Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
darmwand
Repo.
66
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 01:14:00 -
[1] - Quote
This is coming from a low-sec roamer: as a lot of people might be aware, low-sec tends to be somewhat on the empty side. Now, the way GCC works at the moment, it greatly reduces one's ability to move between systems or only just dock up for repairs between fights GÇô larger ships can easily be tacked on a gate and killed off by gate guns and smaller ships risk getting blown to pieces by station guns when, for whatever reason, you don't dock immediately (happens).
Basically this means that in many situations you have to wait for 15 minutes after a fight before you can even start looking for another engagement. It also means that people tend to ignore potential victims because "an Iteron is not worth 15 minutes of GCC".
What I would therefore like to propose is some sort of "probation period": your initial GCC would only last for 5 minutes. However, if within a certain time-frame (eg. half an hour) you get another GCC, that one last longer (10 minutes) and so on, up to a maximum of the current 15 minutes. This could possibly be combined with a stacking penalty based on the number of aggressors, eg. if two people engage one target, both of them get 10 minutes of GCC etc.
This change might further encourage roaming and small-scale PvP in low-sec. Plus, with the stacking penalty, it might encourage roaming gangs to send just one of their pilots to engage possible targets instead of sending the whole fleet after them.
The obvious downside of nerfing GCC, namely making it even easier to camp gates, should be mitigated by the probation period and the stacking penalty (even though I have to admit that I don't know whether gate campers care at all about GCC, maybe they just perma-tank the guns). The maximum GCC duration could even be increased to, say, 20 minutes if desired. darmwand Repossession Agent http://www.repo-corp.net/ Recruitment is OPEN |
Katie Frost
Asgard. Exodus.
80
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 01:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
GCC should be reduced outright.
As a matter of fact, the whole GCC concept as well as sec-status loss on aggression in low-sec should be looked at to promote more fighting in this area.
There are numerous threads on this topic however. |
darmwand
Repo.
66
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 01:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ah, sorry to bring it up again then - I checked the first 3-4 pages here but couldn't find anything.
Please just ignore this thread then. darmwand Repossession Agent http://www.repo-corp.net/ Recruitment is OPEN |
Katie Frost
Asgard. Exodus.
80
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 02:07:00 -
[4] - Quote
Yeah, happens all the time and at times it doesn't go amiss to have a new thread on a subject discussed previously as the others got burried under a sea of trolls.
I still agree though that GCC of 15 mins is far too long and far too restrictive for PvP. |
Bubanni
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
394
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 02:42:00 -
[5] - Quote
What happens in low sec "should" stay's' in low sec...
I personly think that you shouldn't lose sec status in low sec... concord shouldn't pop you if you jump from low sec to high sec with GCC,
Sentries shouldn't "instapop" frigates (reduce damage based on signature?) Eve should encourage PvP more in general, specially for newer players.. Christmas wish list https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=134275 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934 |
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1582
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 05:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
More tears.
Awesome. |
Minnaroth
Powered by Yoda
2
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 05:46:00 -
[7] - Quote
I thought about these things myself, but the conclusion I came to was that if you make changes like this, how is low sec any different from 00? |
Neotin Nahrain
The Praxis Initiative Gentlemen's Agreement
21
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 11:52:00 -
[8] - Quote
I agree with the poster that GCC is limiting the pvp possibilities in low sec. Glad i am in 0.0 |
Verity Sovereign
Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic
212
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 16:58:00 -
[9] - Quote
What would be the difference between low sec, and NPC null sec?
Its Low-sec, not No-sec
There should be consequences. I'd even be willin gto support a change in the other direction- in 0.4 space, when agressed, non-scramming empire faction police will respond instead of Concord, and escaping empire faction police would be very doable (as would killing the first wave, but then I'd implement a GTA III era police like response - run from police long enough, wanted level goes away, but fight the police, and they come with more and more force)
Then (and you'd probably like this part) I would remove concord from 0.5 space, and replace it with scramming NPC empire police (that are more powerful than their 0.4 sec spawns).
0.5 sec becomes much less safe as you can gank and escape. 0.4 sec becomes a bit safer, and the sharp divide between high and low sec isn't so sharp anymore. |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
9036
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 17:11:00 -
[10] - Quote
Nah, I like it.
