EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Low-sec Hopes and Changes

Author
#381 - 2017-03-20 19:19:38 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
but i really shouldnt complain about you buffing gatecamping.


It doesnt buff gatecamps.
Just removes jumping over them in LS.
Army of New Eden
#382 - 2017-03-20 19:19:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Orakkus
Okay, trying to bring back the conversation to producing some useful results..

I am sure someone posted something like this earlier, but I am wondering what you all might think of it.

Have low-sec gates turn off for a period of time. Not randomly, but in a predictable period.. say 5 to 20 minutes out of every hour depending on the security level. While the amount of time the gate is off stays the same, when it goes off changes daily, and you can buy a constellation's information with some isk or LP depending on your standing with the local faction.

This would allow players to be invested in developing local industry, because if they have good faction they can keep up with when the gates close and open, giving them more control over risk. WIth a higher perceived level of control, more people will move out to low-sec. With more people out to low-sec, more content would be provided to those who want to pirate.

In addition, this would cause more traffic to be diverted through wormholes, increasing content for that avenue as well. You also have the possibility of an insider trading this information to pirates for potential backstabbing content goodness too.

He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander

Snuffed Out
#383 - 2017-03-20 19:25:49 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
but i really shouldnt complain about you buffing gatecamping.


It doesnt buff gatecamps.
Just removes jumping over them in LS.


it does because all i simply need to do is put scouts in each surrounding system around where i am camping, i dont need to worry about someone dropping blops, or capitals, i can see any hostile fleet coming into my system and i can just warp off the gate.

currently all someone needs to do is have a nuetral cyno jump in system and gg gatecamp gets rekt'd by a ton of blops and nobody has any time to respond because its over in the blink of an eye

thats a buff to gatecamps

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

#384 - 2017-03-20 19:37:37 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
but i really shouldnt complain about you buffing gatecamping.


It doesnt buff gatecamps.
Just removes jumping over them in LS.


it does because all i simply need to do is put scouts in each surrounding system around where i am camping, i dont need to worry about someone dropping blops, or capitals, i can see any hostile fleet coming into my system and i can just warp off the gate.

currently all someone needs to do is have a nuetral cyno jump in system and gg gatecamp gets rekt'd by a ton of blops and nobody has any time to respond because its over in the blink of an eye

thats a buff to gatecamps


It doesnt buff gatecamps.
Just removes jumping over them in LS.

It really is that simple.

Gate camps remain the same.

Its not a buff to gate camps, its the elimination of the option of jumping past them.

Post-change, you dont have to worry about blops reking your cyno.

If you want to pass through LS, prepare, fit, choose path, and either sneak through or fight through.
Amarr Empire
#385 - 2017-03-20 19:38:02 UTC
Mr Mieyli wrote:
I want you to think hard about this bit salvos, what makes a thing justified?

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

#386 - 2017-03-20 19:41:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Mr Mieyli wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
I want you to think hard about this bit salvos, what makes a thing justified?


Game mechanics and structure.
Equilibrium as a rational totality.

This game is a machine in which we are the moving parts.
Amarr Empire
#387 - 2017-03-20 19:44:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Mr Mieyli
You haven't answered the question of what makes something justified, which makes me think you haven't thought about it. Anyone can flat out refuse your justification that's the nature of society.

There is no such thing as rational totality.

There is also no such thing as justice, or any objective morality.

We are alone to decide for ourselves what is right and what should be. There's thousands of years of proof people can't agree what should be.

In the context of eve, CCP decide what is right, they are god here. They literally create the (game) universe.

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

Goonswarm Federation
#388 - 2017-03-20 19:44:44 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Post-change, you dont have to worry about blops reking your cyno.



Blops aren't reking cynos. They use cynos to squash gatecamp.

Your though process is all over the place man...
Caldari State
#389 - 2017-03-20 20:05:05 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


Post-change, you dont have to worry about blops reking your cyno.



Blops aren't reking cynos. They use cynos to squash gatecamp.

Your though process is all over the place man...

He doesn't understand cyno, he's shown that before when he thought you cyno off grid and then warp to the target, giving them plenty of time with d-scan to know what you have and warp out.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Caldari State
#390 - 2017-03-20 20:55:51 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
sero Hita wrote:
Snip


Explain to me how cynos/caps are justified in LS.


It doesn't matter if it is justified or not. It doesn't have to be. It says no where that every mechanic has to be justified, that is only in your head.

