EVE Search - Proposed - Dynamic Difficulty for NPC Enemy Gate Groups

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Proposed - Dynamic Difficulty for NPC Enemy Gate Groups

» 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)
Erich Einstein Swoop Salvage 3	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:37:56 - [31] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: What about your assumed right to sit on a gate and camp noobs. Bottom line, its a game. CCP is in it to make a profit not to take care of the good old boy club. If the solution will make them more money through more subscribers who dont rage quite, then its a good solution. This solution balances out the ability to get camped and the ability to camp. It doesnt favor one or the other. It forces campers to move around to different gates. It keeps getting mentioned that the game is player driven - but their are so many npc isk drains in this game. This is just one more than makes people actually play the game to earn isk. There is no right to sit on a camp. They earned it by putting in the man power and the effort. It's open season on them for anyone who wants to take a shot. If no one tries to stop them thats not their fault. Hand holding carebears does not increase subs. The players who quit because of getting shot at are never going to play eve for long. They'll quit when they get ganked, or wardecced or any of the million of ways their day can be ruined in this game. Even if they don't get attacked, they are statistically unlikely to last before they get bored and leave. Don't cater to these players. Im glad you dont work for CCP... Game would have been dead long ago.
Christopher Mabata Sentinel Incorporium 449	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:40:40 - [32] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: Daichi Yamato wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: What about your assumed right to sit on a gate and camp noobs. Bottom line, its a game. CCP is in it to make a profit not to take care of the good old boy club. If the solution will make them more money through more subscribers who dont rage quite, then its a good solution. This solution balances out the ability to get camped and the ability to camp. It doesnt favor one or the other. It forces campers to move around to different gates. It keeps getting mentioned that the game is player driven - but their are so many npc isk drains in this game. This is just one more than makes people actually play the game to earn isk. There is no right to sit on a camp. They earned it by putting in the man power and the effort. It's open season on them for anyone who wants to take a shot. If no one tries to stop them thats not their fault. Hand holding carebears does not increase subs. The players who quit because of getting shot at are never going to play eve for long. They'll quit when they get ganked, or wardecced or any of the million of ways their day can be ruined in this game. Even if they don't get attacked, they are statistically unlikely to last before they get bored and leave. Don't cater to these players. Im glad you dont work for CCP... Game would have been dead long ago. Almost got the full bingo sheet here, keep going page 3 awaits GÖú Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry GÖú 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing GÖú This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet
Erich Einstein Swoop Salvage 3	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:41:05 - [33] - Quote Christopher Mabata wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: Christopher Mabata wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: Shae Tadaruwa wrote: The easiest solution of all is to not go through the Nourv gate and take a few extra jumps. Simple and effective. A few extra jumps is more like 15 extra jumps if you want to get into tama but have to go around. If you look at my list i noted a solution to this on bullet point (A)#6 "Go somewhere else" Not replying to your comments anymore... its pointless now you know what the rest of us feel like trying to tell you that A- Gatecamps aren't a problem B- Your idea is bad C- There are other solutions D- Existing game mechanics are working as intended Welcome to F&I Gatecamping is not a problem. Gate camping the same gate 24/7 as a method of grinding is a problem. If you want to grind, go do missions. If npc gate enemies that you cant just ignore are a problem for you... well go cry yourself to sleep.
Christopher Mabata Sentinel Incorporium 449	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:44:48 - [34] - Quote Your missing the vital point here that 3 people have said, Its not a method of grinding, its content generation both for the people camping and those jumping into these gatecamps, if you don't understand that your missing a vital point within PVP in EVE. GÖú Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry GÖú 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing GÖú This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet
Shae Tadaruwa Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1106	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:45:35 - [35] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: The idea of having gate guns and npc's that can just be ignored for the most part is pointless. Just get rid of them. They are pointless as is. The guys who do it obviously find a point in doing so. The beauty of a sandbox based game. Everyone has their choice. Why don't you outline your gameplay in a post and we will propose lots of mechanics to nerf it completely. That's fair right? I should totally be able to determine what is ok for you to choose to do. Surely. After all, that's what this thread is about. Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Erich Einstein Swoop Salvage 3	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:47:51 - [36] - Quote Christopher Mabata wrote: Your missing the vital point here that 3 people have said, Its not a method of grinding, its content generation both for the people camping and those jumping into these gatecamps, if you don't understand that your missing a vital point within PVP in EVE. No one is saying you cant gate camp or that its wrong. But when you set up a citadel right next to tama and warp back and forth for quick repairs to sit on the gate for half the day killing noobs going to do some faction warfare... I call that grinding. My solution only requires gatecamps to move around and come back so that no gate can be camped 24 / 7.
Erich Einstein Swoop Salvage 3	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:49:33 - [37] - Quote Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: The idea of having gate guns and npc's that can just be ignored for the most part is pointless. Just get rid of them. They are pointless as is. They aren't pointless at all. Sentry guns are often used defensively (to avoid a fight) and/or gain assistance in a fight. As for the gate campers, the guys who do it obviously find a point in doing so. The beauty of a sandbox based game. Everyone has their choice. Why don't you outline your gameplay in a post and we will propose lots of mechanics to nerf it completely. That's fair right? I should totally be able to determine what is ok for you to choose to do. Surely. After all, that's what this thread is about. It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day.
Shae Tadaruwa Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1106	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:52:44 - [38] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day. Your use of the 'think of the children argument' is one of the most ridiculous arguments ever for a mechanics change. There is a warning popup by default that requires a player to accept the danger of jumping into lowsec. If a player accepts that danger then it's not the gate campers fault. Can't switch the responsibility after the fact. "Oh yeah, I knew I was jumping into potential danger, but it's not fair that it happened". That is a very, very weak argument. Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Christopher Mabata Sentinel Incorporium 449	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:54:29 - [39] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: The idea of having gate guns and npc's that can just be ignored for the most part is pointless. Just get rid of them. They are pointless as is. They aren't pointless at all. Sentry guns are often used defensively (to avoid a fight) and/or gain assistance in a fight. As for the gate campers, the guys who do it obviously find a point in doing so. The beauty of a sandbox based game. Everyone has their choice. Why don't you outline your gameplay in a post and we will propose lots of mechanics to nerf it completely. That's fair right? I should totally be able to determine what is ok for you to choose to do. Surely. After all, that's what this thread is about. It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day. Sandbox game They dont have to move They can sit there and get kills if they have the manpower to do it its content for them and everyone else they aren't farming, theyre playing the game; as intended NPC's shouldn't ever be the ones to break up player gatherings that are permitted by the game mechanics why should they have to move? why is their gameplay subject to change and not yours? These are the points your still missing GÖú Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry GÖú 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing GÖú This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet
Erich Einstein Swoop Salvage 3	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:54:55 - [40] - Quote Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day. Your use of the 'think of the children argument' is one of the most ridiculous arguments ever for a mechanics change. There is a warning popup by default that requires a player to accept the danger of jumping into lowsec. If a player accepts that danger then it's not the gate campers fault. Can't switch the responsibility after the fact. "Oh yeah, I knew I was jumping into potential danger, but it's not fair that it happened". That is a very, very weak argument. Well the thread like count keeps going up so please, keep telling me how weak you think it is.
Erich Einstein Swoop Salvage 22	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:57:20 - [41] - Quote Christopher Mabata wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: The idea of having gate guns and npc's that can just be ignored for the most part is pointless. Just get rid of them. They are pointless as is. They aren't pointless at all. Sentry guns are often used defensively (to avoid a fight) and/or gain assistance in a fight. As for the gate campers, the guys who do it obviously find a point in doing so. The beauty of a sandbox based game. Everyone has their choice. Why don't you outline your gameplay in a post and we will propose lots of mechanics to nerf it completely. That's fair right? I should totally be able to determine what is ok for you to choose to do. Surely. After all, that's what this thread is about. It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day. Sandbox game They dont have to move They can sit there and get kills if they have the manpower to do it its content for them and everyone else they aren't farming, theyre playing the game; as intended NPC's shouldn't ever be the ones to break up player gatherings that are permitted by the game mechanics why should they have to move? why is their gameplay subject to change and not yours? These are the points your still missing The thing you are missing is that its not about the game's original content and what it is meant to be. Its about making the game fun and interactive for all. CCP has every right to change a game mechanic that will make them more money. Both through more NPC related kills and happier solo / small gangs players. Now that they are coming out with clone states, their will be a lot of new first time players. CCP definitely doesn't want to push these players out of the game. This change is beneficial in making CCP more money, bottom line.
Christopher Mabata Sentinel Incorporium 449	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:58:05 - [42] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day. Your use of the 'think of the children argument' is one of the most ridiculous arguments ever for a mechanics change. There is a warning popup by default that requires a player to accept the danger of jumping into lowsec. If a player accepts that danger then it's not the gate campers fault. Can't switch the responsibility after the fact. "Oh yeah, I knew I was jumping into potential danger, but it's not fair that it happened". That is a very, very weak argument. Well the thread like count keeps going up so please, keep telling me how weak you think it is. You are aware thats counting total likes in the thread? Not of the thread itself? And if you look those likes if they even matter, which they don't are distributed among the 3-4 others here and not your post Your understanding of forum mechanics is as weak as your understanding of low sec game mechanics GÖú Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry GÖú 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing GÖú This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet
Shae Tadaruwa Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1106	Posted - 2016.10.02 04:58:42 - [43] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day. Your use of the 'think of the children argument' is one of the most ridiculous arguments ever for a mechanics change. There is a warning popup by default that requires a player to accept the danger of jumping into lowsec. If a player accepts that danger then it's not the gate campers fault. Can't switch the responsibility after the fact. "Oh yeah, I knew I was jumping into potential danger, but it's not fair that it happened". That is a very, very weak argument. Well the thread like count keeps going up so please, keep telling me how weak you think it is. Oh god. Now you think likes mean something. Hang on. I'll go like all your posts. I still think they are stupid and ridiculous and extremely weak, but that's the choice I have, to like rubbish posts anyway. Likes mean absolutely squat, and they certainly don't mean an argument is good. It could very well be liked by other idiots. As per the edit I made above, if a players accepts this warning: https://puu.sh/ruQ3m/03af725dfa.png and then dies, their responsibility. Edit: You just went from 3 to 22 likes after that run. You must feel like a total pro game designer now. Go you. Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Erich Einstein Swoop Salvage 22	Posted - 2016.10.02 05:02:13 - [44] - Quote Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day. Your use of the 'think of the children argument' is one of the most ridiculous arguments ever for a mechanics change. There is a warning popup by default that requires a player to accept the danger of jumping into lowsec. If a player accepts that danger then it's not the gate campers fault. Can't switch the responsibility after the fact. "Oh yeah, I knew I was jumping into potential danger, but it's not fair that it happened". That is a very, very weak argument. Well the thread like count keeps going up so please, keep telling me how weak you think it is. Oh god. Now you think likes mean something. Hang on. I'll go like all your posts. I still think they are stupid and ridiculous and extremely weak, but that's the choice I have, to like rubbish posts anyway. Likes mean absolutely squat, and they certainly don't mean an argument is good. It could very well be liked by other idiots. As per the edit I made above, if a players accepts this warning: https://puu.sh/ruQ3m/03af725dfa.png and then dies, their responsibility. Edit: You just went from 3 to 22 likes after that run. You must feel like a total pro game designer now. Go you. Its visibility... Thats all I care about.
Shae Tadaruwa Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1106	Posted - 2016.10.02 05:12:51 - [45] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: Its visibility... Thats all I care about. Good luck with that. This from the CSM Minutes just released: Mr Hyde brought up the topic of Interdiction and Nullification. He asked whether there was any consideration to making a difference between the anchored bubbles and the other types of bubbles. This would allow for nullification to then work against only anchored bubbles. This means that manned gatecamps can counter groups that currently just slip through, encouraging people to gate camp again. Nullsec focused, not lowsec; however there is no difference in the concept of gatecamping in low or null. If members of the CSM are trying to find ways to encourage gate camping, then us randoms in the forum are pushing water up hill against that. If you want visibility though, you need to post it on Reddit, not here. There isn't anywhere near the visibility here that you expect. Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 3545	Posted - 2016.10.02 05:20:13 - [46] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: Im glad you dont work for CCP... Game would have been dead long ago. And if you worked for ccp there would never have been an eve. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Valkin Mordirc 2546	Posted - 2016.10.02 06:01:04 - [47] - Quote This guy is priceless. First he wants +5 WCS now he wants NPC to crash gates for him. To bad botting isn't allowed. He'd be all over that. `#DeleteTheWeak`
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 4828	Posted - 2016.10.02 07:19:17 - [48] - Quote I am looking at tama on zkill right now. Are the navy maulus, gold pods, brutix, zealots, bombers, covops, VNIs, navy slicers and all the rest the hallmarks of the 'noob farming' you're complaining about? When I've camped the tama gate, it's rarely newbies that come in. And newbies don't HAVE any isk to grind either.
Bumblefck Kerensky Initiatives 13017	Posted - 2016.10.02 10:23:42 - [49] - Quote Why do you insist on making threads that suggest transforming New Eden into a hand-holdy, theme-parky kind of place? GTFO and take your toxic electrons with you, kindly Ironically, Erich is no Einstein when it comes to EVE. https://zkillboard.com/character/95683889/ This may have something to do with the endless tears - four ships and two pods lost in Tama on the same day! Haw, haw Perfection is a dish best served like wasabi . Bumble's Space Log
Shae Tadaruwa Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 1113	Posted - 2016.10.02 11:17:24 - [50] - Quote Bumblefck wrote: https://zkillboard.com/character/95683889/ This may have something to do with the endless tears - four ships and two pods lost in Tama on the same day! Haw, haw Definition of stupid right there. Same thing, over and over and over. Same outcome over and over and over. He's lost ships going through all the main gate camped gates into Gal-Cal FW space. Such fail and so easy to avoid. @OP, some tips: Old Man Star from Villore: Instead go Villore -> Allamotte -> Vifrevaert (lowsec) -> Ladistier -> Old Man Star The Allamotte gate in Vifrevaert is never camped. It's just a FW farming system. Safe as highsec. Alternatively go Villore -> Pimene -> Mesybier -> Murethand (lowsec) Also never camped into Murethand and lots of ways to go from there. You can also go Mesybier -> Orvolle -> Oulley (lowsec) and also many ways from there. Ostingele from Stacmon: Instead go Stacmon -> Dastryns -> Ostingele 1 more jump and Dastryns is almost never camped. I think I've seen it camped once in the last 4 years. Tama from Nourvakaiken: Instead avoid Tama gate and go to Tierjev -> Tannolen (lowsec) 3 jumps from Tama and Tannolen is never camped. Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 1016	Posted - 2016.10.02 15:18:19 - [51] - Quote Read the first page scanned the rest. One terrible aspect of this that I have not seen addressed is the simple fact that this would (at least temporarily) replace an impassable player created gate camp with a nearly impassable NPC gate camp, here is an example. The NPC have grown strong enough that a 5 ship player gate camp cannot stay in the area so they leave. Just a few moments later one of those new players the OP is so concerned about jumps solo into this angry hornets nest of NPC on his way to his first ever faction war encounter and what happens to him? Do the NPC ignore him? Do they kill him instantly because he has no prayer of tanking the damage even long enough to warp away. Can he even warp away or would these NPC have scrams? If he dies to the NPC is that really any different than dying to a player group? A personal story to relate that may apply to these situations. This characters first ever low sec journey ended at the high to low gate due to a gate camp. The folks that destroyed my shiny new ship then sat there for 30 minutes protecting my pod from all comers while we talked in local about what I could have done differently and about game play options that I never knew existed. Would the NPC have sat at that gate and talk to me? At the end -1 to your idea. I understand what you want to achieve but your idea will do nothing to solve the problems you are trying to solve.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2712	Posted - 2016.10.02 15:30:18 - [52] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: Its much more fun for everyone when players form together and remove gate camps themselves. If you get npc's to do it for you that makes for a **** game. Not empty quoting. Also, I subtract three points for your "think of the noobies" argument. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2712	Posted - 2016.10.02 15:38:14 - [53] - Quote Erich Einstein wrote: Shae Tadaruwa wrote: Erich Einstein wrote: It's not a nerf... Its a get off your ass and move around mechanic. Stop farming noobs all day. Your use of the 'think of the children argument' is one of the most ridiculous arguments ever for a mechanics change. There is a warning popup by default that requires a player to accept the danger of jumping into lowsec. If a player accepts that danger then it's not the gate campers fault. Can't switch the responsibility after the fact. "Oh yeah, I knew I was jumping into potential danger, but it's not fair that it happened". That is a very, very weak argument. Well the thread like count keeps going up so please, keep telling me how weak you think it is. Yes, but only because all the posts saying that your idea is terrible are getting "liked." That's not a ringing endorsement of your idea. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

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

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,52s, ref 20250913/0157
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

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.