EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Planned lowsec sentry "fix" - you guys serious?

First post First post First post
Author
Caldari State
#301 - 2012-08-03 13:22:31 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
You know how you fix this? Make it so you cant dock your ship into an orca/capital if you have GCC. It's a very simple fix that doesn't horribly break so many other types of engagements.


Ladies and gentlemen, and EVE players, we have a winner.

By the way, since we're already talking, do you want to buy a rifter? I've got the cheapest rifters in Metropolis. If you can find a cheaper rifter, buy it!

Amarrian Commandos
#302 - 2012-08-03 13:23:36 UTC
This does not seem like a good idea.

Gate guns will ramp up so much damage they will out dps a triage carrier tank?

Somone picked up the wrong sort of tobacco that morning me thinks :P

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.

Amarr Empire
#303 - 2012-08-03 13:24:45 UTC
Thread cleaned of troll posting. Please post responsibly, thank you - ISD Type40.

[b]ISD Type40 Lt. Commander Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]

#304 - 2012-08-03 13:30:48 UTC
Agreed, the ship maintenance bailout has got to go. That **** simply doesn't belong here, and most of the people who use it only do so because they can (why pass on a legit advantage if it exists?)

As far as a low-sec buff, instead of a half-assed change that will only change the tactics gate campers use, why not go for something with a little bit more impact, such as boosting rat bounties to 0.0 levels, while at the same time making it so that only low-sec rats boost security status? On top of that, give people with positive ratings the ability to convert their spare status into tokens that can be traded and sold on the market/contracts.

Bam, instant low-sec buff. I guarantee that due to the time factor and danger in acquisition, these things will fetch a nice premium. Now all the pve bros have a reason to go to low because they can actually get rich there. They'll have to compete with each other for rats, and pirates will also have more targets (while at the same time being able to form protection rackets in systems they control).

Anyone got a dev position open? I'll do it for like a third of Greyscale's pay.

I wrote some true EVE stories! And no, they're not of the generic "my 0.0 alliance had lots of 0.0 fleets and took a lot of 0.0 space" sort. Check them out here:

https://truestories.eveonline.com/users/2074-destiny-corrupted

Amarr Empire
#305 - 2012-08-03 13:31:43 UTC
Now i figure its time to give my point of view on this.
As i am one of these "lame gatecampers" which you so describe, its only fair to see my side of the coin.

Lets think firstly about why gatecamps occur. We gatecamp because it is the only way to get a decent amount of kills within a day to stave off the boredom of lowsec. People dont fly around in lowsec to belts unless they are baiting for a fight or just plain stupid, so by killing off the gate fights you also kill off 90% of lowsec pvp.

Yes i agree that gatecamps should be nerfed in some way as they can be ridiculous and they discourage traffic into lowsec, however before this occurs you need to give people a reason to be out and about flying in lowsec and not just going from gate to station.

And so like others have said you need some form of resource which is only obtainable in lowsec, but is very important and valuable enough to draw players into lowsec. Im not talking about a passive resource such as moon goo but a resource which needs to be actively exploited, prefereably in groups to increase pvp engagements.

If these changes go ahead, lowsec will mostly die off, only leaving any real fights to the faction warfare guys and completely destroying any decent piracy and as such i will be repping my sec and going into either faction warfare or highsec wardec griefing because there will be no viable targets for me as a pirate in lowsec and i would be playing a role in the game which no longer exists.
Minmatar Republic
#306 - 2012-08-03 13:33:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Cid Tazer
I agree with Tippia in that I'm not sure what problem is attempting to be solved by this.

It would be nice if when CCP/CSM are spitballing, they write down the problem they are trying to fix with their spitballed idea.

Spitballing isn't a problem. Spitballing with no one asking "Why should we do this?" is. Also make sure what the problem that is stated is indeed considered a problem.

Smartbombing titans sitting on a gate to high sec doesn't seem to be something that is intended. Being somewhat ignorant about how big the smartbomb blast ends up being from a titan, is it computed based upon the physics engine bubble which extends past the hull or from a point at the center? Is the area that a smartbombing titan covering larger than a 15KM smartbomb would on a battleship.
Templis CALSF
#307 - 2012-08-03 13:42:37 UTC
I truly hope this is a bad joke.

There are 100 things more important then this to do.

And this reasoning is a fail. This is just a shortcut to avoid more work and the usage of baincells. Easy way out.

So this means that a few members on a fleet with -5 sec status (and bellow derp) will get shot by sentry guns even tough their intentions its to fly a fleet to point A to point B. not camping.

What about neutral boosters on highsec? what about the orca gate camps with t3's with no agro-faggotry that happens everysingle day?

How about fixing the drone regions once and for all and avoid more fuckups?

Whats the point of this?? take out gatecamps?? Station games?? eliminate a fleet even before getting to the destination? A very good explanation needs to be given by HIM.

This seems so easy its unbelievable people are payed for this.

Amarr Empire
#308 - 2012-08-03 13:47:08 UTC
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Agreed, the ship maintenance bailout has got to go. That **** simply doesn't belong here, and most of the people who use it only do so because they can (why pass on a legit advantage if it exists?)

As far as a low-sec buff, instead of a half-assed change that will only change the tactics gate campers use, why not go for something with a little bit more impact, such as boosting rat bounties to 0.0 levels, while at the same time making it so that only low-sec rats boost security status? On top of that, give people with positive ratings the ability to convert their spare status into tokens that can be traded and sold on the market/contracts.

Bam, instant low-sec buff. I guarantee that due to the time factor and danger in acquisition, these things will fetch a nice premium. Now all the pve bros have a reason to go to low because they can actually get rich there. They'll have to compete with each other for rats, and pirates will also have more targets (while at the same time being able to form protection rackets in systems they control).

Anyone got a dev position open? I'll do it for like a third of Greyscale's pay.

Bolded the important bit.

I think this would be a fantastic idea. Why would Concord be interested in pirate rats dying in null sec?
#309 - 2012-08-03 13:51:23 UTC
Isalone wrote:
Quote:
CCP Greyscale moves on to explain his work on sentry guns. Sentry guns will now shoot anyone with a criminal flag, suspect or otherwise. Sentry guns will also start with smaller amounts of damage, and ramp up with time. Ideal tuning will be to where triage carriers will die at around 4 1/2 minutes. This way, if you want to use triage carriers in lowsec on gates you can, but you must commit to the cycle for a length of time before starting your reps, if you want to deactivate triage before the sentry guns kill you and jump out. CCP Greyscale also points out that another goal is to make it so that the first couple of hits won't kill an interceptor immediately, enabling a quick tackle, and then a warp out.


I've lived in lowsec for quite a while now and gotta tell you - this is probably gonna cause as much "whine 'n' unsub" threads as nex store/greed is good did. For those who don't go to low often - most of fleet/gang fights in low take place at gates. If gateguns are gonna pop carriers 4.5mins into the fight, cruiser/bc fleets going gcc on a gate aren't gonna happen at all. When was the last time you have seen a carrier at a gate? I don't think I've ever seen one.

Gatecamps - those aren't the problem, people who won't learn/adapt are. You can easily get through all of them, just do a little research.

discuss, lol



It seems blindingly obvious - low sec players complain there's not enough cannon fodder, carebears say its because of gate camps, so CCP takes action to cut down gate camps and therefore more 'bears will head into low-sec.

Oh wait...you want to have your targets given to you on a plate. How silly of me to miss that. And to state the bleeding obvious, gatecamps ARE seen as the problem.

Evidence? There is a guy who was formerly in my main's alliance (still hangs out in alliance chat) has got 1018 kills in July - almost all of them by camping a gate with a serious gang.

Nuff said.
Lost Obsession
#310 - 2012-08-03 14:09:49 UTC
Hestia Mar wrote:
Isalone wrote:
Quote:
CCP Greyscale moves on to explain his work on sentry guns. Sentry guns will now shoot anyone with a criminal flag, suspect or otherwise. Sentry guns will also start with smaller amounts of damage, and ramp up with time. Ideal tuning will be to where triage carriers will die at around 4 1/2 minutes. This way, if you want to use triage carriers in lowsec on gates you can, but you must commit to the cycle for a length of time before starting your reps, if you want to deactivate triage before the sentry guns kill you and jump out. CCP Greyscale also points out that another goal is to make it so that the first couple of hits won't kill an interceptor immediately, enabling a quick tackle, and then a warp out.


I've lived in lowsec for quite a while now and gotta tell you - this is probably gonna cause as much "whine 'n' unsub" threads as nex store/greed is good did. For those who don't go to low often - most of fleet/gang fights in low take place at gates. If gateguns are gonna pop carriers 4.5mins into the fight, cruiser/bc fleets going gcc on a gate aren't gonna happen at all. When was the last time you have seen a carrier at a gate? I don't think I've ever seen one.

Gatecamps - those aren't the problem, people who won't learn/adapt are. You can easily get through all of them, just do a little research.

discuss, lol



It seems blindingly obvious - low sec players complain there's not enough cannon fodder, carebears say its because of gate camps, so CCP takes action to cut down gate camps and therefore more 'bears will head into low-sec.

Oh wait...you want to have your targets given to you on a plate. How silly of me to miss that. And to state the bleeding obvious, gatecamps ARE seen as the problem.

Evidence? There is a guy who was formerly in my main's alliance (still hangs out in alliance chat) has got 1018 kills in July - almost all of them by camping a gate with a serious gang.

Nuff said.


The changes mention wont cut gate camps, it will increase them. Learn what the **** you're talking about before opening your mouth and letting out a brain fart.

Allowing insta locking inties to not die in a fire allows the pirates to sit outside sentry range and lol blap you from 200km.

Im pretty sure, people use to escort **** thourgh losec in fleets with falcons and Dps boats. Carebears got lazy, campers got orcas and everyone's complaining.

CCP is fixing the orca issuse, so campers are gonna have to commit to a gank, bears just need to scout ****, and no that doesn't mean an alt. Its means in an MMO use other PEOPLE!.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.

Caldari State
#311 - 2012-08-03 14:10:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Ghaztehschmexeh
As someone who has lived in lowsec almost constantly since 2007, I have to say this idea upsets me. I'm not going to be one of those "if you do this I'll quit!" guys, but I see this seriously hurting the existing playerbase in lowsec. I don't see the issue with the current system, and the idea of a triage carrier dying to gate guns is just... wow. If this is the case, fights basically won't happen on gates. Fights don't last seconds unless they are ganks, which isn't what we want to be encouraging. This means that guns will kill anyone trying to fight on a gate.

This also removes certain elements of risk taking out a fleet in lowsec. If an enemy fleet lands with you on the gate, they may not be able to engage due inevitable death due to guns. Thus saying "fights will take place in belts etc" means that ALL pvp in lowsec will become consensual, which is completely removed from the "piracy" view of lowsec. It'll become a kiddy pvp ground with very little risk.

In my eyes, if this goes forward, it'll destroy lowsec as we know it. Is there a pirate CSM member? If so, where the hell is he/she?
#312 - 2012-08-03 14:14:22 UTC
Just do this at the .4 High sec entries and leave the rest of the guns as they are.


Less people will Rage n' Unsub because they have to go hunting.
#313 - 2012-08-03 14:15:53 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
I think we need a more linerar line from 1.0 to 0.0 befause right now its out of wack.. clearly the most dangerous systems in low sec are the 0.4 due to them being regional gates to ghigh sec... having a clear progression from1.0 (concord death ray) to 0.0 no concrd at all would be nice...

one of the barriers for high sec players endtering low sec is the complete lack of any security.. how about in 0.4 systems you have a small roaming gang of npc who have the sleeper A>I so that if you are attacked and have a 0.1+ sec status then the npc will save you if they are in the same system... every constilation will have a small roaming gang... so there is a chance that they could be up to 5 jumps away wich means you are dead...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Lost Obsession
#314 - 2012-08-03 14:27:22 UTC  |  Edited by: FIRST GENERAL
CCP Greyscale, I really do hope that this was merely an idea and nothing more. We've all been witness to at the time so-called 'ideas' which were later implemented exactly 'as is' despite only ever being advertised as ideas.

After reading through the whole thread and finding some whining, some trolling but also some rigorous (and righteously so) and valid arguments against even the 'mere idea' of these new gate guns i'll add my 5 cents worth to it as well:

The idea to 'fix gate guns' or implement 'stronger gate guns' seems to stem (and achieve that very desire) from a :
- desire to eliminate gate camps (a)
- desire to make low-sec safer (b)
- desire to draw carebears into lowsec to make it more crowded (c)

(a) First off, there isn't that much gate camping to being with, and I think that in that respect its a false desire to begin with. Its a vast generalisation that comes from having a few systems in Eve that are notorious for gate Smartbombing and camping gates with insta-locking ships.
Most of the time so-called 'gate camps' are merely gangs running around 'showing some leg' in order to find engagements and naturally taking the possibility away to 'show some leg' on a gate to get an engagement will not help at all to make lowsec more crowded, quite the opposite actually, it will drain it of the life and action you've given it lately with Inferno. Your idea will not lead to eliminating gate camps.

(b) Second, the proposed changes will not make low-sec safer. You merely force the lowsec veterans to adapt their tactics if they want to gate camp and gank. Some adapted tactics have already been formulated in this thread to illustrate just that. Your idea will then eliminate the problem nor bring with it your desired effect. However fleet fights around the gates will simply not be possible anymore as stated above. Your idea will not lead to making lowsec safer. (If you want safe stay in high-sec)

(c) Third, and by (b) this will already be clear to most, your idea will not draw carebears into lowsec to make it more crowded simply because pvp'ers will find ways around your changes and still hurt the 'carebears' and gank them like there's no tomorrow. Your idea will however drive pvp'ers out of low-sec, and that, is not something you want or do you? Your idea will not bring more carebears into lowsec and will not make it more crowded, quite the opposite.

Instead of trying to get carebears into low-sec how about getting even more pvp'ers into low-sec? After all, low-sec is one of the main homes of PvP or isn't it? So instead make it more attractive for pvp'ers to live in low-sec. The mechanics as they are are not unfair simply because there's ways to avoid getting killed in low-sec and as long as there is, it is in my opinion balanced (in a general way and this is of course disregarding known bugs; sentry guns as they are at the moment, are not a bug).

If carebears learn the low-sec mechanics, you won't have to have ideas about fixing something that isn't broken in the first place in the form of having sentry guns' power go OVER 9000 after 4 minutes.

If the master plan really is to make low-sec more crowded, and it seems to me as if it were, then do the only sensible thing in that regard, and make low-sec more rewarding.
#315 - 2012-08-03 14:33:06 UTC
Maybe this is a plan to get more people in FW? Afterall we can shoot folks in low without getting a sec status hit or going gcc.

I do like the idea but would like it to be implemented with caution. And as suggested before the lower the security of the system the slower the progression should be. In a 0.1 systems for instance you should be able to tank the sentries for quite some time.

_-Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily. _

Friendly Probes
#316 - 2012-08-03 14:35:40 UTC
CCP Greyscale if this was a spitball idea then it should be never spoken of again it is a terrible idea.

I have been pirating since 2004 and since 2005 when the quick fix sec stat change happend CCP has been screwing pirates over. The main reason with people living in highsec and not comming to low is not because of camps thats just an automated response to it, the real reason is isk making to risk, I personaly don't blame people for staying in highsec and making a load of money with no risk to dieing minus the odd suicide ganker, it makes sense instead of comming to lowsec maybe making a bit more isk but at alot more risk of being blown up.

CCP has failed to make lowsec a middle ground between highsec and 0.0. The money you can make in 0.0 dwarfs the cash in highsec as it should but moving to lowsec does not provide enough cash to be worth the risk as it does with moving to 0.0.

If CCP make lowsec more profitable then people will come, if they make these proposed changes then people will still come but for a different reason by CCP removing the risk so they may aswell remove all lowsec make it all 0.5 and higher and be cone with it as thats the way they are heading. Business wise I can see why as the little amount of rl money CCP get from lowsec players if they all quit its not going to dent their income by a noticable amount and they will have alot more happy carebaers doing their thing in highsec.

Whilst im here the CSM is probably one of the worst ideas CCP has implemented with it all being big names in eve or people from big alliances who don't seem to want to do anything unless its benifiting them personaly.
Lost Obsession
#317 - 2012-08-03 14:38:48 UTC
Generals4 wrote:
Maybe this is a plan to get more people in FW? Afterall we can shoot folks in low without getting a sec status hit or going gcc.

I do like the idea but would like it to be implemented with caution. And as suggested before the lower the security of the system the slower the progression should be. In a 0.1 systems for instance you should be able to tank the sentries for quite some time.


I'm in FW and this would affect me as well.

a) I'm -9.8 and engage neutrals under gateguns quite regularily
b) I'm very often a logistics pilot repping outlaws and get gateguns quite regularily
c) A lot of my best fights happen vs neutrals/other pirate entities in lowsec, those I would no longer get to experince because :gateguns:
Caldari State
#318 - 2012-08-03 14:41:00 UTC  |  Edited by: flakeys
What strikes me most here is how many people are stomping on the pirates.


Could we highsec carebears please keep in mind that the barges are getting some dps because of the massive complaints about how empire griefers had no balls telling them to grow some and go to lowsec because they could get reall fights there ?


Now with this change your shooting the low-sec guys to the griefing side.


Is it so much to ask for eve players to keep the playstyle of others in mind.High-seccers in here are now looking just as stupid as the griefers did in the ''weeeeelp stop hulkageddon'' threads saying how high-sec should not be safe , fit a tank , yadda yadda.


I support the barge changes even though i don't mine because for ''that crowd'' it is a welcome change and the mining ships still can be ganked but need more numbers.And in the same way i agree with the pirates that this is a bad move for their specific playstyle as they'll be bored shitless jumping up and down system all day to get a kill .Low-sec is easy to pass through IF you do just a small bit of scouting so leave it as it is.

How about we finally after all this time get a REALL change for low-sec to make it more attractive.This change will not bring a lot more people to low-sec for pve it will just increase the traffic wich burns through low-sec and get's out again asap.CCP is seeking an easy way out yet again to ''fix'' low-sec.How about you devote your time for the next expansion purely on low-sec because it's about damn time.

And just to be clear : I'm not a pirate .Just an empire bear who has a solo pvp trip through low-sec a few times a year.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.

Caldari State
#319 - 2012-08-03 14:42:53 UTC
suprised i haven't really read it anywhere in this thread. But if you want more people (of all kinds) in lowsec there is a solution (which has been suggested by my mate tetsel a number of times), though it is outside the bounds of what can be changed at this time.

Simply put a resource in low that cannot be found anywhere else in eve. Ppl will come and fight for it.

I has all the eve inactivity

Minmatar Republic
#320 - 2012-08-03 14:46:35 UTC
Great! Now take it the rest of the way and make below -0.5 unable to dock in empire. Want to be a pirate? No empire space for you. Also no recycling of low security alts, or at least a month wait with a lockout while waiting to biomass it.
Forum Jump