Besides I already have: power projection for lowsec groups, giving people the posibillity to set up traps etc. One can clearly feel that you are not playing in lowsec. Because usually lowsec groups hotdrop other lowsec groups, and not like you think: nullsec hotdropping lowsec. Even the fw militias (Galmil/calmil) have used caps when taking systems in the past(One being stopped by an incursion suddenly not allowing cynos and breaking down the logistics chain feeding ships to the grinder, ending the siege). And i also think the ability to escalate above your enemy is reason enough tbh.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker

#391 - 2017-03-20 20:58:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Mr Mieyli wrote:
In the context of eve, CCP decide what is right, they are god here. They literally create the (game) universe.

EVE is a machine. It has no life of its own.
Nor is it a perfect machine.
It has flaws.

It is created and populated by people whom are fallible.

That CCP decides what they do with their machine, does not mean their decisions are right, rational or justified.

There is a distinction between the games mechanical parts, and its organic parts (us as players and CCP).

In my view, cynos/caps in LS are a dysfunctional part of the machine.

NS exists over 3400 systems in which to use cynos/caps.
LS exists as a slim border between HS and NS of only 817 systems.

I have at length explained the inequity between NS dropping into LS vs LS dropping into NS.
I have at length explained that LS content, nor gatecamps, do not require cynos/caps.

Caps/cynos, rationally, mechanically, belong in NS.

I understand the misgivings of LS/NS (whichever or, or however organised) about losing cynos/caps in LS for whatever purpose they currently enjoy it as. Some expressed overtly, some vested.

But caps/cynos, rationally, mechanically, belong in NS.
NPC Null is ideal if you want LS style non-sov. Its a vast emptiness.
Player Sov is ideal if you want conflict.

These spaces already exist for cyno/cap play, without restrictions.

Why then are they staying in LS?
Why are they arguing for LS to keep cynos/caps, when NS is out there already, with no restrictions?
Caldari State
#392 - 2017-03-20 21:06:25 UTC  |  Edited by: sero Hita
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
but i really shouldnt complain about you buffing gatecamping.


It doesnt buff gatecamps.
Just removes jumping over them in LS.


Salvos, you are not understanding. Lan Wang Means that cynos are the counter to gatecamps right now. Because if you slow boat to them, they will see you on d-scan and leave. If you light a cyno on the gatecamp, your backup fleet will jump bridge in and appear immidiately and the whole gatecap won't get away. It has NOHTING to do with jumping over the gatecamp

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker

Goonswarm Federation
#393 - 2017-03-20 21:07:25 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
In the context of eve, CCP decide what is right, they are god here. They literally create the (game) universe.

EVE is a machine. It has no life of its own.
Nor is it a perfect machine.
It has flaws.

It is created and populated by people whom are fallible.

That CCP decides what they do with their machine, does not mean their decisions are right, rational or justified.

There is a distinction between the games mechanical parts, and its organic parts (us as players and CCP).

In my view, cynos/caps in LS are a dysfunctional part of the machine.

NS exists over 3400 systems in which to use cynos/caps.
LS exists as a slim border between HS and NS of only 817 systems.

I have at length explained the inequity between NS dropping into LS vs LS dropping into NS.
I have at length explained that LS content, nor gatecamps, do not require cynos/caps.

Caps/cynos, rationally, mechanically, belong in NS.

I understand the misgivings of LS/NS (whichever or, or however organised) about losing cynos/caps in LS for whatever purpose they currently enjoy it as. Some expressed overtly, some vested.

But caps/cynos, rationally, mechanically, belong in NS.
NPC Null is ideal if you want LS style non-sov. Its a vast emptiness.
Player Sov is ideal if you want conflict.

These spaces already exist for cyno/cap play, without restrictions.

Why then are they staying in LS?
Why are they arguing for LS to keep cynos/caps, when NS is out there already, with no restrictions?


I really wonder how you manage to post while holding your hands over your ears because there is no way you haven't understood how nonsensical your point is beside blatantly ignoring people while chanting lalalalala.
Snuffed Out
#394 - 2017-03-20 21:10:05 UTC
we are in lowsec because we dont like nullsec, how hard is that for you to understand? the current mechanics in lowsec allow for a range of different gameplay options and logistics is easier for people who dont want to rely on using huge logistics networks.

nullsec do not walk over lowsec by projecting caps in every system, nullsec do not own or dominate lowsec either, thats all in your head

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Caldari State
#395 - 2017-03-20 21:12:04 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


These spaces already exist for cyno/cap play, without restrictions.

Why then are they staying in LS?
Why are they arguing for LS to keep cynos/caps, when NS is out there already, with no restrictions?


Well, why stay in lowsec... FW, no bubbles, a nice mixture of solo and fleet. But I thank you, because i actually see the solution to buffing lowsec now. Let's remove NPC null, lowsec does it better anyway.

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker

#396 - 2017-03-20 21:12:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Othran
Get rid of lowsec is probably the easiest answer. Maybe not the best but easy.

If you can deploy supers in lowsec which cannot be built there then whats the point of it?

Either have lowsec as true pirate space - no caps of any sort (JFs excepted) allowed once POS are gone or get rid of it. This would be my preferred solution.

If not then turn it into hisec or null & put the FW systems on their own blades - that'd save a lot of cpu cycles.
#397 - 2017-03-20 21:12:20 UTC
sero Hita wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
but i really shouldnt complain about you buffing gatecamping.


It doesnt buff gatecamps.
Just removes jumping over them in LS.


Salvos, you are not understanding. Lan Wang Means that cynos are the counter to gatecamps right now. Because if you slow boat to them, they will see you on d-scan and leave. If you light a cyno on the gatecamp, your backup fleet will jup bridge in and appear immidiately and the whole gatecap won't get away. It has NOHTING to do with jumping over the gatecamp


If cynos/caps are removed from LS, this becomes a non-issue.

Either go through another gate, fit for travel, or brute force yourself through.
Caldari State
#398 - 2017-03-20 21:14:55 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
sero Hita wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Lan Wang wrote:
but i really shouldnt complain about you buffing gatecamping.


It doesnt buff gatecamps.
Just removes jumping over them in LS.


Salvos, you are not understanding. Lan Wang Means that cynos are the counter to gatecamps right now. Because if you slow boat to them, they will see you on d-scan and leave. If you light a cyno on the gatecamp, your backup fleet will jup bridge in and appear immidiately and the whole gatecap won't get away. It has NOHTING to do with jumping over the gatecamp


If cynos/caps are removed from LS, this becomes a non-issue.

Either go through another gate, fit for travel, or brute force yourself through.

So not killing them then before they warp off... why should lowsec gatecaps be more secure? I don't get it

"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker

#399 - 2017-03-20 21:15:09 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Mr Mieyli wrote:
In the context of eve, CCP decide what is right, they are god here. They literally create the (game) universe.

EVE is a machine. It has no life of its own.
Nor is it a perfect machine.
It has flaws.

It is created and populated by people whom are fallible.

That CCP decides what they do with their machine, does not mean their decisions are right, rational or justified.

There is a distinction between the games mechanical parts, and its organic parts (us as players and CCP).

In my view, cynos/caps in LS are a dysfunctional part of the machine.

NS exists over 3400 systems in which to use cynos/caps.
LS exists as a slim border between HS and NS of only 817 systems.

I have at length explained the inequity between NS dropping into LS vs LS dropping into NS.
I have at length explained that LS content, nor gatecamps, do not require cynos/caps.

Caps/cynos, rationally, mechanically, belong in NS.

I understand the misgivings of LS/NS (whichever or, or however organised) about losing cynos/caps in LS for whatever purpose they currently enjoy it as. Some expressed overtly, some vested.

But caps/cynos, rationally, mechanically, belong in NS.
NPC Null is ideal if you want LS style non-sov. Its a vast emptiness.
Player Sov is ideal if you want conflict.

These spaces already exist for cyno/cap play, without restrictions.

Why then are they staying in LS?
Why are they arguing for LS to keep cynos/caps, when NS is out there already, with no restrictions?


I really wonder how you manage to post while holding your hands over your ears because there is no way you haven't understood how nonsensical your point is beside blatantly ignoring people while chanting lalalalala.


The irony, when you ignored my post, stuck your fingers in your ears and lalalalad right past it.
#400 - 2017-03-20 21:17:19 UTC
sero Hita wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:


These spaces already exist for cyno/cap play, without restrictions.

Why then are they staying in LS?
Why are they arguing for LS to keep cynos/caps, when NS is out there already, with no restrictions?


Well, why stay in lowsec... FW, no bubbles, a nice mixture of solo and fleet. But I thank you, because i actually see the solution to buffing lowsec now. Let's remove NPC null, lowsec does it better anyway.


NPC Null does do it better. And more rationally.

Which supports that LS is not a place for cynos/caps.
Forum Jump