Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.25 21:45:00 -
[1]
With the advent of NWO inter-region border zones should the following be possible in Empire?
Set up snipe gate camp outside of sentry range.
Instalock, Instagank anyone passing through
Avoid intended response for hostile act in Empire (albeit low sec eg 0.3) that is sentry guns targetting aggressor.
This action by-passes intended response in Empire for such an act, should it therefore be possible?
Discuss
BTW if ur interested I'm not a victim of such an occurrence just curious as to sentiment.
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.08.25 21:50:00 -
[2]
Hmm.
The intended response is that sentry guns behave agressively towards you for the next 15-20 minutes.
How exactly are you bypassing that ? _______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know. Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online Solutions to your issues. |
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.08.25 21:51:00 -
[3]
What Rod Blaine said. You're not bypassing anything -- Proud member of the [23].
Selling Capital Cargo Bays and Kernite Mining Crystal IIs, cheaper than anyone else. |
Joshua Foiritain
|
Posted - 2005.08.25 21:52:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Joshua Foiritain on 25/08/2005 21:52:02 Its easy to snipe from outside of sentry range. Its what all low sec snipers do.
Edit: Of course, snipers are easy kills for Pirate hunters. ------------------
[Coreli Corporation Mainframe] |
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 04:01:00 -
[5]
OK, At least the question didn't get insta-flamed
To take it further then...
"How are you by-passing anything?"
The premise of empire is that initiating non-justifiable hostile acts player on player will illicit a security response. In 0.5 and above, such an act will induce instant CONCORDOKKEN, 0.1-0.4 Concord are less likely to intervene but if the act is initiated near a station/stargate, sentries will respond.
The idea of this is to provide areas for noobs to learn the game before venturing out - eventually to 0.0. Lower sec areas providing opportunities for riskier exploration, with some elememt of protection.
By the game mechanics permitting a gate camp to be set-up outside of the response range of sentries with the ability to instalock/insta-gank using a support boosted BS then frigates etc are easy prey. There is no risk for the "pirate" Concord won't respond, sentries can't hit, any support/retaliation that comes thru the gate or warps toward the gate is just more easy prey. This ultimately will discourage newer players from dispersing (CCPs aim) to lower sec areas and ultimately 0.0.
So this situation happening in 0.0 fine
In 0.1-0.4 in belts nar planets etc
Having the game mechanics allow this near empire gates discourages noob/carebear exploration - contradicts the intentions of CCP?
If such an act occurred in 0.5 and up where those responsible could avoid intended response (ie CONCORDOKKEN) this would be un-acceptable (not my opinon, but fact as I understand it). How is it different to allow the intended response to be neutered in 0.1-0.4?
Note, I'm not saying you should not be able to engage at gates, but that your set-up should have to take account of having to survive sentry fire (ie weaken targetting/offensive capability to run a tank) which would give the target more opportunity to escape etc.
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 06:31:00 -
[6]
Do you realise how much a pirate makes himself vulnerable by sniping?
Covops + BS fleet = OMG dead pirate. You can do it with just one BS, or even a cruiser.
All you have to do is take the initiative. -- Proud member of the [23].
Selling Capital Cargo Bays and Kernite Mining Crystal IIs, cheaper than anyone else. |
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 06:52:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Dark Shikari Do you realise how much a pirate makes himself vulnerable by sniping?
Covops + BS fleet = OMG dead pirate. You can do it with just one BS, or even a cruiser.
All you have to do is take the initiative.
Yes..to the experienced player he makes himself very vulnerable.
To the noob/in-experienced player (as in point of thread) he is in a dominant position.
Please address the mechanics issue that is being questioned by this thread in particular with its possible effects on player migration, not question my capabilities.
Regards, Bel
|
mahhy
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 06:58:00 -
[8]
I was going to reply to this... I can't really be bothered beyond:
Low Sec space is unsafe.
|
F'nog
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 07:07:00 -
[9]
Sniping does instigate a response: sec status hits for those involved. It's just that some players don't care about their sec, so they can ignore the consequences, as long as a more capable force does not intervene to stop them.
Originally by: Morela
"hey! I'm gonna go attack the north! Afk till tuesday!"
|
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 07:51:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Belshamarothx on 26/08/2005 07:53:45 Ok
First off I may be incorrect in my understanding...we'll see. If I am fine, I more than happy to accede that if it is adequately demonstrated.
Secondly, let me break it down as I'm not sure the point of topic is being fully grasped.
1.0-0.5 = High Security space. Any illegal act will initiate Concordokken.
0.1-0.4 = Lower Security space. Any illegal act will result in standing loss and in the presence of sentries aggressor will be fired upon.
0.0 anything goes (essentially)
Now to my understanding this is to allow a gradiated pathway from 1.0 -> 0.0 for noobs/carebears who turn to the darkside :p (sorry colleague is playing film quotes while I'm typing).
Therefore in 0.1-0.4 any illegal act performed away from a station/stargate will incur a standing loss and flag for criminal activity but there is no pre-planned security intervention. However any performed near station/gate is supposed to induce sentry fire which will be inflicted upon the aggressor.
An out of sentry range gatecamp would appear therefore to be effectively neutering an intended security action within the concept of the game. Normally this would be relatively ineffective anyway, but with sensor boosters and support sensor boosting this becomes instalock/instagank, with no risk.
My question has been and still is.."Is this an intended occurrence within the design concept of EvE or is it taking advantage of a flaw in game design/mechanics?"
Edit: In addition if this is the intended design, then what is the point of having varying degrees of security (other than on ore types snd NPC spawn type/rate)
None of the responses so far has actually answered this relatively simple question.
|
|
Andrue
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:36:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Andrue on 26/08/2005 08:37:52 The basic misunderstanding you have is that 'the response' is not guaranteed to be total and fatal. All the game does is guarantee that there will be a response and it will be intensive.
The idea is to make it hard for people to pray on noobs and empire dwellers but not impossible. No part of Eve (aside from stations) is supposed to be 100% safe. That's the charm of Eve.
Sticking to high security (0.5 and above) is supposed to be reasonably safe but even then all it really means is that whomever aggresses loses their ship. Quite often that means punishment after the fact rather than prevention of the act itself.
That's the way the game is designed to be.
So, yes, there is a path for noobs but there is no 'super safe' area where you can never come to harm. There are just many systems where agressors have to be suicide characters to undertake it. If those suicide chars are recycled (deleted and a new one created) then that is an exploit so in theory 0.5 and above should be pretty safe. But never 100% safe. -- (Battle hardened miner)
[Brackley, UK]
WARNING:This post may contain large doses of reality. |
Baldour Ngarr
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:37:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Belshamarothx An out of sentry range gatecamp would appear therefore to be effectively neutering an intended security action within the concept of the game. Normally this would be relatively ineffective anyway, but with sensor boosters and support sensor boosting this becomes instalock/instagank, with no risk...
This point has been addressed before - notably when CCP raised the sentry gun range (it used to be a mere 75km, and even *I* could have sniped from outside it, so why even bother having the damn guns )
One can only assume, since CCP have left the guns at 150km (it is 150km, right??) range for so long, that they're happy to allow outside-sentry-range sniping. The risk to the pirate, as indicated above, comes from the experienced bounty/pirate hunters, who can massacre a sniping BS if only they can get into the system.
And yes, it does mean that newbs trying to make their first foray into low-sec space will be insta-annihilated. The generic response from most people on these boards is a variant of "well you shouldn't have gone there, then." ...and then they wonder why so many people stay in high-sec empire __________________________________________ I tried strip mining, but I lost; and it's cold flying around in space naked. |
Andrue
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:40:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Andrue on 26/08/2005 08:41:48 Edited by: Andrue on 26/08/2005 08:40:39
Originally by: Baldour Ngarr And yes, it does mean that newbs trying to make their first foray into low-sec space will be insta-annihilated. The generic response from most people on these boards is a variant of "well you shouldn't have gone there, then." ...and then they wonder why so many people stay in high-sec empire
It depends how common snipers become. Right now they are pretty rare but, yes, if the number increases it could be a real problem. Hopefully CCP are keeping an eye on it. -- (Battle hardened miner)
[Brackley, UK]
WARNING:This post may contain large doses of reality. |
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:44:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Baldour Ngarr
Originally by: Belshamarothx An out of sentry range gatecamp would appear therefore to be effectively neutering an intended security action within the concept of the game. Normally this would be relatively ineffective anyway, but with sensor boosters and support sensor boosting this becomes instalock/instagank, with no risk...
This point has been addressed before - notably when CCP raised the sentry gun range (it used to be a mere 75km, and even *I* could have sniped from outside it, so why even bother having the damn guns )
One can only assume, since CCP have left the guns at 150km (it is 150km, right??) range for so long, that they're happy to allow outside-sentry-range sniping. The risk to the pirate, as indicated above, comes from the experienced bounty/pirate hunters, who can massacre a sniping BS if only they can get into the system.
And yes, it does mean that newbs trying to make their first foray into low-sec space will be insta-annihilated. The generic response from most people on these boards is a variant of "well you shouldn't have gone there, then." ...and then they wonder why so many people stay in high-sec empire
Which is kinda the point I'm making
So essentially the sentry range needs to be re-addressed to compensate for the change in effective snipe range. Which was also what I was hinting at.
Since this is as I interpreted, the intended response to be, then being able to avoid said response due to range is taking advantage of flaw in game mechanics. QED
|
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 08:48:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Andrue Edited by: Andrue on 26/08/2005 08:37:52 The basic misunderstanding you have is that 'the response' is not guaranteed to be total and fatal. All the game does is guarantee that there will be a response and it will be intensive.
Erm nope, didn't say that response was supposed to be total and fatel. I actually said that current mechanics allow a set-up to be used that does not need to take account of incoming sentry fire, thereby leaving more slots for dam mods etc as no tanking modules required.
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:01:00 -
[16]
Jump in to gate. Activate cloaking device - any type on any ship. Watch snipers leave in a hurry. ______________________________________________
Pay or pray..er..prey..yeah, pray you aren't prey. Er, just pay. |
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:11:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Avon Jump in to gate. Activate cloaking device - any type on any ship. Watch snipers leave in a hurry.
Merely informs of a possible tactic to disrupt a gate camp. Does not address the thread issue of whether said camp should be possible outside of sentry range.
|
sonofollo
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:25:00 -
[18]
mmmm yeah training electronics V and then cloaking - its a very helpful device in many situations not infalliable either but can be helpful with long range sniper setup. Also if in hostile territory and dotn want youre SS discovered by scan probes hit the scanner
|
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:29:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Belshamarothx
Originally by: Avon Jump in to gate. Activate cloaking device - any type on any ship. Watch snipers leave in a hurry.
Merely informs of a possible tactic to disrupt a gate camp. Does not address the thread issue of whether said camp should be possible outside of sentry range.
If it can be countered it is not unbalanced.
______________________________________________
Pay or pray..er..prey..yeah, pray you aren't prey. Er, just pay. |
Discorporation
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:33:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Avon
If it can be countered it is not unbalanced.
depends on the relative efficiency of the counter ;\
[23]
|
|
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:34:00 -
[21]
Avon, Sonofollo
Thankyou for your advice. I myself am aware of some of the tactics, but appreciate your input. However this is not what this thread is about.
*Belshamarothx grabs thread by scruff of neck and drags back on-topic.
I personally am not looking for assistance/advice for myself on how to avoid low-sec empire gate-camps.
The reason for starting this thread is to discuss and demonstrate as I did above that the out-of-sentry-range instalock/instagank gatecamp is preventing noob/carebear exploration and side-stepping the risks assosciated with such actions near gates (ie sentry-fire and the need to gimp offensive capability to load adequate tank which would increase targets possibility of escape) and as such is undermining a key premise of the 1.0-->0.0 reducing safety design and is in fact an indication of a flaw in game mechanics. (So far Quod Erat Demonstratum - unless someone has a superior counter-argument)
Regards, Bel
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:45:00 -
[22]
Ok.
We have established that shiping does NOT bypass the given response of the security system. It also requires you to adapt your ship and setup to match the requirements to not be hit by the sentry guns at the time you are shooting.
Your question essentailly comes down to the same thing we get asked every other week here:
'Given the fact that sniping outside of sentry range is even possible, resulting in camped gates that are deadly to new pilots or any non experienced pilot in a small ship. Should not CCP take measures to change the situation so that this is no longer possible ?'
The regular negative answers are along the lines of:
'No, how do you think the experienced people got experienced, trial and error will result in you learning to deal with it' 'Yes, you CAN kill them or chase them off quite easily, newb or not, if you bother to ask around how to do it and bother to arganise the response needed to do it' 'Low sec space should be unsafe'
Etc.
The positive answers always follow the lines of:
'But there's no way to get past in a shuttle this way...' 'Not everyone has the ability or resources do what you say is needed to chase them off' 'the game is not allowed to keep me from going where i want since I pay my subscription too' 'All these pirates are after is griefing, it's idiotic that CCP let's it continue'
Now, after that the thread normally dies or gets locked.
You can already see responses above adhering to these templates can't you ? So how do you bypass this template and go somewhere new (cause otherwise we could just as well let the thread die right now) ?
Think a bit further and ask yourself why there even are instalocking 150km gate sniping setups in existence.
They are there because solo or small group pirating on gates (sentry tanking) has become too dangerous for most pirates in low sec empire. This because of the higher amount of sentry guns, their higher damage, and the stronger player response these days.
The only tactic left that has acceptable risk is sniping. But sniping means you don't get to kill many battleships anymore, or even cruisers if the pilot knows what he's doing. So we end up with gate snipers that snipe anything small before it warps.
The question now is, if you find the situation undesirable, what to do about it. Because taking away the possibility of sniping is simply taking away the risk. It's not a balanced way out because you essentailly make high sec space start at 0.3 that way. (0.2 is typically a security rating where tanking the sentries becomes doable enough to leave enough possibility to win a straight up fight while doing so even for the non-uber pirate I believe).
And expanding high sec space is not the best idea is it ? CCP is not going to do that.
So, the challenge. Come up with something else that leaves the possibility of piracy in 0.4 intact, yet will mean pirates step away from instalock setups again, resulting in small ships getting through most of the time instead of part of the time. _______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know. Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online Solutions to your issues. |
Tar om
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:45:00 -
[23]
They need to address the damage as well as the range, in light of the buff to tanking with improved plates/shield amps. I think you're more likely to run into a gate-tanker in lowsec now than a sniper. -- We are the Octavian Vanguard www.octavianvanguard.net http://www.serenitymovie.com |
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 10:51:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Belshamarothx on 26/08/2005 10:52:50 Rod Blaine
We have not established that sniping is not by-passing intended response. The intended response is that you get hit by sentries. However, moving on..
OK I see your point, but I'm not saying remove the gate camp
Nor increase the response
I'm saying the out-of-range gate camp is side-stepping the already intended response of that sec level system. The answer is simple to extend the range of the sentry guns.
That in no way makes piracy impossible elsewhere in the system. As I believe is the intended scenario.
|
Belshamarothx
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:00:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Rod Blaine Edited by: Rod Blaine on 26/08/2005 10:49:05 Ok.
Your question essentailly comes down to the same thing we get asked every other week here, except you also bring in a discutable opinion that newbs should be able to explore low sec space without being at prohobitive risk. This in itself is of course entirely subjective.
Sorry but wanted to reply to this separately as its slightly off topic. I do not say there should not be prohibitive risk. That is why sentry numbers decrease making an attack more likely to be succesful in lower sec.
I say the game schematic is that the lower the empire sec the lower the protection offered. But that the OOR gate-camp is not as a result of lower protection but a flaw in game mechanics.
Regards, Bel
|
Rod Blaine
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:03:00 -
[26]
Erh, yes it does, in 0.4 space for example.
In 0.4 space the amount of sentry guns is larger then in 0.1. This means tanking them is harder too. In fact, I think tanking the sentries in 0.4 means you need a battleship, a damn load of skills and a good setup. And even then you are more or less guaranteed to lose a fight against any other experienced player in a battleship since he does not need to deal with the sentries.
This is exactly why sniping is popular in 0.4 and 0.3 especially. Because a tanking setup becomes very hard. Too hard for newer pirates that want to explore operating in lo security empire for example...
So, take sniping away by extending sentry range, and you will see pirace removed by large from 0.4 space, making it more or less equal to high sec pace when it comes to travelling through. That can never be the intention since 905 of all combat takes place at gates and stations, which would then be much safer then they are now. And increasing overall safety is not the issue, increasing legitimate piracy is.
Now, we DID establish that sniping doesn't bypass the intended response because you still get flagged, still get the security hit, and the sentries still shoot you. They just don't hit. Where you to warp out to any station or other gate in system, you'd simply die to the sentries there because of your flag.
I consider the intended response of agression in low sec being the combination of sentries being agessive towards you, getting the sec hit, and getting the criminal flag.
All three still apply. Moreover, you are required to adapt your ship setup in such a way that makes you quite vulnerable to be able to do it at all.
However, I do agree with you that sniping needs adressing. Not because of your arguments, but because it's too easy still in my opinion. And makes for no difference between a good and a bad pirate. It's not the security system that is screwed up, but the pirate profession. So I don't look to change the security system, but pirating possibilities. _______________________________________________
Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know. Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online Solutions to your issues. |
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:17:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Matthew on 26/08/2005 11:20:44
Originally by: Belshamarothx 1.0-0.5 = High Security space. Any illegal act will initiate Concordokken.
Correct, and avoiding losing your ship to that Concordokken response is not allowed.
Originally by: Belshamarothx 0.1-0.4 = Lower Security space. Any illegal act will result in standing loss and in the presence of sentries aggressor will be fired upon.
0.0 anything goes (essentially)
Now to my understanding this is to allow a gradiated pathway from 1.0 -> 0.0 for noobs/carebears who turn to the darkside :p (sorry colleague is playing film quotes while I'm typing).
All correct. But you have to remember, you can only graduate fatal danger so much....it doesn't much matter if you're a little bit dead, or very dead. You're still dead.
Now, in 0.1-0.4, you know that any agressor has limited options avaliable. If he wants to attack you within sentry range, he has to either use a snipe setup, or a heavy tanking setup so he can tank the sentries and kill you at the same time. Their limited offensive options in that situation means that you only have to worry about countering those few options. The "training" element of 0.1-0.4 space is to get you good at those options - to learn how to formulate, refine and apply counter-plans without having to think of everything at once.
0.0 is then the next step up in the path. As you say, it's a free-for-all. Anyone could attack you at any time in any manner. You have no clear idea what you might face, and have to plan for anything, including the fact that you won't be able to be prepared to counter everything you might find.
That's the gradiated pathway between 0.1-0.4 and 0.0.
Beware those beyond here, for they cannot see evil. |
Matthew
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:17:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Matthew on 26/08/2005 11:17:32 Silly double-post
Beware those beyond here, for they cannot see evil. |
Avon
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:21:00 -
[29]
Ok. If you think that sniping is wrong because it prevents expansion to 0.0 space, as seems to be your claim, what do you think awaits people in 0.0?
If players are not yet able to run a gate camp in low-sec space with all the limitations placed on the people who camp them, how do you expect them to cope at 0.0 gates where the campers have no limitations?
I can't quite work out if you really want to help people get to 0.0, or if you just want easier access to low-sec, and have no interest in populating 0.0 ______________________________________________
Pay or pray..er..prey..yeah, pray you aren't prey. Er, just pay. |
sonofollo
|
Posted - 2005.08.26 11:24:00 -
[30]
How to avoid a gatecamp snipe (not a closer range tank)
Cloaker - sig radius reducer modules - warp stabs - plating (thermal, kinetic, explosive and EM) - for Missiles Defenders if u wanna fit em.
Targetting disruptors but u do take a aggro from concord as ewll because they are actives.
The sig radius reducer modules - ECM modules and cloaker as well as instas nd a good AB and warp stabs are probably the safest solo flight low sec option (join a corp that moves through low sec together as another optoin) Use the map but be prepared to lose a few ships to this as well once u get through the main bottlenecks its safer so if newbies venturing into low sec for first time - use minimal implants if in high risk area. Set yorueself up in low sec but make sure u are ISK and asset flow positive then minus the cost of ships - taking on manufacting agents can eb a quick ISK earner and LP rewards without the need for an expensive BS - u can do the level 4 manufactung missions in a frig - iteron 4 or 5
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |