These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

90% of PVP happens at gates. THAT'S that problem.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
IGNATIUS HOOD
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#41 - 2012-08-03 15:27:58 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
Boudicca Arbosa wrote:
If you turds would just get off gates and hunt like REAL pirates, there wouldn't be a need to change the way gates work in low. Stop hugging gates to gain an advantage (because your 93843 million ISK ship going after that cheaply fit Rifter wasn't good enough) and get your asses out there and destroy ships in SPACE. Get off your front porch, you whiny pussies.

I'm a goddamn new player that immediately went to lowsec space to carve out my niche. Even I'M not ***** enough to sit at a gate. I hunt when I'm feeling froggy. You veterans sitting around at the gates make my teeth itch. Get off the gates and join the rest of the world.


Okay genius, where should people fight in low sec then?

You can't drag people into bubbles in low sec so the only places fights can happen is gates and stations (docking games are fun?).

Ps. ganking mission runners isn't legit pvp.


Form fleet, burn up a POS? Form fleet, burn up a POCO? Thats what I'd be doing if I wanted to get into a fight. Eventually someone will respond.

And before you whine about grinding structures. HTFU. Want a curb stomp battle, gotta find a curb.
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."   --H.L. Mencken
yopparai
ASTARTES CORP
Hashashin Cartel
#42 - 2012-08-03 15:48:26 UTC
Boudicca Arbosa wrote:
AFK Mining =/= AFK Gatecamping



Nope, at least with afk mining you gain something (ore). The only thing you can gain from afk gatecamping is a lossmail.

Yopp
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#43 - 2012-08-03 15:55:58 UTC
Would be interesting to see some CCP stats on how much % of PvP in the various securities that happen, where. At gates, stations, moons/POS, belt, etc. I am willing to bet that the top 2 % spots for PvP in both low and null is gates and moons. And guess what, moons will have a vast, vast impact on the future sec status if Greyskales/CSM get this crazy idea through. Usually at least one party that fight on a POS will eat GCC, and if you are logistic on lowsec POS fights (I have been a number of times), you can easily drop from +5 to -10 sec in just one fight. How do you plan for me to go home now that gates will fire on me just for sitting near them, without even aggressing?

Being below -5 just mean you can't travel anywhere without cyno. Great idea. And it also removes the two biggest places you'd be fighting at, gates, and POS, woohoo. Not that it matters, who'd fight in belts, custom offices, plexes etc if you risk dropping sec, then you can't travel home anyway? Roll

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2012-08-03 16:08:13 UTC
IGNATIUS HOOD wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
Boudicca Arbosa wrote:
If you turds would just get off gates and hunt like REAL pirates, there wouldn't be a need to change the way gates work in low. Stop hugging gates to gain an advantage (because your 93843 million ISK ship going after that cheaply fit Rifter wasn't good enough) and get your asses out there and destroy ships in SPACE. Get off your front porch, you whiny pussies.

I'm a goddamn new player that immediately went to lowsec space to carve out my niche. Even I'M not ***** enough to sit at a gate. I hunt when I'm feeling froggy. You veterans sitting around at the gates make my teeth itch. Get off the gates and join the rest of the world.


Okay genius, where should people fight in low sec then?

You can't drag people into bubbles in low sec so the only places fights can happen is gates and stations (docking games are fun?).

Ps. ganking mission runners isn't legit pvp.


Form fleet, burn up a POS? Form fleet, burn up a POCO? Thats what I'd be doing if I wanted to get into a fight. Eventually someone will respond.

And before you whine about grinding structures. HTFU. Want a curb stomp battle, gotta find a curb.


Because you just click your fingers and you've destroyed a POS... Oh wait, i have to come back in 1 day 16 hours only to be hot dropped by 5 random corps? Straight

I do shoot structures now and again but it's boring as **** most of the time and i'd pick unpredictable gate fights anytime.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Sarik Olecar
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#45 - 2012-08-03 16:09:41 UTC
Misanth wrote:
Would be interesting to see some CCP stats on how much % of PvP in the various securities that happen, where. At gates, stations, moons/POS, belt, etc. I am willing to bet that the top 2 % spots for PvP in both low and null is gates and moons. And guess what, moons will have a vast, vast impact on the future sec status if Greyskales/CSM get this crazy idea through. Usually at least one party that fight on a POS will eat GCC, and if you are logistic on lowsec POS fights (I have been a number of times), you can easily drop from +5 to -10 sec in just one fight. How do you plan for me to go home now that gates will fire on me just for sitting near them, without even aggressing?

Being below -5 just mean you can't travel anywhere without cyno. Great idea. And it also removes the two biggest places you'd be fighting at, gates, and POS, woohoo. Not that it matters, who'd fight in belts, custom offices, plexes etc if you risk dropping sec, then you can't travel home anyway? Roll


Because the new gate guns will one-hit everything as soon as you load grid, right?

Hows my posting? Call 1-800-747-7633 to leave feedback.
Shukuzen Kiraa
F4G Wild Weasel
#46 - 2012-08-03 16:09:53 UTC
Kryss Darkdust wrote:
I like the attitude, like the balls and agree with the sentiment.


This! ^^
XxRTEKxX
256th Shadow Wing
Phantom-Recon
#47 - 2012-08-03 17:49:57 UTC  |  Edited by: XxRTEKxX
Vagilicious wrote:
I agree with this 100%.

When I first started playing it took me a while to pluck up the courage to venture into Lowsec. When I did I encountered my first gate camp, did the newb thing and panicked, and died pretty much instantly.

But I stuck at it. I learned, adapted and eventually figured out how to pass them, only to find the areas beyond pretty much deserted.

I got my first decent fight at a belt - I died quickly (again) but the adrenaline rush, my heart pounding, was what really made it for me.

I personally think that making it more difficult to camp on a gate is a good thing. The biggest barrier for new players is jumping through and dying instantly. That, coupled with the horror stories of how Lowsec is a death trap is enough to put most of them off from venturing outside Hisec.

IMO if Lowsec appeared to be safer - at least on entering - it might actually encourage newer players to take a bit more of a risk, possibly risk slipping a mining or mission running ship in with the thought of making bigger iskies.

Of course they'd more than likely get their ships popped but they'd at least be there. Maybe some would still give up, but I'm betting that a lot more would experience that same rush and try to adapt, learn new techniques to survive, and hopefully start to populate Lowsec.

Now more than ever I think CCP needs to improve new player retention, and I think this is a step in the right direction.


Gate camps were the reason I stayed out of ls for so long. Id be up for more powerful gateguns to push pilots to fight off gates. Downside would be traveling through lowsec would be far easier. I do wish pvp wasn't so often done at gates. Even in highsec wars its usually at gates, and stations where camping happens.

What about more powerful gate guns, but guns that can be destroyed by a large enough force. Guns could respawn after downtime. Then if you want to camp a gate you have to take out the guns or they will simply cause you far too much hurt to even stand tanking them and engaging any targets.

Maybe ccp will come up with a good solution to more encourage combat off gates and stations.
Tiberious Thessalonia
True Slave Foundations
#48 - 2012-08-03 17:52:45 UTC
XxRTEKxX wrote:


Gate camps were the reason I stayed out of ls for so long. Id be up for more powerful gateguns to push pilots to fight off gates. Downside would be traveling through lowsec would be far easier. I do wish pvp wasn't so often done at gates. Even in highsec wars its usually at gates, and stations where camping happens.

Maybe ccp will come up with a good solution to more encourage combat off gates and stations.


There is a reason for this. The reason is that combat happens where people are. People are not at belt 1, or at planet V, they are at the gates, or the stations.
XxRTEKxX
256th Shadow Wing
Phantom-Recon
#49 - 2012-08-03 17:57:28 UTC
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
XxRTEKxX wrote:


Gate camps were the reason I stayed out of ls for so long. Id be up for more powerful gateguns to push pilots to fight off gates. Downside would be traveling through lowsec would be far easier. I do wish pvp wasn't so often done at gates. Even in highsec wars its usually at gates, and stations where camping happens.

Maybe ccp will come up with a good solution to more encourage combat off gates and stations.


There is a reason for this. The reason is that combat happens where people are. People are not at belt 1, or at planet V, they are at the gates, or the stations.


I agree that is the reason people generally fight on gates. However, why should it always be that way? Why not add in factors to either encourage pilots to be in belts, at planets etc?
Proletariat Tingtango
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#50 - 2012-08-03 17:58:18 UTC
It's amazing how the rest of the game thinks in a different way than I do. I have absolutely no sense of attachment or fear of loss or risk. If I lose a ship, I lose several millions sure, then I have to buy a new clone and fit a new ship, but big ******* deal?

Are all of these pirates seriously running around with pods and ships they can't afford to lose? What's wrong with you people. Stop being girly-men. Engage your target and fight to the death. If you lose your officer-fit rifter and 10b pod, that's your dumb-ass mistake not mine.
Vagilicious
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#51 - 2012-08-03 18:02:21 UTC
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think that a gate camp counts as combat. It's more like shooting fish in a barrel as a means to pad a killboard, at least till the victim gains experience in avoiding them.

IMO true combat is when the victim has a chance to shoot back. Jumping through and being popped by ships 200km away isn't a lot of fun, although when you do learn to evade them it can cause rage and hilarity Lol
Lyron-Baktos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2012-08-03 18:06:14 UTC
confirming that hi-sec gate camping is the ultimate faggotry in Eve
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#53 - 2012-08-03 18:07:58 UTC
Boudicca Arbosa wrote:
If you turds would just get off gates and hunt like REAL pirates, there wouldn't be a need to change the way gates work in low. Stop hugging gates to gain an advantage (because your 93843 million ISK ship going after that cheaply fit Rifter wasn't good enough) and get your asses out there and destroy ships in SPACE. Get off your front porch, you whiny pussies.

I'm a goddamn new player that immediately went to lowsec space to carve out my niche. Even I'M not ***** enough to sit at a gate. I hunt when I'm feeling froggy. You veterans sitting around at the gates make my teeth itch. Get off the gates and join the rest of the world.


Hi, I spend a lot of time sitting at zero at Amamake Belt 3-1 (top belt) - though frankly that only works out for me because Amamake is a well known PVP hot spot. I refuse to camp the Oso gate and damn sure refuse to do it with Orca support. When I roam, I'd say that 90% of the fights happen at gates - not because either party is gate camping but simply because that's where the people are.

I like your viewpoint and spunkiness, but you're dreadfully naive. As someone who enjoys good fights far more than gate camps, I can say with some certainty that you're simply deluded. Belt piracy died out years ago with the demise of belt ratting, and even killing mission runners is no fun.

I really don't want carebears in low sec. High sec and null sec can keep them. Give me your PVPers.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Ajit Kumar Bhattacharya
DEEP-13
#54 - 2012-08-03 18:09:03 UTC
Boudicca Arbosa wrote:
If you turds would just get off gates and hunt like REAL pirates, there wouldn't be a need to change the way gates work in low. Stop hugging gates to gain an advantage (because your 93843 million ISK ship going after that cheaply fit Rifter wasn't good enough) and get your asses out there and destroy ships in SPACE. Get off your front porch, you whiny pussies.

I'm a goddamn new player that immediately went to lowsec space to carve out my niche. Even I'M not ***** enough to sit at a gate. I hunt when I'm feeling froggy. You veterans sitting around at the gates make my teeth itch. Get off the gates and join the rest of the world.


Damn straight.

“How Earth-like? 'Temperate and able to sustain life' Earth-like or 'completely overrun with self-absorbed assholes' Earth-like?”
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#55 - 2012-08-03 19:01:15 UTC
Psychotic Monk wrote:
...
Really, dudes? You honestly expect people to throw away competitive advantages? In everything you do, you're up against someone else, directly or indirectly. Do you think all your competition is also throwing away these advantages? Does your sense of e-honour have you in such an incredible stranglehold? I mean, I get it, I harbor some shreds of e-honour I have trouble letting go of too, but this isn't pistols at dawn. This is a shanking in a prison shower.


No I don't expect people to throw away competitive advantages. I do expect game mechanics that enable or disable certain types of behavior and we have seen such changes occur for a very long time in the game. It might be held that having loaded dice for playing craps is a "competitive advantage" but that tends to draw a bit of angst from gamblers just as certain "competitive advantages" in EVE also tend to draw displeasure.

"Adapt or die" - that goes for your "competitive advantages" as well as anything else. To those that don't like the changes -- it's their turn to adapt instead of expecting everyone else to do so for THEIR convenience and ease.

When "the victims" need a bit more coverage, things change to keep them around - otherwise your victimizers won't have targets. They just need to adapt and all the whines are simply the squealing of old unchanging ways preparing to change like gears that haven't had to move in a long time. It's a bit amusing when looked at this way.
Bunnie Hop
Bunny Knights
#56 - 2012-08-03 19:08:11 UTC
High and Low sec gates should equip a module which disrupts target locking within a certain range of it, allowing transient ships a chance to go to warp. Let the fights take place elsewhere, that will increase the flow into Low Sec. Null should have no such thing though.
Shizuken
Venerated Stars
#57 - 2012-08-03 19:14:10 UTC
Skippermonkey wrote:
All this moaning about 'gate camping' is hillarious.

You know people have to use them, so thats a great place to catch targets


That is the problem. Travel in this game needs to work more like star trek, set a course and speed, and arrive in a certain amount of time. You could still interdict warp travel but the natural choke points of gates would disappear.

Plus it would make actual scanning more relevant and system defense woukd not rely solely on local chat to tell you that enemies are afoot.

Local chat and stargates are lame holdovers from early low budget game design.
Boudicca Arbosa
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#58 - 2012-08-03 20:02:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Boudicca Arbosa
I, for one, applaud the new changes. Should force some of you Greenbeards into being Blackbeards. The same people that are whining about gate changes are the same ones that sit outside a station in null. Big ups for anyone with balls enough to come out and fight when they know the station is being camped.

The ones that want all the PVP are the ones that seem to be taking the pussy way out to achieve it. The game has devolved.

Still addicted though.

See you kids in low/null tonight? Or...at least the gates as I pass through.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#59 - 2012-08-03 20:08:50 UTC
Thor Kerrigan wrote:
Even with these changes pirates will still be able to catch you.

Don't get me wrong, I think people are overreacting. You only need 30 seconds to kill a target and warp back to your safe spot.



Changes are not supposed to make it so pirates can't do their favourite activity, changes are done to save the pigs from themselves being so dumb they can't do anything else than camp gates for hours ruining the sandbox with no consequence.
This was against the principle of the sandbox, the fact an action will bring de appropriate consequence is not wasting the sand box, it's just making good players just better and the stupid pigs cry a little more because no one is giving them a hand any more.

brb
Tiberious Thessalonia
True Slave Foundations
#60 - 2012-08-03 20:09:54 UTC
XxRTEKxX wrote:
Tiberious Thessalonia wrote:
XxRTEKxX wrote:


Gate camps were the reason I stayed out of ls for so long. Id be up for more powerful gateguns to push pilots to fight off gates. Downside would be traveling through lowsec would be far easier. I do wish pvp wasn't so often done at gates. Even in highsec wars its usually at gates, and stations where camping happens.

Maybe ccp will come up with a good solution to more encourage combat off gates and stations.


There is a reason for this. The reason is that combat happens where people are. People are not at belt 1, or at planet V, they are at the gates, or the stations.


I agree that is the reason people generally fight on gates. However, why should it always be that way? Why not add in factors to either encourage pilots to be in belts, at planets etc?


If there are actual reasons? Great! As it stands, when I am roaming I am not looking to do "something else". Im there to fight. What usually ends up happening is either everyone docks up when we come around, or we crash into an enemy fleet. At a gate. Usually my side takes GCC because someone's got to.

Most fights take place at gates and stations because these are the natural chokepoints in space. That is why gates are there, to make certain places in the systems where people are much more likely to end up. Making it so that those of us who live out here can't find natural fights is going to drive a lot of us out.

And no, agreeing to fight at planet 1 or belt V or whatever is not a natural fight. That sort of arena-style PvP has absolutely no interest to me. I like the risk that I am going to jump into a much bigger gang than the one I am in, but I'm not stupid enough to do it on purpose.