Just because a gun shoots people at gate / stations are we considering it security?
I disagree, I believe most ganks happens at gate (prove me wrong).
low sec is wrong give us a clue why it’s not working. It become a worse null sec for small corps to be hunted down bi bigger ones.
Now to bring NO-sec to low we may need security only at gates, maybe some scram/web gun. That would mean any security, over the joke guns that do not kill anybody (% speaking, prove me wrong).
Creating a no-sec space with no security and nothing to do over roam around to find prey leads to the crap we have today.
‘Low sec’ should be the players space, HS should be demoted to ‘newbie’ space and gates and stations should be CONCORD like secure. Jumping on anoms/belts/missioning is where the PvP is, that would encourage collision and organization. Followed by criminals not being able to dock, player would be able to STEP UP and defend the space, some groups could offer ‘protection’ services.
IF, and prob the answer is NO, but if you read it right, there’s no problem letting people pass around, since HS now is a non-profitable space. Let newbros stay there and learn the game.
Just saying, it’s at least one idea that does not rely on calling others carebears or asking for segregation.
Yes, it’s more security than if no guns shoot people at gates/stations.
Just as concord is more security than gate guns.
The gate gun mechanic forces a serious change in tactics for gate camping compared to your average null gate camp. You cannot use inteceptors (let alone interdictors!) to catch people on gate, since they will get instapopped by the gate guns.
This means your casual, interceptor/dictor + dps low effort null sec camp will not succeed in low, and you actually have to put some planning (and ISK) in – which some people obviously do.
“Gate guns and no bubbles allowed” is indeed lower security than space where CONCORD destroys any ship after the capsuleer commits a criminal act and is indeed higher security than space where there are no gate guns and where bubbles are allowed to catch ships.
Low security space is therefore correctly called ‘low security’ as it has more security than null sec and less security than high sec.
@Edmorte_Fehrnah Yes it does. The fact that thread after thread on the subject keep popping up means that CCP needs to have a serious look at this, if only to clarify a few things so that players do not end up having wrong assumptions as to how things work.
I personally think that having security ratings for each system is not condutive to a good gaming environment.
EVE’s space is dangerous space and I like that a lot.
I also think noobie space should be a place for PvE only.
But I think that getting rid of system security rating altogether would be a good thing. I think there should be only two kinds of space: Starter system for one and all the rest to be the “wild west”. It would cut out all the confusion and we’d finally be rid of this endless arguing about what should be or not be in Hi/Low/Null sec.
All you do is have the interceptor shoot a neutral toon, and then warp out and back. Now they are free to initiate aggression until their suspect timer falls off and gate guns will ignore. Now even if, if, CCP fixed that (I haven’t gate camped since 2014 - surprised people still do it TBH), the solution is to just either a) use cheap T1 tackle or b) use the interceptor for the initial point, and warp it off while someone else is getting secondary.
Now I agree that gate guns don’t really do anything except force people into certain shiptypes and setups. It encourages gangs of cruisers+, and that doesn’t make anyone safer.
At any rate I’d like to see more LowSec and less HiSec.
Nope, internet popularity contests by ignorantes is not in the slightest relevant for any decision. Remember, this is a highsec carebear with no clue about other space mechanics, ranting about a loss due to incompetence (99% loss is due to incompetence at this point, rest is technical failure).
I’m not saying they would take decisions one way or the other, what you quoted was a preface to what followed in my post.
I think dividing space in security portions isn’t so great an idea. And to name the system of division “security” is even worse of an idea.
There isn’t any security anywhere in EVE and it’s the way it should be.