These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A month into Eve, my biggest beef: Inescapable gate camps

Author
Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#81 - 2015-12-03 19:09:13 UTC
The sheer amount of negativity in this thread is... well, it's to be expected actually. The OP does, in my opinion, raise a valid point however as a new player his solutions would be less than ideal.

I understand that there are many ways in the game to avoid gatecamps but that doesn't detract from the fact that once you take that gate and are in the middle of the camp you either die because your ship wasn't fit right or you can get away because you're in a cloaky ship or a ceptor. Sure you can scout but who's to say that by the time you go back for the ship you wanted to bring that a camp hasn't formed? This means you need either a friend (or realistically an alt) to be there to scout at the moment you need to pass the gate and the game should not require several accounts to play.

As has been said by many gate camps are a fairly small problem outside of certain choke points where there is little option but to go that way, perhaps a map rework would be enough to open up more paths and make camping a pipe slightly more difficult, maybe require a group to camp several gates at once to lock down an area.

My general feelings on this issue are that your survival chances are too heavily based on your fit, I would prefer if player skill and quick decision making had a larger impact but I can understand if others disagree on that.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#82 - 2015-12-03 19:23:18 UTC
Skill starts when the client loads, not when you hit jump.

Your survival chances rest on you doing your homework first, fit second and twitch skills third and last.

I am OK with this.
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
#83 - 2015-12-03 19:34:20 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Mr Mieyli wrote:

I understand that there are many ways in the game to avoid gatecamps but that doesn't detract from the fact that once you take that gate and are in the middle of the camp you either die because your ship wasn't fit right or you can get away because you're in a cloaky ship or a ceptor.



So you're saying that once someone has an advantage over you, they have an advantage over you unless you've planned ahead to counteract that advantage! Bit tautological, don't you think?

Where are we drawing the line on that way of thinking?

"I understand there are many ways for an AB brawler to get the drop on a kiter, but that doesn't detract from the fact that once the kiter pulls range and gets a point on the brawler... etc."

"I understand that there are many ways to avoid hotdrop bait, but once you take the bait and the caps land on grid..."

If I find myself in a 1v1, should I stop shooting the guy if he hits structure and I'm still in shield? I mean, it's not fair anymore - I have WAY more HP left!

Good job, you've observed that there's a tipping point in most conflicts where one party is almost assured of losing, absent some contingency. It's an utterly meaningless observation.
Quote:

Sure you can scout but who's to say that by the time you go back for the ship you wanted to bring that a camp hasn't formed? This means you need either a friend (or realistically an alt) to be there to scout at the moment you need to pass the gate and the game should not require several accounts to play.


No, it doesn't mean you NEED. You're presenting a false dilemma: Either you're 100% certain it's safe, or you can't go at all.

Sure, there's a chance that, if you go back for your ship, a camp will have formed. So what? **** happens, no?

And that's where other risk management techniques come in. You scouted it and a camp formed, but just in case, you travel fit with a cloak and MWD? Problem solved, unless you get unlucky with positioning. The fact that nothing is guaranteed isn't a bug, it's a feature.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Mr Mieyli
Doomheim
#84 - 2015-12-03 20:39:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Mieyli
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Good job, you've observed that there's a tipping point in most conflicts where one party is almost assured of losing, absent some contingency. It's an utterly meaningless observation.


Sure but in this case the tipping point is before anything has happened, jumping gate to gate is how you travel in EvE and its purely down to chance whether this jump or that jump is going to land you in a camp. Its this that I find less than ideal from a gameplay point of view, it isn't very interesting for either side. Yes you can fit a MWD and cloak and probably avoid the camp but is it really fun gameplay having to switch between travel fits and then actual useful fits all the time? Eve actually has this problem in a lot of areas, you need to be prepared for 100 different possibilities that may or may not end up happening and if you happen to be unprepared for the 1 thing that does end up happening then too bad you're dead.

You're being pedantic when I said you need an alt to scout you, your choice is either bring one and spot camps before you're in them or you don't and you get stuck facing whatever you happened to jump into. I brought up the fact that a camp could form in the time it takes you to scout yourself to show that the scouting has to happen when you take the jump for it to be worth anything, and since nobody will want to scout you around all day this requires an alt. Alt reliance is bad for the game as it discourages players from getting attached to their characters; for EvE to be the type of game CCP want people need to treat their character seriously and this cant happen when your character is only one of the many you control.

Edit: I should be clear I'm not saying we need radical change, but that there may be more enjoyable ways to get the same outcome.

This post brought to you by CCP's alpha forum alt initiative. Playing the eve forums has never come cheaper.

Karash Amerius
The Seven Shadows
Scotch and Tea
#85 - 2015-12-03 20:53:16 UTC
Travel Fits...look them up.

If you are in Null or WH...bubbles are just part of the environment. Personally I don't like bubbles, but they are not going anywhere.

Karash Amerius Operative, Sutoka

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#86 - 2015-12-03 21:02:48 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:


My general feelings on this issue are that your survival chances are too heavily based on your fit, I would prefer if player skill and quick decision making had a larger impact but I can understand if others disagree on that.


Fitting is player skill. Its actually one the most important pieces of the game. Yea you can copy paste a "good" fit someone gives you, but if you dont know why the fit is good, then you'll die just like if you had a small laser thorax.
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
#87 - 2015-12-03 21:09:10 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Mr Mieyli wrote:

Sure but in this case the tipping point is before anything has happened,


This is an arbitrary, self-serving, and largely imaginary distinction. Things happened as soon as you undocked. As others have already noted, most fights are actually over before the pewpew formally begins. Again, this is not Honorable Spaceship Duels Online.


Quote:
Its this that I find less than ideal from a gameplay point of view, it isn't very interesting for either side. Yes you can fit a MWD and cloak and probably avoid the camp but is it really fun gameplay having to switch between travel fits and then actual useful fits all the time?


You don't have to. You can choose to do so, in accordance with your level of risk tolerance. In a combat fit, I don't really think much of just checking the map stats for a bloom on a HS-LS border and #YOLOing on in there if it looks okay.
I'll almost certainly get caught doing this some day, when the camp is brand new and no stats have appeared yet. I've accepted this. That loss is already calculated in as a business expense.



If I'm in a heavily laden industrial ship, scouting, MWD/cloak, etc. are utilized. Or, on occasion, I'll just find another option. Find a wormhole near the destination, chain it back to somewhere in contiguous high sec, courier contract the loot to the HS system and then last-mile it myself, for instance. Single trip cargo values are kept below what I consider to be an acceptable loss should the wheels come off.


WHY do you imagine that you simply HAVE to be 100% certain of safety?

Quote:


You're being pedantic when I said you need an alt to scout you, your choice is either bring one and spot camps before you're in them or you don't and you get stuck facing whatever you happened to jump into. I brought up the fact that a camp could form in the time it takes you to scout yourself to show that the scouting has to happen when you take the jump for it to be worth anything, and since nobody will want to scout you around all day this requires an alt.


No, "pedantic" is saying, "That's not a dinner roll, it's a crescent roll." What you said was factually incorrect.

The scouting does not HAVE to happen when you take the jump for it to be worth anything. That's utter nonsense of the, "You should be embarrassed to have actually said that," variety. As I said before, you're arguing a false dilemma: Either it's perfect, or it's useless. There's a reason it's called "risk management" and not "risk elimination".

Intelligence has an expiration date, but it is not "seconds", and to claim otherwise is flat out lying.

Yes, there COULD be a camp there in the few minutes it takes you to swap, but there probably won't be and that's probably good enough most of the time, especially when coupled with other risk management techniques as contingencies.

Quote:
Alt reliance is bad for the game as it discourages players from getting attached to their characters; for EvE to be the type of game CCP want people need to treat their character seriously and this cant happen when your character is only one of the many you control.


I'm a single account, generally solo player. I get by without them. Bonus: Doing heavy industry outside of high sec. How is this possible?!

I moved ~500K m3 out of high sec yesterday, in T1 industrials. The only time I felt remotely concerned? The HS undocks.

Alts are just *A* tool - they're not *THE* answer, as you're suggesting. It's quite doable other ways if you're resourceful and willing to accept that, no, you can't eliminate all of the risk all of the time.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#88 - 2015-12-03 21:30:29 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
TBH, I don't really like gatecamps, myself. Different reasons, though. I don't find them problematic, I just think they're a boring chore that appeals only to the most shiftless and risk-averse of players.


Might I suggest you pull your head out and learn what terms like risk averse mean, because running around and using the term like an insult only makes you look like an idiot.



They are also very thin-skinned, precious things. Lol


Maybe, but you still look like an idiot for using a desirable trait as an insult.

Here is a hint: Risk aversion is a good thing. And when people do not behave in a risk averse fashion, it is doubly ironic when somebody like you calls them bad or tells them how to be....risk averse.

BTW, gate camping is more than just sitting there thinking, "Lets ruin someone's day." It is also done at the entrance points to sov space. An alliance/coalition that holds space camps the entrance points in part to assert their control over that space.

Gates also make great ambush sites since people can't see what is on the other side, once they jump through they have to burn back to the gate making them vulnerable, or they have to burn out of the bubbles (if in NS)...making them vulnerable (cloaking and nullified ships excepted). Chances are if somebody is going to get caught and killed...it is on gate, IMO (big block level fleet battles aside). It is the one place where local really wont help you.

So, not only are using a desirable trait as an insult, you've got the wrong end of the stick as well.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
#89 - 2015-12-03 21:33:16 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Teckos Pech wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
TBH, I don't really like gatecamps, myself. Different reasons, though. I don't find them problematic, I just think they're a boring chore that appeals only to the most shiftless and risk-averse of players.


Might I suggest you pull your head out and learn what terms like risk averse mean, because running around and using the term like an insult only makes you look like an idiot.



They are also very thin-skinned, precious things. Lol


Maybe, but you still look like an idiot for using a desirable trait as an insult.

Here is a hint: Risk aversion is a good thing. And when people do not behave in a risk averse fashion, it is doubly ironic when somebody like you calls them bad or tells them how to be....risk averse.

BTW, gate camping is more than just sitting there thinking, "Lets ruin someone's day." It is also done at the entrance points to sov space. An alliance/coalition that holds space camps the entrance points in part to assert their control over that space.

Gates also make great ambush sites since people can't see what is on the other side, once they jump through they have to burn back to the gate making them vulnerable, or they have to burn out of the bubbles (if in NS)...making them vulnerable (cloaking and nullified ships excepted). Chances are if somebody is going to get caught and killed...it is on gate, IMO (big block level fleet battles aside). It is the one place where local really wont help you.

So, not only are using a desirable trait as an insult, you've got the wrong end of the stick as well.



So you didn't actually read the thread before going all, "GRRR, MY FEEFEES!" eh, Precious? Roll

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#90 - 2015-12-03 21:45:54 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
TBH, I don't really like gatecamps, myself. Different reasons, though. I don't find them problematic, I just think they're a boring chore that appeals only to the most shiftless and risk-averse of players.


Might I suggest you pull your head out and learn what terms like risk averse mean, because running around and using the term like an insult only makes you look like an idiot.



They are also very thin-skinned, precious things. Lol


Maybe, but you still look like an idiot for using a desirable trait as an insult.

Here is a hint: Risk aversion is a good thing. And when people do not behave in a risk averse fashion, it is doubly ironic when somebody like you calls them bad or tells them how to be....risk averse.

BTW, gate camping is more than just sitting there thinking, "Lets ruin someone's day." It is also done at the entrance points to sov space. An alliance/coalition that holds space camps the entrance points in part to assert their control over that space.

Gates also make great ambush sites since people can't see what is on the other side, once they jump through they have to burn back to the gate making them vulnerable, or they have to burn out of the bubbles (if in NS)...making them vulnerable (cloaking and nullified ships excepted). Chances are if somebody is going to get caught and killed...it is on gate, IMO (big block level fleet battles aside). It is the one place where local really wont help you.

So, not only are using a desirable trait as an insult, you've got the wrong end of the stick as well.



So you didn't actually read the thread before going all, "GRRR, MY FEEFEES!" eh, Precious? Roll


You lost me on that last loop. Are you thinking I'm on the OP's side?

I was responding to your drivel, not the OP. I see people on these forums using the term 'risk aversion/averse' as if it is a dirty phrase.

The point is, we are all risk averse and it is a good thing.

As for the OP, I think he is flat out wrong and it is partly a function of his flawed understanding of the nature of the game. But calling him risk averse is about as useful as calling him Betty.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Jasonne Ormand
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#91 - 2015-12-03 21:53:45 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:

So you didn't actually read the thread before going all, "GRRR, MY FEEFEES!" eh, Precious? Roll

It's hard to take your arguments seriously when you not only go out of your way to sling snarky insults, but you also edit them to make sure they're just right.
Jasonne Ormand
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2015-12-03 22:00:43 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:

A "fair fight" is what happens when someone made a mistake. This is not Honorable Internet Spaceship Duels Online.

I guess I come from the old school where the appeal of a game comes from overcoming a challenge. The love people seem to have in Eve for jumping the unprepared is fairly bizarre to me.

I'll go annihilate my daughter at chess and report back. Maybe I'm missing something.
Paranoid Loyd
#93 - 2015-12-03 22:03:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Paranoid Loyd
Jasonne Ormand wrote:
I guess I come from the old school where the appeal of a game comes from overcoming a challenge.
Oh really? Your posting seems to indicate the exact opposite.
Jasonne Ormand wrote:
The love people seem to have in Eve for jumping the unprepared is fairly bizarre to me.
Because avoiding this my ignorant friend is indeed the challenge.

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!

SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
#94 - 2015-12-03 22:04:04 UTC
Jasonne Ormand wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:

A "fair fight" is what happens when someone made a mistake. This is not Honorable Internet Spaceship Duels Online.


I guess I come from the old school where the appeal of a game comes from overcoming a challenge.



