Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
1623
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Let's remove dependency on gates. All ships dial in warp system to system, distance based on power? Modules? Whatever?
Want more people in null? Let people make incursions deep into it with system-to-system dialed in warp ala Star Trek/Star Wars. Don't like it? Then all you want are targets in your gate camp. Don't want people out there not under your control? Then all you want is cannon fodder for your NAPped up ISK fountain. Admit it.
Want more small fleet engagement? Then let's replace the bubble camp with the combat patrol and make the combat probe more useful than the warp bubble. Don't like the idea? Then sitting on a gate is as dysfunctional as mining all day, and admit that you are just as semi-afk as those miners. What kind of game is that? And stop calling it PVP.
In the world of gunfighting a door is often referred to as a "fatal funnel" where anybody watching it can have a very easy time shooting anybody who comes through. Gates are fatal funnels. These comprise a "Great Wall of Carebear".
So let's man up a bit and admit how dumb it is to complain on the forums about how dead low/null is while killing everything that comes through the fatal funnel. Let everybody dial in a warp from system to system. How? Mechanics? Who cares.
Nothing would stir things up more than this. The NAPfest? Meaningless. Deserted 0.0 systems? Ripe for the picking. Gate camps? Gone. Blob warfare? History.
Until this changes, we might as well all be playing a game of wet biscuit and pretending it's something to be proud of. |
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub Like I Give A F--K
1353
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
lrn2scout I guess.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"-á-á-MXZF |
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
1501
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:35:00 -
[3] - Quote
Well, Herzog, I've seen some pretty bizarre ideas come from your keyboard, but this isn't one of them.
EVE does need some shaking up and I think you are on to a good start for how it might be done. Space right now consists of gates and stations. Kinda boring in my opinion.
Lose the gates. Or add to them via a skill and module for a personal Cyno and things would certainly get interesting again.
Mr Epeen There is no excuse beyond fatalistic self-indulgence and sheer laziness for doing nothing --á Iain Banks |
baltec1
1526
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:37:00 -
[4] - Quote
Its called a titan jump bridge. |
Montmazar
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
13
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
Gates are pretty clearly an imperfect way of doing a space MMO but at this point removing gates from EVE would be like removing jumps from a Mario. |
Kiteo Hatto
The Fiction Factory Blue Nation
226
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:40:00 -
[6] - Quote
Simi Kusoni wrote:lrn2scout I guess. Sure, let me go get a second account so i can make sure whats ahead. Thats a definition of hardcore, and no it's not "just a game" for you if you have more than 1 account.
Here's an idea, maybe we don't want to be "hardcore" ? Stop trying to pull us towards your kind. "That's okay it annoys me when people pile on new definitions to the word sandbox every time CCP does something they don't like.
By the by it means non linear gameplay. and free roam worlds." - Alara IonStorm |
Tallianna Avenkarde
Deadman W0nderland
344
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:42:00 -
[7] - Quote
I like your thinking, but IMO probes are a tad to easy as is.
I think gates should still exist, but should dump you at some random point in the next system, rather then gate to gate. While your "every ship jump capable" idea is good in theory, how do you suggext getting from region to region, i.e Y-2 in fountain to ZXB in delve?
So yeah, systems still have out gates, but jumps you to random point in target system. And a sudden plunge in the sullen swell. Ten fathoms deep on the road to hell. |
Kiteo Hatto
The Fiction Factory Blue Nation
226
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:47:00 -
[8] - Quote
Tallianna Avenkarde wrote:I like your thinking, but IMO probes are a tad to easy as is.
So yeah, systems still have out gates, but jumps you to random point in target system.
I like this. "That's okay it annoys me when people pile on new definitions to the word sandbox every time CCP does something they don't like.
By the by it means non linear gameplay. and free roam worlds." - Alara IonStorm |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
749
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:52:00 -
[9] - Quote
Would we just go to having nothing but station camps?
Also, more than "get rid of gates" is needed. From where can a star jump be initiated from? Do you have to get far away from a station or planet first? Where do you end up after the jump?
Are only certain stars accessible from any given star? For example we could have that you can only jump over the same routes we can now with star gates, you just do not use gates. Or would we want to allow new routes, or free movement over all of the the star system? http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Ryoken McKeon
Obstergo TEMNAVA
14
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 20:59:00 -
[10] - Quote
Confirming that the OP is an idiot. |
|
Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub Like I Give A F--K
1353
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:07:00 -
[11] - Quote
Kiteo Hatto wrote:Simi Kusoni wrote:lrn2scout I guess. Sure, let me go get a second account so i can make sure whats ahead. Thats a definition of hardcore, and no it's not "just a game" for you if you have more than 1 account. Here's an idea, maybe we don't want to be "hardcore" ? Stop trying to pull us towards your kind. Having friends has its benefits I guess.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"-á-á-MXZF |
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
390
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:08:00 -
[12] - Quote
I agree that gates are a crappy game mechanic. In terms of changes I would like to see without having to rely on CCP having to do too much work...
Increase the point at which a ship jump into a new system from a gate from ~15K to randomly 15-150K 360 degrees around the gate. This means gates can only really be camped on the side you activate the gate to jump, and therefore gives a traveler the opportunity to DScan and take other precautions without having to be dependent on things like scouts via multiple accounts.
Radically increase the number of wormholes that go from known space to known space. Perhaps make them a new class of signature from other wormholes so as not to burden explorers with more scanning.
Pirate/smuggler Gates from NPC Nullsec to Lowsec that are only usable by players with High Standings to the NPCs in question.
Vincent Athena wrote:Would we just go to having nothing but station camps?
No, Local Chat Intel needs to be removed. Fights could then occur more frequently off gates and stations at points of resource access (aka PvE) |
Ituhata
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:13:00 -
[13] - Quote
Real world wars are not typically fought over chokehold points but rather over strategically valuable locations. Not sure why the same couldn't work in EvE, if you hold something valuable people will come find it and fight for it and there shouldn't be a need for chokehold points to force a fight. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1359
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:13:00 -
[14] - Quote
six years in the game and still can't get past a gatecamp lol |
Pix Severus
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:19:00 -
[15] - Quote
I'm a high-sec miner/mission runner, If the changes the OP proposed were to take place, and thus remove gate camps, I would go into low/null a lot more often.
I don't see any reason to complain over this idea. High-sec people get to see more of the universe without getting insta-ganked as soon as they enter low-sec. Low/Null-sec people get more targets.
Where's the problem? |
Kiteo Hatto
The Fiction Factory Blue Nation
226
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:20:00 -
[16] - Quote
Pix Severus wrote:I'm a high-sec miner/mission runner, If the changes the OP proposed were to take place, and thus remove gate camps, I would go into low/null a lot more often.
I don't see any reason to complain over this idea. High-sec people get to see more of the universe without getting insta-ganked as soon as they enter low-sec. Low/Null-sec people get more targets.
Where's the problem?
The problem is that it will require effort from the low/null peeps to get their kills then. "That's okay it annoys me when people pile on new definitions to the word sandbox every time CCP does something they don't like.
By the by it means non linear gameplay. and free roam worlds." - Alara IonStorm |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1359
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:24:00 -
[17] - Quote
Kiteo Hatto wrote:Pix Severus wrote:I'm a high-sec miner/mission runner, If the changes the OP proposed were to take place, and thus remove gate camps, I would go into low/null a lot more often.
I don't see any reason to complain over this idea. High-sec people get to see more of the universe without getting insta-ganked as soon as they enter low-sec. Low/Null-sec people get more targets.
Where's the problem? The problem is that it will require effort from the low/null peeps to get their kills then. No it'll mean getting kills would be easier then ever, getting into an enemy system would be so easy even OP could do it. |
Russell Casey
Goldbug Inc.
165
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:28:00 -
[18] - Quote
IMO I'd like to see an increase in frequency of K-space-to-K-space wormholes , having used wormholes to get into null and low past the chokes plenty of times. They're too random to replace cynos and jump portals for dedicated logistics, but they're great for farming in someone's back yard or even raiding behind where their normal surveillance is and avoiding intel channels. |
Ituhata
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:28:00 -
[19] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Kiteo Hatto wrote:Pix Severus wrote:I'm a high-sec miner/mission runner, If the changes the OP proposed were to take place, and thus remove gate camps, I would go into low/null a lot more often.
I don't see any reason to complain over this idea. High-sec people get to see more of the universe without getting insta-ganked as soon as they enter low-sec. Low/Null-sec people get more targets.
Where's the problem? The problem is that it will require effort from the low/null peeps to get their kills then. No it'll mean getting kills would be easier then ever, getting into an enemy system would be so easy even OP could do it.
How do you make getting kills easier when you remove the chokepoint system? |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
1316
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:33:00 -
[20] - Quote
If coming in through gates is using the front door, then black ops bridges are coming in through the window and titan bridges are coming in through the living room wall. Your idea has problems:
- Makes no lore sense. If your ship has trouble warping 200 AU, what makes you think it will have less trouble warping entire light years?
- Minimizes the importance of jump bridges, titan bridges, etc. I'm all for eliminating these, because they make movement too easy, but this makes movement even easier.
- Makes movement too easy. The "defense" is supposed to have some "terrain advantage", but when the enemy can simply warp into a safe spot in your system, what's the point? What's the point of owning a blockade runner or jump freighter for resupply when you can probably just safely barge right into 0.0 with a friggin freighter?
So... no. Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
|
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
1316
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:35:00 -
[21] - Quote
Xorv wrote:No, Local Chat Intel needs to be removed. Fights could then occur more frequently off gates and stations at points of resource access (aka PvE) Bingo.
But everyone's tired of discussing that. Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1359
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:36:00 -
[22] - Quote
Ituhata wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Kiteo Hatto wrote:Pix Severus wrote:I'm a high-sec miner/mission runner, If the changes the OP proposed were to take place, and thus remove gate camps, I would go into low/null a lot more often.
I don't see any reason to complain over this idea. High-sec people get to see more of the universe without getting insta-ganked as soon as they enter low-sec. Low/Null-sec people get more targets.
Where's the problem? The problem is that it will require effort from the low/null peeps to get their kills then. No it'll mean getting kills would be easier then ever, getting into an enemy system would be so easy even OP could do it. How do you make getting kills easier when you remove the chokepoint system? I fly a combat ship and go attack other people mining/ratting in belts and anomalies non-stop since there's no "chokepoints" stopping me or thousands like me from just roaming around all day killing carebears, the threat of being forced to potentially fight people who live in the space and can fight back no longer a concern. Duh.
On the plus side the "highsec tourist in a covert ops ship" demographic would go up |
Tallianna Avenkarde
Deadman W0nderland
344
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:38:00 -
[23] - Quote
Ituhata wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Kiteo Hatto wrote:Pix Severus wrote:I'm a high-sec miner/mission runner, If the changes the OP proposed were to take place, and thus remove gate camps, I would go into low/null a lot more often.
I don't see any reason to complain over this idea. High-sec people get to see more of the universe without getting insta-ganked as soon as they enter low-sec. Low/Null-sec people get more targets.
Where's the problem? The problem is that it will require effort from the low/null peeps to get their kills then. No it'll mean getting kills would be easier then ever, getting into an enemy system would be so easy even OP could do it. How do you make getting kills easier when you remove the chokepoint system?
Because it puts the advantage squarely on the shoulders of the aggressor.
ATM yes the balanced is skewed too hard in the side of the defender. Being able to cage choke points means that at the very least you have advance warning of incoming threat, and best case, you have a choke point actively camped. The proposed changes favour agressors so that they no longer have to pass choke systems, and their movements will become largely unpredictable.
While this would have the effect of short term increase of ratter ganks, I actually don't see any increasse of :gudfites: if the proposal stays exactly as the OP puts it. In fact, it will also be a MAJOR advantage to the blob as with good scouts, they have a greater chance of getting their fleets in to strategic position with less chance of being spotted on the way in. Also, without gates, tactical crossjumpin and tactical bubbling, it also makes it a lot harder for smaller entities to fight larger ones.
And a sudden plunge in the sullen swell. Ten fathoms deep on the road to hell. |
Ituhata
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:41:00 -
[24] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Ituhata wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:Kiteo Hatto wrote:Pix Severus wrote:I'm a high-sec miner/mission runner, If the changes the OP proposed were to take place, and thus remove gate camps, I would go into low/null a lot more often.
I don't see any reason to complain over this idea. High-sec people get to see more of the universe without getting insta-ganked as soon as they enter low-sec. Low/Null-sec people get more targets.
Where's the problem? The problem is that it will require effort from the low/null peeps to get their kills then. No it'll mean getting kills would be easier then ever, getting into an enemy system would be so easy even OP could do it. How do you make getting kills easier when you remove the chokepoint system? I fly a combat ship and go attack other people mining/ratting in belts and anomalies. Duh. There's no chokepoints stopping me or thousands like me from just roaming around all day killing carebears with no more "chokepoints" in my way potentially forcing me to fight guys who could fight back. Duh. On the plus side the "highsec tourist in a covert ops ship" demographic would go up
Oh my, they might have to HTFU and learn to use DSCAN, just like the guys in high sec are supposed to be doing now. PS, the guys that fight back have probes, interdictors and interceptors...I'm sure we can come up with some combination to make it effective for hunting baddies without relying on gate mechanics. Of course, it requires a little more skill but that shouldn't be a problem for the most intelligent gaming community in the world. |
Ituhata
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:45:00 -
[25] - Quote
Tallianna Avenkarde wrote:
Because it puts the advantage squarely on the shoulders of the aggressor.
ATM yes the balanced is skewed too hard in the side of the defender. Being able to cage choke points means that at the very least you have advance warning of incoming threat, and best case, you have a choke point actively camped. The proposed changes favour agressors so that they no longer have to pass choke systems, and their movements will become largely unpredictable.
While this would have the effect of short term increase of ratter ganks, I actually don't see any increasse of :gudfites: if the proposal stays exactly as the OP puts it. In fact, it will also be a MAJOR advantage to the blob as with good scouts, they have a greater chance of getting their fleets in to strategic position with less chance of being spotted on the way in. Also, without gates, tactical crossjumpin and tactical bubbling, it also makes it a lot harder for smaller entities to fight larger ones.
As I said, it might actually force the nullbears to do exactly what this very same community is asking the minerbears in hisec to do. See, in highsec its pretty much the same as not having local because of all the noise, and essentially forces them to use dscan. So I really shouldn't be hearing any bleating from anyone that you might have to keep your dscan active to outfox these new aggressors of the proposed change. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Damu'Khonde
1316
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:46:00 -
[26] - Quote
Ituhata wrote:I'm sure we can come up with some combination to make it effective for hunting baddies without relying on gate mechanics.
Unless you plan to sit a dictor/ceptor on every carebear in the region, I don't see what you could do. Should I also mention that dictors/ceptors are very vulnerable, and will die horribly to a determined carebear ganker in, say, a Vagabond or Cynabal? Or hell, since there is nothing stopping it from coming in, even a Bhaalgorn. Rifterlings - Small gang lowsec combat corp specializing in frigates and cruisers (all races, not just Rifters!). US Timezone veterans and newbies alike are welcome to join. Come chat in the "we fly rifters" in-game channel. Free fitted frigates for members! |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
1359
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:48:00 -
[27] - Quote
Ituhata wrote:Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: I fly a combat ship and go attack other people mining/ratting in belts and anomalies. Duh. There's no chokepoints stopping me or thousands like me from just roaming around all day killing carebears with no more "chokepoints" in my way potentially forcing me to fight guys who could fight back. Duh.
On the plus side the "highsec tourist in a covert ops ship" demographic would go up
Oh my, they might have to HTFU and learn to use DSCAN. I thought this thread was by an OP who was complaining about "drag bubbles" and others, all of which are easily found with DSCAN. My bad. Not to infer anything on his ability to "HTFU".
Quote:PS, the guys that fight back have probes, interdictors and interceptors. Interdictors are a nono since they use the fearsome bubble and the rest are useless if you can't get the enemy to appear at a gate and force him to fight. |
Ituhata
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:48:00 -
[28] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:Ituhata wrote:I'm sure we can come up with some combination to make it effective for hunting baddies without relying on gate mechanics. Unless you plan to sit a dictor/ceptor on every carebear in the region, I don't see what you could do. Should I also mention that dictors/ceptors are very vulnerable, and will die horribly to a determined carebear ganker in, say, a Vagabond or Cynabal? Or hell, since there is nothing stopping it from coming in, even a Bhaalgorn.
A good combination. Does not mean send in one ship at a time. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
7458
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:49:00 -
[29] - Quote
Ryoken McKeon wrote:Confirming that the OP is an idiot.
CCP Zulu..... Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Ituhata
The Scope Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2012.06.23 21:50:00 -
[30] - Quote
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote: Interdictors are a nono since they use the fearsome bubble and the rest are useless if you can't get the enemy to appear at a gate and force him to fight.
So you cant set a bait ship, you cant probe someone down, you cant fleet warp in and get the point and throw a bubble up and kill something?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |