EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Low-sec Hopes and Changes

Author
Caldari State
#441 - 2017-03-20 23:20:57 UTC  |  Edited by: sero Hita
Salvos Rhoska wrote:

Cyno drop of caps is pirate like?
In LS?

First it was "sending a signal".
Now its "artistic freedom".

What is this bullshit?

If you want cyno/cap action, go to the 3400+ NS systems.

LS can work just fine with subcaps and without cyno.
If you w,ant to clear the gate, bring a fleet and clear it.

I bring a fleet, and transport it in by cyno. Because they will flee otherwise. Not so hard to understand

"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

#442 - 2017-03-20 23:24:05 UTC
sero Hita wrote:
Because they will flee otherwise.


So?
#443 - 2017-03-20 23:29:00 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

I think it was you who said I can use cyno inhibitor. So what will you do then if GC will have cyno inhib? Cyno off-grid and warp to them right?

Most GCs are maintained by the large corps in LS such as Lowsechnaya, or FW-corps and they do not fear you will drop them because they can escalate far more than you can - they have everything prepared for it.

It seems to me like all this is about is that you want to be able to destroy GCs of some random noob corps with easy. Which is hell simple with a t3 who can pass their gc, cloak, wait till they engage someone who comes and light a cyno.

Btw cyno-inhib seems to be unavailable, either there is no demand (I had demand) or the demand is too high and the production is too low. Create it on my own is a no go, noo high PI prereqs for corp that doesn't specialize in industry. Also the price makes it inefficient - its cheaper to lose 2 cruisers in the drop than to pay for somehing that lasts 1 hour only, is visible on d-scan and has low area of effect with a limitation it can be anchored 75km off gate which means that all you need to do is to move 25km off gate in right direction to light a cyno. Useless piece of crap.
Caldari State
#444 - 2017-03-20 23:29:33 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
sero Hita wrote:
Because they will flee otherwise.


So?


Look up the answer I gave you earlier. Sometimes you want to hunt down the gatecamp. period. That you think scaring it off has just as much value is your perogative, but I would rather smash their fleet using a cyno, showing strength and tactical superiority. You don't agree fine. But the truth is your solution, does not lead to them having to take the fight and mine does. Hence that is enough reason for me to have cynos in lowsec. But repeat it again, how I should go to nullsec instead, perhaps it will work this time.

"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

Snuffed Out
#445 - 2017-03-20 23:43:46 UTC
Vokan Narkar wrote:
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

I think it was you who said I can use cyno inhibitor. So what will you do then if GC will have cyno inhib? Cyno off-grid and warp to them right?

Most GCs are maintained by the large corps in LS such as Lowsechnaya, or FW-corps and they do not fear you will drop them because they can escalate far more than you can - they have everything prepared for it.

It seems to me like all this is about is that you want to be able to destroy GCs of some random noob corps with easy. Which is hell simple with a t3 who can pass their gc, cloak, wait till they engage someone who comes and light a cyno.

Btw cyno-inhib seems to be unavailable, either there is no demand (I had demand) or the demand is too high and the production is too low. Create it on my own is a no go, noo high PI prereqs for corp that doesn't specialize in industry. Also the price makes it inefficient - its cheaper to lose 2 cruisers in the drop than to pay for somehing that lasts 1 hour only, is visible on d-scan and has low area of effect with a limitation it can be anchored 75km off gate which means that all you need to do is to move 25km off gate in right direction to light a cyno. Useless piece of crap.


are you actually being serious?

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*

#446 - 2017-03-20 23:43:57 UTC
The only way to revitalize lowsec is obviously to remove local from null.

Hey! I don't know about you

but I'm joining CTRL-Q

#447 - 2017-03-21 00:16:06 UTC
Various security spaces exist for reasons.
End of Life
#448 - 2017-03-21 01:25:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Vokan Narkar wrote:
...It seems to me like all this is about is that you want to be able to destroy GCs of some random noob corps with easy. Which is hell simple with a t3 who can pass their gc, cloak, wait till they engage someone who comes and light a cyno.

Look at what Alliance Lan is in and check her killboard.

You couldn't be further from the truth if you tried.
#449 - 2017-03-21 02:35:18 UTC
Vokan Narkar wrote:
I think it was you who said I can use cyno inhibitor. So what will you do then if GC will have cyno inhib? Cyno off-grid and warp to them right?

Most GCs are maintained by the large corps in LS such as Lowsechnaya, or FW-corps and they do not fear you will drop them because they can escalate far more than you can - they have everything prepared for it.

It seems to me like all this is about is that you want to be able to destroy GCs of some random noob corps with easy. Which is hell simple with a t3 who can pass their gc, cloak, wait till they engage someone who comes and light a cyno.

Btw cyno-inhib seems to be unavailable, either there is no demand (I had demand) or the demand is too high and the production is too low. Create it on my own is a no go, noo high PI prereqs for corp that doesn't specialize in industry. Also the price makes it inefficient - its cheaper to lose 2 cruisers in the drop than to pay for somehing that lasts 1 hour only, is visible on d-scan and has low area of effect with a limitation it can be anchored 75km off gate which means that all you need to do is to move 25km off gate in right direction to light a cyno. Useless piece of crap.


Oh man this is a load of bad info.

First off, the idea that most GCs in Low are maintained by massive entities that can out-escalate a null group dropping BLOPs is ridiculous. There are tons of small groups in low who gate camp at least occasionally, and most of the larger entities in Low are tiny and can drop, at best, a relatively small number of caps compared to a Null entity with more dreads in a standard drop-Cache than that Low entity can drop. They also don't have the bank to just shrug off a massive cap welp the same way a Null group can. That's not to say that a cap welp is gonna break the bank, but it's not nothing either.

Also, FYI, Mobile Cyno inhibs aren't unavailable, they're just expensive and not that useful most of the time. If, for some reason, you feel the need to burn 63m you can buy them in Jita for a semi-reasonable price, Amarr for an unreasonable one, and a smattering of other systems for anywhere between reasonable and highway robbery.

Also "just burning away from the gate" is laughable. First off, gate models are pretty big, second you pop in 10-15km off the thing in a random direction so you can actually end up having to burn about 40km to get out of the cyno inhib. By that point you're either dead or everyone's warped off, same for if you cyno in from off grid. Anyone who doesn't notice the local spike is either *hilariously* drunk or has no business leading a fleet.

Also, those same big groups you're griping about, would probably be more than happy to see cynos restricted, because as Lan quite rightly pointed out they can avoid anything they can't take, or since they're the locals, they can *undock* their capitals, warp them to grid, and "begin dealing out merry hell on a democratic basis" to every non-blue on grid.

The idea that anyone could view cynos being restricted in Low as a *nerf* to GCs is just... wat?

Completely academic though, because CCP would need an amazingly compelling reason to even consider a change like that, and "why not?" isn't it.
#450 - 2017-03-21 04:29:03 UTC
This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now.
Minmatar Republic
#451 - 2017-03-21 05:48:12 UTC
I've always thought that it's sort of backwards that Low Sec is less dangerous than Null Sec.

Using the Age of Sail as a blueprint, I see High Sec as the old big empires of Europe where the markets were. Null Sec is the New World or India where the exotic resources were harvested, but under fairly strong local control by semi-freelance corporations (like the East India company which had it's own military/mercenary arm).
Low Sec is that long, dangerous space in between the two.

Thus, it should be Low Sec which is truly lawless, has warp bubbles, etc. Not claimable- anyone there is a 'pirate' by default. Soldiers on opposing sides use that space to interdict their enemy's goods and pirates try to interdict it all. The real difference between piracy and legitimate warfare just a little fuzzy. Lol

If more resources were being harvested in Low Sec, and transported thru Low Sec (as opposed to jump bridging right past it), then it would matter much more to the whole game. Make FW ownership of space matter more to the free flow of goods and it becomes part of everyone's interests to keep it stable. Null Sec, as well as the NPC empires.

Goonswarm Federation
#452 - 2017-03-21 12:43:43 UTC
Zirashi wrote:
This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now.


Well his forum alt got dropped some time ago and it cost him a cynabal and the crystal pod so maybe he is just salty...
Ushra'Khan
#453 - 2017-03-21 16:01:39 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
Orakkus wrote:
So, does everyone have their own idea about how to make low-sec good,
I don't know about everyone, but I do.

Get rid of it. All you need is lawful space and lawless space. No need for some in between space that makes no one happy.

Mr Epeen Cool


Speak for yourself.
#454 - 2017-03-21 18:16:47 UTC
Alaric Faelen wrote:
I've always thought that it's sort of backwards that Low Sec is less dangerous than Null Sec.

Using the Age of Sail as a blueprint, I see High Sec as the old big empires of Europe where the markets were. Null Sec is the New World or India where the exotic resources were harvested, but under fairly strong local control by semi-freelance corporations (like the East India company which had it's own military/mercenary arm).
Low Sec is that long, dangerous space in between the two.

Thus, it should be Low Sec which is truly lawless, has warp bubbles, etc. Not claimable- anyone there is a 'pirate' by default. Soldiers on opposing sides use that space to interdict their enemy's goods and pirates try to interdict it all. The real difference between piracy and legitimate warfare just a little fuzzy. Lol

If more resources were being harvested in Low Sec, and transported thru Low Sec (as opposed to jump bridging right past it), then it would matter much more to the whole game. Make FW ownership of space matter more to the free flow of goods and it becomes part of everyone's interests to keep it stable. Null Sec, as well as the NPC empires.



Astute observations.

I think that the problem with factional warfare though is the LP system. You can farm, farm, farm in a cheap stabbed frig with very little risk, and running away repeatedly. I HATE stabbed FW farmers and still kill them with double scrams when I can.

Instead of LP, if there was a tangible object, tag, loot, or somehting that they have to 'sell' or convert to lp with some value, this would make FW far more benificial and interesting for all parties: militia, pirates, privateers.
Ofc you would have to increase the reward just a little bit.

Another intersting factoid about RL pirate history, is that it was often secretly sponsored, encouraged, or tolerated by 'legitimate' entrepeneurs who were corrupt.

But yeah I think there would need to be a new system or essential supply in lowsec that you can get.

Also I think lately there is a problem about PvP training. Eve-Uni is jsut not cutting it, RvB is restarting but not what it was, but if people learned how to solo or small gang PvP they would be more inclined to try lowsec. OR AGAIN, mission agent incentive to PvP in lwosec that is NOT faction warfare LP farming. We need more pirate agents or constable agents or something like that.

Nullsec PvP is different. Its groupthink PvP...which is why they all lost to Lowsec pvp-ers during World War Bee. :)
#455 - 2017-03-22 04:17:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Zirashi wrote:
This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now.


Well his forum alt got dropped some time ago and it cost him a cynabal and the crystal pod so maybe he is just salty...


Pfft..

There are 3400+ NS systems for cynos/caps. (Both NPC and Player)
The narrow 800 system LS buffer between HS and NS would be better served as a non-cyno sub-cap sector.
Gallente Federation
#456 - 2017-03-22 05:10:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Coralas
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Zirashi wrote:
This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now.


Well his forum alt got dropped some time ago and it cost him a cynabal and the crystal pod so maybe he is just salty...


Pfft..

There are 3400+ NS systems for cynos/caps. (Both NPC and Player)
The narrow 800 system LS buffer between HS and NS would be better served as a non-cyno sub-cap sector.


That would have the effect of building a cyno proof trench around all the nullsec that doesn't border large swathes of NPC null, and that would thus make great swathes of nullsec much closer to invasion proof. I did live in Vale of the Silent as a renter for some time, and it was invaded by capitals staged from lowsec, despite being blue on one side and "strategically" neutral on the other.

Also currently nullsec ratters get dropped on all the time (so common even a terrible renter alliance will publish known drop scouts as such on their intel channels), and this change would reduce the neutral space locations that can reach into null for such, dramatically - ie ratting would be a simple case of analysing reach on the map.

Never mind what a pain in the ass JF piloting would become.
Snuffed Out
#457 - 2017-03-22 07:43:16 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Zirashi wrote:
This is a troll right? I mean, c'mon, he's been unironically telling people to HTFU while simultaneously whining about the "unjust" cynos in low sec and "unfair" mechanics on a forum alt for over 5 pages now.


Well his forum alt got dropped some time ago and it cost him a cynabal and the crystal pod so maybe he is just salty...


Pfft..

There are 3400+ NS systems for cynos/caps. (Both NPC and Player)
The narrow 800 system LS buffer between HS and NS would be better served as a non-cyno sub-cap sector.


what does the amount of systems have to do with it? if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos

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
#458 - 2017-03-22 07:52:07 UTC
Lan Wang wrote:


what does the amount of systems have to do with it? if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos


Like I said before, he is confusing arguments and statements. But I am sure that in his head the number of systems are the answer to why cyno should not be there. He has repeated it so much now, that I don't think he would be able to understand why it is not an argument anymore.

"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

Amarr Empire
#459 - 2017-03-22 08:06:48 UTC
You know, making it harder to invade null from outside would drive up local conflict. Why have so many blues if you aren't worried about being jumped on from the centre of the wheel that is the eve map. Of course, null players only claim to love dangerous lawless space so they won't like any changes to cynos.

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

#460 - 2017-03-22 14:44:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Lan Wang wrote:
if anything traveling around 800 hostile systems is reason enough to allow capitals and cynos


Explain.
Do you feel you would be unable to survive in LS without cynos/caps?
Forum Jump