EVE Search - Proposal for random Concord Patrols in Low Sec

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Proposal for random Concord Patrols in Low Sec

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Alliaanna Dalaii Gallente Does Not Compute	Posted - 2006.08.07 07:11:00 - [31] I play eve as a pirate to kill others ... umm I mean 'Interact with the community' I Do not want more bloody NPC content, If players want to break a camp do it yourselves. Alliaanna Official Spokestard of=-= Does Not Compute =-=
Bloodsong Immortalis Silens	Posted - 2006.08.07 07:47:00 - [32] THIS IS NOT A FLAME!!! Just posting my ideas on how to make eve a better place Wait a sec... You mean that you can come down to our turf (low sec) and do what you do... But we can't go to your turf (high sec) and do what we do? Im confused... I like the ideas that were posted.. ie. killable spawns in low sec while faction bs spawns camp belts in high sec. I say there should be a set number of concord in the game, lets say 1 ship for each system in the game. they patrol the entire map as usual, calling on each other for support. (guy ets attacked in jita, 3 other systems go concord less while they respond in jita) Meanwhile, dommi, gurista, and cent BS spwans camp high sec belts and stations. Oh, and take out the sentry guns EVERYWHERE. This should keep everyone happy. While we are at it, lets get rid of the gallente (I dont like them) and give freightors only 5 shield, armor, and hull (seeing as its not fair to solo gankers trying to kill something that big.) Oh and how about making every skill traing instantly... I hate waiting for stuff to train up so I can use new gear. And finaly, make the game free, seeing as its not fair for the financialy challenged.
Just Smith Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.08.07 08:06:00 - [33] I am all for random concord patrols in to 0.1 space max(not as strong as 0.5 space concord so it's killable) but i also want concord to only show up to kill you if they seen you shot at belts/stations/gates/planets/moons in 0.5+ space (if they seen you shot then they chase you around the system like now) should not show up if you shot somone at a safespot or where no one else can see you
Splagada Minmatar	Posted - 2006.08.07 08:09:00 - [34] that would be awesome - Looking for technetium delivery contracts
robacz Gallente	Posted - 2006.08.07 08:58:00 - [35] Edited by: robacz on 07/08/2006 08:58:29 Originally by: localandbitter At the moment, Concord has no presence in 0.1-0.4 "Low-sec" Security Space. This does not need to mean that Concord or police presence is never in these systems. I propose that NPC Concord Expeditionary units make random, surprise visits in low sec systems to agitate the current status quo of low-sec living. These patrols need not be the same as the full-force units in high-sec space but enough of a threat that pirate presence and gate camps become that much more risky. Bzzzt. Yeah is good idea, was discussed few times already. Even though its low security, its still empire so it would be logic if empire security forces visited these systems sometimes. Imho they should react on some number of podkills, i.e. if there is large gate camp killing one podpilot per minute, Concord should take a visit and see whats going on there. However it probably wont happen, cos all those brave PvPers who snipe 1 month old haulers from 180km will start crying and with huge support of forum warriors they would annoy devs to death. ___________ Buying/Selling: Implants, Cargo Expanders and more
Vikram Bedi	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:11:00 - [36] Originally by: Mi Lai Only if I and my fellow outlaws can have occassional high-sec patrols This was my first idea when I read this. The more I thought about it, the better of an idea it was to me. I envision almost all low/high sec border zones being in dispute, with faction navies occasionally making raids into the low-sec areas and along with players, trying to claim the .4's as .5's., and pvp'ers having to do some pve, and being able to raid the .5's and turn them into .4's. Concord will always (sadly) need to be impervious, but from what I understand the faction navies can be tanked and even killed (though maybe they should be weakened a bit, allowing outlaws more of a chance to break through). Of course, something like that would be pretty difficult to do well, and in the end it would probably just turn into something that was exploitable in some way.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:14:00 - [37] Originally by: robacz However it probably wont happen, cos all those brave PvPers who snipe 1 month old haulers from 180km will start crying and with huge support of forum warriors they would annoy devs to death. CCP is free to deploy better options for piracy anytime they wish. Belt piracy is still doable for fun, but as you probably understand, its much more profitable to just camp gates and kill everything. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Calprimus Caldari School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:22:00 - [38] Originally by: Antoinette Civari Sure, as long as we'd have npc pirate raids and gatecamps randomly appearing in 1.0 space :) Bring em on.......
