| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Frying Doom
Zat's Affiliated Traders
407
   |
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:33:00 -
[181] - Quote
Hell and people think care bears whine alot.
The amount of tears from gankers and now pirates are hilarious and it all seems to stem from inability to adapt.
You know adapt, the very thing that people have been telling carebears to do for years. Sure lo-sec will change and more people will want to use it. Not just noobs, Vets and pirates. More players will probably enter lo-sec if there were not smart bombing idiots sitting at gates for hours a day, hoping to pop some ones pod.
Yes you will have to work more for kills and actually PvP.
Any Spelling, gramatical and literary errors made by me are included free of charge.
|
Tsubutai
The Tuskers
105
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:36:00 -
[182] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Hell and people think care bears whine alot.
The amount of tears from gankers and now pirates are hilarious and it all seems to stem from inability to adapt.
You know adapt, the very thing that people have been telling carebears to do for years. Sure lo-sec will change and more people will want to use it. Not just noobs, Vets and pirates. More players will probably enter lo-sec if there were not smart bombing idiots sitting at gates for hours a day, hoping to pop some ones pod.
Yes you will have to work more for kills and actually PvP.
You do realise that as written, this would be a buff to gatecamping, right? A good tackle inty will now offer all the instalock capabilities of a sebo'd hic/recon without needing much/any (remote) sensor boosting and will be a capable decloaker to boot. It's not a nerf to ganking, it's a nerf to roaming pvp between gangs who are out looking for a fight. |
Cavalira
New Eden Renegades
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:38:00 -
[183] - Quote
Lowsec is the land of Pirates and Brave carebears. In my oppinion gatecamping is fine, because thats what makes them the evil pirates.
If you force the pirates to fight in belts, lowsec wouldn't be 'lowsec' but more like 'expanded highsec'. Where is the danger in going through lowsec? Where's the adrenaline?
I think we should prevent pirate gangs from completely shutting down a gate, using insta-locking t3s/lachs with huginn support.
A solution could be a boost to 'Sentry VS Recons'. If the sentry damage scales with sigradius, frigates could actually engage another frig on a gate without being insta popped.
To prevent the neutral orca, stop ships from being scooped, or the GCC should be applied to the orca, when a GCC ship is scooped into Orca.
A common engagement in lowsec is on gates/stations.
Imagine two fleets jumping into each other in lowsec. Unable to fight on gate, they go to a belt. When challenges people to fight 1v1 at planet one, usually people get scared and wont accept it. I bet most FC's are like that, when they're FC'ing a fleet. Same thing transfered to gangs.
afdusfhakdsufhkadsufhasdfsf |
Sven Viko VIkolander
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
16
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:39:00 -
[184] - Quote
Docking games and gate camps are not low sec pvp. They are boring and too easy. They are also not fun.
On the other hand, the changes to sentry guns as outlined probably go too far.
On the other hand, the dev remark was months ago and was speculative. Who knows what changes are in store.
So take some preparation H and stop being so butt-hurt about mere [possibilities.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
159
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:40:00 -
[185] - Quote
Frying Doom wrote:Hell and people think care bears whine alot.
The amount of tears from gankers and now pirates are hilarious and it all seems to stem from inability to adapt.
You know adapt, the very thing that people have been telling carebears to do for years. Sure lo-sec will change and more people will want to use it. Not just noobs, Vets and pirates. More players will probably enter lo-sec if there were not smart bombing idiots sitting at gates for hours a day, hoping to pop some ones pod.
Yes you will have to work more for kills and actually PvP.
I've been through a whole lotta lowsec and haven't been smartbomed once. and as already said, will be easy to just camp with ceptors and a few t3 bcs, imo that is just not a fun camp. |
alittlebirdy
All Hail The Liopleurodon
45
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:41:00 -
[186] - Quote
Is ccp ******* high? This will kill almost allllllll lowsec fights. When the **** do you not get a fight on a gate? and 4 and 1/2 min = dead carrier? WTF GF is over in 4 and 1/2 min... let alone how long till it will kill a bc (what 2min?) rofl
CCP better count on MASSIVE unsubs over this.
+ the mining buff... should = ship prices in the 100's of isk rofl.
Yep gj ccp new lowsec gate camp will be a alpha fleet at 160k. |
Natasha Mendel
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
23
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:42:00 -
[187] - Quote
Well, now that I've read and thought about this, I think that there may need to be some sort of change, but this is far too drastic.
Automatic shooting of anybody under -5 is OK in my book. Anyone that has that low of a sec status is most likely used to being shot at by gate guns anyway.
However, the massive escalation of damage will just ruin any sort of fight. As Destiny said earlier in the thread, CCP seems to be implementing non-player mechanics to punish player actions. This is the wrong direction. Players need to get more tools to play with the sand, not a sandbox referee smacking people.
It is true that most fights do take place on transition areas. I myself did a stint of lowsec PvP while living in a wormhole. I remember about an eighth of my fights being off gates or stations. Every other fight I was in was on a gate or the undock of a station. Is this the best way to go about lowsec PvP? Maybe. Maybe not. But as it is, that's how it works. Maybe it would be good to change this, but right now, buffing sentry guns without a corresponding change in an area to fight would make things difficult for many parties.
So I am definitely opposed to the changes as described in the CSM minutes. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
Late Night Alliance
817
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:43:00 -
[188] - Quote
Issler Dainze wrote:So I think it comes down to this. Do you want more folks in low sec? If so, the perception of a lot of high sec players is low sec is the home of the perma-gate camping ganker. Seeing that CCP wants to address this reduces that fear.
That's just the issue though... it's just "fear" that keeps the risk adverse in high-sec. And that "fear" is not exactly the reality of the situation we have.
MOST of the low-sec gates are NOT camped. Only the gates that are easiest and most convenient to access are the ones that see the most camping (because they see the most traffic).
For example... the gate between the systems Amamake and Ossogur is often camped. However, there are two "backroads" that allow people to access the same general area. And while they certainly take people well out of their way and add many more jumps to the trip, both routes are rarely camped.
Issler Dainze wrote:Add some other exciting elements to life in low sec that make folks hit the magic risk/reward point and you have an influx of new folks in low sec. Not changing the dynamic of low sec means it remains the wasteland it is today.
Two things:
1: New people aren't going to be going into low-sec the way you think. Some people might come in... but they'll leave because they don't enjoy the hassle of "keeping an eye peeled" at all times. Voluntarily accepting risk and enjoying yourself with it while doing your day to day stuff is a mentality. It's not something you can really "lure" people into.
2. Carebears and PvPers will adapt. But not for the better.
Carebears will just become more skittish and take full advantage of the fact that it would be very difficult to engage them for any length of time on a gate or station (and it's already hard as hell to catach a mission runner in low-sec).
PvPers will adapt by adopting more 0.0-like tactics... more numbers... more alpha... more range. Say goodbye to prolonged skirmish warfare and escalating engagements.
Issler Dainze wrote:So if you don't like this idea, how do you think you get more folks into low sec? Hint, "keeping roaming pirate like PvP fights" like they happen today isn't the answer. We can see the results of that experience.
The alternative is to make low-sec more "safe." Because really... that's the only way I can see high-sec people coming to LIVE in low-sec.
And no... there isn't an issue with making money in low-sec. Level 5 missions pay stupid high. And you can make killings by selling ships and mods in low-sec markets.
Like I said in the last quote... voluntarily putting yourself at risk isn't something you can be goaded into. You either "have the mentality" to willingly put yourself in danger or your don't.
And to echo what Tippa and Liang have been saying... in the 2 years I have played, almost all the PvP I have taken part in have been on gates.
Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Aina Sasaki
Red Core
Paradigm Shift Alliance
400
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:53:00 -
[189] - Quote
This is rather silly. While I am not exactly a fan of gatecamps (I think they are annoying to run into and boring to actually do), it still is a viable method of play. Trying to deal with it in this manner is a little much. :o
- Rei |
Nibberler
the united
Negative Ten.
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:53:00 -
[190] - Quote
this is by far the biggest carebear buff i have ever seen, if this goes through i loose all hope in ccp, u know this gets rid of piracy completely and denies the entire profession
dont do this |
|
|
Strider Hiryu
ICEBOX.
Negative Ten.
16
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:58:00 -
[191] - Quote
Gate camps are player driven content. People enjoy running gate camps. Using rancer and amamake as examples, they have a reputation that alot of people know about.
I guess we all will just have to use sniper camps now. Cheers CCP for these awesome teir 3 bc's. Makes this ******** idea less relevant.
I really think discouraging fleet fights on gates in lowsec with the use of capitals is really stupid, because I have found those to be some of the most exciting fights in my eve career, win or lose.
But it is typical of CCP to take advise on game mechanics from Highsec pubbies and 0.0 scrubs. |
Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
Ushra'Khan
33
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 02:59:00 -
[192] - Quote
This idea for sentry gun DPS scaling upwards will not end well.
Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |
Wrayeth
We Reach Around
Situation: Normal
31
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:00:00 -
[193] - Quote
TBH, I think this change will massively reduce the amount of actual fights that occur on lowsec gates and leave ganks unaffected. Other people have pointed out how ganks will be affected (i.e. swap setups for more firepower, less tank, resulting in faster ganks) but there's another side of the coin: fights last much longer than ganks. As such, the increased firepower of the sentry guns is going to mean the criminal side of the fight is almost certainly going to lose. Once that starts happening, most people will simply avoid fighting entirely, only engaging when it's a sure thing. Most pirates already do this, but everyone else who currently doesn't will find themselves forced to either ape this tactic or not bother at all.
End result? Fewer fights and more one-sided ganks.
Anyway, that's my two ISK. |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
825
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:04:00 -
[194] - Quote
Wrayeth wrote:TBH, I think this change will massively reduce the amount of actual fights that occur on lowsec gates and leave ganks unaffected.
Exactly.
And that is why I am going public with my prediction that CCP will extend sentry gun range to 250km as a complement for this change.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) |
lanyaie
478
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:06:00 -
[195] - Quote
AFTER YEARS...CCP DECIDED TO NERF RANCER....
I dont post often, but when I do i'm probably trolling you Currently offering 100% legit hulkageddon security sponsored by the mittani, send 50m to me and 50m to him |
Strider Hiryu
ICEBOX.
Negative Ten.
16
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:07:00 -
[196] - Quote
As for ransoms on the gate... |
Ludi Burek
The Player Haters Corp
128
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:08:00 -
[197] - Quote
Lmao, 4.5 minutes!!? What gang would want to aggress another gang on gate with that? Should be at the very minimum 15 minutes.
I'm not against hampering perma tanking but this is such a blanket change that screws over so many other forms of pvp.
My prediction:
1) CCP will go ahead regardless of warnings (history repeating and all that)
2) Low seccers will adapt, new (or revival of old) tactics will emerge
3) Bears gonna whine about being insta tackled by frigs and or volleyed from range
4) CCP makes sentry range cover whole grid :)
5) ... some time passes, more whining
6) Sentries do uber dps from 1st second, eliminating that fast locking small ship threat
7) Sub caps cannot aggress at gates due to dps
8) ... I dunno, seboed supercaps blapping haulers and having to warp out screaming?
9) Any sentry presence becomes pvp free zone.
10) Whining about being probed and killed.
11) Sentries appearing at npc sites, belts 
12) ... not sure |
Cavalira
New Eden Renegades
11
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:09:00 -
[198] - Quote
Ludi Burek wrote:Lmao, 4.5 minutes!!? What gang would want to aggress another gang on gate with that? Should be at the very minimum 15 minutes. I'm not against hampering perma tanking but this is such a blanket change that screws over so many other forms of pvp. My prediction: 1) CCP will go ahead regardless of warnings (history repeating and all that) 2) Low seccers will adapt, new (or revival of old) tactics will emerge 3) Bears gonna whine about being insta tackled by frigs and or volleyed from range 4) CCP makes sentry range cover whole grid :) 5) ... some time passes, more whining 6) Sentries do uber dps from 1st second, eliminating that fast locking small ship threat 7) Sub caps cannot aggress at gates due to dps 8) ... I dunno, seboed supercaps blapping haulers and having to warp out screaming? 9) Any sentry presence becomes pvp free zone. 10) Whining about being probed and killed. 11) Sentries appearing at npc sites, belts 12) ... not sure
13) Concord escort |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
825
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:11:00 -
[199] - Quote
Ludi Burek wrote:Lmao, 4.5 minutes!!? What gang would want to aggress another gang on gate with that? Should be at the very minimum 15 minutes. I'm not against hampering perma tanking but this is such a blanket change that screws over so many other forms of pvp. My prediction: 1) CCP will go ahead regardless of warnings (history repeating and all that) 2) Low seccers will adapt, new (or revival of old) tactics will emerge 3) Bears gonna whine about being insta tackled by frigs and or volleyed from range 4) CCP makes sentry range cover whole grid :) 5) ... some time passes, more whining 6) Sentries do uber dps from 1st second, eliminating that fast locking small ship threat 7) Sub caps cannot aggress at gates due to dps 8) ... I dunno, seboed supercaps blapping haulers and having to warp out screaming? 9) Any sentry presence becomes pvp free zone. 10) Whining about being probed and killed. 11) Sentries appearing at npc sites, belts 12) ... not sure
Liked. ******* beautiful.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) |
Bayram Blacklion
Heretic University
Heretic Nation
1
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:12:00 -
[200] - Quote
this is bullshit ccp might as well kill the whole pirate comunity,and the only people who like this are probaly all FW anyways.
all i see here is ccp trying to prevent pirate corps from gatecamping, which is for example my major income all they do is to help pve'ers and blobs.
great job really this game is going down the drain,its morphing from an really mature game to an absolutly noob friendly game . |
|
|
Ivy Romanova
All Your Machariel Belong to Ham
Industrial Technonauts
63
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:14:00 -
[201] - Quote
Isalone wrote:Quote:CCP Greyscale moves on to explain his work on sentry guns. Sentry guns will now shoot anyone with a criminal flag, suspect or otherwise. Sentry guns will also start with smaller amounts of damage, and ramp up with time. Ideal tuning will be to where triage carriers will die at around 4 1/2 minutes. This way, if you want to use triage carriers in lowsec on gates you can, but you must commit to the cycle for a length of time before starting your reps, if you want to deactivate triage before the sentry guns kill you and jump out. CCP Greyscale also points out that another goal is to make it so that the first couple of hits won't kill an interceptor immediately, enabling a quick tackle, and then a warp out. I've lived in lowsec for quite a while now and gotta tell you - this is probably gonna cause as much "whine 'n' unsub" threads as nex store/greed is good did. For those who don't go to low often - most of fleet/gang fights in low take place at gates. If gateguns are gonna pop carriers 4.5mins into the fight, cruiser/bc fleets going gcc on a gate aren't gonna happen at all. When was the last time you have seen a carrier at a gate? I don't think I've ever seen one. 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. discuss, lol
I like it a lot |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
825
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:16:00 -
[202] - Quote
Bayram Blacklion wrote:this is bullshit ccp might as well kill the whole pirate comunity,and the only people who like this are probaly all FW anyways.
Nah, I do FW and I'm (obviously, as can be seen from my posting) completely against this. But then again, I'm not one of those "farm Amarr sites with a TLF alt" people, so I guess my opinion doesn't matter anyway.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) |
Freya Hrondulf
Black Lance
Fidelas Constans
0
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:19:00 -
[203] - Quote
So now low sec, safe haven for those with low sec status, will no longer allow these individuals to engage in station or gate combat nor can they deploy bubbles to catch people in warp.
Low sec residents are now limited to what... trying to catch one of the three eve lowsec miners in a belt and challenging people to honor duels at planet one?
Thank god they can still take part in carrier gate camps - the bread and butter of lowsec pvp. |
Danny Diamonds
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
33
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:20:00 -
[204] - Quote
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again. P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh
According to the numbers presented in that same CSM...
Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game.
If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority... |
Destiny Corrupted
Deadly Viper Kitten Mitten Sewing Company
825
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:21:00 -
[205] - Quote
Danny Diamonds wrote:Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again. P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh According to the numbers presented in that same CSM... Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game. If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority...
The only problem with that logic (or lack of) is that without the pvp, this game wouldn't exist at all.
(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST) |
Natasha Mendel
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
23
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:21:00 -
[206] - Quote
Bayram Blacklion wrote:all i see here is ccp trying to prevent pirate corps from gatecamping, which is for example my major income all they do is to help pve'ers and blobs.
You guys actually try and make money off lowsec PvP?
Finally, been wondering where all the real pirates are.
Danny Diamonds wrote:Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again. P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh According to the numbers presented in that same CSM... Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game. If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority...
Because the majority is always right?
There's this thing called mob rule. And it happens a lot, and societies have made bad decisions because of it. |
Virgil Travis
Non Constructive Self Management
Unified Church of the Unobligated
507
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:24:00 -
[207] - Quote
Freya Hrondulf wrote: nor can they deploy bubbles to catch people in warp..
They can't do that in low sec now
Unified Church of the Unobligated - madness in the method
Mamma didn't raise no victims. |
Danny Diamonds
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
33
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:29:00 -
[208] - Quote
Destiny Corrupted wrote:Danny Diamonds wrote:Jerick Ludhowe wrote:Worst proposed change of the year. Congratz CCP on knowing next to nothing about your own game yet again. P.S. This CSM guy actually thinks he knows what he is talking about, kinda funny tbh According to the numbers presented in that same CSM... Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. That leaves...75% who do not consider it a reason for playing the game. If i were running CCP, I wonder what group I would listen to? Maybe the majority... The only problem with that logic (or lack of) is that without the pvp, this game wouldn't exist at all.
That's strange, it seems that would only impact 25% of current playerbase in drastic ways. I merely echoed (as best i could from memory) the numbers mentioned. Are you denying that only 25% of players responded with PVP as a reason for playing the game?
It amazes me at the lengths the handful of forum trolls go to try and convince everyone (including CCP) that they are the only ones who know the "truth". Same 5 turds every time too.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
8871
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:30:00 -
[209] - Quote
Danny Diamonds wrote:According to the numbers presented in that same CSM...
Only 25% of players were playing EvE for the PVP. GǪexcept that they're referring to this study, which measures what first got people interested in EVE, not what they like doing in the game. The study over what people like in the game shows that 75% enjoy PvP (see here for a cleaned-up version) GÇö more than any other activity.
Those that enjoy PvP outnumber the ones who dislike it by a factor of 7:1GǪ so yes, listening to that majority would probably be a good idea.
Oh, and for the record, notice how in that GÇ£what got you startedGÇ¥ poll, PvE didn't even make the list GÇö it's collected into the GÇ£otherGÇ¥ category and is thus less relevant to new players than the Mac client. 
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
CONCORD spawns: quick enough to save you?
|
Tamiya Sarossa
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
178
|
Posted - 2012.08.03 03:30:00 -
[210] - Quote
This is pretty poor reasoning - inties being able to tackle on lowsec gates will make lowsec more inhospitable, not more friendly, and only enhance the choke-point nature of gates. Frigs/cruisers used to be able to roam in relative confidence - this change will wholly remove that ability. Experienced players can still get by with mwd-cloak, so it's new players that will get the shaft here. Really don't understand the logic.
I'm not inherently opposed to ramping up damage, but there's gonna be a lot of shenanigans with pinning down gcced guys and letting sentries do the work, and in either case the ability of sentries to keep light tackle off gates shouldn't be nerfed too much.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 32 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |