Low-sec gate camping with hic+fighters

Hey all. I’d like to bring up some thoughts about the gameplay around hictors camping low sec gates with fighters. It’s my opinion this is completely broken. For example, a Bustard with native +2, +1 wcs, mwd-cloak cannot run this gate. You get decloaked by fighter swarms and infini-pointed by a cruiser that can tank gate guns, there is no counter to this. To be clear these are citadel fighters. No carriers on-grid, extremely low risk, you are virtually guaranteed a km as the aggressor/s

is this a HTFU moment? or is there more to unpack here?

I think there are a number of gate camp ship compositions that are nearly impossible for a single ship to get through. The first counter that comes to mind is an even larger fleet taking them out- but that’s not always going to happen.

The other 3 options that I’ll always consider:

  1. Go around, avoid that system
  2. Go through at a different time (very few gate camps during weekday, off hours)
  3. Using a scout

I’ll be interested to hear feedback from others- in case there’s something I’ve missed.


This is, indeed, an HTFU moment.


I mean… scouts. Better yet. A Griffen scout so if you’re still dumb enough to jump through that gate he can permanently jam the fighters.

Congrats you have now countered a multi billion gate camp with less than 10 mil.

In six years I have lost 5 t2 transports. 3 of them in null and only two in ls. Each time because I screwed up.

The most recent was do to a cloaked arazu cynoing in 4 carriers who’s fighters de cloaked me.

I ■■■■■■ up by waiting to see what was going on giving the carriers plenty of time to watch for where I Decloaked from.

If a Carrier or a hic is on grid there is no way I’m jumping that gate.

Thank you for the replies, I appreciate the ability to have this discussion. wouldn’t using ecm trigger the gate guns? I’ve considered ecm burst as a counter, but that gives a timer. Does using ecm in low sec give aggression? Would a frigate be able to tank gate guns?

To clear a few things up in this specific instance I am referring to citadel fighters, the fighters do not do damage, they are used as a swarm to decloak ships on the gate.

If the fighters engaged first you don’t go suspect.

And a dst can tank citadel fighters for more than long enough.

Long enough for what? There’s going to be a HIC there warp destabilizing

1 Like

There’s that broken code popping up as a solution again. Seriously does CCP even have team leads or QA that care about the quality of their code base?

I really like the idea of players dealing with problems versus CCP throwing more fishing line code into the current tangled line. This sounds like an opportunity for player to do some REAL purposeful PVP.

I think this is definitely a case of just needing to scout ahead your hauler, whether it be an alt or another player.

I think it’s perfectly acceptable that players using a multi-billion ISK structure and multiple ships on field can catch a player that blind jumps into them. As others have said, having even a cheap frigate in front of you can save your valuable cargo. A blind jump into dangerous space (especially pipes to things like trade hubs) should be considered a high-risk action and it’s perfectly fine that caution needs to be taken.

With no bubbles in low sec, MWD/cloak can be pretty hard to stop without there being some counter play. The fighters give that (with the fairly hefty preparation cost of needing to be able to place and defend an Astrahus in low sec). You have the further ability of counter play by just scouting ahead of yourself.

Well the obvious solution is to buy a hauling permit.

Structure fighters being used for purposes other than structure defense is now an intended feature?

Wasn’t the entire point of the repeated series of prior cidatel deployment restriction changess aimed to keep citadel defenses being kept in check as defensive options ONLY… from themobile warp disruptor that will land you in point defense of a forti when you warp to a gate, to citadels assisting each other in combat due to being allowed to deploy too close to each other

It has always been a form of emergent gameplay. WHers were using citadels to rat with. There are going to be some structures that are set up in places where they can be used offensively.

key word: were.
When drifters were new and shiny, back before triglavians, they would chase you around if you warped off…including to citadels, where the structure could kill them quite easily.
This was called ‘abuse’ and patched out, due to falling outside of “emergent” and into “unintended and undesired” category of gameplay.

CCP has been quite clear about their design intent with citadels, and this “used offensively” aspect is strictly limited to being a staging/docking area in hostile territory for players in ships to perform the hostile actions, where any offensive capabilities of the structure itself are limited to attacking those that are in range of, attacking the citadel.

That isn’t to say that CCP will never change their mind on the gameplay design philosophy for structures, or that yolo’ing a bustard through a LS gate shouldn’t be safer, but this use of a structure fighter is clearly outside of the current intended use with structures.

I don’t think this is true, honestly. If it were, based on their past precedent which you’ve noted, they’d have patched it out.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.