Then why aren't you out there bypassing, running, or just plain crashing gatecamps instead of crying about how it's just too gosh darn inconvenient to have to deal with them?

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/

Jasonne Ormand
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2015-12-03 22:23:46 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
[quote=Jasonne Ormand]
Then why aren't you out there bypassing, running, or just plain crashing gatecamps instead of crying about how it's just too gosh darn inconvenient to have to deal with them?

Well, I am. It's sort of a requirement to exist in lowsec. The fact that I even have to is the issue. My only issue with Eve, really. Other than maybe some cultural weirdnesses, but that's not eating up my game time like gate camps do.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#96 - 2015-12-03 22:48:14 UTC
Current gate camp mechanics are.. managable right now. Yes there are some camps that have 2 prots a loki and legion with an instalock procurer that will ruin your day. But, nothing will be 100% safe. MJD is your friend in larger ships and using your map to spot camps is the best way to avoid them.

Another bit of advice is use killboards. Depending on the API you can get information before the map updates and actually confirm a camp is ongoing.

That being said, just wait a week when the new HICs come out with 30km+ scrams. Now MJDs are useless too.

Coming soon, to every gate camp near you.
Ralph King-Griffin
Lords.Of.Midnight
The Devil's Warrior Alliance
#97 - 2015-12-03 23:08:10 UTC
Jasonne Ormand wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:

So you didn't actually read the thread before going all, "GRRR, MY FEEFEES!" eh, Precious? Roll

It's hard to take your arguments seriously when you not only go out of your way to sling snarky insults, but you also edit them to make sure they're just right.

It's much much harder to take you seriously when you say this
Jasonne Ormand wrote:

I guess I come from the old school where the appeal of a game comes from overcoming a challenge.

in a thread explicitly complaining and pleading for the removal of the one thing synonymous with lowsec and one of its most basic challenges.

Jasonne Ormand
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#98 - 2015-12-03 23:23:18 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

It's much much harder to take you seriously when you say this
Jasonne Ormand wrote:

I guess I come from the old school where the appeal of a game comes from overcoming a challenge.

in a thread explicitly complaining and pleading for the removal of the one thing synonymous with lowsec and one of its most basic challenges.


It wouldn't be if you read it in context, specifically in response to someone claiming fair fights only happen in Eve if someone screws up -- and at least one other in this thread asked why they'd even want a fair fight at all. Pretty sure more than one, actually.

*boggle*

Eve is weird. I mean, it's fun, and I'll play even with the gate camps, but y'all do some weird ****.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#99 - 2015-12-04 00:17:01 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
In EVE, the challenge is beating back "unfairness" with equal levels of "unfairness." That is the meta-game here.

Stop thinking, "if I jink to the left maybe I can avoid some incoming fire"

Start thinking, "that is the shortest route to my destination. By default I will assume it is camped. Pull up the map... turn on the kill statistics... well now, the route I want to take has 40 kills in the last hour, 200+ in the last twenty four... hmmm... what about that route? Only 5 kills in the last twenty four hours, but it adds 5 systems to my overall journey (which adds about 5 to 10 minutes to my trip)... but i am carrying some pretty valuable stuff... I'll err on the side of caution despite the extra time I have to spend travelling.
Oh, Oh! And I should still fit my ship to blitz past an impromptu gate camp. Those do happen. A few warp stabs, a cloak, a MWD. Oh wait... I need none of that. I'll just call up my corpmate who also lives with me in low-sec and have him scout the gates for me! After all... I have done and always will do the same thing for him. Because if we don't watch each other's backs, no one else will!"
SurrenderMonkey
Space Llama Industries
#100 - 2015-12-04 00:31:41 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Jasonne Ormand wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:

It's much much harder to take you seriously when you say this
Jasonne Ormand wrote:

I guess I come from the old school where the appeal of a game comes from overcoming a challenge.

in a thread explicitly complaining and pleading for the removal of the one thing synonymous with lowsec and one of its most basic challenges.


It wouldn't be if you read it in context, specifically in response to someone claiming fair fights only happen in Eve if someone screws up -- and at least one other in this thread asked why they'd even want a fair fight at all. Pretty sure more than one, actually.

*boggle*

Eve is weird. I mean, it's fun, and I'll play even with the gate camps, but y'all do some weird ****.



Eve is always fair in that, outside of actual cheating via hacks or some illegal abuse of game mechanics, everyone is adhering to the same set of rules.

Within that ruleset, everyone has an equal opportunity to place themselves in an advantaged position, or others in a disadvantaged position.

If you land in a gate camp, it was "fair" when you undocked, and the culmination of their decisions and your decisions is that you're now at a disadvantage. Or, perhaps, you're not. Maybe you have a cyno fit and they're the ones who are ******?

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/