|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Robert Caldera
   |
Posted - 2010.05.17 15:18:00 -
[1]
there is no issue.
you can run, you can kill the cyno, you can kill tacklers or counter hotdrop; those are enough options.
Noone hotdrops a single battleship out of boredom, you must have messed with wrong people and should die.
Fact is, there is no other counter to well scouted gatecamps beyond hotdrop, so be just prepared because its the only way to remove your camp effectively.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.17 22:18:00 -
[2]
 Originally by: Lil Mule
Could be the suggestion is already buried in the 5 pages you post wh*res have written but Ill toss this in as I think it makes more sense, and is more simple:
When a cyno pops, and a cap jumps, each cap ship jumping through will arrive at X% distance to one another in LY's (not in KM's). Therefore you have a dispersion pattern across the solar system. Call it the innacuracy of using jump drives and the random possibilities generated by particle physics that results in such variances.
This will achieve the results you are looking for and will make it fair. In that manner the Caps take a certain risk jumping in as they have to re-group. It also gives you the time needed to GTFO because they will be re-grouping. Mayhaps you might even tackle one of the juicy b*stards and pop it.
so how would you hotdrop camps if they could GTFO easily and return if you leave?
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.18 14:41:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Robert Caldera on 18/05/2010 14:41:40
no, what I'm trying to say is there would be no effective counter for at least half brained gatecampers.
Campers should not have the privilege of being allowed to be a pain in the ass, so hotdropping them is all fine, they're waiting for weak puppies to wtfpwn, so why should be a capital hotdrop on them not fair, it just reverses their own intentions.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.19 13:11:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Hazel Starr
The huge flexibility that a responding fleet has in bringing support
from all over EVE low-sec straight into an ongoing battle provides
a huge disincentive for less powerful forces to engage in overt combat.
how is it limited to low-sec only?
Yes, less powerful forces bite the dust more frequently, but whats wrong with that? Its all over eve that way and even beyond eve IRL.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.19 16:59:00 -
[5]
Originally by: tiviirulez
Discussion was about can you beam a batallion of special forces into a suburb street brawl by pushing a button on your mobile irl?
Go away with RL comparisons, they mostly suck.
My IRL analogy was rather meant at a more abstract level, that larger blobs bash smaller blobs in EVE as IRL also!
I know no reason why you should not be able to beam your forces to any random spot since there is jump drive tech available for that.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.19 23:31:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Ephemeron
Yes. 
The analogy would be more accurate if instead of battalion you beamed down a couple aircraft carriers to the street fight.
yes, because pushing navy cruisers and battleships through streets is more realistic.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 10:21:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Robert Caldera on 20/05/2010 10:27:26
Basically, (capital) hotdrops do the same thing to lowsec campers, what campers do to travelers, passing through lowsec. Simple thing. A bigger fish eats the smaller one -> all fine with this.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 12:33:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
But OK I'll play: Where are the coral reefs and plants for the small fish to use as cover against the big fish?
mh.. nowhere??
You should accept the omnipresent possibility of a bigger fish. Except for station and POS bubbles. Even in high sec you can be overwhelmed by a larger blob of people since the numbers arent limited in any manner.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 13:26:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Robert Caldera on 20/05/2010 13:26:41
Originally by: irion felpamy
I think we should add a high slot module to counter cynos.
Basicly you fit them to your high slots and activate them on the ship that has activated a cyno, this new module reduced the current HP of the target ship incrementaly untill it is disabled or the ship is destroyed. Mutiple modules would increase the speed at which the cyno ships HP is reduced. Once the ship is destroyed the cyno disappears
Maybe we could add multiple different types with different ranges and give them bonuses when fitted to certain ships.
you still didnt provide viable reasons for a cyno nerf.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 18:02:00 -
[10]
a bunch of people not liking being hotdropped but still no real argument for a cyno nerf there.
|
|
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 18:27:00 -
[11]
so you dont believe such a jammer, effectively preventing the only method for removing camps, would not be a mandatory part in campers toolbox? What a ****head are you?
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 19:12:00 -
[12]
rofl and no, campers are not as bright as they would just cynojam their camp permanently with a dedicated ship only for that only purpose?
Why am I actually argueing with such a noob like you?
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 19:53:00 -
[13]
I dont see a reason why hotdropping camps should be made more complicated and less effective. There is simply no reason.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.20 21:06:00 -
[14]
I dont see an issue.
Kill easyly, get killed easily its all fine.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2010.05.24 11:09:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Hirana Yoshida
I see your arguments are still made from the infinitely flawed assumption that capitals are only used against BS heavy gate camps
no, I didnt relate my statement to certain ship types, I'm just saying ship types involved dont matter absolutely.
Originally by: Wacktopia
2) There is no direct preventative measure (like there are Cyno Jammers in nullsec)
there is no direct preventative measure for enemy coming through a gate. Nerf gates.
|
|
|
| |
|