These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Get rid of gate camps.

First post
Author
0Lona 0ltor
Adeptio Gloriae
#141 - 2013-07-01 13:47:15 UTC
If you want to remove a gate camp form an anti gate camp gang and do it yourself.

On the other hand I do think CCP needs to fix gate camps and station camps. An instant fix would be warp scram prevents docking and star gate jumping. Sitting at zero should not be risk free.
Adunh Slavy
#142 - 2013-07-01 14:07:31 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

This is true and it has been identified as an issue, and I can definitely confirm that it's on the agenda. You may note that conditions for industry in 0.0 have been improved a little in Odyssey (lots more slots and office spaces in 0.0 outposts, improved availablity of low end minerals). But that's only a first step.



Great more slots, more minerals. Won't help get others out there. It'll just be more alts of the same old blocs.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#143 - 2013-07-01 14:10:32 UTC
0Lona 0ltor wrote:
If you want to remove a gate camp form an anti gate camp gang and do it yourself.

On the other hand I do think CCP needs to fix gate camps and station camps. An instant fix would be warp scram prevents docking and star gate jumping. Sitting at zero should not be risk free.

It's not. You just have to form your own ambush on the other side. For all I know, if I jump back through a gate, there's an even bigger group sitting on the other side just waiting to shut me down. Yes, it happens, you just have to put forth a little :effort: to make a gatecamper's life hell.
Jarod Garamonde
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#144 - 2013-07-01 14:21:23 UTC
Majindoom Shi wrote:
So I would like CCP to some how do away with gate camps.
I Do not have the full details on how this will work out.
My goal is not to lower the amount of pvp but do something to increase it.
Gate camps to me are not real pvp. I would like ccp to implement something to add more pvp to EVE without the use of gate camps. I am not sure what they could do to make this happen but I would like to see more pvp but little to no gate camps at all.

Maybe add lvl 6 agent to low to draw people into system and engage them at the site. Like i said I don't know how to pull this off but gate camps are boring and lame there needs to be a lot more options for pvp



Item 1: Being a pirate, I'm loathe to say this... but being a decent human being other than that, I will help you out a little: Dotlan can help you avoid gatecamps. Now, if you don't use that tool to plan your trip, it's on your head. If I am part of that gatecamp... I'm deeply and truly sorry that you didn't map out your route properly, but a guy's gotta make ISK, somehow. I promise I won't take your pod, but I can't speak for the rest of my fleet.

Item 2: Gatecamps are trade/travel/military blockades. They have a valid RL counterpart, and it sucks that it has to come to this... but if I redbox you, it's not personal. YOU travelled through MY gate. Godspeed, and may your ship align faster than I can target you. I really do wish you all the best... but if I'm better, so be it.
(bonus point: you don't hear me qq'ing every time someone outguns me, or escapes before I can point them, do you? Didn't think so)

That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...

    [#savethelance]
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#145 - 2013-07-01 14:22:03 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

This is true and it has been identified as an issue, and I can definitely confirm that it's on the agenda. You may note that conditions for industry in 0.0 have been improved a little in Odyssey (lots more slots and office spaces in 0.0 outposts, improved availablity of low end minerals). But that's only a first step.



Great more slots, more minerals. Won't help get others out there. It'll just be more alts of the same old blocs.



Well that's the nature of sov space: you can claim it. Why should the owners of sov space possibly want to let a bunch of randoms use their resources?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Jarod Garamonde
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#146 - 2013-07-01 14:33:15 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

This is true and it has been identified as an issue, and I can definitely confirm that it's on the agenda. You may note that conditions for industry in 0.0 have been improved a little in Odyssey (lots more slots and office spaces in 0.0 outposts, improved availablity of low end minerals). But that's only a first step.



Great more slots, more minerals. Won't help get others out there. It'll just be more alts of the same old blocs.



Well that's the nature of sov space: you can claim it. Why should the owners of sov space possibly want to let a bunch of randoms use their resources?



0.0 = private property in the middle of nowhere
lowsec = gangland

know the difference.

That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...

    [#savethelance]
Adunh Slavy
#147 - 2013-07-01 14:56:44 UTC
Malcanis wrote:

Well that's the nature of sov space: you can claim it. Why should the owners of sov space possibly want to let a bunch of randoms use their resources?


And much of it is unused and held for little reason other than the fact it can be held cheaply. If it were more difficult to defend borders, many of the large blocks would tighten up their borders and reduce their holdings, creating opportunity for smaller groups and more adventuresome solo activities.

Each gate being a castle keep and the cheap projection of power. These reduce the number of sov holding entities, and reduce the opportunities for small groups. Again, is more people out in null and low a good thing or a bad thing?

It's bad because you want to keep 'randoms' out? To me that reeks of some huge multinational corporation, urging government to create more regulations so that small competitors have a harder time of getting into an industry.

What's your motive, promoting more interesting and exciting game play or defending the profits of your null sec constituents, Mr. Politician.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#148 - 2013-07-01 15:15:40 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Well that's the nature of sov space: you can claim it. Why should the owners of sov space possibly want to let a bunch of randoms use their resources?


And much of it is unused and held for little reason other than the fact it can be held cheaply. If it were more difficult to defend borders, many of the large blocks would tighten up their borders and reduce their holdings, creating opportunity for smaller groups and more adventuresome solo activities.

Each gate being a castle keep and the cheap projection of power. These reduce the number of sov holding entities, and reduce the opportunities for small groups. Again, is more people out in null and low a good thing or a bad thing?

It's bad because you want to keep 'randoms' out? To me that reeks of some huge multinational corporation, urging government to create more regulations so that small competitors have a harder time of getting into an industry.

What's your motive, promoting more interesting and exciting game play or defending the profits of your null sec constituents, Mr. Politician.

I am pretty sure it's got more to do with the fact that your average "random" doesn't have the means to grind through Dominion sov mechanics in any kind of timely manner.
Ace Uoweme
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#149 - 2013-07-01 16:34:22 UTC
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
I am pretty sure it's got more to do with the fact that your average "random" doesn't have the means to grind through Dominion sov mechanics in any kind of timely manner.


But it would help to get more players to do this, and encourage more warfare in null.

Problem now is the big blocs conquer and just sit like fat kings on their domains. It turns null into a form of high-sec.

_"In a world of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." _ ~George Orwell

Gallowmere Rorschach
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#150 - 2013-07-01 16:44:47 UTC
Ace Uoweme wrote:
Gallowmere Rorschach wrote:
I am pretty sure it's got more to do with the fact that your average "random" doesn't have the means to grind through Dominion sov mechanics in any kind of timely manner.


But it would help to get more players to do this, and encourage more warfare in null.

Problem now is the big blocs conquer and just sit like fat kings on their domains. It turns null into a form of high-sec.

Let me now direct you to the breaking thread about Nulli's renter alliance being disbanded. Now's the time for all of these people who want into null to bumrush some systems.

Oh...wait....nope. They'll just sit out here and cry about how it isn't possible, even with literally nothing stopping them right now.
Helfeln Meathead
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#151 - 2013-07-02 01:17:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Helfeln Meathead
Majindoom Shi wrote:

Gate camps to me are not real pvp.
Lets address this by empathising with our pilots, roleplaying if you like

CCP has written a history of how human kind arrived in New Eden, prospered, then despaired and rotted for millennia after the wormhole to Earth collapsed. We can see brutality, cruelty, ambition and domination in the wars that erupted between the races just a short time after first contact. What we don't see is a Utopia. We see relentless war, we see slavery, we see generations of pain.

In such a place, are you suggesting that nobody would think to stalk a gate just waiting for something juicy to come along?

New Eden is desperate, brutal and cruel. That's the canon you bought into when you first said "Hey I might try this game". Some would have us believe it's a churchyard fete.

Ace Uoweme wrote:
Only way to get rid of gate camps is to do away with the blob warfare, as a way to encourage small gang PvP (which should be the main PvP fare as it encourages having fun with your RL friends).
.
You can't remove blobs, it's human nature to say I have more friends than you do. How many Facebook friends do YOU have? (Don't answer that, I'm not interested. it's a rhetorical question used only to illustrate the point)

Also, Goonfleet was a small PvP corp based in Syndicate playing with their RL friends once. Do you know what happened?
SmilingVagrant
Doomheim
#152 - 2013-07-02 02:11:34 UTC
Jaan Thiesant wrote:
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
A bomber can get you past one, same with covert recon.


That only works in Empire. In Null the dictor will prevent you from warping and the interceptor will decloak you. I've managed to get out of the bubble in gate camps because the interceptors were simply not paying enough attention and they were too slow.

If the interceptor knows what is he doing, you are toasted.


If you can't get a bomber through a sabre + interceptor gatecamp you probably shouldn't be flying one.
SmilingVagrant
Doomheim
#153 - 2013-07-02 02:21:42 UTC
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Malcanis wrote:

Well that's the nature of sov space: you can claim it. Why should the owners of sov space possibly want to let a bunch of randoms use their resources?


And much of it is unused and held for little reason other than the fact it can be held cheaply. If it were more difficult to defend borders, many of the large blocks would tighten up their borders and reduce their holdings, creating opportunity for smaller groups and more adventuresome solo activities.


It's already impossible to defend borders. There is literally nothing stopping you from coming and setting up shop in my back yard. How do I know this? This is exactly what my group within Goonswarm does. Seven months ago we were living in The Kalevala Expanse with SCDOT, killing them and carting home bucketfulls of loot. Then we moved to Delve, now we're in fountain. Border control the way you think it exists in null is simply not a thing. If you get caught at a regional gate it's because you didn't plan out your entrance appropriately. Sorry.

Quote:
Each gate being a castle keep and the cheap projection of power. These reduce the number of sov holding entities, and reduce the opportunities for small groups. Again, is more people out in null and low a good thing or a bad thing?


Ironically it's the very power projection you whine about that made it easy for us to move into all of these places. You can put a lot of ships in a Carrier.

Quote:
It's bad because you want to keep 'randoms' out? To me that reeks of some huge multinational corporation, urging government to create more regulations so that small competitors have a harder time of getting into an industry.


And? I think you miss the point of nullsec.

Quote:
What's your motive, promoting more interesting and exciting game play or defending the profits of your null sec constituents, Mr. Politician.


Defending my profits promotes more and interesting gameplay for me. Like it or not the rich kids can afford more interesting toys. On the rare occasion I did get blown up, my alliance threw money at me to make it easier for me to create a new glorious explosion in space. Ultimately I'm here to entertain myself, and my friends. If that entertainment is had at your expense, so be it.
Adunh Slavy
#154 - 2013-07-02 02:28:26 UTC
SmilingVagrant wrote:

Defending my profits promotes more and interesting gameplay for me. Like it or not the rich kids can afford more interesting toys. On the rare occasion I did get blown up, my alliance threw money at me to make it easier for me to create a new glorious explosion in space. Ultimately I'm here to entertain myself, and my friends. If that entertainment is had at your expense, so be it.



So you agree with corruption of the development process? Interesting.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt

Verunae Caseti
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#155 - 2013-07-02 04:44:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Verunae Caseti
Adunh Slavy wrote:
Again, is more people out in null and low a good thing or a bad thing?


If every single jackanapes with a ship and a prayer starts their own corporation and grab a couple systems instead of joining an existing corporation/alliance? Bad thing. Very bad thing.

Corporation hiring and recruitment relies on there being an inherent benefit in larger corporations. If every small corporation that starts could carve out a chunk of space and make a name for themselves, then recruitment would be a nightmare and large corporations would basically be unable to maintain their size.

A few large corporations/alliances warring against one another is far more interesting than 15,000 tiny corporations all fighting over every backwoods system in the game. It makes for epic wars, epic battles and epic stories instead of "System nobody gives a **** about changed hands between two corporations nobody has ever heard of or cares about."

It's a design principle and it has worked great so far. No need to back down now because Joe Nobody decides he doesn't like it.