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. |
|
FloppieTheBanjoClown
The Skunkworks The Marmite Collective
2078
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 20:13:00 -
[11] - Quote
(I'm not a lowsec enthusiast. My sec status is ~1.3, so the changes I suggest here aren't to benefit myself)
I think you should *at least* get a warning that you're under GCC when you try to jump into high sec. With all the recent and coming changes centered around clear and consistent information, it would be a shame for CCP to leave this in place. Never mind seasoned -10 pirates, this is about the new player who heard lowsec is the place to go to try out PVP.
He jumps out there, warps around a bit, engages the first ship he sees, and either gets the kill or somehow escapes with his ship. He decides to go back to highsec, jumps through and...Concord? This makes no sense! They don't punish you if you stay in that system, but they do here? Wtf?!
I'm hoping this is being addressed with CrimeWatch. if Concord is not going to enforce their rules in lowsec, they don't need to be exacting punishment for crimes committed there.
As for gate gun aggression...I like that station and gate guns will assist someone against an aggressor. That's one of the things that makes lowsec different from nullsec. Maybe the full 15 minutes is too long, or maybe it should only be the guns that were on-grid when you aggressed the guy. Actually, I like the second one. You commit an act of aggression and the on-grid gate guns aggress you for 15 minutes. You'd be safe at a different gate or station. That would solve the OP's problem without tossing out good game mechanics. The Skunkworks is recruiting. -áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1540711#post1540711 |
Ford Ix Prefect
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2012.07.31 20:47:00 -
[12] - Quote
Id rather see them buffed, and if you wanna be a pirate your forced to live in low sec, and have difficulty moving. |
Be4st
The Abusement Park
6
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 04:49:00 -
[13] - Quote
Ford Ix Prefect wrote:Id rather see them buffed, and if you wanna be a pirate your forced to live in low sec, and have difficulty moving. They do make it difficult already. Its called a "Security Status Penalty". I have been down there. Its a b*tch to back from. Plus, people that generally want to be pirates, don't really care about sec status, GGC timers or even highsec. Their only interest is to use you to fill up their Tear Cup. |
darmwand
Repo.
68
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 05:05:00 -
[14] - Quote
Be4st wrote:Their only interest is to use you to fill up their Tear Cup.
Not really. I just like explosions and corpses. darmwand Repossession Agent http://www.repo-corp.net/ Recruitment is OPEN |
Katie Frost
Asgard. Exodus.
86
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 06:43:00 -
[15] - Quote
Minnaroth wrote:I thought about these things myself, but the conclusion I came to was that if you make changes like this, how is low sec any different from 00?
1) Gate guns; 2) Bubbles; 3) Sov; 4) GCC (as OP is not advocating its removal completely).
... just off the top of my head.
I don't think that changing sec-status loss and GCC mechanics would make low-sec the same as 0.0 - but it would certainly promote more care-free/casual PvP for players that would not like to be barred from hi-sec after getting in 2 fleet fights in low sec. |
Mike Whiite
Keystone Industrial
64
|
Posted - 2012.08.01 07:56:00 -
[16] - Quote
hmm why would it help small gang PvP?
It would only make low sec more empty.
you want small gang PvP with-out the status loss, join Faction war.
I live in Low sec most of the time, and the roaming small gang PvP-ers I see don't enter any fights with other roaming pvp gangs, they jump PvE-ers.
Now that is their good right within EVE.
But making it easier for those groups to jump Miniers and PvP-ers will not make low sec more intresting, it will only make it more empty.
Don't bite the hand that feeds.
Don't pretent there is a large scale of players that follow rules of engagement. The only times small gang PvP occures is when people a jumped, or when both parties think they have the advantage.
Making it easier to gain an advantage at shooting people will make lowsec even more empty because people will start to avoid it. |
Minnaroth
Powered by Yoda
3
|
Posted - 2012.08.10 21:20:00 -
[17] - Quote
Katie Frost wrote:Minnaroth wrote:I thought about these things myself, but the conclusion I came to was that if you make changes like this, how is low sec any different from 00? 1) Gate guns; 2) Bubbles; 3) Sov; 4) GCC (as OP is not advocating its removal completely). ... just off the top of my head. I don't think that changing sec-status loss and GCC mechanics would make low-sec the same as 0.0 - but it would certainly promote more care-free/casual PvP for players that would not like to be barred from hi-sec after getting in 2 fleet fights in low sec.
Having now actually tried some low sec pvp, I totally agree. I was wrong. GCC is stupid - why should you be prevented going to hi sec for 15 minutes after doing low sec pvp? |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |