Thank you for the explanation Mr Grey, but i really do hope this change never sees the light of day anyways.

Mostly because i dont see the need for this change. It is not an benefit for us (and here i talk about me and pirates like me) who live and try to make a living in lo-sec.
CCP has stated that they wanna see more players enter lo-sec...and that idea i do support to the fullest, but this is not the way imo.. rather the opposite.

What i see as fun in lo is the escalating of fights at gates or even stations... baiting in neut fleets, keeping the fight going as long as u can by "barely" have the upper hand.. making them jump in more ships to tip the scale, and then we jump in more etc... With a "timer" this will die and we will end up with pure gank-fleets do hit and runs.. or sniping fleets 180km of gate/station.

Please fix other more pressing issues before fixing something that is not broken.. EVE is the only game that can offer this kind of gameplay, dont kill it!

As to the broader picture, we will absolutely continue to consider these sorts of "crazy" changes, because we don't just want to keep making adjustments inside the current design frameworks if we have the chance to make bits of the game *significantly* better by moving outside the current box. A consequence of this is that sometimes we come up with things that, on closer analysis, are just plain dumb. We try to identify these and drop them as early as possible. Sometimes we miss some of them. We try to reduce the incidence of this happening, but the only way to prevent them completely is to be incredibly conservative with our designs, and we feel that there are enough areas of EVE design that could be *significantly* improved with more radical design changes that that's not a tradeoff we want to make.

Ok as a frigate pilot from a predominately frigate based corporation.

Gate guns should continue, now and in the future, to kill frigates outright if you don't buff the damage to the point where it can force BC's, BS's and up of grid.

Because if they don't you enable people using cheap fast tackle on lowsec gates and you effectively end up boosting gate camps (at least you currently need a Legion now just give Orca's scooping them on gates timers so they can't jump to high sec please). Currently you stand at least a chance to get past a gate camp in something that align and warps fast. In a world where frigates have time to tackle on lowsec gates while big dps can also stay on grid you will have effectively killed small ship PvP in lowsec.
As frigate pilots will just lose their ships every time they run into a gate camp where now they at least have some chance of getting away in their ships.

Also I spend 2 years pirating in lowsec and only moved to null a few weeks ago. There's plenty of pirates making a living in lowsec doing things that aren't gate camping. So saying that making gate camping harder some how ruins lowsec is nonsense.

Gate camping is a legitimate activity and should not be dismissed as something stupid. Just because there are other ways to pirate, does not mean CCP should interfere with currently existing game content just because "they can"

Ok as a frigate pilot from a predominately frigate based corporation.

Gate guns should continue, now and in the future, to kill frigates outright if you don't buff the damage to the point where it can force BC's, BS's and up of grid.

Because if they don't you enable people using cheap fast tackle on lowsec gates and you effectively end up boosting gate camps (at least you currently need a Legion now just give Orca's scooping them on gates timers so they can't jump to high sec please). Currently you stand at least a chance to get past a gate camp in something that align and warps fast. In a world where frigates have time to tackle on lowsec gates while big dps can also stay on grid you will have effectively killed small ship PvP in lowsec.
As frigate pilots will just lose their ships every time they run into a gate camp where now they at least have some chance of getting away in their ships.

Also I spend 2 years pirating in lowsec and only moved to null a few weeks ago. There's plenty of pirates making a living in lowsec doing things that aren't gate camping. So saying that making gate camping harder some how ruins lowsec is nonsense.

CCP Greyscale, I really do hope that this was merely an idea and nothing more. We've all been witness to at the time so-called 'ideas' which were later implemented exactly 'as is' despite only ever being advertised as ideas.

After reading through the whole thread and finding some whining, some trolling but also some rigorous (and righteously so) and valid arguments against even the 'mere idea' of these new gate guns i'll add my 5 cents worth to it as well:

The idea to 'fix gate guns' or implement 'stronger gate guns' seems to stem (and achieve that very desire) from a :
- desire to eliminate gate camps (a)
- desire to make low-sec safer (b)
- desire to draw carebears into lowsec to make it more crowded (c)

(a) First off, there isn't that much gate camping to being with, and I think that in that respect its a false desire to begin with. Its a vast generalisation that comes from having a few systems in Eve that are notorious for gate Smartbombing and camping gates with insta-locking ships.
Most of the time so-called 'gate camps' are merely gangs running around 'showing some leg' in order to find engagements and naturally taking the possibility away to 'show some leg' on a gate to get an engagement will not help at all to make lowsec more crowded, quite the opposite actually, it will drain it of the life and action you've given it lately with Inferno. Your idea will not lead to eliminating gate camps.

(b) Second, the proposed changes will not make low-sec safer. You merely force the lowsec veterans to adapt their tactics if they want to gate camp and gank. Some adapted tactics have already been formulated in this thread to illustrate just that. Your idea will then eliminate the problem nor bring with it your desired effect. However fleet fights around the gates will simply not be possible anymore as stated above. Your idea will not lead to making lowsec safer. (If you want safe stay in high-sec)

(c) Third, and by (b) this will already be clear to most, your idea will not draw carebears into lowsec to make it more crowded simply because pvp'ers will find ways around your changes and still hurt the 'carebears' and gank them like there's no tomorrow. Your idea will however drive pvp'ers out of low-sec, and that, is not something you want or do you? Your idea will not bring more carebears into lowsec and will not make it more crowded, quite the opposite.

Instead of trying to get carebears into low-sec how about getting even more pvp'ers into low-sec? After all, low-sec is one of the main homes of PvP or isn't it? So instead make it more attractive for pvp'ers to live in low-sec. The mechanics as they are are not unfair simply because there's ways to avoid getting killed in low-sec and as long as there is, it is in my opinion balanced (in a general way and this is of course disregarding known bugs; sentry guns as they are at the moment, are not a bug).

If carebears learn the low-sec mechanics, you won't have to have ideas about fixing something that isn't broken in the first place in the form of having sentry guns' power go OVER 9000 after 4 minutes.

If the master plan really is to make low-sec more crowded, and it seems to me as if it were, then do the only sensible thing in that regard, and make low-sec more rewarding.

So you're explaining that there is no other motivation behind those ideas than "just for the lulz" ? in fact you point no major issues about sentries ? o_O (I might misunderstood this point tbh)

So here is my feedback about this "CSM idea" not a "devblog": Improve damages to sentries till they will not be sustainable for subcap fleet, will shutdown several LOW-SEC PERMANENT RESIDENT PLAYER gameplay and RP.
Gate camping a choke point is as fun as frigate pvp in belt, ransoming people is as fun as counting corpse in hangar, looting reckless hauler is as fun as having a good T3 killmail.
Improving Sentries the way you think you're almost shutdown half of those activities.
You will also be able to remove Piracy from the AWESOME "The Sanbox" list on eveonline.com, cause small gang warfare and kill in low-sec doesn't makes people some pirates !

As to the broader picture, we will absolutely continue to consider these sorts of "crazy" changes, because we don't just want to keep making adjustments inside the current design frameworks if we have the chance to make bits of the game *significantly* better by moving outside the current box. A consequence of this is that sometimes we come up with things that, on closer analysis, are just plain dumb. We try to identify these and drop them as early as possible. Sometimes we miss some of them. We try to reduce the incidence of this happening, but the only way to prevent them completely is to be incredibly conservative with our designs, and we feel that there are enough areas of EVE design that could be *significantly* improved with more radical design changes that that's not a tradeoff we want to make.

So you're explaining that there is no other motivation behind those ideas than "just for the lulz" ? in fact you point no major issues about sentries ? o_O (I might misunderstood this point tbh)

+1

Like i ask you before CCP, how many of you ever tries to live in low with -10 mark and kill for a living?
I bet none.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Sentries aren't perfect, but they are currently working just fine. CCP has already made one serious mistake with this philosophy (unified inventory) and is rapidly headed towards another (crimewatch revamp). Radical change for the sake of radical change is always a terrible idea.

made up numbers

[quote=Tetsel]So you're explaining that there is no other motivation behind those ideas than "just for the lulz" ? in fact you point no major issues about sentries ? o_O (I might misunderstood this point tbh)
The motivation behind them is "can we find new ways to make EVE better?". That's kind of our job.

HAHA, I thought carebear tears were great but pirate tears are even better!

I'm sorry but I can't subscribe to that philosophy. The idea that once something is "good enough" it should never be touched again is a complete creative capitulation.

Gimping a viable career/profession isnt making EVE better. Is it not better to fix whats broken first before breaking something that isnt.

CCP listens to carebear tears tho.

The idea presented back then suggested that a carrier shouldn't be able to survive a full triage cycle. Would that still be a goal of yours?

I ask because I strongly disagree that sentries should be able to do *all* the work in such a situation. In fact I find myself reversing on some of my previous notions as I think about just what this means for combat in general: fights MUST be resolved in a matter of minutes or the gate guns will do it for you. Crashing a gate camp? Don't worry about bringing DPS. Just bring tank and hold them down long enough for the guns to work. It's taking the need for DPS away from the players, because they can depend on an NPC source for it.

CCP listens to carebear tears tho.