking for fights in belts. What a fool I've been.



(Note: I've actually never camped a gate. Did I get the mechanics right for this scenario?)
Jack Dant
The Gentlemen of Low Moral Fibre
#187 - 2012-02-10 12:09:52 UTC
You missed the part where you are easy to bait. A rifter with -1 sec status jumps in, you aggro. Inmediately, his six friends in hurricanes who were waiting on the other side of the gate jump in and gank you before you can deaggro and jump.

Ah, but I will have a scout watching on the other side, you say. Ok, then instead of waiting on that side of the gate, they will be on another gate a short warp distance from it. And then, you need another scout on that system. So instead they wait at a safespot just outside scan range from the gate. Egghelende is a busy system, so you won't notice they are there.

Now, since your tanky ship got popped a few times, you get a cloaky logistics ship (T3 works best) to help you deaggro.

But by then, you have 3-4 accounts involved, probably in excess of 1b invested in ships. And the only thing you can kill is T1 frigs, industrials, and if you are feeling brave, cruisers. While being a target for every PVPer in the area who will spend nights figuring out ways to trap you.

These people exist, they are incredibly hard to catch. But the feeling when you do...

What happens in lowsec, stays in lowsec, lowering the barrier to entry to lowsec PVP: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=476644&#post476644

Plutonian
Intransigent
#188 - 2012-02-11 04:50:43 UTC
Jack, I have to disagree with your proposal.

In addition, I created an alternate proposal in this same forum category. The reason for this is I feel your proposal only moderates (caps) a SS punishment which should not occur in the first place. It also allows pirates more targets on gates, which I feel scares off the casual Empire crowd.

FWIW, since Jan 2007 I've been fighting to get more pilots from Empire to come out and fight solo in lowsec. That's five years of this (possibly hopeless) battle. It bothers me to see anything proposed which makes travel more dangerous for those pilots, because I believe they are the salvation of lowsec... new, fresh blood. Your proposal has gathered a great deal of support (most from -10 pirates I must note) and a great deal of press (due to our Eve Election period). My posting of the Alternate Lowsec Fix is simply my way to at least throw out a view from the side of the solo lowsec PvP pilot. I would be remiss if I did not speak up against something I disagree with.

If it dies quietly, I can say "Hey, I tried."

No hard feelings (at least on this side) either way.
Mintrolio
Doomheim
#189 - 2012-02-12 05:45:48 UTC
CONFRIMIGN I AM LIKE IDEA VER MUCH,.

I AM THINKIGN WHEN I AM GET ON CSM, WE AM NEEDIGN TO TALK TO GET THESE IDEA INTO WIDRE FRAMEWORKS FOR REVEIWS OF ALL DEC / SEC \ BOUNTY SYSTIMS. THESE MAY BECOMIGN PART OF MINE PLATFORM MOVE FORWARDS.

KEEP UP GOOD THINKIGN !
TFirish3
Apollo's Rising
#190 - 2012-02-12 19:58:29 UTC
Well done, Jack. This accounts perfectly for 99% of people's problems with lowsec pvp -- the sec status and travel restrictions. Would love to see this implemented, hope CCP is listening.

http://www.rollinseveride.blogspot.com

Corelin
The Fancy Hats Corporation
#191 - 2012-02-13 17:34:39 UTC
Mintrolio wrote:
CONFRIMIGN I AM LIKE IDEA VER MUCH,.

I AM THINKIGN WHEN I AM GET ON CSM, WE AM NEEDIGN TO TALK TO GET THESE IDEA INTO WIDRE FRAMEWORKS FOR REVEIWS OF ALL DEC / SEC \ BOUNTY SYSTIMS. THESE MAY BECOMIGN PART OF MINE PLATFORM MOVE FORWARDS.

KEEP UP GOOD THINKIGN !


You know you've arrived when Mintrolio shows up.
Baaa Shakiel
Kinnah Incorporated
#192 - 2012-02-13 17:39:08 UTC
Tahna Rouspel wrote:
This is something I want.

The security penalty is the reason I don't pvp in low sec.


^ This is why I made an Alt to PvP in Lo-sec, It's a pain, but It's working as intended... CCP please listen to OP!

Who Said that Noob Ships SuCK? http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/killmail.php?id=15091146#lostLoadout

Buddy Program Available - Start off with Millions of Isk! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=9874&p=10

BIGTEX123
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#193 - 2012-02-14 00:57:00 UTC
Just getting into low-sec PvP lately and I have to say it's real fun, but the whole standings hit system really curtails my blood thirst since I live in high sec. +1
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#194 - 2012-02-14 05:24:04 UTC
If it was to be 'locked' at -2.0 you are essentially making LS pew a 100% consequence free activity which goes against everything real and virtual .. drop it to -3.5 (attacked in 0.7 systems) and it would still make RP sense, still allow people access to high-sec but bar them from polite society (read: hubs, trade lanes).

Would personally want to see Concord/Navy auto-response to negatives replaced with KillRights transferrals and rat type bounties paid for killing them .. the only mechanic limits on negatives in high-sec should be inability to use links, cloaks and other 'advanced' tactics.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#195 - 2012-02-14 09:46:15 UTC
TFirish3 wrote:
Well done, Jack. This accounts perfectly for 99% of people's problems with lowsec pvp -- the sec status and travel restrictions. Would love to see this implemented, hope CCP is listening.


My biggest problem with low sec PvP is the use of a vast amount of alts to scout and gather intel risk free. Toss in the local chat and cloaky T3's and you have a stage set for by far the most risk adverse players that have ever played any game. Always running at the first sign that one of them might take a round of antimatter.

Another example of what happens when far too much information is available with no risk for players to use. "Wait what? You mean it wont be a 100% risk free gank?! **** that ****. EVERYONE WARP OUT AND GET SAFE NOW!!!" - 99% of EVE Online Players
Vaurion Infara
Doomheim
#196 - 2012-02-14 12:16:21 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
If it was to be 'locked' at -2.0 you are essentially making LS pew a 100% consequence free activity which goes against everything real and virtual .. drop it to -3.5 (attacked in 0.7 systems) and it would still make RP sense, still allow people access to high-sec but bar them from polite society (read: hubs, trade lanes).



Then explain to me how highsec mission griefing or trade channel scamming would be tolerated in 'polite society'.

this is it

Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#197 - 2012-02-14 14:30:23 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
TFirish3 wrote:
Well done, Jack. This accounts perfectly for 99% of people's problems with lowsec pvp -- the sec status and travel restrictions. Would love to see this implemented, hope CCP is listening.


My biggest problem with low sec PvP is the use of a vast amount of alts to scout and gather intel risk free. Toss in the local chat and cloaky T3's and you have a stage set for by far the most risk adverse players that have ever played any game. Always running at the first sign that one of them might take a round of antimatter.

Another example of what happens when far too much information is available with no risk for players to use. "Wait what? You mean it wont be a 100% risk free gank?! **** that ****. EVERYONE WARP OUT AND GET SAFE NOW!!!" - 99% of EVE Online Players


Do you think null sec is better?

If so, do you think there is a mechanic that null sec has that makes it better?

If you think wormholes are better for pvp I can only say the actual facts the of amount of pvp per player in wormholes versus low sec proves that is not true.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#198 - 2012-02-14 16:41:17 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Do you think null sec is better?

If so, do you think there is a mechanic that null sec has that makes it better?

If you think wormholes are better for pvp I can only say the actual facts the of amount of pvp per player in wormholes versus low sec proves that is not true.


I don't think null is better. The issue comes down to the fact there is no more unknown when it comes to PvP. I am not saying the OP's idea is bad, I think it has a lot of merit, but it will not be enough to get more players to want to come out of high sec. Movement in this game is by far too easily tracked. Which forces anyone to join a large entity to have a chance.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#199 - 2012-02-14 17:04:23 UTC
Marlona Sky wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Do you think null sec is better?

If so, do you think there is a mechanic that null sec has that makes it better?

If you think wormholes are better for pvp I can only say the actual facts the of amount of pvp per player in wormholes versus low sec proves that is not true.


I don't think null is better. The issue comes down to the fact there is no more unknown when it comes to PvP. I am not saying the OP's idea is bad, I think it has a lot of merit, but it will not be enough to get more players to want to come out of high sec. Movement in this game is by far too easily tracked. Which forces anyone to join a large entity to have a chance.



I don't know who is right overall but in my experience the opposite is true.

When you have no idea what your up against you bring what you can expecting the worst. If you have an idea of what the other guy has you will bring something similar to get a fight.

Moreover I think if people end up leeroying gangs into overwhelming odds because the intel is more difficult to come by they will be less likely to pvp - or even play eve - in the future. If people don't know what they are getting into the fights will tend to be more lopsided not less.

My experience is in faction war so ymmv. I think because Faction war's main draw is the good fights there are more people who are of that mindset. Of course if your running up against pirates who are actually trying to make isk from pvp they won't have this same mindset.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#200 - 2012-02-14 17:06:53 UTC
Vaurion Infara wrote:
Then explain to me how highsec mission griefing or trade channel scamming would be tolerated in 'polite society'.

There is a rather big difference between tricking money from gullible people (scam), throwing banana peels in front of people (mission grief) and then premeditated murder (pew). While the two former are frowned upon, causes some raised eye-brows or a slap on the wrist (depending on severity) the latter will 'normally' be against the law and involves severe sanctions.