Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
King Rothgar
Violent By Design Rough Necks
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 23:13:00 -
[31]
Kill the haulers when they undock? Bubble the null sec stations and kill them before they can dock? Probe them out in that 30 second jump timer where they can't move or cloak? You can still kill haulers under my proposed system.
I did forget about jump freighters, I will give you that. They would need a redesign under my system much like BO's. I don't know what would be best for them. Maybe enhanced jump range but jump freighter pilots would be best to answer this. Cov ops transports would still be useful although their role would be diminished some. They too could perhaps use an adjustment. I'm sure there are some other things this will impact that will need to be looked at.
|
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
|
Posted - 2010.03.14 23:20:00 -
[32]
Edited by: HELIC0N ONE on 14/03/2010 23:23:39 Gatecamping is boring as hell but people do it because gates are the only predictable place where people might show up for you to kill them. Remove the gates and have people appearing in and jumping from their own personal safespots, as well as allowing ships to move unpredictably because they're not limited to particular designated gate routes, and nerfing the probing system on top of that, and you make travelling across the galaxy literally completely safe, as long as you fit a protocloak and have prepared safespots to bounce between while your cap charges up.
Fit a protocloak, jump to system, cloak immediately, recharge cap, decloak, warp to a safespot (it takes a while to probe someone out when you don't know where to place the probes) jump to next system, cloak immediately, recharge cap, decloak, warp to safespot, jump to next system.... get the idea? You may as well disallow shooting people unless they flag themselves as PvP-willing and go the whole way, since this would make lowsec or 0.0 travel completely safe for anything but freighters.
|
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar Reckoning.
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 00:05:00 -
[33]
Ah. So then instead of camping a gate, you just have someone mashing the scan button constantly and when you see a new hit in space, fleet warp everyone on top of it. It becomes like current gatecamping except you
a) Can't burn back to the gate and
b) can't get help from friends before you explode.
Unless of course you can warp away or cloak or something before the camp arrives...in which case we go back to haulers being invulnerable.
|
King Rothgar
Violent By Design Rough Necks
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 01:30:00 -
[34]
Gates and stations are the only predictable place you can find someone, and that's why I'd like gates removed. Not sure what to do about stations but when I figure out a non immersion killing way to have them unpredictable, I'll propose that too.
Think about it for a minute. If a player jumps into low sec, is instantly vaporized on the gate and tries it again 2 days later to the same result do you really think he's going to come back for round 3? No, of course not. He will become one of the 75%+ of eve players who refuses to leave high sec regardless of risk vs reward.
On the other hand, make jumping in relatively safe and let them start their mission or mining or whatever. Then they get ganked a few minutes later. Well, they still died but they didn't die instantly. They had a reasonable chance to accomplish their objective and get out alive but they over stayed their welcome. They are far more likely to come back and try again in this case. The end result is you catch a lower percentage of neutrals in your systems, but you catch a larger number overall because of increased traffic. Since it requires some actual skill, it's also a lot more fun than just looking at a stargate all day.
The reason I developed this proposal is because I've watched one of my favorite pirating systems die completely thanks to overly effective gate camping. The final straw was watching a noob pirate, who in all honesty is a complete idiot and failure at pvp in general, setup a sniper maelstrom that insta locks and one shots everything entering system smaller than a cruiser. As a backup, there is a smartbombing BS at the only station killing off the occasional shuttle that slips past. In addition to this there is a 23/7 camp of BS's and a HIC or some other tackler to catch the bigger stuff. Everyone in the region got the message about that system and there has been practically no traffic there in weeks because of this.
This type of camp is not uncommon either, my allies were actually rather slow at developing it. Some of us knew about it long ago and chose not to use such tactics because we knew the problems it would create. However, "wise" pirates who understand this are relatively rare. And so I would like CCP to nerf stupid pirates via a game change that actually requires them to look for targets rather than having them served on a silver platter. It does impact warfare as well and I'd say it impacts it for the better for the very same reasons.
It does make haulers much more secure but as said, you can probe them out easily as their sensor strength is crap. And tbh I don't care anyways. I'd rather blow up a BS than an iteron full of veldspar even if the veldspar is worth more in loot.
|
Kara Sharalien
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 02:13:00 -
[35]
I have mixed feelings about this.
There isnt really a lot of stuff floating out in space, removing gates would make the game feel a little barren IMO. But I agree that gatecamping is a problem. Camps are one of the main reasons I rarely venture into 0.0.
I'm not sure that the idea of a jump drive in every ship is the solution though. Jump drives are shiny and stuff, but are a tactical reward.
Personally, I always liked the idea of a gate randomly dropping you somewhere in a system, and would probably prefer something along those lines. The idea of a jump drive does appeal to me, of course, but I know its a bad idea long term.
Another possibility is we could introduce a jump drive module. There are precious few things you can put in a utility high slot, why not have jump modules similar to AB's/MWD's?
You could have a 1MW, 10MW and 100MW jump drives for frigs, mids and battleships.
Each one comes with a range determined by the mass and sig radius of the ship. This also opens up the opportunity for specialized setups like how if you put a 100MN AB on a battle cruiser, it goes very fast compared to its own AB but accelerates like a brick.
Putting a 100MW jump drive on a BC might let it jump twice as far but would drain the cap to nothing.
Equally, putting a 100MW jump drive on a carrier might give it a really small jump range, but at least it wouldn't need a cyno alt to move around the local cluster, only to do really long range jumps.
Originally by: Thuul'Khalat WHY YOU VIOLENCE MY BOAT?!
|
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar Reckoning.
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 02:35:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 15/03/2010 02:36:26 I've heard just as many "I jumped into lowsec, ratted for a couple minutes before a pirate jumped me and podded me" stories as I have "I jumped into a lowsec gatecamp and was popped". In fact, I've heard vastly more of the former.
Most lowsec gates aren't camped. The reason so few bother to leave hisec is that there's no reason to. There's no resource that makes people think "hmm, should I risk my ship to go to lowsec to do X?"
People avoid lowsec because for all intents and purposes it's just like hisec, except with vastly improved risk. There's nothing wrong with gatecamps, the problem is in how easy everything is in hisec.
You still haven't addressed how it will make people utterly unable to interdict travel routes or logistics.
|
Kara Sharalien
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 03:29:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden
Most lowsec gates aren't camped.
pretty sure we were talking about jumps form high sec directly to 0.0.
all these gates are camped 23/7
Originally by: Thuul'Khalat WHY YOU VIOLENCE MY BOAT?!
|
Botrias Pirabus
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 03:33:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 15/03/2010 02:36:26 People avoid lowsec because for all intents and purposes it's just like hisec, except with vastly improved risk. There's nothing wrong with gatecamps, the problem is in how easy everything is in hisec.
You still haven't addressed how it will make people utterly unable to interdict travel routes or logistics.
Just like hisec but with vastly improved risk? Nah. There's stuff I want in lowsec that isn't in highsec. But to go after it without a strong and well-organized fleet? I dont' think so. Even just trying to get one cycle off a lowsec roid is too long. 60 seconds of cycle for regular mining lasers + the time to reach the roid in the first place is already enough to be scanned, warped to, and blasted to pieces before you can react. Move it up to strip miners, and it's worse.
Toss in that unlike 0.0, you take sec-loss if you fire before the pirate, and a trip to low-sec for any reason other than intentionally getting into a fight becomes a joke. You could fill it with 0.0 roids and L1 agents who pay like L4-20q and it still wouldn't be worth it.
Why? Because you aren't getting what you came out there for. You're just getting blown up, and trying to defend yourself before you take the alpha (frequently from multiple ships) lowers your sec status. Sure, pirates don't give a damn about that, but there are people who try not to take sec losses.
Due to the sec status issue, lowsec is actually more dangerous than 0.0.
As for the logistics issue? That is a huge problem in the original idea. The only option I can think of, really, is making the jump drive be a module that is exclusive to stealth ships and the like. Problem is, that renders a large portion of the original intent on the post irrelevant.
|
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar Reckoning.
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 04:26:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 15/03/2010 04:32:10
Quote: Just like hisec but with vastly improved risk? Nah. There's stuff I want in lowsec that isn't in highsec. But to go after it without a strong and well-organized fleet? I dont' think so. Even just trying to get one cycle off a lowsec roid is too long. 60 seconds of cycle for regular mining lasers + the time to reach the roid in the first place is already enough to be scanned, warped to, and blasted to pieces before you can react. Move it up to strip miners, and it's worse.
Toss in that unlike 0.0, you take sec-loss if you fire before the pirate, and a trip to low-sec for any reason other than intentionally getting into a fight becomes a joke. You could fill it with 0.0 roids and L1 agents who pay like L4-20q and it still wouldn't be worth it.
None of the lowsec roids are worth more than veldspar. So no, it has everything to do with reward.
Also, the sec loss is absolutely minimal if you fire on a ship and they shoot back. Sec loss is NONEXISTENT if they're less than -5 sec status (which is anyone who "doesn't give a damn" about it)
Quote: Due to the sec status issue, lowsec is actually more dangerous than 0.0.
That's just a joke. You can't be podded in lowsec, no bubbles, sec status identifies who your likely enemies are, and nothing smaller than a BC or a Hictor can tackle you on a gate due to sentries. All because you might like .02% sec status if you shoot first.
|
Josef Huffenpuff
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 06:37:00 -
[40]
SO what you are really saying is ....
To help newbies move to Lo-Sec, remove all of the places where they might get involved in combat
Yes, I know you didn't say "remove" but effectively you want a zero risk lo-sec and 0.0, by stopping gates & stations being places where combat occurs, and allowing people to jump/cloak their way around the universe. This changes EvE completely from a game that allows non-consensual PvP (or rather one where you consent to PvP just by logging in) to hello kitty online. And perversely makes Empire (where presumambly your plan is that you cant use jump drives) more dangerous than lo or null sec.
Do you not realise this would completely destroy the game?
Please, grow up or go play something else
|
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 07:25:00 -
[41]
Do you really consider gate-camp ganks PvP, if so then you are the one that needs to change your ways.
Gate camps are so boring that even the newest of pirates only do it when bored after exhausting all other options. They require neither skill nor commitment and provide no challenge beyond fitting MOAR buffer (only partially applicable to null-sec).
Instead of slinging mud to protect your easy-mode "PvP" perhaps you could type up some constructive criticism instead and offer ideas that might make it work? Without taking a thought experiment as far as it can go there is no way of knowing if it can/will work.
|
Botrias Pirabus
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 08:43:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Kahega Amielden Edited by: Kahega Amielden on 15/03/2010 04:32:10 None of the lowsec roids are worth more than veldspar. So no, it has everything to do with reward.
Also, the sec loss is absolutely minimal if you fire on a ship and they shoot back. Sec loss is NONEXISTENT if they're less than -5 sec status (which is anyone who "doesn't give a damn" about it)
No reward is going to be worth going in alone if all attempts to get it are effectively doomed to net you nothing but a destroyed ship. That's a big part of why so many people stay in highsec so much.
Most people I know who go to lowsec go either because they absolutely have to fly through it, or because they're looking for a fight. And they fly through cloaked or in a fleet because anything else is considered suicide. That's the problem there, and I seriously doubt there's any real reward level that will change that dynamic. Tell someone you'll give them 100m, but only if they can sprint through a minefield while people shoot them in the face, and chances are, they'll pass.
|
King Rothgar
Violent By Design Rough Necks
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 15:13:00 -
[43]
Edited by: King Rothgar on 15/03/2010 15:13:26
Originally by: Josef Huffenpuff SO what you are really saying is ....
To help newbies move to Lo-Sec, remove all of the places where they might get involved in combat
Yes, I know you didn't say "remove" but effectively you want a zero risk lo-sec and 0.0, by stopping gates & stations being places where combat occurs, and allowing people to jump/cloak their way around the universe. This changes EvE completely from a game that allows non-consensual PvP (or rather one where you consent to PvP just by logging in) to hello kitty online. And perversely makes Empire (where presumambly your plan is that you cant use jump drives) more dangerous than lo or null sec.
Do you not realise this would completely destroy the game?
Please, grow up or go play something else
I'm a pirate genius, I'm ranked solidly in the top 2k on BC. I've been pvping for profit in low sec for the past year and a half roughly. I propose this change to make pvp more interesting and dynamic. Yes it will make traveling safer but no one jumps around 40 systems just for the hell of it. They do it so they can do something else in space where you can locate and attack them. If you can't kill anything except on a gate then you are a complete failure as a pvp'er.
|
Cearain
Caldari ReSlavers
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 15:44:00 -
[44]
I think the op makes some good points about how lame some gate camps can be. But there are gate camps where you are actually trying to catch a whole wt fleet. In those cases you are keeping scouts in the systems and trying to cut off the war target fleet from getting "home" safely. The gate mechanics work really well for this and this is by no means boring - regardless of which fleet you are in.
I think the low sec gate mechanics work really well. (other than the stupid sentry guns which I dislike) They provide a choke point where fights can occur and where you can cut off your enemy. You can usually (although not always) get through gates to scout if you have a smaller ship. But you can't normally sneak around in a larger ship. This is good. There are different options you have if you get caught on a gate. And you can fit your ship to try to avoid this.
I fly in fw not a pirate corp. When you are fighting another decent sized enemy the gate mechanics shine. If you find that your pirate corp just sits on gates and ganks stragglers, it may be that your pirate corp needs some good war decs. War dec some other good pvp corps and the gate mechanics may work better. If you have plenty of war targets but still don't like the gate mechanics - I'm, not sure, maybe you need to use more scouts.
|
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 16:00:00 -
[45]
Removign gate camps as eve is now woudl damage it too much. Coudl be a game withotu it? yes.. but now with rest of things as they are.
Thee only thing i think might need adjustment to help new players to get to low sec is. MAke the HIGH sec -> low cec gates have 4 guns not 2. Only those systems.
|
Ogogov
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 16:07:00 -
[46]
How about another workaround;
Keep stargates, but have empire/CONCORD patrols of tough (but destroyable with no salvage/loot dropped) groups swing by heavily camped systems as a kind of empire patrol?
This would be a realistic empire response to pirate attacks on trade routes..so would work quite well from the wizard hat perspective.
It would also serve to make gate camps more unpredictable in terms of location and more exciting for both the campers - who would now have to worry about getting hot dropped by a navy carrier and a few battleships - and for people running the camps because there would now be no reasonable way to predict where a camp would be.
Patrol frequency could be tied into the same ship kill/pod kill statistics that you can already get through the eve map.
It would be relatively easy to rebalance/balance the frequency and strength of these patrols to make sure everyone stays happy.
They wouldn't be a cash spinner because they would drop no loot or salvage (like current police/customs ships) and they would trash your faction standings if you killed them.
|
Daedalus II
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 16:13:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Seishi Maru Removign gate camps as eve is now woudl damage it too much. Coudl be a game withotu it? yes.. but now with rest of things as they are.
Thee only thing i think might need adjustment to help new players to get to low sec is. MAke the HIGH sec -> low cec gates have 4 guns not 2. Only those systems.
That's an idea. Make the gate guns so uberly dangerous that they are essentially a location bound CONCORD installation. The gates and possibly stations would be safe havens, but anything in between would not.
Otherwise if we want to keep the free jump mechanic idea, let the jump have a certain limited number of end points. Planets for example would be a pretty good one: * We see more planets and space doesn't seem so empty. * It's logical from a lore point of view where the jump drive locks on to a large mass as destination point. * For someone determined to keep a system locked down it's not impossible to camp every planet. * It's reasonably safe; there might be a camp, but the probability is extremely low.
A new upgrade that pulls ships to a specific planet could be added to 0.0. This would give the owning alliance a good reason to actually hold sov in all their systems. It would simplify for 0.0 alliances to keep their space safe, while not affecting low and high sec.
|
Altieki Maradir
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 16:14:00 -
[48]
Its an interesting concept, and would work towards the end you pointed out, but it would also make PvP **** - Virtually the only type of PvP you'd see would be pitted fights at specific locations, like when a pos is up for takedown.
|
Daedalus II
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 16:33:00 -
[49]
Having thought some more about this, the absolutely best and most realistic solution would be to spice up the gate guns. It's a really simple solution which would stop the large blob killing the single ship problem.
And it would still be possible for warring corps to get each other at the gates, as the gate guns wouldn't attack someone who shoots at a war target.
Removing the gates all together will never happen, no matter how good it would turn out, because it's just too complex. But it's realistic for CCP to spice up the gate guns, it's just a matter of either changing a few values making them more powerful or adding more of them. Simple as pie (and that's no lie pie).
|
Seishi Maru
The Black Dawn Gang
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 18:57:00 -
[50]
When I proposed gun changes i was thinking ONLY the high sec to low sec gates and only doubling the guns. More than that would be too much.
|
|
Atata Kaiko
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 19:08:00 -
[51]
Easiest way to kill gate camps is to allow players to see what's on the other side. Red light - podding has occurred on other gate in last 20-minutes, yellow light - ship kill has occurred on other gate side in last 20-minutes, green light - neither has occurred. To be fair though, such lights would only exist on gates from high-sec to low-sec; where they'd a) matter most and b) be something CONCORD would do.
|
Atata Kaiko
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 19:15:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Seishi Maru When I proposed gun changes i was thinking ONLY the high sec to low sec gates and only doubling the guns. More than that would be too much.
More effective would be to change the AI slightly, so that all the guns target the same ship (lowest sec or biggest ship), and pound on it until it's dust, then move onto the next one. Gate guns can only be tanked with fleets where the guns start to cycle between targets.
|
Kahega Amielden
Minmatar Reckoning.
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 20:15:00 -
[53]
Quote: No reward is going to be worth going in alone if all attempts to get it are effectively doomed to net you nothing but a destroyed ship. That's a big part of why so many people stay in highsec so much.
Staying alive in lowsec is quite easy. Really easy, in fact, when you don't have to worry about instalocking ceptors or bubbles on gates,
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 20:48:00 -
[54]
So, a looooong time ago, back when I was a noob (don't go there!) I wrote a post titled "why WoW is better than Eve". It was basically me complaining about the limitations of stargates, similar to what King is talking about now.
Back in the day, during Eve's alpha/beta days, ships did indeed appear at the star when entering a system, and there were no stargates.
Now, while the problem of stargates is a pretty valid one in some respects, it's unavoidable in others. Eve has no terrain to shape the flow of player traffic like other (non space) games do. Stargates act as this terrain. If CCP did away with stargates as they are now then you'd be looking at nothing short of redesigning the entire game from scratch to accomplish it. Maybe in Eve 2.0 or another game entirely something could be designed to solve the problem more elegantly than what CCP has come up with, but I don't see it happening any time soon. It's just too fundamental to the core design at the moment.
That being said, what can be done to mitigate the issues/problems associated with the current stargate game design? Sure, having both the stargates and the ability to jump to the sun is an option, but if you have your ship deposited randomly in space some 2-3 AU from any sort of stellar object then how do you expect any ship not fitted with a probe launcher to be able to track you down and engage you? There is no option in Eve to simply move to a coordinate in space like you can in Homeworld (for example).
Cynos help overcome the limitation of stargates to some extent, but one of the real issues here is the local channel as an intel tool. Because of local the stargates are even more effective at defining boundaries when it comes to sorting intel and who is where. If local were removed as it is currently implemented then it would go a long way to mitigate the stargate choke point issues.
Another way to approach this would be to change the way cynos work with respect to smaller ships- reduce normal cyno time from 10 minutes to 2-3 minutes, reduce the fuel requirements for lighting a cyno and then allow JUMP DRIVE MODULES to be fit to ships as a low slot module. The new jump drive modules (JDM) would consume fuel like ammo, use cap to fire (consuming 95% of your cap) and even have rigs available for things like better fuel economy and longer range.
If JDMs were properly designed (read: used grid/cpu/cap/fuel/slots/etc.) properly so as to reduce the combat effectiveness of the ships that it is mounted on, but not so much as to be useless, then you could have a clear trade off for their use: do we make our fleet super mobile and flexible, or do we use a more traditional, more powerful fleet with less mobility and surprise? -- Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
MaterialsEngineer Kariya
Caldari Deformed inc A.P.O.P.H.I.S
|
Posted - 2010.03.15 23:17:00 -
[55]
Originally by: King Rothgar Think about it for a minute. If a player jumps into low sec, is instantly vaporized on the gate and tries it again 2 days later to the same result do you really think he's going to come back for round 3? No, of course not. He will become one of the 75%+ of eve players who refuses to leave high sec regardless of risk vs reward.
On the other hand, make jumping in relatively safe and let them start their mission or mining or whatever. Then they get ganked a few minutes later. Well, they still died but they didn't die instantly. They had a reasonable chance to accomplish their objective and get out alive but they over stayed their welcome. They are far more likely to come back and try again in this case. The end result is you catch a lower percentage of neutrals in your systems, but you catch a larger number overall because of increased traffic. Since it requires some actual skill, it's also a lot more fun than just looking at a stargate all day.
This does ring true.
When I first played EvE I went out looking about in v-e-r-y dangerous areas (got out to -0.0 and saw the Crokite fields and all). The ability to get out there is very tempting to go back. But it took 2 gatecamps that stopped that fun. Now knowing that instakill types are around for their fun, I'd rather spend my time in high sec and spend months skilling up, instead.
I'll still, from time to time run through low-sec, because there is still a chance to get out intact. But one word of a gatecamp, I'll find something else to do (and folks will mention the camps in local to avoid them).
There's playing PvP and being a stupid and willing target, afterall.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
|
Posted - 2010.03.16 01:00:00 -
[56]
and next we complain about how we can get to lowsec but can't stick around because we get probed out in 30 seconds and ganked in mission (or w/e people do)
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |