Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Marindra
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 23:16:00 -
[1]
they should not be allowed to gate camp. ther should be a timer in place to stop loitering around thes gates after 5 min concord comes in and moves them along in null sec it would be acceptable but in low sec no. i only say this cause when i first started i wanted to run missions for the sansha nation but i was unable to get to ther station in low sec cause of qate campers. so that basically limited me to high sec crappy corperations like the caldari. or you could make thes Shay corperations more accessable
|
Sarah Scarlett Mackenzie
|
Posted - 2011.07.12 23:34:00 -
[2]
Or try to not use the obvious way.
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
|
Posted - 2011.07.13 09:21:00 -
[3]
*yawn*
So you want the greater profits out in low and null-sec? Accept that there are going to be bigger risks as well (in the form of other players who have established themselves in such an environment).
Find a way around such things or a way to get through (hint: use a fast/cloaking frigate). _______________________
"Just because I seem like an idiot doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown |
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.07.13 09:42:00 -
[4]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave I think gatecamps are fine. ItÆs one of the more tangible ways for alliances and corps to protect their areas geographically and while a lot of people donÆt see it as the most exciting form of PVP, itÆs as legitimate as any other.
Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Mograph
Caldari Conspiracy Theorists M-A-L-E-V-O-L-E-N-C-E
|
Posted - 2011.07.13 11:33:00 -
[5]
did you lose a freighter? and if you are reading this you have reached the signature without noticing. |
Sir Hillary
|
Posted - 2011.07.13 13:46:00 -
[6]
0/10
|
HELLBOUNDMAN
|
Posted - 2011.07.13 15:01:00 -
[7]
Originally by: CCP Soundwave I think gatecamps are fine. ItÆs one of the more tangible ways for alliances and corps to protect their areas geographically and while a lot of people donÆt see it as the most exciting form of PVP, itÆs as legitimate as any other.
I see that, and it makes sense, but corps/alliances don't own low sec systems so why should the be able to gate camp low sec?
Sure, null sec where they have sov it totally makes sense.
The other thing about low sec gate camps is they're the NUMBER 1 reason why no one really goes to low sec.
Lots of people complain that there's not enough pvp in eve and ccp needs to make a push to buff that up.
Well, here's the chance. Taking out low sec gate camps is like opening the door to legit pvp.
Now, if you're one of those people that can't get kills without gate camping, well then I'd have to say you're not only unskilled, but also ruining the pvp experience of others who actually like a bit of a challenge instead of just popping unsuspecting ships that can't insta warp.
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.07.13 15:15:00 -
[8]
Originally by: HELLBOUNDMAN I see that, and it makes sense, but corps/alliances don't own low sec systems so why should the be able to gate camp low sec?
The same reason: to protect their hunting grounds.
Quote: The other thing about low sec gate camps is they're the NUMBER 1 reason why no one really goes to low sec.
àwhich is particularly funny since they're so insanely easy to avoid in lowsec. Anyway, the reason why no one really goes to low sec is because a belief camps are everywhere ù not because they actually are.
Quote: Taking out low sec gate camps is like opening the door to legit pvp.
Nah. The people who avoid lowsec now because of the (supposed) gate camps will then dream up some new reason not to go there. ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
Jesarey
|
Posted - 2011.07.13 23:43:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Jesarey on 13/07/2011 23:44:31 Tippia, your opinion of the people seems a bit low. Most capsuleers that I know who are avoiding lowsec almost exclusively because of the gatecamps. Some reconsidered their stance after I taught them how to avoid thoose camps. The game of EVE doesnt revolve around alliances and their hunting grounds. They have claimed some null, fine, they are entitled to do whatever they want there. Game mechanics in EVE should not be defined by how "convenient" they are to alliances.
I am not in favor of removing gatecamps altogether. Make them harder to execute. Lowsec is not null, it is not supposed to be totally lawless. Its a place that is technically under concord and empires jurisdiction, but with very little actual enforcement, and only in the most critical cases.
If there would be a system when concord came to bust the gatecamp, but only after a certain amount of kills was reached, that would make sense. A couple of pirates can set a gatecamp in hope that some juicy target will pass through. Thats ok. And after a couple of kills they know its time to GTFO, because the concord took notice and is on the way. Some group of capsuleers who set up a gatecamp as a sort of border-checkpoint, and blast anyone who they dont like in a territory that they have no claims to, just for the sake of convenience. Thats not ok.
|
Tippia
Caldari Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2011.07.13 23:51:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Jesarey Tippia, your opinion of the people seems a bit low. Most capsuleers that I know who are avoiding lowsec almost exclusively because of the gatecamps.
àand that is where the (supposedly) low opinion comes from: they're avoiding lowsec for a reason that is almost all fantasy. Lowsec is not a campfest, so anyone avoiding it for that reason isà let's call it ôsillyö.
ùùù ôWe want to try this thing called micro-transactions, but we don't know what it is. Can anyone explainà aw screw it, let's just do it! What could go wrong?ö ù ÇÇP |
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.07.14 07:35:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Jesarey Edited by: Jesarey on 13/07/2011 23:44:31 Tippia, your opinion of the people seems a bit low. Most capsuleers that I know who are avoiding lowsec almost exclusively because of the gatecamps. Some reconsidered their stance after I taught them how to avoid thoose camps. The game of EVE doesnt revolve around alliances and their hunting grounds. They have claimed some null, fine, they are entitled to do whatever they want there. Game mechanics in EVE should not be defined by how "convenient" they are to alliances.
I am not in favor of removing gatecamps altogether. Make them harder to execute. Lowsec is not null, it is not supposed to be totally lawless. Its a place that is technically under concord and empires jurisdiction, but with very little actual enforcement, and only in the most critical cases.
If there would be a system when concord came to bust the gatecamp, but only after a certain amount of kills was reached, that would make sense. A couple of pirates can set a gatecamp in hope that some juicy target will pass through. Thats ok. And after a couple of kills they know its time to GTFO, because the concord took notice and is on the way. Some group of capsuleers who set up a gatecamp as a sort of border-checkpoint, and blast anyone who they dont like in a territory that they have no claims to, just for the sake of convenience. Thats not ok.
You must be trolling, no one is that dumb.
Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Jesarey
|
Posted - 2011.07.14 08:23:00 -
[12]
Mag's, please specify which parts of my post are "trolling".
|
Mag's
the united Negative Ten.
|
Posted - 2011.07.14 08:26:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Jesarey Mag's, please specify which parts of my post are "trolling".
The part where you claim low sec is not meant to be lawless, then proceed to ask for the missing law to start going into low sec to break up camps.
Originally by: CCP Zulu Forcing players to dock at the captain's quarters is a form of what we actually wanted to get through, which is making Incarna a seamless part of the EVE Online experience. |
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2011.07.14 08:28:00 -
[14]
this (bad) troll thread is still alive?? Ppl, stop posting, let it die.
|
Annexe
Gallente I N E X T R E M I S Anti-Social Outcast
|
Posted - 2011.07.14 21:14:00 -
[15]
I think it's annoying that some missions send you into low-sec and I have to turn them down cuz of people gate-camping. Maybe people 'on a mission' get a 'security pass' so they can actually go do their mission. PVE vs PVP bring it on!! sometimes u just need to make some quick isk.
|
Sakaras Lane
|
Posted - 2011.07.14 22:25:00 -
[16]
Gate camping is fine working as intended in a choke point.
|
Tobin Lore
|
Posted - 2011.07.15 02:42:00 -
[17]
gate camping is for losers if you have to camp to get a kill then it shows others you got no skills. they wouldnt last two minutes in null sec or low sec without hanging around a gate that they could jump through to run like little girls when a bigger target comes through that they cant handle. get rid of gate campes in low, once and for all
|
Valei Khurelem
|
Posted - 2011.07.15 09:52:00 -
[18]
This is a shameless plug, but I have offered up what I think is a good solution against these kind of players, we won't be able to beat these kind of players by slapping a half-assed game mechanic over it but rather making one that makes them fear the idea of gatecamping in the first place.
Linkage
|
Medarr
Amarr Vengance Inc. Wayfarer Stellar Initiative
|
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:01:00 -
[19]
No... now... G.T.F.O our eve.
|
HELLBOUNDMAN
|
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:09:00 -
[20]
One thing I think they could do that would be totally fair all around the board.
Make pod pops concordable in high and low sec unless it's against a corp/alliance in which the popper is at war with.
|
|
Vice Admiral Spreadsheet
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:20:00 -
[21]
I agree that gate-camps should ultimately go. However, gates are THE major source of pew-pew. If you want to jump 50 times through 0.0 and gatecamps don't exist, you'll be safe
The underlying mechanics need changing. Unfortunately, that will most likely take ludicrous amounts of effort.
|
Jesarey
|
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:40:00 -
[22]
Mag's, low-sec isnt lawless. If it was, then there would be no penalty for attacking others. Low-sec space is a place where laws do exist, but their enforcement is almost nonexistent. Thats why you get a security penalty for unprovoked attacks on others there. According to game lore, low-sec systems are technically under empires and CONCORD jurisdiction, but both empire and CONCORD simply lack the resources to actively enforce laws there.
Which brings me to another point, that no one can claim these systems. They are already claimed, its just that the claimer cant or doesnt want to deal with problems there. That doesnt mean that someone else can declare these systems theirs. In fact, if some third party suddenly blocks passage through such system, they are de-facto claim to be the sovereignty holders of the said system, and that would surely **** off the empires and/or CONCORD.
Again, im not entirely against gatecamps, they are legit type of gameplay. But some limits need to be put in place. Right now, lowsec is viewed little more than a border zone and padding between nullsec and highsec.
|
Valei Khurelem
|
Posted - 2011.07.15 16:52:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Valei Khurelem on 15/07/2011 16:52:32
Originally by: Medarr No... now... G.T.F.O our eve.
You are exactly the type of mindless ganking and gatecamping moron that is killing EVE.
|
Tobin Darko
|
Posted - 2011.07.16 01:20:00 -
[24]
i have an alt with 75mill sp i have never gate camped and i dont like it. it is cowardly. i also roam low sec and null sec. and have never attacked anyone for the helll of it. i only attack if fired upon. just because your in lawless space it doesnt mean you have to behave like a moron and attack anything that moves . like new players going into low sec to explore . ther is no honor in killing a new player, in your t3 ship. such a brave man you are btagging to your corp members how you killed a lowley 1 week player hahaha you nooobs
|
Ezra Stal
|
Posted - 2011.07.16 02:28:00 -
[25]
Low-sec is the first border where "king-of-the-hill" begins, there is valuable moons and assets AND there is no concord preventing you from gaining it. Ofc people want to protect their POSses and such or even just "I own this system, roar". They wanna make people pay if they visit the system, if not in ISK then maybe modules or cargo they have inside their ship.
gate camps are working as intended imo. If you jump into system with valuables and you havent scouted it for gate camps then you just had a learning experience.
mostly you just wait and the gate camp is gone. EVE is not working too well on people who wants everything now.
|
Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.07.16 02:34:00 -
[26]
Gates are boring, get rid of them
Sandbox Protection League
|
Valei Khurelem
|
Posted - 2011.07.16 09:23:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Valei Khurelem on 16/07/2011 09:23:16
Originally by: Ezra Stal Low-sec is the first border where "king-of-the-hill" begins, there is valuable moons and assets AND there is no concord preventing you from gaining it. Ofc people want to protect their POSses and such or even just "I own this system, roar". They wanna make people pay if they visit the system, if not in ISK then maybe modules or cargo they have inside their ship.
gate camps are working as intended imo. If you jump into system with valuables and you havent scouted it for gate camps then you just had a learning experience.
mostly you just wait and the gate camp is gone. EVE is not working too well on people who wants everything now.
Let me ask you about that kind of flawless logic, if every game was like EVE where you would be forced to wait for what you want for several days or hours before you could do anything how many people do you think would bother spending money on it? Going by your logic instead of making us pay a monthly subscription CCP should make you pay bit by bit in order to experience content like a DLC, regardless of the fact that we are paying for the full game along with the fee to install the account.
The kind of logic you're using is going to be the death of the games industry if everyone decides it's a good idea, thank god for independent developers and I'm not a religious man.
|
Nth Ares
|
Posted - 2011.07.16 10:01:00 -
[28]
Gate camps are stupid and prevent more people from making that first step out of highsec living. They are predictable and perpetuated by weak PvPers. However, they are a given due to the current system of travel in EVE.
Here's an idea, I think easy to implement, though far from perfect: have the gates deposit you much farther away from the exit gate than currently, but let there be a remote gate hacking device that enables would-be pirates narrow the potential range of exit locations, in exchange for some time invested defending the hack location (making it easy for pirate-hunters to find them).
Alternately CCP could introduce a new type of ship that functions as part of a portable gate system; a pair of these, one in a highsec system and another in an adjacent lowsec system, could create a temporary bridge between them, which other ships could use to bypass the fixed gates. These gate-ships could be made quite large and vulnerable, risky to fly in lowsec, and their pilots could charge other players a hefty fee for their services. Corporations could be set up around having and protecting these ships in every potentially high-traffic lowsec system, creating an informal toll transit network. Of course, pirates could have their own gateships, but they would hardly find them useful - except to scam people... (oh hai there, you worried about getting gatecamped? use my bridge! --> gateship camp ^_^)
|
Hunin Ravensong
|
Posted - 2011.07.16 23:09:00 -
[29]
Gatecamps are fine as is. (No I don't camp, yes I have died in a few) The campers get their GCF, and their security hit in lowsec. IRL there are neighborhoods in cities where you do not go unless you either live there or are looking for trouble, because law enforcement is scarce and sporadic - THIS is the effect of moving through lowsec. If you want to travel safely through lowsec it's actually pretty easy, hire (or make) a scout in a fast cloaky frig to check for camps a gate or 2 ahead of your slow clunky ship. The gatecamp mechanic is there, and for those players with enough of a brain, they are even fairly easy to avoid in lowsec. In nullsec, the use of bubbles changes everything, but hey, you want to go where there are no laws, you better be on good terms with the locals or be ready to be bubbled and podkilled by said locals.
Too scared of gatecamps to go to lowsec/nullsec? Your skills (not your characters, yours) probably arent good enough to go walking down dark alleyways anyhow.
|
Tobin Darko
|
Posted - 2011.07.17 07:18:00 -
[30]
IRL there are neighborhoods in cities where you do not go unless you either live there or are looking for trouble, because law enforcement is scarce and sporadic
hashahaha were do you live afganastan you sir are a moron ther are police everywere in my country wich is australa. ther a no low sec areas were police are scarce. unless you live in the usa than that is your unfortunate statas and i suggest you move to a counrty were ther are no low sec areas. gate camps a for losers with no skill
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |