Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Saladinae
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 04:54:00 -
[1]
Would it be game breaking to make low-sec gate guns speed tankable?
As of right now, low sec PvP is for battleship pilots only (unless you have relaly good cruiser and heavy dictor skills).
|
ihcn
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 05:27:00 -
[2]
or shoot people off of gates and stations
|
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 06:06:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Saladinae Would it be game breaking to make low-sec gate guns speed tankable?
As of right now, low sec PvP is for battleship pilots only (unless you have relaly good cruiser and heavy dictor skills).
You mean "lowsec gatecamping is not for frigates", which is just fine. Want to gatecamp in lowsec, get a big, expensive and vulnerable ship. There's no issue there.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
The Djego
Minmatar Hellequin Inc. Mean Coalition
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 06:24:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Saladinae Would it be game breaking to make low-sec gate guns speed tankable?
As of right now, low sec PvP is for battleship pilots only (unless you have relaly good cruiser and heavy dictor skills).
You mean "lowsec gatecamping is not for frigates", which is just fine. Want to gatecamp in lowsec, get a big, expensive and vulnerable ship. There's no issue there.
This. ---- Nerf Tank - Boost Gank!
Originally by: Amantus Real men don't need to get into blaster range.
|
Isidore Tailleur
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 06:32:00 -
[5]
Yes this would chance the game radically and make low-sec much more similar to 0.0 in terms of travel safety.
Now unless you are an outlaw it is very unlikely that someone will manage to tackle your small ship on a gate in low-sec. It takes a well setup gate-camp with remote sensor boosted HICs or special assault frigates and good logistics to the be able to snatch small stuff on gates.
If any stray interceptor could tank the gate guns not so much...
|
Kismo
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 16:19:00 -
[6]
I can tank sentries in my SKIMITAR. Try getting one of those.
|
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 17:17:00 -
[7]
We could use more people in lowsec, not less. It's empty enough as is.
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 18:11:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Goose99 We could use more people in lowsec, not less. It's empty enough as is.
Allowing frigate-sized ships to safely engage in PVP at gates will make it even more vacant, as there will be more risk of being ganked.
This signature is useless, but it is red.
|
Vladimiru
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 18:21:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Bagehi
Originally by: Goose99 We could use more people in lowsec, not less. It's empty enough as is.
Allowing frigate-sized ships to safely engage in PVP at gates will make it even more vacant, as there will be more risk of being ganked.
Isn't that why it's called low-sec? The Security Status losses are enough. Supported
|
Saladinae
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 19:03:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Bagehi
Originally by: Goose99 We could use more people in lowsec, not less. It's empty enough as is.
Allowing frigate-sized ships to safely engage in PVP at gates will make it even more vacant, as there will be more risk of being ganked.
The reason low-sec is vacant is because no one wants to risk the expensive ships that are required in low sec to PvP (battleships). It's too dangerous to even bring a HAC to the damn gates (which makes up a considerable portion of PvP pilots).
|
|
darius mclever
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 19:11:00 -
[11]
Edited by: darius mclever on 09/06/2010 19:14:12 if your gang is prepared you can bring hacs to a gate camp.
Anyway ... to the frigates ... there is plenty of frigate PVP in lowsec. Especially in the faction warfare areas. Gate camping is a tough one true. but if you are fast, you can land the suicide tackle and warp out before the gate guns kill you. Or you end up as suicide tackle. (hope you got a lot of ships ;)
That said ... If your corp mates sit on the gate for camping. run belts or neighboring systems. maybe you find some targets.
p.s.: if you start shooting pirates, sentries are so kind to look away. might be an option to consider :)
not supported.
|
King Rothgar
Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 21:21:00 -
[12]
Not supported, if anything I think the gate guns could use a boost to cut back on gate camping. It's a bit too easy to tank in big ships, especially if you have several of them. I think if gate travel were made a bit safer, it would result in atleast some increase in low sec traffic thus making it more interesting.
And btw, if you want to gate camp in a frigate in low sec, join FW. It can be fun at times running around low sec in a fleet of 20+ faction frigates and camping some of the major arteries. Thus far you shall read, but no further; for this is my sig. |
el Sabor
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 21:35:00 -
[13]
Hell no. There will be insta-locking inties on every lowsec gate camp.
|
Dograzor
The Black Rabbits Academy The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 21:38:00 -
[14]
Nah, keep gate guns as it is. A decent BC can tank the guns, so thats quite affordable. -
"We don't gank, we just apply force in a disproportionate manner during an uneven tactical combat situation to maximize revenue and increase shareholder value" |
chatgris
Quantum Cats Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.06.09 21:47:00 -
[15]
Originally by: el Sabor Hell no. There will be insta-locking inties on every lowsec gate camp.
This.
|
Gah'Matar
|
Posted - 2010.07.22 18:37:00 -
[16]
Originally by: el Sabor Hell no. There will be insta-locking inties on every lowsec gate camp.
I guess that's worse then an insta-locking, remote sensor boosted, remote repaired lachesis.
|
King Rothgar
Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2010.07.22 19:02:00 -
[17]
Edited by: King Rothgar on 22/07/2010 19:03:46 Not supported. We don't need frigate gate camps in low sec, travel is dangerous enough as it is. In regards to no one going there to pvp because they don't want to bring a BS/BC, well that's bull. Go to a populated system with your frigate gang and warp to the top belt, you'll get some action. The top belt in amamake isn't called "the glory belt" for nothing.
Edit: RR'd, remote sensor boosted lachesis is really specialized though, I've only seen that once in nearly 2 years of living in low sec. It's cool as **** though. Thus far you shall read, but no further; for this is my sig. |
Jason Edwards
Internet Tough Guy Spreadsheets Online
|
Posted - 2010.07.23 01:55:00 -
[18]
Gate guns ought to be removed and replaced with a concord faction navy which spawns and comes after you with similar dps as the gateguns and similar ewar as ud expect.
That way the entire system gets some minimal protection. The increased freedom on ship choice and such comes into it also. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe.
|
Grunanca
Final Agony B A N E
|
Posted - 2010.07.23 04:31:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Grunanca on 23/07/2010 04:32:05 Contrary to what some people say, this would reduce the number of ships in camps. For a good camp you need a rapier, a lach and a HIC. This can be done with 1 scimitar as backup, but if the scimi took sentry guns and got shot at the same time by a target it could go critiacal, hence the need for a nother scimitar. Apart from that you can put in a Keres to lock shuttles coming through, however this requires another logistic ship only focusing on keeping that one frigate up.
If all this could be changed into a dramiel, it would definately reduce the numbers in camps. Of course you would just see more small effective camps than normally.
I dont really care if its one way or another, just throwing my opinion out there.
|
Verdon Teraskun
|
Posted - 2010.07.23 05:04:00 -
[20]
Edited by: Verdon Teraskun on 23/07/2010 05:05:23 If anything the gate guns need to be boosted, scramming camps is for 0.0, Lowsec should at least be enterable, barring the snipers, who don't really have the ability to tackle at gates.
If you want people in low-sec, camping every gate 0.0 style is a bad idea. It should be fairly easy to enter, with the risk of being attacked while performing actions in system. The security status penalty is completely ineffectual, as most lowsec gankers live there solely, and there's no NPC intervention for them entering hisec.
|
|
Mist3r Evil
Caldari the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2010.07.23 08:33:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Grunanca Edited by: Grunanca on 23/07/2010 04:32:05 Contrary to what some people say, this would reduce the number of ships in camps. For a good camp you need a rapier, a lach and a HIC. This can be done with 1 scimitar as backup, but if the scimi took sentry guns and got shot at the same time by a target it could go critiacal, hence the need for a nother scimitar. Apart from that you can put in a Keres to lock shuttles coming through, however this requires another logistic ship only focusing on keeping that one frigate up.
If all this could be changed into a dramiel, it would definately reduce the numbers in camps. Of course you would just see more small effective camps than normally.
I dont really care if its one way or another, just throwing my opinion out there.
QFT, with some remarks tho;
in order to catch the smaller stuff, in addition to the ships mentioned above, you will need some (serious) remote sensor boosting (=ship #4). additionally, anything larger then a BC would pose a significant threat(without logistics, ship #8 and 9)to both the huginn/rapier aswell as the lachesis. In that context, you will need some (BS or BC) DPS (ship #5,6,7)added to that to make sure you are able to kill a BC or BS in a timely manner (or try to ransom it, whatever floats your boat).
(in order for this NOT to become an how-to gatecamp lecture)On topic: you guys really don't want frigs able to tank sentries in low sec, travel would become much, much more dangerous. in testing we've been able to get an inty to have a scan res of over 6000 (wanted over 9000, but hey), and keep it alive with the help of logistics. (kinda ironic, this coming from me, of all PPL)
in closing: Not Supported
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |