EVE Search - How to solve gate camps

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

How to solve gate camps

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 2 post(s)
Strange Guy	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:11:00 - [1] Edited by: Strange Guy on 26/01/2007 18:09:26 Get rid of gates, instead of using gates, we just could just use "natural warp paths" to other systems. To warp to another system you would need atleast 50% of your cap. The speed of warping to other systems could be double or triple normal warp speed. Then when you reach another system, you are dropped near a random planet in that system. So this way pirates have to camp all of the planets, or a select few, making camping much more difficult. No cloak anymore due to this random planet picking though. But what about alliance space control you say? Well, if a system is under the sov (0.0) of a player corp or player alliance, they can drop "gravity wells" at a planet(s) pulling anyone/corp/alliance who has a certain amount of standing to the corp/alliance that placed the structure, gets pulled to it (Random if there are more than one) when warping to that system. This allows them to try and control who goes into their space. The "gravity wells" would be player made only, and need moon materials and other high end minerals. IMHO, gates should be removed, it makes the universe feel smaller and less realistic.
Einheriar Ulrich Minmatar FATAL REVELATIONS FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:16:00 - [2] Originally by: Strange Guy Edited by: Strange Guy on 26/01/2007 18:09:26 Get rid of gates, instead of using gates, we just could just use "natural warp paths" to other systems. To warp to another system you would need atleast 50% of your cap. The speed of warping to other systems could be double or triple normal warp speed. Then when you reach another system, you are dropped near a random planet in that system. So this way pirates have to camp all of the planets, or a select few, making camping much more difficult. No cloak anymore due to this random planet picking though. But what about alliance space control you say? Well, if a system is under the sov (0.0) of a player corp or player alliance, they can drop "gravity wells" at a planet(s) pulling anyone/corp/alliance who has a certain amount of standing to the corp/alliance that placed the structure, gets pulled to it (Random if there are more than one) when warping to that system. This allows them to try and control who goes into their space. The "gravity wells" would be player made only, and need moon materials and other high end minerals. IMHO, gates should be removed, it makes the universe feel smaller and less realistic. and you would never meet a soul in space...EVE is designed for PvP....if you dont want to be shoot at there are countermeassures I once had a sig...it deleted
Taedrin Gallente The Last Ravens	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:16:00 - [3] I think this belongs in features and ideas forum, not general discussion. But regardless, travelling long distances takes way to long as it is already. Forcing a battleship to wait until it has 50% cap before it can move on to the next system would take way too long. Furthermore - merely being double or triple warp speed is nowhere near fast enough to reach a neighboring system in a reasonable amount of time. And lastly, gate camps are not a problem that needs to be solved. Gate camps are an 'intended feature'
Lyzander Caldari Mugen Academy	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:17:00 - [4] Originally by: Strange Guy The speed of warping to other systems could be double or triple normal warp speed... stuff, etc. So basically, assuming the stars in EVE are closely packed at, say, 2 light years apart (Alpha Centauri is 4 light years away), then it would take a cruiser (average ship)... FOUR HOURS TO REACH THE NEXT SYSTEM. I think I speak for everyone when I say that it's an interesting idea, but no. It's just not practical.
MrDisposable	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:21:00 - [5] I like the idea of 50% cap to jump.... but I would like it to only require you to be within 1 grid. Anywhere on that grid you could jump from... and you would appear somewhere at random in a "jump grid" of another system. The only real issue with that is how to implement it and allow alliances to maintain control of their systems?
hydraSlav Synergy Evolved Serenity Fallen	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:25:00 - [6] First, i don't see what there to fix with gate camps. Really. Nothing is broken. Secondly, read the EvE back story for basic understanding of the fundamentals of warping and interstellar travel (aka jumping). They are completely different technologies == Above comments are my personal views Oveur >Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat
Thor Xian Vertigo One E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:29:00 - [7] You have the right idea, but so much would need to be changed [read: improved] in Eve that I doubt CCP will ever do it. Sensor revamps, long range sensors, Transwarp (interstellar warp at 20-100x speed depending on ship), fuel, and in general improving ways to intercept ships that are in warp/transwarp. Gate camps aren't required for pvp, but as it stands Eve would have to get a whole lot better to make removing them viable...so don't count on it. Hyperspace ala Babylon 5 may be a better idea overall. ~Thor Xian, Material Defender "For all your Material Needs, Vertigo One." Corp/Alliance Services
Artthana Minmatar Kinda'Shujaa Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:46:00 - [8] Don't fix what ain't borke.
Djininia	Posted - 2007.01.26 18:50:00 - [9] Originally by: Strange Guy Edited by: Strange Guy on 26/01/2007 18:09:26 Get rid of gates, instead of using gates, we just could just use "natural warp paths" to other systems. To warp to another system you would need atleast 50% of your cap. The speed of warping to other systems could be double or triple normal warp speed. Then when you reach another system, you are dropped near a random planet in that system. So this way pirates have to camp all of the planets, or a select few, making camping much more difficult. No cloak anymore due to this random planet picking though. But what about alliance space control you say? Well, if a system is under the sov (0.0) of a player corp or player alliance, they can drop "gravity wells" at a planet(s) pulling anyone/corp/alliance who has a certain amount of standing to the corp/alliance that placed the structure, gets pulled to it (Random if there are more than one) when warping to that system. This allows them to try and control who goes into their space. The "gravity wells" would be player made only, and need moon materials and other high end minerals. IMHO, gates should be removed, it makes the universe feel smaller and less realistic. There is only one way to "fix" gate camps, and it's nothing like what you're saying. Gatecamps certainly need fixing: nerfbat the logoffski's. That's the only fix they need. If you don't like gatecamps, learn to avoid them. It's not difficult. Find a detour (I remember a lowsec gate that was camped 24-7, but the detour added just ONE highsec jump and was never camped), use a scout, use the map, or whatever you want, just don't whine about gatecamps on forums. They are here to stay, and they are an intentional feature of the game.
Lucifer Fellblade Ore Mongers SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:12:00 - [10] Originally by: Djininia There is only one way to "fix" gate camps, and it's nothing like what you're saying. Gatecamps certainly need fixing: nerfbat the logoffski's. That's the only fix they need. If you don't like gatecamps, learn to avoid them. It's not difficult. Find a detour (I remember a lowsec gate that was camped 24-7, but the detour added just ONE highsec jump and was never camped), use a scout, use the map, or whatever you want, just don't whine about gatecamps on forums. They are here to stay, and they are an intentional feature of the game. Quoted for truth. ------
Helix Fluxx Caldari Contempo Enterprises	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:39:00 - [11] Originally by: Strange Guy Waffle/whine/whinge This does sound like the whining of someone who got caught out and lost a ship or two, possibly with some value, to a gatecamp. Sorry mate but gatecamps are a standard operations strategy in this game. WCS already got overnerfed because of whiners. If CCP nerfed everything every player ever complained about the game would be unplayable. Besides, among other things you're talking about a complete recode of the long distance travelling part of the game, along with how the game manages sessions and physical locations of players within the universe. Can we possibly see if they can fix all the current problems before you ask them to recode half the game and create a whole load of new ones, please?* *That isn't a dig at CCP, just a statement of fact regarding the game at present. There are bugs and flaws. We all know that.
Zarottid Boznemmek Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.01.26 19:46:00 - [12] Maybe CCP should make the game work in such a manner in which no one would ever be killed without their express permission. Then they could rename the game Barney and FriendsÖ and we could all love each other and all be winners!
Haffrage Beagle Corp	Posted - 2007.01.26 20:06:00 - [13] As far as I'm aware, gatecamps are an integral and intentional part of the game, allowing territorial control for alliances and bottleneck camping to fund piewats in lowsec -----
Roy Batty68 Caldari Immortal Dead	Posted - 2007.01.26 20:42:00 - [14] The best fun to be had in EVE is when you out smart other players. Think ahead and gate camps aren't something that needs to be solved. After awhile you may even find yourself hoping to run into one and disapointed when you don't. ------------------- ... [OK] ... zOMG!
Wendat Huron Lupus Industries	Posted - 2007.01.26 21:35:00 - [15] Have NPC jump anyone staying static for too long, be it at gates, by stations or in safespots.
Zarottid Boznemmek Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.01.26 21:38:00 - [16] Originally by: Wendat Huron Have NPC jump anyone staying static for too long, be it at gates, by stations or in safespots. LOL! That's some funny stuff. Good one!
Wendat Huron Lupus Industries	Posted - 2007.01.26 21:59:00 - [17] Originally by: Zarottid Boznemmek Originally by: Wendat Huron Have NPC jump anyone staying static for too long, be it at gates, by stations or in safespots. LOL! That's some funny stuff. Good one! How is it funny? Random spawns, in both location and size triggered by static PC would be a decent deterent to camping.
Djininia	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:13:00 - [18] Originally by: Wendat Huron Originally by: Zarottid Boznemmek Originally by: Wendat Huron Have NPC jump anyone staying static for too long, be it at gates, by stations or in safespots. LOL! That's some funny stuff. Good one! How is it funny? Random spawns, in both location and size triggered by static PC would be a decent deterent to camping. You fail to point out why gate camps need to be deterred at all... once more, they are part of the game. A while back, though, someone came up with an interesting idea. Gate camps in lowsec (naturally, not 0.0) are monitored by concord (ie, for every X ships destroyed, it's escalated by Y points). At random times, NPC patrol fleets will respond, their size determined by the escalation points accrued by the camp and by the general security status of the system. These fleets vary randomly anywhere from laughable to devastating (with more escalation, the random spawns start to be weighted towards stronger and stronger), but the reward for conquering a devastating fleet would be quite decent - to offset what would otherwise be an obvious nerf. This would certainly reduce random killings if done properly - who wants to escalate over a 2 day old in an ibis (granted, it might be carrying a BPO)? At the same time it would add a bit of excitement. You never know when that NPC fleet is going to come to break the camp (note: they are not like anti-aggression CONCORD, they CAN be beaten and aren't in overwhelming numbers), and you get that thrill of watching the gate go off ten times and thinking "oh... #&^*..."
Wendat Huron Lupus Industries	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:16:00 - [19] Originally by: Djininia Originally by: Wendat Huron Originally by: Zarottid Boznemmek Originally by: Wendat Huron Have NPC jump anyone staying static for too long, be it at gates, by stations or in safespots. LOL! That's some funny stuff. Good one! How is it funny? Random spawns, in both location and size triggered by static PC would be a decent deterent to camping. You fail to point out why gate camps need to be deterred at all... once more, they are part of the game. A while back, though, someone came up with an interesting idea. Gate camps in lowsec (naturally, not 0.0) are monitored by concord (ie, for every X ships destroyed, it's escalated by Y points). At random times, NPC patrol fleets will respond, their size determined by the escalation points accrued by the camp and by the general security status of the system. These fleets vary randomly anywhere from laughable to devastating (with more escalation, the random spawns start to be weighted towards stronger and stronger), but the reward for conquering a devastating fleet would be quite decent - to offset what would otherwise be an obvious nerf. This would certainly reduce random killings if done properly - who wants to escalate over a 2 day old in an ibis (granted, it might be carrying a BPO)? At the same time it would add a bit of excitement. You never know when that NPC fleet is going to come to break the camp (note: they are not like anti-aggression CONCORD, they CAN be beaten and aren't in overwhelming numbers), and you get that thrill of watching the gate go off ten times and thinking "oh... #&^*..." They need to be broken up when they become an around the clock entity, becoming more of a certainty than a hazard. Why would Guristas for one allow an all hour siege at a bottleneck in a system they have claims to?
Eralus	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:19:00 - [20] Gah. "Gatecamps" are fine. All you have to do is stop thinking of gatecamps as other players and start thinking of them as just NPC's with REALLY GOOD AI. Or think of a gate camp like a pit of lava in a FPS game. If you want to not die playing quake, you gotta make sure that when you're walking along, you don't jump into the pit of lava. When you're playing EVE, you gotta make sure that when you're warping around, you don't jump into a gate camp. _____ Lifewire is a big, ugly, mean... carebear.
Wendat Huron Lupus Industries	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:20:00 - [21] I for one think even the gatecampers would welcome some action.
Dave White Beagle Corp	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:24:00 - [22] While I think that is completely retarded, I do like the idea of random hidden wormholes that can be taken to travel a massive distance. Ofcourse, these would despawn after time so they can't be used constantly. EvE +NLINE - T+TALHELLDEATH SUPPORTER My post bla bla my view bla no way corp or alliance bla reflection bla bla.
Djininia	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:25:00 - [23] Originally by: Wendat Huron Originally by: Djininia Originally by: Wendat Huron Originally by: Zarottid Boznemmek Originally by: Wendat Huron Have NPC jump anyone staying static for too long, be it at gates, by stations or in safespots. LOL! That's some funny stuff. Good one! How is it funny? Random spawns, in both location and size triggered by static PC would be a decent deterent to camping. You fail to point out why gate camps need to be deterred at all... once more, they are part of the game. A while back, though, someone came up with an interesting idea. Gate camps in lowsec (naturally, not 0.0) are monitored by concord (ie, for every X ships destroyed, it's escalated by Y points). At random times, NPC patrol fleets will respond, their size determined by the escalation points accrued by the camp and by the general security status of the system. These fleets vary randomly anywhere from laughable to devastating (with more escalation, the random spawns start to be weighted towards stronger and stronger), but the reward for conquering a devastating fleet would be quite decent - to offset what would otherwise be an obvious nerf. This would certainly reduce random killings if done properly - who wants to escalate over a 2 day old in an ibis (granted, it might be carrying a BPO)? At the same time it would add a bit of excitement. You never know when that NPC fleet is going to come to break the camp (note: they are not like anti-aggression CONCORD, they CAN be beaten and aren't in overwhelming numbers), and you get that thrill of watching the gate go off ten times and thinking "oh... #&^*..." They need to be broken up when they become an around the clock entity, becoming more of a certainty than a hazard. Why would Guristas for one allow an all hour siege at a bottleneck in a system they have claims to? Escalation would have that effect. For a normal or casual lowsec gatecamp, escalation isn't a major threat. Sure, if you get particularly unlucky it could be, but that same luck might turn around and you manage to handle a strong NPC reaction and you get decent loot as a reward. For super-camps that are 24/7 and are really just for kill boards (AMAMAKE anyone?), then it would be a deterrent. NPC's stop carrying the good loot (no farming!) at extreme escalation scores and use less pleasing tactics. If you let escalation get too far out of hand, THEN you get the wtfpwn fleets that would appease even some of the really bad whiners (how would a blob of EM spamming gnats sound [again, not like the UNSTOPPABLE CONCORD spam of doom, but quite a number of racial jammers, warp jammers, and webifiers]? And after a moment of such annoyance, the big guns come through ).
Marcus TheMartin Gallente Tuxedo.	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:41:00 - [24] Originally by: Lucifer Fellblade Originally by: Djininia There is only one way to "fix" gate camps, and it's nothing like what you're saying. Gatecamps certainly need fixing: nerfbat the logoffski's. That's the only fix they need. If you don't like gatecamps, learn to avoid them. It's not difficult. Find a detour (I remember a lowsec gate that was camped 24-7, but the detour added just ONE highsec jump and was never camped), use a scout, use the map, or whatever you want, just don't whine about gatecamps on forums. They are here to stay, and they are an intentional feature of the game. Quoted for truth. DOUBLE TRUE!
Tobias Sjodin Caldari Ore Mongers SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2007.01.26 22:52:00 - [25] If only there were forum-bans for stupid suggestions... :p [OMG! SMASH!]
Dao 2 The Scope	Posted - 2007.01.26 23:01:00 - [26] wot do u mean "solve" theres no problem. cept maybe lag ;p but thats not the gatecamps fault (well technically it is but u no whatever :\| ) ;p ------------------------------------------------ NEWLY ADDED ON 1/19 (though applies to all posts before ;p) the usual "I don't represent my corp or alliance" and stuffs like that Also the gal
Jyinn Gallente Newbies On Xstacy The Imperial Order	Posted - 2007.01.27 00:03:00 - [27] Here is a solution to gate camps. If you fly into a gate camp.. LOG OFF!! Your ship goes poof and you're safe. Works very well.. So well that all the cool kids are doing it. Bring an alt back to see if the gate is safe to log on again. Once you go YARGGH!!, you'll never go back.
Strange Guy	Posted - 2007.01.27 00:32:00 - [28] Heh, I never ctrl+Q'd before. But I will now, thanks for proving that gate campers don't want have to put effort into doing anything. Just camp a gate, free kills to put on the killboard. I do see the loggers side now, why don't you guys fight someone who will fight back? Because you have a chance of losing? This new system I suggested would mean moving around, and having to put effort into catching people. They get no cloak, and they could even add a scanner that detects warp ins and tells you the planet, add "Breacher" ships that can attack ships that are warping between systems. As for the guy who said 2x or 3x warp speed wasn't enough, make it 100x or 1000x faster, the idea is still solid. Real alliances, not the ones who hang out in NPC 0.0 sov systems, would have no issue with this new system, because of "gravity wells". No matter, some tard will still say that I got killed in a gate camp and I am whining about it, I have only died to one gate camp, ever, and only because I didn't ask in local or check the map. The current system allows no effort from one party, maybe the other should have a no effort escape too. Or you fix it so both sides have to be some effort into it! That is a damn crazy idea now isn't it!
Ander Gallente Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.01.27 00:38:00 - [29] When will we see threads with the topic "Solution for carebear-whine?" ;) EVE Online - Pirates
Lowanaera Amarr 1st Praetorian Guard Vigilia Valeria	Posted - 2007.01.27 00:42:00 - [30] The problem with your "gravity well" idea is that it makes POS warfare extremely impractical. Gate gamps aren't just for griefers in low-sec, locking down the entrances to an enemy system while you siege the POSs inside it is an extremely important part of basic 0.0 warfare. Without the ability to do this, you have the attacking support fleet chasing all over the system to try and stop the incomings? And the incoming fleet split up and being destroyed piecemeal? Yeah right... sounds like a lot of fun. Gate camps are not hard to avoid, and are an essential a part of 0.0 warfare. They are not something that needs fixing.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 :: 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.