Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Jackal Datapaw
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 09:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
Yes, I have skimmed much of the commonly suggested ideas, this is really simple.
This is a petition for CCP to remove local, or at the very least, bring it up that they should look at this over powered tool, and think about balancing it.
I personally think local it self, should be removed.
This is simple, if you like this idea, give this topic and +1 and a post you said +1 and what ever else kind of nonsense you have.
If you feel that local shouldn't be remove, feel free NOT to give it a +1 and go ahead at posting what ever non-sense you still wish to post.
Have a nice day, I shall be hiding in a vat of ice, to keep the flames from licking me. |
Trollin
48
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 10:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
+1
either remove it or make it same grid only as overview is
i want station guest list removed also
and buyer seller identity removed from wallet journal/transactions
find another way to initiate trades, they are all scammy anyways unless its someone you probably already have in another window. like corp/alliance . |
Jafit McJafitson
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
279
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 10:39:00 -
[3] - Quote
Jackal Datapaw wrote: If you feel that local shouldn't be remove, feel free NOT to give it a +1 and go ahead at posting what ever non-sense you still wish to post.
I'm happy to see that you're open-minded about this issue, flexible about your ideas, and eager to participate in rational debate |
realdognose
Reals Retirement Residence
23
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 10:45:00 -
[4] - Quote
You can minimize the local chat, if you don't like it |
Aerich e'Kieron
Snuff Box
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 10:59:00 -
[5] - Quote
+0.5 |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
111
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 11:04:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jackal Datapaw wrote: If you feel that local shouldn't be remove, feel free NOT to give it a +1 and go ahead at posting what ever non-sense you still wish to post.
So nice to see that you've already decided that the debate regarding local has finished. A bit like a religious fundamentalist deciding that all other monotheistics should die because they don't share the same, insane, viewpoint.
You seem to have completely brushed over all the reasons not to lose local. You don't propose anything to fix the rather obvious bias towards pirates where your change is concerned. One can only surmise that this is because the complete and total removal of the intel provided by local would suit you down to the ground and screw whether it's good for the game as a whole.
Jackal Datapaw wrote: Have a nice day, I shall be hiding in a vat of ice, to keep the flames from licking me.
The fact that you know you're going to get flamed, hard, shows that you already know that more people will disagree with you than agree.
Mind you, the main reason for you getting flamed is that you've just proposed removing something from the game without addressing any of the fallout that would cause. |
implor
Big Shadows Initiative Mercenaries
24
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 11:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
well, it will mess things up for nullsec. if you like to gank unknowing ppl just go to WH space.
BUT! Local in jita can be removed! |
Venus Rinah
Paladin Philanthropists
62
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 12:02:00 -
[8] - Quote
I'm all for removing local as a meta-intelligence tool.
However, this needs to be doen when the career aspect of the recon/scout role is improved upon with intelligence tools and mods that can help feed data to fleets/corps/alliances as required.
In this sense removing local as an intel tool is a good idea, but not without first allowing some other form of methodology to replace it with an IG intelligence method more involved with actual player activity in space from scouts. |
Jackal Datapaw
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
9
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 12:18:00 -
[9] - Quote
Jafit McJafitson wrote:Jackal Datapaw wrote: If you feel that local shouldn't be remove, feel free NOT to give it a +1 and go ahead at posting what ever non-sense you still wish to post.
I'm happy to see that you're open-minded about this issue, flexible about your ideas, and eager to participate in rational debate
I already have a rational debate going on.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=102852&p=6
Go there, and be rational all you want.
Tchulen wrote: So nice to see that you've already decided that the debate regarding local has finished. A bit like a religious fundamentalist deciding that all other monotheistics should die because they don't share the same, insane, viewpoint.
You seem to have completely brushed over all the reasons not to lose local. You don't propose anything to fix the rather obvious bias towards pirates where your change is concerned. One can only surmise that this is because the complete and total removal of the intel provided by local would suit you down to the ground and screw whether it's good for the game as a whole.
Reasoning? Why do you suggest I make any of that, it not like in just about every thread that I've meaningfully been in, always made an out cry that local requires some kind of change, let me ask you this, what are your reasons for not removing local?
Tchulen wrote: The fact that you know you're going to get flamed, hard, shows that you already know that more people will disagree with you than agree.
Mind you, the main reason for you getting flamed is that you've just proposed removing something from the game without addressing any of the fallout that would cause.
Some of the fall out hmm, lets see, no more whining about AFK cloaking, Cloakers have to work for their kill, no longer able to automatically know that there are targets here, people actually have to use their D-scanner. No more spam in Jita. The less smarter and bot population will have a harder time broad casting there rather meaningless plex scams.
Oh, and I already know This thread will get flame, maybe a little more the others, but lets face that facts ALL threads posted in this section, will get flamed in some way or another, cause you know why? This is EVE, and EVE has flamers. Big surprise there.
|
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
111
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 12:47:00 -
[10] - Quote
Jackal Datapaw wrote: Reasoning? Why do you suggest I make any of that, it not like in just about every thread that I've meaningfully been in, always made an out cry that local requires some kind of change, let me ask you this, what are your reasons for not removing local?
Because without it your suggestion isn't well thought through. You're just suggesting removing something that a lot of people use without even attempting to compensate for it. Not surprising you're expecting to get flamed.
I don't object to local being removed as long as there are, as suggested by others, new tools for discovering the same or similar intel.
I have no vested interest either way, personally. I live in a wormhole so I already have no intel. But you'd be completely buggering nullsec by just removing local.
Jackal Datapaw wrote: Some of the fall out hmm, lets see, no more whining about AFK cloaking, Cloakers have to work for their kill, no longer able to automatically know that there are targets here, people actually have to use their D-scanner.
EDIT - removed line. Unnecessarily confrontational.
No more whining about AFK cloakers? Perhaps. A MASSIVE increase in whining about being ganked by cloaked ships will ensue from the nullsec crowd however. If you thought the AFK cloakers whines were bad you wait till the entire population of lowsec and a large chunk of high sec realise that with a decently fitted force recon or tech III they can fly about nullsec almost immune and unknown killing mining ships left, right and centre because the pilots had no idea that there was anyone in local. Once the nullsec bears realise that they have absolutely no chance of mining or ratting with any form of security they'll rage quit or move back to high sec, completely reversing the "move to nullsec" push that CCP and large chunks of the community have been on for some time.
One might almost think that your main purpose here is to get rid of cloaking entirely with this suggestion as that would be the end result unless there was some other way to find out if there are cloaked ships in your system.
Jackal Datapaw wrote: No more spam in Jita. The less smarter and bot population will have a harder time broad casting there rather meaningless plex scams.
I'll give you that one. But that could be solved by, as someone else already suggested, just removing local in Jita.
Jackal Datapaw wrote:Oh, and I already know This thread will get flame, maybe a little more the others, but lets face that facts ALL threads posted in this section, will get flamed in some way or another, cause you know why? This is EVE, and EVE has flamers. Big surprise there.
Again, nope. I've seen several suggestions that haven't got flamed at all. That was because they were good, well thought through, simple changes that didn't negatively affect anyone. Of course you'll get flamed for suggesting a badly thought out proposal that doesn't even attempt to address the ramifications of implimentation. |
|
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy Black Sun Alliance
157
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 16:53:00 -
[11] - Quote
Jackal Datapaw wrote:Yes, I have skimmed much of the commonly suggested ideas, this is really simple.
This is a petition for CCP to remove local, or at the very least, bring it up that they should look at this over powered tool, and think about balancing it.
I personally think local it self, should be removed.
This is simple, if you like this idea, give this topic and +1 and a post you said +1 and what ever else kind of nonsense you have.
If you feel that local shouldn't be remove, feel free NOT to give it a +1 and go ahead at posting what ever non-sense you still wish to post.
Have a nice day, I shall be hiding in a vat of ice, to keep the flames from licking me.
I'm in favor with one cavete.. local needs to graduate out to null sec.. in other words, full local in empire is fine.. in low sec local without cloaked ships showing would be good... in null sec no auto local for any player unless they chat. WH space. no local id at all.. ever - even when you chat so that you see the communication but no name with it.. note: this would only apply to local not to corp or alliance or play created chat channels. [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/OldST.jpg[/IMG] |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Mordus Angels
288
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 17:18:00 -
[12] - Quote
+1 with the caveat that your idea is incomplete.
For lack of a more familiar reference, players need a radar screen. (Radar screen fails to explain the concept properly, but most will get the basic idea)
Ships have sensors. USE THEM. People want a convenient heads up display for important information, and without a doubt this should be considered important.
Here is a simple tip: Use the overview. It can do this surprisingly well.
Just add a category of items to the overview, call them sensor items. Highlight them in day-glo green or something so they stand out. Your ship's sensor strength and your detecting abilities combine to give your current ship it's sensor range. You can't see whats outside your visual range, neither can your ship.
Got a cloak? Is your cloaking skill higher than their sensor skill? They can't see you until you get closer then. The passive default scan will never see a cloaked vessel. They will be warned a cloaked vessel is in range if they do active scans, just not details about how many or how far. Active scans can be toggled on, but need to be reset after anything that moves you off your current grid, like undocking / changing systems / warping to another spot in system.
Logic: you must make an effort to detect someone making an effort to hide. If they are better at hiding, then they can get closer to you before you can know they are there. |
sabre906
Old Spice Syndicate Sailors of the Sacred Spice
75
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 17:27:00 -
[13] - Quote
Yes, we should have a tickbox option that can remove local for your client. |
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Divine Power. Cascade Imminent
976
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 17:31:00 -
[14] - Quote
ban npc corp forum alts from Features & Ideas Discussion forum |
Razgriz Shaishi
Helix Pulse Rolling Thunder.
6
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 17:41:00 -
[15] - Quote
They could make it so that local is like some other channels, you dont actually show up in it until you say something. |
Loius Woo
PATRIOT KNIGHTS
67
|
Posted - 2012.05.24 20:37:00 -
[16] - Quote
Venus Rinah wrote:I'm all for removing local as a meta-intelligence tool.
However, this needs to be doen when the career aspect of the recon/scout role is improved upon with intelligence tools and mods that can help feed data to fleets/corps/alliances as required.
In this sense removing local as an intel tool is a good idea, but not without first allowing some other form of methodology to replace it with an IG intelligence method more involved with actual player activity in space from scouts.
+1 to this!
If you make a module usable by scout ships that are able to scan a system in say 10 sec and give the names of every one in system, then that would work.
Also, allow someone who has been in a system for a sufficient period of time (say 1 minute) to link to the gate and see a system population and nothing else.
Then make local a chat channel that you can subscribe to if you want to.
Problem solved.
And I guess that since this would mean "removing local" I have to give this thread a +1 |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
114
|
Posted - 2012.05.25 14:15:00 -
[17] - Quote
Loius Woo wrote:Venus Rinah wrote:I'm all for removing local as a meta-intelligence tool.
However, this needs to be doen when the career aspect of the recon/scout role is improved upon with intelligence tools and mods that can help feed data to fleets/corps/alliances as required.
In this sense removing local as an intel tool is a good idea, but not without first allowing some other form of methodology to replace it with an IG intelligence method more involved with actual player activity in space from scouts. +1 to this! If you make a module usable by scout ships that are able to scan a system in say 10 sec and give the names of every one in system, then that would work. Also, allow someone who has been in a system for a sufficient period of time (say 1 minute) to link to the gate and see a system population and nothing else. Then make local a chat channel that you can subscribe to if you want to. Problem solved. And I guess that since this would mean "removing local" I have to give this thread a +1
Why? If you can scan a system in 10 seconds and get all the information of local why not just keep local? If you can wait 60 seconds and get the entire local list why change local.
If you want to delay the info then delay the info.
If you want to remove the info from everyone excepot scouts then make it specific to a module that is used on scout ships.
A bastardisation of both will just mean that everyone has to click to get info which they now get without clicking. More click-fest for no benefit. Like the new inventory. Not good. |
Bluddwolf
Minmatar Death Squad Broken Chains Alliance
29
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 12:48:00 -
[18] - Quote
I see nothing wrong with local the way that it is.
Does it give an brief advantage to non combat seeking pilots, looking to just pass through? "yes"
Is it still possible for a highly skilled pvp player to gate camp and snag the occasional "fly in his web"? "yes"
It seems to be pretty balanced in my opinion. Besides, CCP have other things to fix (Inventory Unification being the most important). To join Heimatar Military Industries-á visit website or conatct Bluddwolf in-gamewww.hmi.guildlaunch.com |
Jackal Datapaw
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
14
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 14:19:00 -
[19] - Quote
Bluddwolf wrote:I see nothing wrong with local the way that it is.
Does it give an brief advantage to non combat seeking pilots, looking to just pass through? "yes"
Is it still possible for a highly skilled pvp player to gate camp and snag the occasional "fly in his web"? "yes"
It seems to be pretty balanced in my opinion. Besides, CCP have other things to fix (Inventory Unification being the most important).
Does it give a massive disadvantage to cloaks: Yes
Does it give a massive disadvantage to people mining in hidden belts: Yes.
If you can get everything that is in local from scan, why keep it?
Removing local can give advantage to both cloakers, and non-cloakers: Yes.
Removing local will make scouts more important as a job line.
Balance you say. I don't agree with you. |
Bluddwolf
Minmatar Death Squad Broken Chains Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2012.05.26 15:59:00 -
[20] - Quote
Jackal Datapaw wrote:Bluddwolf wrote:I see nothing wrong with local the way that it is.
Does it give an brief advantage to non combat seeking pilots, looking to just pass through? "yes"
Is it still possible for a highly skilled pvp player to gate camp and snag the occasional "fly in his web"? "yes"
It seems to be pretty balanced in my opinion. Besides, CCP have other things to fix (Inventory Unification being the most important). Does it give a massive disadvantage to cloaks: Yes Does it give a massive disadvantage to people mining in hidden belts: Yes. If you can get everything that is in local from scan, why keep it? Removing local can give advantage to both cloakers, and non-cloakers: Yes. Removing local will make scouts more important as a job line. Balance you say. I don't agree with you.
How long would you suggest the auto cloak when jumping in be extended by?
It would have to be significantly long, to allow for scanning to take place, while auto cloaked.
Otherwise, the being blind to possible gankers, pirates, war targets, etc would be one sided in favor of the gate camper.
Bottom line, if you don't believe there is more than enough risk in EVE, please point out another MMO that has more or even the same amount? If you do find one, then perhaps that is a better game for you? To join Heimatar Military Industries-á visit website or conatct Bluddwolf in-gamewww.hmi.guildlaunch.com |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |