These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#81 - 2012-08-02 23:15:02 UTC
MadMuppet wrote:
So now a cepter can sit on the gate, fast lock and tackle a ship while the aligned main fleet 5,000km away warps in on top of them in a blink hop and the cepter bolts out for safety. I guess resetting will be the headache part.

get a scout alt on the other side of the gate and you have enough time to warp heavy tackle (sensor-boosted HIC) down to the gate

smart people camping low-sec gates do this today to fool incompetent scouts.

.
Large Collidable Object
morons.
#82 - 2012-08-02 23:15:03 UTC
Vera Algaert wrote:
Large Collidable Object wrote:
I don't like gatecamps, but I can't see how this is going to help new players trying to get into lowsec.

A frig was pretty safe when traveling through lowsec because ceptors wouldn't tackle you at a gate and unless it's some stupidly sensor boosted T3 with an offgrid booster, noone could tackle them unless they messed up - now a single ceptor will be able to get an initial point, which is fairly easy to get on a frig-pilot with poor navigation skills.

I currently don't need tackle to kill your frigate - I just need smartbombing battleships and 2 Guardians.



And how often do you encounter that unless you're a total **** going through rancer?
You know... [morons.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjOx65yD5A)
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#83 - 2012-08-02 23:16:53 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
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.
Is any of that a problem? Gate guns means the aggressor has to contend with more incoming fire than the target — why is more needed?

Quote:
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.
It also means that less fights will happen since most targets are found on gates — it's a place people go to (and through); belts and the like are not. So that just loops back to the initial question: why is that a good thing?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#84 - 2012-08-02 23:17:03 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


What an ignorant viewpoint. Do you even PVP?

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#85 - 2012-08-02 23:17:58 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:
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.
Is any of that a problem? Gate guns means the aggressor has to contend with more incoming fire than the target — why is more needed?

Quote:
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.
It also means that less fights will happen since most targets are found on gates — it's a place people go to (and through); belts and the like are not. So that just loops back to the initial question: why is that a good thing?


In the time since this thread has started, I've seen 5-6 roaming engagements happen on a gate. None on a celestial.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Eternal Error
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#86 - 2012-08-02 23:19:28 UTC
I figured that I wouldn't need to read the CSM minutes because CCP wouldn't propose anything too stupid.

I will post again after I have finished reading the CSM minutes.
Jim Era
#87 - 2012-08-02 23:19:43 UTC
Dude, my job would be so boring if I couldn't just sit here and collect these tears all day. Glad I found out about these forums. Smile

Wat™
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#88 - 2012-08-02 23:23:09 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


See the thing you missed... when a fleet is camping a gate, and another fleet comes roaming by... this would create action... you want that destroyed? You want eve more boring than it already is? Eve has had "concord" players for years "anti pirats" people who would roam around low sec looking for criminals (which would normally be on the gates preying on the weak)... now they will just wait at a bookmark above the gate and warp down when they know you come in...(which is already done)

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#89 - 2012-08-02 23:24:13 UTC
Large Collidable Object wrote:
Vera Algaert wrote:
Large Collidable Object wrote:
I don't like gatecamps, but I can't see how this is going to help new players trying to get into lowsec.

A frig was pretty safe when traveling through lowsec because ceptors wouldn't tackle you at a gate and unless it's some stupidly sensor boosted T3 with an offgrid booster, noone could tackle them unless they messed up - now a single ceptor will be able to get an initial point, which is fairly easy to get on a frig-pilot with poor navigation skills.

I currently don't need tackle to kill your frigate - I just need smartbombing battleships and 2 Guardians.



And how often do you encounter that unless you're a total **** going through rancer?

my main's corp runs such camps when we are in low-sec Oops

.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#90 - 2012-08-02 23:27:52 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
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


What an ignorant viewpoint. Do you even PVP?

-Liang


You will need to be a little more specific about what I got wrong. Do you disagree that CCP put gate guns on gates in low sec for a reason? Do you disagree you couldn't perma-camp them until ships progressed to the point that now they can? Do you think moving the fights off the gates is a bad idea? If so, why?

Just insulting me without a counter to my explanation doesn't make your case any more compelling. CCP clearly sees this as something that needs attention, I think I'll side with them on this change.

Issler
Jim Era
#91 - 2012-08-02 23:29:08 UTC
Nuu Issler, dun feed the whiners, they won't stop until you make gate guns only target people <6mo old
and Concord attacks miners.

Wat™
Nikolai Dostoyevski
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2012-08-02 23:30:39 UTC
Syphon Lodian wrote:
Don't fight at gates. Problem solved.

Also don't play docking games.

Your killboard will survive. It'll be okay.


Amen.

Now we just need more reasons to go elsewhere in low-sec so that some fights will crop up. Other than the FW sites.

I'm glad that gate camps are getting neutered, though.. gates always seemed like a silly mechanic to me anyway.
Jim Era
#93 - 2012-08-02 23:35:03 UTC
I like the gates, I think it would be better if you could just jump FROM a gate to whichever solar system but in a random point (not necessarily a belt but just somewhere in the *middle* instead of jumping gate to gate, but it doesn't really bother me either way.
They are a mechanic in a game that I choose to play and that I choose to pay for therefore I am choosing to play with said mechanic. I don't get why people want to join into something and change it to match their needs.

Wat™
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#94 - 2012-08-02 23:35:19 UTC
Nikolai Dostoyevski wrote:
Now we just need more reasons to go elsewhere in low-sec so that some fights will crop up. Other than the FW sites.
…and that's why the change is thoroughly ill-advised. First you find some place for people to go, and then you move them there. All they're doing now is flat-out removing combat situations for no good reason.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#95 - 2012-08-02 23:36:44 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:

You will need to be a little more specific about what I got wrong. Do you disagree that CCP put gate guns on gates in low sec for a reason? Do you disagree you couldn't perma-camp them until ships progressed to the point that now they can? Do you think moving the fights off the gates is a bad idea? If so, why?

Just insulting me without a counter to my explanation doesn't make your case any more compelling. CCP clearly sees this as something that needs attention, I think I'll side with them on this change.

Issler


I've been very forthright with why it's a bad idea: almost all PVP in all areas of Eve happens on gates. High sec, low sec, null sec, WH space... wherever. The fights always happen where people travel. The entire game is built around it. While the change would undoubtedly prevent people from gate camping, it will ALSO severely hamper people that are roaming - so even the "good" kind of PVP would simply die out too.

Furthermore, this does nothing to really affect the usage of content in low sec because that's already not on gates. Basically, it's misguided and naive. And it will further break this section of the game.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#96 - 2012-08-02 23:36:51 UTC
Bubanni wrote:
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


See the thing you missed... when a fleet is camping a gate, and another fleet comes roaming by... this would create action... you want that destroyed? You want eve more boring than it already is? Eve has had "concord" players for years "anti pirats" people who would roam around low sec looking for criminals (which would normally be on the gates preying on the weak)... now they will just wait at a bookmark above the gate and warp down when they know you come in...(which is already done)


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.

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.

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.

Issler
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#97 - 2012-08-02 23:39:59 UTC
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

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Issler Dainze
Tadakastu-Obata Corporation
The Honda Accord
#98 - 2012-08-02 23:40:14 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Issler Dainze wrote:

You will need to be a little more specific about what I got wrong. Do you disagree that CCP put gate guns on gates in low sec for a reason? Do you disagree you couldn't perma-camp them until ships progressed to the point that now they can? Do you think moving the fights off the gates is a bad idea? If so, why?

Just insulting me without a counter to my explanation doesn't make your case any more compelling. CCP clearly sees this as something that needs attention, I think I'll side with them on this change.

Issler


I've been very forthright with why it's a bad idea: almost all PVP in all areas of Eve happens on gates. High sec, low sec, null sec, WH space... wherever. The fights always happen where people travel. The entire game is built around it. While the change would undoubtedly prevent people from gate camping, it will ALSO severely hamper people that are roaming - so even the "good" kind of PVP would simply die out too.

Furthermore, this does nothing to really affect the usage of content in low sec because that's already not on gates. Basically, it's misguided and naive. And it will further break this section of the game.

-Liang


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
Jim Era
#99 - 2012-08-02 23:40:49 UTC
Tippia~ I understand your point and everything I swear.
*not choosing any side here because either way I don't give a ****, leave it the same or change it idc*
But I think this could be good for one thing (I know it has its flaws and I'm sure it will be tweaked before actually implemented)
-ask anybody who resides in high-sec why they are there, most will say because every time they try to go anywhere else they die constantly to gate camps.
I understand how easy it is to avoid them-I've never died to one yet. But apparently people do and that is keeping it very stagnant. I think that this could honestly generate more traffic, even if only a temporary fix.

Wat™
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#100 - 2012-08-02 23:41:20 UTC
Issler Dainze wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
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


What an ignorant viewpoint. Do you even PVP?

-Liang


You will need to be a little more specific about what I got wrong. Do you disagree that CCP put gate guns on gates in low sec for a reason? Do you disagree you couldn't perma-camp them until ships progressed to the point that now they can? Do you think moving the fights off the gates is a bad idea? If so, why?

Just insulting me without a counter to my explanation doesn't make your case any more compelling. CCP clearly sees this as something that needs attention, I think I'll side with them on this change.

Issler


The problem is that most fun in eve is had on a gate (because that's were all the action is!) Your obviously a non pvp player so you won't understand this... sure I want more people in low sec too, but what people like me and liang is saying is potentially this would make less people in low sec... oh sure if you made it just like high sec, then more people would... but how about adding more stuff that encourages pvp instead of removing it? What about making all low sec into 0.0 without bubbles... and all highsec into low sec lol

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934