These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Remove lowsec Gate camps

Author
Tia Tzu
G.E.A.R.
#21 - 2013-11-08 14:58:29 UTC
Just another thing that CCP wont change because they like the bullies. Camping station undocks is another one of these. ofc It's also completely realistic from a storyline perspective that a sole legion would be able to tank the entire police force of hubs like Jita and Hek 23/7 ganking with impunity.
Sarah Stallman
Pen2 Logistics
#22 - 2013-11-08 17:23:58 UTC
Soloing EVE is like soloing Facebook and about half as much fun.
Motorbit
Moira.
#23 - 2013-11-08 18:29:14 UTC
tbh:
the one thing i dislike most in eve is that it forces you to have at last 2 accounts if you ever want to leave highsec.
does it realy have to be sucky for players that just want to be on their own for once to have a rewarding expirience for groups?

else, i dont care much about the gatecamp discussion.
Urkhan Law
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#24 - 2013-11-08 19:28:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Urkhan Law
Motorbit wrote:
tbh:
the one thing i dislike most in eve is that it forces you to have at last 2 accounts if you ever want to leave highsec.
does it realy have to be sucky for players that just want to be on their own for once to have a rewarding expirience for groups?
else, i dont care much about the gatecamp discussion.


Not really true.
When people say to use a scout in low sec, it does not really mean a second account, usually it means a friend, a corp mate. Even when you don't have one, you can use map statistics to check what is happening in the systems you plan to visit - I prefer dotlan to the in-game map interface. After a time living in certain regions, you'll also know which systems are usually camped (not many) and by who. You have tools in game and out of game to help you out, use them, and never fly what you can't afford to lose.

What I would like was if low-sec guns would be more neutral, just engage everyone equally despite their security status.
E-UNI roaming blobs with people still above -5 is a good reason for that change (not only E-UNI, everybody roams).
Mag's
Azn Empire
#25 - 2013-11-08 20:04:36 UTC
Tia Tzu wrote:
Just another thing that CCP wont change because they like the bullies. Camping station undocks is another one of these. ofc It's also completely realistic from a storyline perspective that a sole legion would be able to tank the entire police force of hubs like Jita and Hek 23/7 ganking with impunity.
Just as all chess players are active participants of regicide. I think it's a terrible state of affairs and should be banned asap.

On a serious note, if someone is ganking in a Legion and keeping it, then they are not committing a crime. If they had, Concord would gladly take that Legion off them. This doesn't mean of course, that they wouldn't be open to boat violence from other players. Please check the Crimewatch mechanics, for more information.
Thank you.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Bischopt
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2013-11-08 20:24:19 UTC
Tia Tzu wrote:
Just another thing that CCP wont change because they like the bullies. Camping station undocks is another one of these. ofc It's also completely realistic from a storyline perspective that a sole legion would be able to tank the entire police force of hubs like Jita and Hek 23/7 ganking with impunity.


This is actually a bigger leap than you seem to realize. The thread is about gatecamps in lowsec. What you're complaining about is -apparently- a legit wartarget in highsec. One person who is camping your station.

A random person can never camp you into your station in highsec unless they're prepared to commit suicide in order to get you. It's always going to be somebody you're already aware of. There's no element of surprise and there's no trap. It's just a dude sitting outside a station, waiting for you.

I thought OP was a little touchy for hating on gate camping but this is something else.

Just in case there's a legion ganking people illegally in highsec and somehow surviving it, you can petition it because avoiding concord is against the rules. But from what you said it doesn't sound like there's anything illegal going on.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#27 - 2013-11-08 21:57:57 UTC
Tia Tzu wrote:
ofc It's also completely realistic from a storyline perspective that a sole legion would be able to tank the entire police force of hubs like Jita and Hek 23/7 ganking with impunity.



really? Because that would be utterly impossible in game. CONCORD cannot be tanked. The navy can, but don't they neut?
Karma Codolle
Chimera Research and Development
#28 - 2013-11-09 04:56:54 UTC
Having to travel through null gate camps and gates ****-caged to heck and back again. I laugh at lowsec camps
Leta Lilitu
#29 - 2013-11-09 06:38:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Leta Lilitu
Bischopt wrote:

Artificially limiting gameplay would pretty much defeat the purpose of having a sandbox in the first place.


You've got it wrong, mate. This won't really limit gameplay. It will simply push the gatecamps out of their comfortable, easy ISK/hour chair and force some new innovation. I'm not really against people being bastards in this game, it's what drew so many of us in to start with. I just feel that gatecam kill farming has had its day in the sun, and it's time for some enforced innovation.

Thank you for keeping your cool, by the way, and you're right in your second post that I was a bit over touchy on the subject which is NOT helpful when trying to have a real debate about gatecamps and what, if anything, should be done. Quite immature of me.


On another note, about the Legion killing people with impunity.
This is typically done to newbies who don't understand the aggression mechanics and proceed ragequit the game.
CCP's slick redesign is a signal that they take this problem very seriously.
We all know that their servers run on tears, but the tears of utter noobs are not salty enough yet, and dry up too fast.

P.S. I forgot to mention, I freely acknowledge that I am not much of a lowsec pvp master, and sometimes i play this game solo. It may be that for the bittervets, operating with all their knowledge, gatecamps are not an issue, which is why I posted this with very little in the way of suggestions or analysis. I wanted info from those that KNOW, about whether gatecamps are a problem.
Also, solo play does not give you herpes. I know we're all very proud of our mastery of this game, and the corps and friends we fly with are dear to us. But that doesn't mean EVERYONE has to fleet up to do absolutely EVERYTHINNG.
Typical play sessions in this game can stretch to huge amounts, and is related to how large your fleet has to be in order to do whatever you're doing.
If I need to get 100 people together to run sites in a wormhole, we run for as long as we possibly can because we know if we stop, it will be a while before everyone can get organised enough to have another bash.
Less pressure to fleet up means more solo pvp. I heard some lowsec people like that kind of thing.

Hey!  I done a story   :)

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3851158#post3851158

Stein Backstabber
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#30 - 2013-11-09 09:25:23 UTC
Look, an average high>low sec entry point, from about 15 minutes ago:

http://i.imgur.com/sH8NbF2.jpg

Dont remove camps, but if you want people to come to low, quit doing **** like this then crying that no-one comes. There's an argument for the high sec entry points being harder to camp to encourage more people to actually go down there as opposed to hop in>death.
Sarah Stallman
Pen2 Logistics
#31 - 2013-11-09 17:26:10 UTC
No, just need to pick better entry points. I spent a few hours taking frigates into low to hero tackle in FW sites and only came across one camp half that size.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#32 - 2013-11-09 17:41:33 UTC
Picking an entry point is easier said than done. I've seen a map say 9 people around and jumped into a system with a huge camp and 60 in local. Which was impressive fine it was null Smile

Count myself lucky they were slow.
Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#33 - 2013-11-09 18:05:04 UTC
Hiding your corporation, OP, cute.

Your own corp has a low sec campus to help people learn the game. How much time have you spent there with the members that enjoy low sec?

You don't introduce a nerf to a game mechanic because you feel it has had its day in the sun without any reason. If low sec was o my gatecamps maybe but it is much more than that.

You speak of bitter vets but the lack of knowledge presented here can also harm an area. Low sec is an Eco system. People who camp gates know they are vulnerable. Predatory groups hunt them right back. You may not see it but that does not mean it is not there.

Next you will complain about null sec gate camps?

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Reiisha
#34 - 2013-11-09 20:21:12 UTC
Leta Lilitu wrote:
Samillian wrote:
Gate camping is to boring to do but when you do find one its fun to bait them and then warp the rest of the fleet in although usually most og them have GTFO'd before you land.

No sure why you have a problem with them though as when I see EvE Uni in LowSec its either the 20 to 40 man blob (which gate camps run from) with multiple Blackbird support or the solo heavily core stabbed ratter which usually breezes through a camp.



I agree, that's pretty much the entirety of it. And I would rather have smaller gangs, who still have a chance of getting out safely if they ever do come across a camp.

I am beginning to realise my objection to gate camps is mostly crying foul of just sitting still and getting the home advantage of OOC eyes so you can undock your shinies, as well as presumably pretty good escalation support, and feeling that the lazy bums should jump around and poke their noses into active looking systems like the rest of us :P


Also I don't like the cliff-like drop in support that NPCs offer you.
Just consider this progression of security response that I have masterfully created for you.

1.0 CONCORDOKKEN
0.8 ... CONCORDOKKEN
0.6 ........... CONCORDOKKEN
0.4 Gate guns yaaaaay
0.2 Like a single gate gun.

Seriously, just the slightest chance of a navy ship popping in and laying a jam around would give you a better survival chance. No it diesn't need to be every time, and always on the guy with point.
Or maybe if they slapped some scrams around it would make camps think twice before lying around in jacked up tech 3s with slave sets.


This may not actually be a bad idea. Just have a 75% chance of navy (and navy only, no concord) showing up in 0.4, 50% in 0.3, 25% in 0.2 and none in 0.1... Though in this case, navy ships need to be limited to a certain amount, a navydoken shouldn't exist. It should be roughly like, if navy ships do show up, be like ganking someone who's doing a mission, only you get aggro. As a bonus, it can give more tags if you survive :)

If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all...

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2013-11-09 21:51:42 UTC
The only gate camps that are BAD for gameplay are the near permanent smartbomb camps. Those really disrupt heavily, specially new players that have no idea that is possible and will nto learn because they will not even understand why thei died.




I still think gate guns should increase dps every 30 mnutes until the target ship dies or mvoe away for a while. Time enoughto have real fights... BUt can prevent extremely long samrtbomb stuff.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Sarah Stallman
Pen2 Logistics
#36 - 2013-11-09 23:14:56 UTC
Or make gate guns much more powerful, but less likely to fire. If the guns fire on criminal but not on suspect, for example, but are able to reliably take down a dread.
Previous page12