Just wanted to stop by and confirm that no, none of us want to see low sec PvP wiped from the map ;)

I'm a criminal, nearly -10 myself. I live in lowsec. Probably 50% of my kills are on gates. This **** matters, but the reality is that this meeting was about Winter crimewatch changes. Not stuff that's coming out in Inferno 1.2 next week. If you see this kind of stuff on patch notes, and you haven't ever heard the CSM say anything about it? By all means, burn down the house. But rest assured none of this is set in stone. Sometimes the developers will say that the thought process is that "______ will do ______" and they don't literally mean that this is how this is happening tomorrow.

If you really want to continue the blame game and need someone to spitroast, throw darts at, or just scream out when you're shooting people in the face on DUST, go ahead and pin it on me, I was the one that wrote the session to begin with.

Understand these were compiled using multiple rewinds, and I often would slow down sections of dialogue just to make sure I caught key words and phrases. The problem is that by zooming in at this level, it becomes difficult to than step back and say "Hmmmm someone else is going to hear this differently." (Everyone involved was there at the meeting and knew full well it was conceptual and not set in stone. We're all a bit myopic in this regard)

I've certainly learned a valuable lesson in tone and word choice, and we will certainly be careful to look for every opportunity to disclaimer the next set of minutes wherever appropriate to avoid this kind of miscommunication. I'll be discussing this with CCP Manifest myself next time I see him, so we all remember to keep this in mind next time around.

I appreciate everyone's patience as we ease back on the frustration and move back into a constructive dialogue about the proposed mechanics. Remember - it took a lot of courage for devs like CCP Greyscale to share their design ideas so early, and than to allow themselves to be quoted on top of that. This was precisely the fear that we all had (CSM and CCP alike), that one small error can lead to a huge community response that does more harm than good.

As long as we keep it respectful and give the devs some credit for opening up like this hopefully we'll continue to be a part of this design process as early as possible. This kind of discussion is what we're really after, in the end. If the devs take away from this incident that there's no benefit in public spitballing, we've all squandered a tremendous opportunity.

You people are focusing on the wrong thing. Lowsec sucks. It's a buffer between two hugely popular and populated zones because the risk v. reward of the area is wildly imbalanced. Permanent gate camps exist on many High to Low entry points with the intention of catching and destroying anything that comes through, including any and all newer players who either venture there without fulling knowing the consequences or who venture there to see what the fuss is and get their feet wet. Even many newer players are leery of traveling through Lowsec because they're well aware of many existing and permanent gate camps on the entry points.

CCP wants and needs to do something to invigorate Lowsec and pushing Pirates and campers off the Highsec > Lowsec entry gates is one way to do it. The concept they've come up with in this early stage is insignificant next to the intent of the design, which is to increase traffic which benefits everybody. When all is said and done and CCP's design is modified to suit the desires of the community, if they accomplish nothing else beyond forcing gate camps off entry points, the design will be successful and traffic will increase.

You people are focusing on the wrong thing. Lowsec sucks. It's a buffer between two hugely popular and populated zones because the risk v. reward of the area is wildly imbalanced. Permanent gate camps exist on many High to Low entry points with the intention of catching and destroying anything that comes through, including any and all newer players who either venture there without fulling knowing the consequences or who venture there to see what the fuss is and get their feet wet. Even many newer players are leery of traveling through Lowsec because they're well aware of many existing and permanent gate camps on the entry points.

CCP wants and needs to do something to invigorate Lowsec and pushing Pirates and campers off the Highsec > Lowsec entry gates is one way to do it. The concept they've come up with in this early stage is insignificant next to the intent of the design, which is to increase traffic which benefits everybody. When all is said and done and CCP's design is modified to suit the desires of the community, if they accomplish nothing else beyond forcing gate camps off entry points, the design will be successful and traffic will increase.

The whole problem is allowing and encouraging people to move from highsec to low and null. This is a pretty hard for new player, especially if there is certain death awaiting on the otherside, in the form of a gate camp. What incentive is there for these newer players to risk such dangers, when the potential rewards don't measure up.

By making gate-camps alot harder, you are effectively opening the door to low-sec to these newer players, as well as the carebears. If this is combined with a general increase to low-sec resources, sites etc, then they're will be a fresh safer means for high-sec players to risk their ships to aquire them.

So basicly, more players moving from high to low, which means more targets for those nasty flashy-red players. Why would you complain about even more ships to explode? The only difference is, now they aren't shuffling nice and easily one by one into the jaws of a waiting gate-camp, now they actually going to have to be hunted down. Here is where we learn the truth of all these moaning, whining players that claim to be PVP-Pros. I'm afraid sitting on a gate and killing noob industrials that pass through does not make you some expert PVP player.

Those that do know their trade can tell you, finding players that are in low-sec systems is not hard. There will be even more opportunities with more players. The only difference is, now you actually have to go and find your targets. I definately think this levels the playing field, giving high-sec players a chance to get into low-sec and making it more vibrant again, whilst maintaining its dangerous nature anywhere other than at a gate. Everyone wins!

Accept for those L33T gate-camper cowards obviously. They'll have to actually learn how to PVP.

Nah. They'll see you come into local and hit a dock, POS, or a series of rotating safespots, same as in nullsec. If this gets implemented, I see only the extremely dumb getting killed in lowsec.

Gatecamps - those aren't the problem, people who won't learn/adapt are. You can easily get through all of them, just do a little research.

No, there's no way to get through a gatecamp if they have instalock Loki/Arazu/HIC.

cloak/mwd trick, because it doesnt matter if you can insta lock when you cant target something.

NEXT!!

Doesn't help if they aren't AFK. You're visible 1-2 seconds. Instalock HIC locks you in less than a second.

Actually it generally takes around two seconds simply because of the time it takes for server responses. I hate to say it Jorma but im getting a distinct odour of theory crafting coming from your posts, Ive been in gate situations where haulers have evaded us using that trick when we've had remote sensor boosted hics with 6-8000 scan res on grid, wheres your experience from?.

childish flame about lolscanres

cloak/mwd trick, because it doesnt matter if you can insta lock when you cant target something.

NEXT!!

I've been asking for progressively stronger gate guns in low sec for years. This is a great change that is long overdue!

I also agree with the person that suggested that the gun progression is slower as you go into lower sec.

Can't wait to see it CCP!

Issler

No, there's no way to get through a gatecamp if they have instalock Loki/Arazu/HIC.

Have u ever sat solo on a gate or station in a bc or recon? I challenge every one of the csm and CCP Greyscale to go get in a bc or recon and go take global and tell me sentrys are underpowered and also fly to the Crielere solar system where 2 stations are 40km apart and when u get global u get double sentry damage from both stations but i guess this is working as intended. There are more pressing issues in the game atm without breaking more content that isnt broken to start with.

You and your fellow CSM 7 friends are an embarrasment to the eve community. If u spent as much time grasping basic game mechanics and a feel for what the players want instead of writing blogs, appearing on radio shows, making indirect snide remarks on twitter and feathering your own nests with free trips to iceland and free gametime the CSM might actually fill the role its supposed to. You all need to grow a pair instead of sitting at these summits nodding like churchill dogs (Churchill Dog at stupid moronic ideas tabled by ccp.

Grow some bawls, stop flaming ppl with valid points and do the job the community voted u on to do. Oh and you can log in and undock if u like too.

No, there's no way to get through a gatecamp if they have instalock Loki/Arazu/HIC.

Most of us don't care much for gatecamps or killing noobs in industrials (not saying I wouldn't shoot one if I saw one), what we care about are fights that happen mostly on gates (you know, 10-20-30-50-70-100 people brawling it out in style) and how these gateguns would essentially prevent them from ever happening.

Make sure to read some of the replies to the thread before coming in with your rather lacking opinion.

Also, I couldn't care less if brand new players decided to stay in highsec or jump into lowsec life. The type of people we want are the kind that can figure out how to get into lowsec without dying in a fire, or if dying, come back through a different way after having learned from the experience.

But to answer your point about gatecamps, what's so wrong with them?
Some people prefer that kind of gameplay, they make for excellent targets (except in the case of the Orca trick, which I hope get's fixed) and take care of the lazy fools that can't bother to use a scout or some common sense to avoid the gatecamp.

I for one love breaking up a gatecamp and getting juicy kills.

A lot of the posters in this thread seem to have limited experience with gate guns. I'd like to see if they have the same opinion after taking their favorite battlecruiser out solo and engaging someone on a gate and seeing what happens to them. Yeah, you lose ... The gate guns are already a massive bonus for the player being aggressed (as they should be). I can't count the number of times I've run into people on gates who sit there picking their nose staring at me and refusing to shoot because they not only want to outnumber me, but want me to take gate guns as well.

As mentioned previously, 90% of PvP in low sec takes place on stations and gates as they are natural bottlenecks. the suggestions that we all meet at planet 1 to shoot each other are as absurd as they sound. How's that conversation going to go? "Hi there pirate buddy! Here's our fleet comp, want to meet us at planet one for gudfites??=)". Not exactly the spirit of low sec. These changes would effectively limit target gang sizes to not much more than 10 members, since any more than that and the members of the aggressing fleet are going to be taking capital annihilating gate guns since the fleet will be running over 5 min. And hell, even if you do win the engagement and hold the field it's not like you're going to be hanging around under that kind of fire to loot up.

Perhaps the changes would bring more risk adverse people into Low sec, however, what's the point? We can't shoot them on the gates and we can't shoot them on stations, meaning we'd have to probe people down doing whatever it is they're in low sec for ... certainly not the fleet-based roaming PvP I currently enjoy. I also don't understand what's up with these seemingly hundreds of gate camps in low sec people are talking about. I can think of maybe 4 systems that are regularly camped with any sizable force. If you don't like that, use your intelligence and the ships you're already provided in Eve to either find an alternate route, or break through the camp. Asking for a game mechanic to act as a crutch is pretty sad.

When I originally listened to the proposed crimewatch changes on the Fanfest broadcasts I was excited to hear the potential for the revival of frigate-based PvP in low sec, which would have opened up a lot more opportunities for those of us who live here. I really don't understand the thinking behind the new proposal ... It will reduce the amount of roaming gang PvP in low sec and make the area less enjoyable to live in. Outside of FW, why would anyone want to live in low sec after this nerf?

Have you ever been to 0.0? In the last few years? ... Do your reseach before making a blanket statement.

You mean how you did research before asking if I've been to Nullsec in the last few years? Killboards are hard, amirite?