EVE Search - Frigates, low sec and gate guns

All Channels

Crime and Punishment

Frigates, low sec and gate guns

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
kessah	Posted - 2008.03.29 20:38:00 - [1] Im alittle dissapointed that i cant use smaller ships effectively in low sec, i mean there are belt jobbies and killing other pirates, but all -10 pirates know where the action is. Just curious if CCP has thought on what they intend on doing with Low sec space? Id love to see propotional dmg dealt on ships that are small. Battleships / command ship take the dmg they do now, but frigates / cruisers recieve less but proportional to there class. Just an idea... http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=633738 Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.[/url]
Chainsaw Plankton	Posted - 2008.03.29 20:40:00 - [2] i would have disagreed with you a few months ago, but remote sensor boosted hics have changed my mind /signed Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Cikulisuy Infortunatus Eventus	Posted - 2008.03.29 20:47:00 - [3] agreed, kessah. it is sort of lame that you cant use frigates and such in lowsec, belt piracy is rather dead atm is there is no incentive to actually mine in lowsec, and most people will safe/cloak if someone is in the system /signed this out of all will remain, they have lived and have tossed; so much of the game will be gain, though the gold and the dice have been lost.
Stakhanov Metafarmers	Posted - 2008.03.29 20:57:00 - [4] Nah , the point of sentries is to deter smaller ships from fighting with a crim at gates & stations. Gives the competent antipies / mercs an edge. Also quite effective at balancing nano vs tank in lowsec. Belt piracy isn't nearly as good as it used to be , but it's still possible to catch stuff with frigates. Also very useful to get mission runners' pods. Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu edit: Wow, that was unpleasant, I felt pity for someone. Won't happen again.
kessah Blood Corsair's Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.03.29 21:02:00 - [5] Then a counter for that then stak is that when an anti pirate aggros a pirate corp member then they should be agressed to all the corp members. At least we can use frigates agaisnt the said agressed anti pirates. in all fairness, anti pirates have the easiest pvp in eve quite frankly. Sit in high sec and jump in and have sentries help em pop the pirate... or just kill people in there high sec wars without fear of being hot dropped. I mean im jealous that they have the easiest sort of combat, but i still think if you wana tango with a -10 organisation there should be some way of evening the odds
Joe Starbreaker Starbreaker Spaceways Nex Eternus	Posted - 2008.03.29 21:07:00 - [6] Originally by: Stakhanov Nah , the point of sentries is to deter smaller ships from fighting with a crim at gates & stations. Gives the competent antipies / mercs an edge. Also quite effective at balancing nano vs tank in lowsec. That doesn't make any sense. Sentry guns do not shoot you if you target criminals. Rendering nano useless and forcing everyone to fly battleships with heavy tanks does not equal "balancing". Gives "antipies" an edge I suppose but why should that be in the game? I say eliminate sentry guns from lowsec, but keep the security hits and the prohibition of warp bubbles. Lowsec will be the one place in the game where skill matters and fun PVP takes place.
Corstaad Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.03.29 21:27:00 - [7] I really don't understand gateguns. They promote gatecamping(which in EVERY game sucks) and flying stupid heavy tanks(which new people shouldn't be flying). In effect it may be the single reason people don't try low sec. My idea of pvp isn't figuring out how to tank npc damage.
doctorstupid2 Blood Corsair's Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.03.29 21:30:00 - [8] Originally by: Joe Starbreaker Gives "antipies" an edge I suppose but why should that be in the game? Personally I'm comfortable with that, that's the price we pay for the lives we lead. I like the added challenge, but I fall in a very slim minority on that one. In regard to frigates on gates, with aggro split a few ways a jaguar can sit there and tank sentries with the best of em; little risky though as a wrecking hit can take you into armor Couple remote sensor boosters and you're nabbing frigs before they can warp Deadspace2 \| Deadspace \| Fun in FAT-
techzer0	Posted - 2008.03.29 22:06:00 - [9] Originally by: Joe Starbreaker Originally by: Stakhanov Nah , the point of sentries is to deter smaller ships from fighting with a crim at gates & stations. Gives the competent antipies / mercs an edge. Also quite effective at balancing nano vs tank in lowsec. That doesn't make any sense. Sentry guns do not shoot you if you target criminals. Rendering nano useless and forcing everyone to fly battleships with heavy tanks does not equal "balancing". Gives "antipies" an edge I suppose but why should that be in the game? I say eliminate sentry guns from lowsec, but keep the security hits and the prohibition of warp bubbles. Lowsec will be the one place in the game where skill matters and fun PVP takes place. Yeah... I can fly a huginn all I want in lowsec, but an anti-pie sees me and they'll never engage me first if they have half a brain. Because any competent pilot knows a nano-ship can't tank sentries ------------ Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
Athas Darksun Ghost Festival	Posted - 2008.03.29 22:32:00 - [10] Edited by: Athas Darksun on 29/03/2008 22:33:11 Personally, I'd liketo see the folowing changes to lowsec, combat, & commerce in general: 1- Station & Gates guns in all systems (0.0 included) ...capable of utterly destroying ANY ship flagged within a 250KM radius and those who loiter in said radius for more than 10 min. Reasoning: No more gate and Station camping 2- Ores confined to the following sec systems: 1.0 to 0.8 (Veldspar, Scordite) 0.7 to 0.1 (Everything inbetween) 0.0 (Arkonor, Mercoxit) Reasoning: Low Sec truely becomes the meeting ground between Newb/Alliance space 3- GCC increased to 1 hour Reasoning: Go ahead and log off if ya wanna...we dare ya 4- Auto-agression from Attacker to the Defender's Corporation. Reasoning: I dont know bout ya...but im not gonna stand around while my brother catches a beatdown...it's round up the posse time 5- Removal of Local chat in exchange for Constellation and/or Regional Chat (both being optional) Reasoning: Chat is meant to chat...not give an indication of where someone is located..nuff said on this all over the place 6- Removal of non-aligned Stations from enenmy space. Reasoning: Who came up with the bright idea of putting a Amarr Station in Matari space. 7- Since it can be infered that there is some kind of inhibition field in Empire space preventing the movement of Capital ships and Jump drives...extend it to Lowsec. This should also include Battleships and larger "combat" vessels. Reasoning: I cant imagine any government that would willingly allow ANY foreign power (read: Alliances or MegaCorps) to develop, deploy, or patrol such vessels with its territory. Battleships (maybe even Battlecruisers) and such larger vessels should be resigned to private navies/fiefdoms in nullsec. This also plays into Factional Warfare...at least how it works in my mind.
doctorstupid2	Posted - 2008.03.29 22:42:00 - [11] I find myself sincerely hoping above post is a troll. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images. Deadspace2 \| Deadspace \| Fun in FAT-
techzer0	Posted - 2008.03.29 22:47:00 - [12] Originally by: doctorstupid2 I find myself sincerely hoping above post is a troll. Seconded ------------ Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
Athas Darksun	Posted - 2008.03.29 22:51:00 - [13] actually not...just expressing my opinion....i am curious as to what you specifficlly find distastefull...without getting too upset. I realise everyone has their own ideas...if EVE were perfect...we wouldnt have comments. http://www.ghostfestival.net Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.[/url]
Corstaad	Posted - 2008.03.29 22:52:00 - [14] Thats alot of words for a random troll though. Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Andrest Disch Debitum Naturae Rejuvenate	Posted - 2008.03.29 23:23:00 - [15] I don't know.. I wouldn;t mind if Sentry damage increased over time and didn't warp disrupt you, that way ships could attack each other quickly but have to warp out, which would reduce large-scale gate camps atleast. Surely that would make low sec more inviting? (and fun) Though i'm not an old player, don't know completely what adverse effects this could cause. I just don't want to use a lumbering battleship for pirating. =p
doctorstupid2 Blood Corsair's Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.03.29 23:27:00 - [16] Edited by: doctorstupid2 on 29/03/2008 23:29:31 Originally by: Corstaad Thats alot of words for a random troll though. Yeah, and they normally don't format that way. Still I refuse to believe it's not a misguided attempt at satire. Aw, he deleted it, though I suppose it's best that way. Deadspace2 \| Deadspace \| Fun in FAT-
Orar Ironfist Incarnation of Evil Nocturnal Legion	Posted - 2008.03.30 01:52:00 - [17] Edited by: Orar Ironfist on 30/03/2008 01:53:28 Originally by: Joe Starbreaker Originally by: Stakhanov Nah , the point of sentries is to deter smaller ships from fighting with a crim at gates & stations. Gives the competent antipies / mercs an edge. Also quite effective at balancing nano vs tank in lowsec. That doesn't make any sense. Sentry guns do not shoot you if you target criminals. Rendering nano useless and forcing everyone to fly battleships with heavy tanks does not equal "balancing". Gives "antipies" an edge I suppose but why should that be in the game? I say eliminate sentry guns from lowsec, but keep the security hits and the prohibition of warp bubbles. Lowsec will be the one place in the game where skill matters and fun PVP takes place. You should pod yourself to an alpha. Right now. With alot of excitement and rage involved. Pirate for Life(no matter my sec)
Atomos Darksun Infortunatus Eventus	Posted - 2008.03.30 02:19:00 - [18] Originally by: Athas Darksun Edited by: Athas Darksun on 29/03/2008 23:17:18 You have stolen my name. You make me sad. I disagree with being able to use frigs in lowsec, however the difference between using frigs and HIC's as tacklers is about nill right now Originally by: Amoxin My vent is talking to me in a devil voice...
Stakhanov Metafarmers	Posted - 2008.03.30 12:17:00 - [19] Originally by: kessah Then a counter for that then stak is that when an anti pirate aggros a pirate corp member then they should be agressed to all the corp members. That was the intended mechanic , it's been broken for ages. Yet you still find antipies complaining that game mechanics work against them Originally by: Atomos Darksun I disagree with being able to use frigs in lowsec, however the difference between using frigs and HIC's as tacklers is about nill right now Doesn't seem so , unboosted HICs do not have a very high scan res as they need all their slots to solo sentry tank. I admit that they are much easier to boost and support than lach / huginn but still don't have the speed of bastage inc's covops catching suicide merlins (or a properly supported AF) The fact that remote boosting effects are blocked when their point is active makes them sloppy pod catchers , too. Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu edit: Wow, that was unpleasant, I felt pity for someone. Won't happen again.
THEHUNTER123 Vermin.	Posted - 2008.03.30 18:25:00 - [20] i've found frigs pretty useless for gate camps in low sec the jag can with stand a good few hits by sentry's inty's on the other hand can maybe stand 1-2 hits at the most ( my claw managed 3 hehe just as i got in2 war bang claw went bye bye) i also think they should take sentry guns off low sec gates ( maybe 0.3 0.2 0.1 and leave them on 0.4 but w/e) ccp needs to nerf gate guns or boost frigs nuff said I like corpses i collect them in my hanger and have fun with them be4 downtime :P
Sirius Problem	Posted - 2008.03.31 03:51:00 - [21] Originally by: THEHUNTER123 i also think they should take sentry guns off low sec gates ( maybe 0.3 0.2 0.1 and leave them on 0.4 This is definitely one issue with low sec. There is no difference in security as you go from 0.4 to 0.1. It should get riskier the lower you go. For that reason, the number, or lethality, of gate sentries should be reduced as one moves from 0.4 down to 0.1. This would allow smaller ships to be used at gate engagements. ---- I am Super Cool Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Narciss Sevar Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.03.31 15:32:00 - [22] Sentry agro is fine.
Tchell Dahhn Deny Reality	Posted - 2008.03.31 15:36:00 - [23] Originally by: Sirius Problem It should get riskier the lower you go. For that reason, the number, or lethality, of gate sentries should be reduced as one moves from 0.4 down to 0.1. This would allow smaller ships to be used at gate engagements. That means that more and more players would be be blobbing using Frigs and Cruisers, since they might be able to tank the guns more effectively. I think this might be worse, since it would mean more inexpensive ships could be used, and replaced at will should they be lost.
Sirius Problem	Posted - 2008.03.31 20:58:00 - [24] Originally by: Tchell Dahhn Originally by: Sirius Problem It should get riskier the lower you go. For that reason, the number, or lethality, of gate sentries should be reduced as one moves from 0.4 down to 0.1. This would allow smaller ships to be used at gate engagements. That means that more and more players would be be blobbing using Frigs and Cruisers, since they might be able to tank the guns more effectively. I think this might be worse, since it would mean more inexpensive ships could be used, and replaced at will should they be lost. I'm not sure, tbh. I think most pirates would actually like not to blob. Not having to split loot/ransoms is one reason. Most everyone likes a good fight, but current mechanics, of which sentries are a part, have forced low-sec PvPers into blobs of big ships. Some people say, "boost sentries", but all that will do is ratchet-up the size and strength of blobs. Also, since tough sentries force you into a tough ship, that ship is rather expensive. So, another reason for blobs is to protect your assets. If sentries were weaker and one could easily fly cruisers and frigs, there would be much less incentive to blob in heavy hardware. If blobs become smaller and fewer, and typical camps no longer consist of 10 BC/BS class ships, then carebear survivability should actually go up, instead of "insta-pop" the moment you pass through the "wrong" gate. ---- I am Super Cool Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.
Bellum Eternus	Posted - 2008.03.31 22:00:00 - [25] Originally by: kessah Im alittle dissapointed that i cant use smaller ships effectively in low sec, i mean there are belt jobbies and killing other pirates, but all -10 pirates know where the action is. Just curious if CCP has thought on what they intend on doing with Low sec space? Id love to see propotional dmg dealt on ships that are small. Battleships / command ship take the dmg they do now, but frigates / cruisers recieve less but proportional to there class. Just an idea... If smaller/lighter ships worked on gates then low sec would be just like 0.0, only without the bubbles. I really don't want to see nano fights come to low sec. Having your drones shot by sentries sucks however. That needs to be fixed. Bellum Eternus [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y [Vid] L E G E N D A R Y I I
Joe Starbreaker Starbreaker Spaceways Nex Eternus	Posted - 2008.04.01 01:35:00 - [26] Originally by: Tchell Dahhn That means that more and more players would be be blobbing using Frigs and Cruisers, since they might be able to tank the guns more effectively. I think this might be worse, since it would mean more inexpensive ships could be used, and replaced at will should they be lost. I think that's the point of the thread. Some of us want to PVP without waiting 8 months and focusing our training in a drive to get battleships with T2 everything and enough money to replace it ten times weekly. Some of us would like to just take a cruiser or something and pew pew pew. Let the carebears bring armed escort... more pew pew for both sides, sounds like a win-win situation to me.
Lars Lodar Blood Corsair's Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.04.01 09:56:00 - [27] Originally by: Bellum Eternus If smaller/lighter ships worked on gates then low sec would be just like 0.0, only without the bubbles. I really don't want to see nano fights come to low sec. Having your drones shot by sentries sucks however. That needs to be fixed. Agreed on both parts. As much as I hate the sentries sometimes, I hate nanocrap even more. My biggest qualm is that 95% of combat in lowsec happens at gates and most people have realized that low sec risk vs reward is terrible. If CCP could design some way of creating new content or increasing rewards in low sec, hopefully there would be more incentive to roam, fly in smaller ships to catch prey in belts, mitigate some blobbing, and to get away from boring gate camps. Join Blood Corsair's
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.04.01 09:59:00 - [28] Originally by: kessah Im alittle dissapointed that i cant use smaller ships effectively in low sec, i mean there are belt jobbies and killing other pirates, but all -10 pirates know where the action is. It's a bad idea. One of the appealing things is that smaller/faster ships are very safe at gates, except for remote-boosted recons and stuff (and even then, you get away a lot of the time). This gives newer players the ability to go/live in low-sec, and many of these new players will eventually stick around low-sec, even become pirates at some point. Making them more vunerable is a bad thing imo. Besides, letting frigates/etc do belt/complex piracy only is a good thing: they'll be forced to learn how to use the scanner and do things which they wouldn't learn as part of a gatecamp. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint

Pages: [1] :: 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.