EVE Search - MWD back to gate a little OP?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

MWD back to gate a little OP?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Asuka Smith Gallente StarHunt	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:28:00 - [1] Hey guys, I was just out in low-sec and dodged a huge battleship gang in my 1600mm plated Myrmidon by MWDing back to the gate. Luckily they had all aggressed me and so I was able to warp to the station and dock, but I was frankly surprised that I was able to survive 8+ battleships (they had a sabre tackling). The gang I fought was mostly heavy hitters with nothing that could lock too fast and no secondary tackle, but I was heavy neuted down to 0% cap after my second MWD cycle and I had the 24km point on me ASAP. If they had had a disruptor maybe they could have stopped me sooner but I only got off two cycles besides, and the one web they had on me hardly slowed my momentum fast enough. On the one hand I am very glad that I made it out with my ship, but on the other hand I know the frustration of watching a target just MWD back to the gate all to well. It makes me wonder if something ought to be adjusted to make it harder for an opponent to just turn around. I know that in the case of frigates it is literally impossible to stop them from MWDing back unless you have a highly specialized gang utilized either insta-locking minmatar recons or smartbombs. Cruisers are pretty hard to get to, and I can live with the frig/cruiser being harder to get but... Should a battlecruiser be able to MWD back to gate ever? Especially a 1600mm plated one, and I only needed two pulses of MWD to get all the way back. Right now it seems to me that a four-slot tackle is required to guarantee that a target cannot escape, which is practical in a huge gatecamp but hardly reasonable under more regular conditions which makes gate combat sort of difficult to get, which is a shame because it is one of the only places to reliably see something you can lock on to. My knee-jerk theory is to move the spawn-point when you warp into a system to 25km from the gate instead of 15km, and adjust bubbles accordingly. Thoughts?
TraininVain	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:30:00 - [2] They could have put a scram on you, more webs, bumped you away from gate etc. It's their fault for having insufficient tackle tbh.
TimMc Gallente Brutal Deliverance Blackguard Coalition	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:31:00 - [3] Unless bumped any ship can MWD back to the gate from my experience. And consider how blind it is entering another system, there needs to be a way for clever people (read: people who fit their ship right) to escape. In 0.0 though, interceptors can lock quick and disable the MWD with scrams. Also people can just jump through to catch people on otherside as you said. But then they have to be smart enough not to get trigger happy and all aggress themselves.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:37:00 - [4] What if gates would spawn you at 50km from their exterior boundary instead of just 15km ? Oh, and make them all have a diameter of at least 50km too. On one hand, that makes it an _almost_ 50km trip back to the gate instead of almost 15km like nowadays. On the other hand, it's a 150km sphere where you can materialize that they have to interdict, so doing it properly would be much harder (especially in lowsec where you can't have bubbles). EVE issues\|Mining revamp\|Build stuff\|Make ISK
Asuka Smith Gallente StarHunt	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:38:00 - [5] Edited by: Asuka Smith on 12/05/2009 20:42:14 Edited by: Asuka Smith on 12/05/2009 20:39:25 Edited by: Asuka Smith on 12/05/2009 20:38:41 Originally by: TraininVain They could have put a scram on you, more webs, bumped you away from gate etc. It's their fault for having insufficient tackle tbh. Well that is the thing though, how much tackle do you think is reasonable to require a gang to bring to catch a single target? If they have an AB you will need x2 webs and a 24km point. If they have a MWD you will need a 9km point and a web, which sounds not that bad except for that you need to be within range of the target from the get-go as two cycles will be enough momentum to get a ship back to the gate. So it sounds like it takes 2-3 slots of tackle depending on what the opponent has fitted, and since there is no way to know you need to be prepared and bring all the different kinds. And you need to bring enough of it that the odds of the opponent appearing out of range is very low. I am going to say it will take seven to nine tackling modules to be "sure" that you can catch your target which to me seems a tad excessive and makes solo work quite difficult. Although I will admit that the gang I fought was quite unprepared and not the best example, but how good should you have to be to pin down a target that you are 10km away from on a gate? Lucking out and getting someone on the gate should be a jackpot not a desperate struggle requiring specialized ships and setups designed for maximum tackle. Which I guess is my premise, it should be easier to lock people down on gates. Originally by: TimMc Unless bumped any ship can MWD back to the gate from my experience. And consider how blind it is entering another system, there needs to be a way for clever people (read: people who fit their ship right) to escape. Fitting a MWD is not clever, it is a standard PVP fitting that is a requirement of success in almost every case. A clever way to avoid a gatecamp would be checking your map, using a scout, fitting a cloak and knowing how to dodge the inties who come to decloak you. MWDing back to the gate is a two click maneuver that requires no skill and only luck that your opponent is out of position in relation to you and thus allowing you to get the magic two MWD cycles (and really you only need to just start the second cycle for a second to have the momentum you need). It should not be a given that a player can MWD back to the gate, it should require an incredibly inept opponent to be able to slip away so easily IMO.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:42:00 - [6] 4 slot tackle? lol Me wonders if there's a single Caldari ship that can fit a 4 slot tackle without being beyond crap CUDDLES FOR YOU! <3 <3 <3
Matrix Skye Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:42:00 - [7] Not everything needs to drop dead inside a gatecamp. We need more tools to evade gatecamps, not give them a boost.
TraininVain	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:42:00 - [8] Edited by: TraininVain on 12/05/2009 20:43:49 24km or 9km point to stop you just warping off - depending on how close the person making the initial tackle is. Scram to stop you MWDing. At least one web to slow you down further (40% of base speed isn't quick). People bringing ABs is seldom a big worry. That's a whopping 2 or 3 mid slots for the whole gang. It also occurs to me that if they had a dedicated tackler along in a HIC they could have just jumped him through with you to snag you on the other side if you managed to get back to gate. Being able to burn back to gate or out of range is kind of the prerogative of smaller ships when faced with bigger ships only fitted with points, no?
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:46:00 - [9] And that's why Eve's full of ganks and not battles. Because more farmers in the pig pen stand a better chance of catching the greased up little swine. CUDDLES FOR YOU! <3 <3 <3
Clarion Abbot	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:53:00 - [10] Edited by: Clarion Abbot on 12/05/2009 20:55:32 carebears want 11 players to spend 8 billion isk on ships and fittings and wait for 6 hours on a gate for a 30% chance of killing one t1 fit raven. pvpers think that hand eye cordination, planning, scouting, spending lots of isk on ships and fittings, working together, and spending literaly years training up skills should mean something
Matrix Skye Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:58:00 - [11] Originally by: Clarion Abbot Edited by: Clarion Abbot on 12/05/2009 20:55:32 carebears want 11 players to spend 8 billion isk on ships and fittings and wait for 6 hours on a gate for a 30% chance of killing one t1 fit raven. pvpers think that hand eye cordination, planning, scouting, spending lots of isk on ships and fittings, working together, and spending literaly years training up skills should mean something And we all know gate camping takes so much skill that indeed everything should drop dead inside it. CCP BOOST GATECAMPS FFS!1!
crockett EXE Minmatar Mutineers	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:04:00 - [12] Originally by: TimMc Unless bumped any ship can MWD back to the gate from my experience. And consider how blind it is entering another system, there needs to be a way for clever people (read: people who fit their ship right) to escape. In 0.0 though, interceptors can lock quick and disable the MWD with scrams. Also people can just jump through to catch people on otherside as you said. But then they have to be smart enough not to get trigger happy and all aggress themselves. umm you can do that anywhere.. Scrams work the same no matter where you are.
Asuka Smith Gallente StarHunt	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:07:00 - [13] Originally by: Matrix Skye Not everything needs to drop dead inside a gatecamp. We need more tools to evade gatecamps, not give them a boost. I agree, however the method of avoiding a gatecamp or escaping it should not be a two click "back to the gate" maneuver. This particular method of escaping a gatecamp is just as mindless as the camp itself. It should take some brains to get a kill and to avoid being killed TBH, burning back to the gate takes zero skill, at least the camper has to manage his ranges.
Astria Tiphareth Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:10:00 - [14] Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 12/05/2009 21:15:01 No MWD is not overpowered. A single module is required to turn it off, which is far more than we had prior to QR. Failure to equip that module on a ship capable of locking the target quickly enough is the fault of the opposing side and their lack of preparation. One interdictor is a rubbish effort for a gatecamp. Where are their interceptors? Originally by: Clarion Abbot carebears want 11 players to spend 8 billion isk on ships and fittings and wait for 6 hours on a gate for a 30% chance of killing one t1 fit raven. pvpers think that hand eye cordination, planning, scouting, spending lots of isk on ships and fittings, working together, and spending literaly years training up skills should mean something That's some damned expensive tackle gear you seem to feel the need for... I also don't believe anyone requires anyone else to spend all day on a gate... People could, you know, go find those kills instead. Eye coordination doesn't mean a damn in an MMO the moment lag comes into play, which it does, regularly. Scouting? It's a gatecamp, what's to scout out? Oh you mean you want the other side to scout - so it's about someone else's risk and effort now? How touching & thoughtful. Years of skills? Please. Propulsion Jamming 5 is not that hard. Neither is training for an interceptor. A competent gang of 6 month old players can camp a gate successfully. They do, daily. (Edit: although the recent agility changes have made life more awkward, and are supposed to be on the list to be addressed). As a PvPer, I find this 'them' and 'us' whiny ranting childish and stupid. Both sides play to win, and to a non-combat ship, winning is running away successfully. It happens; deal with it. If it didn't/couldn't happen, nobody would ever bother and gatecamping would be really dull. Either you have to have a chance of success, or you don't gamble. That's the entire point. If anything, the success and reputation of gatecamps is such that low-sec is now more feared and over-fished than ever before. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... Environmental Effects
Andrest Disch Amarr Letiferi Praedones	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:10:00 - [15] Originally by: Asuka Smith I agree, however the method of avoiding a gatecamp or escaping it should not be a two click "back to the gate" maneuver. This particular method of escaping a gatecamp is just as mindless as the camp itself. It should take some brains to get a kill and to avoid being killed TBH, burning back to the gate takes zero skill, at least the camper has to manage his ranges. If they really wanted to kill you they would have had one of them disengage and tackle you on the other side. The onyl real problem is the excessive agility CCP decided to give out to everyone after they kicked nano in the balls, but that's getting sorted out soon so it's all good.
Catherine Frasier	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:13:00 - [16] Originally by: Clarion Abbot Edited by: Clarion Abbot on 12/05/2009 20:55:32 carebears want 11 players to spend 8 billion isk on ships and fittings and wait for 6 hours on a gate for a 30% chance of killing one t1 fit raven. Glad to see you restrained the impulse to exaggerate. Originally by: Clarion Abbot pvpers think that hand eye cordination, planning, scouting, spending lots of isk on ships and fittings, working together, and spending literaly years training up skills should mean something It does mean something, it just doesn't mean instant wtfpwnage. It's normal predator and prey dynamics and most of the time the prey escapes, nothing wrong there.
Nyphur Pillowsoft Total Comfort	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:14:00 - [17] Originally by: crockett EXE umm you can do that anywhere.. Scrams work the same no matter where you are. He's referring to the fact that interceptors can't be used in lowsec pirate gatecamps because they die very quickly to gate guns. EVE-Tanking.com - Helping you keep your hull in-tact.
Elise Randolph Foundation	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:15:00 - [18] Originally by: TraininVain They could have put a scram on you, more webs, bumped you away from gate etc. It's their fault for having insufficient tackle tbh. This, they're likely elite PVPers who setup for killing haulers. ----------
TraininVain	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:25:00 - [19] Originally by: Nyphur Originally by: crockett EXE umm you can do that anywhere.. Scrams work the same no matter where you are. He's referring to the fact that interceptors can't be used in lowsec pirate gatecamps because they die very quickly to gate guns. If only there were other ships with quicker locking time than BS but still possessing heavy tanks specialised towards the tackling role. They should put something like that in. I'd call it a Heavy Interceptor... no, then people'd get confused with Interdictors... hmmm
Becq Starforged Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:40:00 - [20] Originally by: 5pinDizzy 4 slot tackle? lol Me wonders if there's a single Caldari ship that can fit a 4 slot tackle without being beyond crap Me wonders why, given the OP's scenario of a blockade involving nine or more pilots, you would assume that all of the tackle modules would need to be on the same ship? -- Becq Starforged The Flame of Freedom Burns On!*
TimMc Gallente Brutal Deliverance Blackguard Coalition	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:50:00 - [21] Originally by: Asuka Smith Fitting a MWD is not clever, it is a standard PVP fitting that is a requirement of success in almost every case. A clever way to avoid a gatecamp would be checking your map, using a scout, fitting a cloak and knowing how to dodge the inties who come to decloak you. MWDing back to the gate is a two click maneuver that requires no skill and only luck that your opponent is out of position in relation to you and thus allowing you to get the magic two MWD cycles (and really you only need to just start the second cycle for a second to have the momentum you need). It should not be a given that a player can MWD back to the gate, it should require an incredibly inept opponent to be able to slip away so easily IMO. When I was a noob I entered low sec with many ships with ABs, and even no propulsion mods at all. That was not smart. Hell I even mined 0.1 solo with a hulk back. =/ Fitting a MWD is preparation, and should be rewarded by surviving these gatecamps. I was a camping pirate for months, I know its irritating to lose a kill when they run back to the gate, but without that it just seems too unforgiving.
Nyphur Pillowsoft Total Comfort	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:01:00 - [22] Originally by: TraininVain If only there were other ships with quicker locking time than BS but still possessing heavy tanks specialised towards the tackling role. They should put something like that in. I'd call it a Heavy Interceptor... no, then people'd get confused with Interdictors... hmmm No offence mate but it's generally not a good idea to act like a smartarse unless you're sure you're right. He's not talking about scrambling, he's talking about shutting down their MWD with a short range scram and using webs. The topic at hand is mwding back to the gate. Not that I agree with the topic, I think MWDing back to the gate is absolutely perfectly balanced at the moment. There are plenty of tools to prevent it, the only case where those tools are restricted is low sec piracy and even then there are alternatives. Have tacklers on both sides of the gate, have a few people hold on engaging in case the target makes it back to the gate, use remote repairers to keep fast webbers alive etc. EVE-Tanking.com - Helping you keep your hull in-tact.
MotherMoon Huang Yinglong	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:11:00 - [23] Originally by: Asuka Smith Well that is the thing though, how much tackle do you think is reasonable to require a gang to bring to catch a single target? Quote: On the one hand I am very glad that I made it out with my ship, but on the other hand I know the frustration of watching a target just MWD back to the gate all to well. It makes me wonder if something ought to be adjusted to make it harder for an opponent to just turn around. Ummm... I think you should need 2 tackle. It's hit and miss. you ether fit out to tackle an Afterburner ship, or fit to tackle a MWD. Or fit out a hurricane with a web and a scram, and a MWD. You only need a 3 point set up to catch any ship. But yeah if you fit for MWD you catch MWD. If you fit for MWD and they have an afterburner, then well, that's that. 2 ships to catch one seems fine to me.
Mica Swanhaven	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:13:00 - [24] Originally by: Becq Starforged Originally by: 5pinDizzy 4 slot tackle? lol Me wonders if there's a single Caldari ship that can fit a 4 slot tackle without being beyond crap *Me wonders why, given the OP's scenario of a blockade involving nine or more pilots, you would assume that all of the tackle modules would need to be on the same ship? becasue they think only the tackle ship should have a web... This is stupid logic, but yeah.
TraininVain	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:15:00 - [25] Originally by: Nyphur Originally by: TraininVain If only there were other ships with quicker locking time than BS but still possessing heavy tanks specialised towards the tackling role. They should put something like that in. I'd call it a Heavy Interceptor... no, then people'd get confused with Interdictors... hmmm No offence mate but it's generally not a good idea to act like a smartarse unless you're sure you're right. He's not talking about scrambling, he's talking about shutting down their MWD with a short range scram and using webs. The topic at hand is mwding back to the gate. Not that I agree with the topic, I think MWDing back to the gate is absolutely perfectly balanced at the moment. There are plenty of tools to prevent it, the only case where those tools are restricted is low sec piracy and even then there are alternatives. Have tacklers on both sides of the gate, have a few people hold on engaging in case the target makes it back to the gate, use remote repairers to keep fast webbers alive etc. Just saying that there are higher scan res options available (higher than a Battleship) even to the blinky red crowd. A BC would work fine for scramming too. Since they added the scram to the tackle equation it's a tool I think most gangs should bring given the choice.
ZinderX500 Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:16:00 - [26] So OP is basically saying that if the gate campers fail/don't care, we must make it easier for them ? pfffffffffff
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:19:00 - [27] you want to hear about stupid gates , let talk about border gates. they are so huge you cant bubble them with a single bubble ='( and because it so big not even inties are catching these people unless they are BC and up most of the time as thwe gate are so huge they spawn almost 40KM we figured out that 6 tech 2 large bubbles covers most of the gate oooh and that 37 km spawn point is bad when the jumping range is likealmost 30km =( if you buy eve in a box from my game store i will give you isk (GAME , parkgate rotherham)
Guillame Herschel Gallente Buffalo Soldiers	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:27:00 - [28] Originally by: Asuka Smith MWDing back to the gate is a two click maneuver that requires no skill ... Of course. This accounts for why nobody gets killed coming through a gate, ever. *-- The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then* --**
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:29:00 - [29] Originally by: Guillame Herschel Originally by: Asuka Smith MWDing back to the gate is a two click maneuver that requires no skill ... Of course. This accounts for why nobody gets killed coming through a gate, ever. fixed that with our KB link sinxce were camping gates =) if you buy eve in a box from my game store i will give you isk (GAME , parkgate rotherham)
Asuka Smith Gallente StarHunt	Posted - 2009.05.12 22:32:00 - [30] Originally by: ZinderX500 So OP is basically saying that if the gate campers fail/don't care, we must make it easier for them ? pfffffffffff No, what I am saying is that unless you have three guys fit with full tackle the odds of me being in a spot where I can get two MWD pulses off before they get my MWD disabled is high. A 1600mm plated Myrmidon only takes two pulses to get back to the gate, which I think needs to change. I guess what it comes down to is what percentage chance should X class of ship have of evading a gatecamp that they jump into blind. Frigates should have a very high chance, cruisers intermediate, battlecruisers rarely, and battleships never (IMO).

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.