Manfred Doomhammer Caldari ShadowTec Inc. Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:28:00 - [39] actually, id rather have faction navy do patrols through low sec instead of concord... nothing regular, and no high frequency, just have some patrol fleets move through systems, hitting random belts and jump through gates (and i mean warp to their destination, and jump through gates, not spawn/despawn) ---- Manfred Doomhammer CEO ShadowTec Inc.
robacz Gallente	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:30:00 - [40] Originally by: Jim McGregor CCP is free to deploy better options for piracy anytime they wish. Belt piracy is still doable for fun, but as you probably understand, its much more profitable to just camp gates and kill everything. Yeah, problem is there is almost no risk involved in this strategy as BS aligned for warp sitting 180km from gate is almost impossible to fight back for any kind of ship. Even if you organize some kind of counter attack, sniper will run away, unless hes total noob or afk. The risk/reward rule is broken in this case. IMO, there should be warp bubble for empire too - not on gates tho (improved sentries, 200km range, bubble=aggro). It would let pirate to place his bubble somewhere on route from gate to gate for example and take ships out of their warps. Therefore only pilots who take straight warp paths would be vulnerable, and they would also have chance to fight back (well sorta), while pirates would still have lot of victims - careless pilots flying afk on straight warp paths. I would even let pirates make bubbles in belts, everyone should be aware of fact that mining in lowsec is dangerous and it requires either luck or armed escort. ___________ Buying/Selling: Implants, Cargo Expanders and more

Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:33:00 - [41] I agree that the risk vs reward is broken in that scenario. If it was up to me, I would just remove sentries in low sec to give pirates the chance to ransom and act like pirates instead of just killing everything. But we both know that wont happen. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:35:00 - [42] What would be the objective of lowsec Concord spawns? - As farmable rats? Sure why not. Another rat faction to give loot, always nice. - To break up gatecamps? No. Get some friends together and do it yourself. Or sit at the other side of the gatecamped gate and warn everyone of the sniper(s) on the other side so they leave for greener pastures, or whatever. - as 'content'? Meh :-( Not interested in NPC content, the playermade type is much more interesting and a million times more challenging and fun. But if you insist, maybe a concord spawn in a system here and there at intervals won't hurt anyone.
Ydyp Ieva Caldari Romarrian Empire Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2006.08.07 11:36:00 - [43] how would be the facial expresion of a gatecamping pirate in low sec when the uncloaking ship seems to be a NPC police force, oh wait make that a full patrol that decloaks But well only after there has been a decent number of kills in the last hour. Let say if there are 30 kills in an hour (1 every 2 minutes). The sovereignity could investigate, I said could I haven't said will. Make it 30% chance they will. Also they should be killable, but no dropping though. Would just open up exploiting otherwise. And those pirates should get enough of loot from the haulers they pop This is only for space with an empire sovereignity.
Mra Rednu	Posted - 2006.08.07 23:55:00 - [44] I read posts about EVE being 'reality'. Right. In reality, if law enforcement suddenly has a tremendous number of killings in a particular neighborhood, they may just sweep through and shoot some folks, (maybe not shoot 'em, at least make 'em a bit nervous.) And as far as I can tell, its referred to as 'low'-sec, not 'no'-sec, which is 0.0 space. How can low-sec actually be no-sec, and no-sec is the real low-sec? Finally, I'm paying for the entire game experience and I'm not getting it. I can't use the entire environment with a reasonable level of success. Fine, let pirates sweep through high-sec...hell, Blackbeard blockaded an entire North American port in the 1700s. Back it up with some attempt at law enforcement in "low-sec".
Deja Thoris Contraband Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.08.08 01:35:00 - [45] Originally by: robacz Originally by: Jim McGregor CCP is free to deploy better options for piracy anytime they wish. Belt piracy is still doable for fun, but as you probably understand, its much more profitable to just camp gates and kill everything. Yeah, problem is there is almost no risk involved in this strategy as BS aligned for warp sitting 180km from gate is almost impossible to fight back for any kind of ship. Even if you organize some kind of counter attack, sniper will run away, unless hes total noob or afk. The risk/reward rule is broken in this case. Aligned and at speed and he died - it's not "nearly impossible"
Incub Minmatar DarkStar 1 Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.08 01:40:00 - [46] Nah, no concord in low sec space. think it would be better if you have the navy of the appropriate faction close by patrolling gates with sentry guns. not that they would act like concord, but just to give the navy's a bit of a job. they currently just float around in empire space doing exactly... right, nothing :p 250's are definitely more versatile, but All the cool kids are using 280's.
Mtthias Clemi Gallente Celestial Horizon Corp. Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.08.08 03:05:00 - [47] /me wants a concord battleship
Tyranical Teabagger	Posted - 2006.08.08 03:11:00 - [48] I like the idea of the faction police having a small chance investigating if there've been 30+ kills in an hour in one system and the number slowly rising as the death toll does. It might put a damper on the nigh invulnerable extremely large pirate corps permacamping certain systems for months straight while having little to no impact on nearly every other pirate.
Cmdr Baxter	Posted - 2006.08.08 05:17:00 - [49] I like the idea, in theory, of possible random navy patrols to systems with excessively high killcounts in an hour. Or maybe x number of podkills in an hour could trigger a random navy sweep into low-security space ("x" of course denoting a variable figure that is left to CCP's discretion). To have permanent CONCORD patrols in low-security systems takes some of the fun out of it, I believe. I'm fairly new to the game, and I have to admit, occasionally taking a shortcut through 0.4 security space has me being extremely vigilant and watchful for any signs of traps and/or camps. So keep CONCORD out, and patrolling the appropriate regions. But maybe a random navy sweep if there's an excessively large number of podkills and/or shipkills might be something to be considered.
xeom Obsidian Sins	Posted - 2006.08.08 05:38:00 - [50] Originally by: Deja Thoris Originally by: robacz Originally by: Jim McGregor CCP is free to deploy better options for piracy anytime they wish. Belt piracy is still doable for fun, but as you probably understand, its much more profitable to just camp gates and kill everything. Yeah, problem is there is almost no risk involved in this strategy as BS aligned for warp sitting 180km from gate is almost impossible to fight back for any kind of ship. Even if you organize some kind of counter attack, sniper will run away, unless hes total noob or afk. The risk/reward rule is broken in this case. Aligned and at speed and he died - it's not "nearly impossible" Deja is right,its not very hard and "OMG WCS" shouldnt be a problem with up coming patch(nerf).Concord in low-sec would possibly make the game unplayable for a lot of use pirates.I have yet to ever camp a low-sec gate.And i can tell ya i hardly make it by pirating belts/plex's.There is virtualy no money,you either fly t1 or err well go carebearing in 0.0.Do i turn a profit? Sure but most of it comes from me getting lucky a lot of times. Pirating is probably the most nerfed carrear in EVE,i fail to see why people wan't it even more nerfed. CCP where are our t2 shield power relays? \| Join[..SIN]

Lorth Body Count Inc. Mercenary Coalition	Posted - 2006.08.08 05:46:00 - [51] Originally by: Stamm Sentry guns could do with a touch more DPS, but that's really all that's needed. It's way too easy to tank them at the moment. Nah, sentry guns are fine as they are right now, in terms of damage. They need more range, let me explain. You want pirates close to the gate, since that's were they are the most vulnerable. When they are sniping, its easy for the pirate to get away. And hard, in comparison for the anti pirate to actually catch them. You ushally need a covert opps, or a previous BM, as well as a fair bit of luck. If they are tanking the sentrys, you only need one person. Not to mention in a same ship call fight the anti pirate starts with a significant advantage given the sentries. Ushally its possible to win a 2v1, with a fairly cheap fitting because of this.
Warp Warrior Caldari The Otter Pop Foundation	Posted - 2006.08.08 05:50:00 - [52] Originally by: localandbitter At the moment, Concord has no presence in 0.1-0.4 "Low-sec" Security Space. This does not need to mean that Concord or police presence is never in these systems. I propose that NPC Concord Expeditionary units make random, surprise visits in low sec systems to agitate the current status quo of low-sec living. These patrols need not be the same as the full-force units in high-sec space but enough of a threat that pirate presence and gate camps become that much more risky. Bzzzt. How about No. Carebears want Concord to hold their hands? Stay in high security. Shouldn't this be in crime and punishment?
Paradice Lost	Posted - 2006.08.08 05:57:00 - [53] Edited by: Paradice Lost on 08/08/2006 05:58:25 How about a comprimise on the whole subject. Instead of Concord which would only make it more dangerous for pirates, have NPC pirate raids on the level of a weakened concord, say a few battle ships or what not that will attack any player they come across pirate or carebear. This will have the effect of adding variety to the game, keeping low sec dangerous, but also add danger for gate campers and snipers (I'm sorry but there is very little danger to sitting at a 0.4 gate popping any single player who comes by and running away if someone forms a gang). I say a medium sized pirate gang with a power level in between 0.5+ concord and 0.0 belt rats. Have them spawn once every 2 days randomly. Set the timer at 00:00:00 and they can spawn at any point in the next 48 hours then resets at 00:00:00 so you could have back to back or you could potentially go 96 hours between spawns. Have the spawn point be a random gate in the system, have them only stay active for 15 minutes until despawn, if they do not find a player or if there are no players at thier location still alive have them randomly warp to a belt or a station, and repeat until the 15 minute timer is up. If everyone is a target it would balance it and be a bit more fair, it would make it much more dangerous and gate campers would have to keep a look over thier shoulder just as much as carebears.
robacz Gallente	Posted - 2006.08.08 07:19:00 - [54] Originally by: xeom Deja is right,its not very hard and "OMG WCS" shouldnt be a problem with up coming patch(nerf).Concord in low-sec would possibly make the game unplayable for a lot of use pirates.I have yet to ever camp a low-sec gate.And i can tell ya i hardly make it by pirating belts/plex's.There is virtualy no money,you either fly t1 or err well go carebearing in 0.0.Do i turn a profit? Sure but most of it comes from me getting lucky a lot of times. Pirating is probably the most nerfed carrear in EVE,i fail to see why people wan't it even more nerfed. Well no one wants do to a) without b). Of course if we make gate camping impossible, we need to give pirates other option to make for their living. Imo it would be better for everyone if pirating acually involved some action, I mean, how entertaining is sitting on gate and hitting F1-F7 in regular intervals? And yes, its possible to kill a sniper, if hes slow enough - which is usually not the case. Either way, risk/reward doesnt work in this scenario. If it did, you wouldnt see 50 podkill/hr camps going on regulary in certain lowsec systems. ___________ Buying/Selling: Implants, Cargo Expanders and more
Daelin Blackleaf	Posted - 2006.08.08 10:19:00 - [55] I like the idea, lo-sec is as previously stated not no-sec. This could be used to break up those major kill zones and spread camps around a bit. An increased chance of a concord (or navy, take your pick) investigation into an area based on a: system security level (0.1 obviously not getting any great deal of love unless massacres are occuring and 0.4 having a greater chance of reponse) and b: pod kills (preferably not just in the last hour or people would just nip out and come back an hour later). What we have at the moment is effectively the farming of players at certain chokepoints. I do not agree with farming. However that all being said pirates have been getting a hard time of late, but I do beleive the proposed salvaging skills and mods, along with the possibility of getting implants or other materials from corpses would bring piracy back into the realm of risk vs reward.


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.