Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Unclaimed.
1479
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 18:04:00 -
[151] - Quote
Daenel wrote:Bump for an awesome idea, one of the better ones around to actually make gathering intel more interesting. Paired with delayed local in null it would make using sensors a lot more important than currently.
For WH space it would save a lot of hassle of spamming the scan button although as for cloaking it'd have to be very carefully balanced not to make it useless. Thank you for your feedback, it is appreciated. I wish more were able to see this as objectively as you seem to.
I hate to state the obvious after seeing so many threads do the same, but players relying on local has become a center point for too much game play.
Because of it, and players trying to counter it, we have AFK Cloaking, Hot Dropping, and dumbing down of strategies to the point where blobbing is the only practical option far too often.
I really wish they would test this for themselves, and not just the extreme example of wormhole space either. Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Unclaimed.
1669
|
Posted - 2013.04.30 19:59:00 -
[152] - Quote
Bump for radar.
We don't need to be carried when we can walk on our own. Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Unclaimed.
1684
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 20:57:00 -
[153] - Quote
It's about having fun, and not just watching from the distance. Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
joshua mckayne
Laststar Industries Inc. The Aurora Shadow
2
|
Posted - 2013.05.15 03:16:00 -
[154] - Quote
+1 for a great system idea. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
1934
|
Posted - 2013.06.24 19:38:00 -
[155] - Quote
joshua mckayne wrote:+1 for a great system idea. I appreciate the positive feedback, Thank you!
Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
2082
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 15:57:00 -
[156] - Quote
It's that time again, D-Scan is being mentioned! Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
Wormerling
Pegasus Unity Bloody Artillery
190
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 20:02:00 -
[157] - Quote
Okay, the head post is pretty vague, but I guess I've caught the idea while reading though thread posts. I'm going to leave a positive feedback, but some particular points look dispute. That way I'm supporting the general mind of the author and of the most people who posted there as well. My main concerns include cloaking detection, equipment that have to be used in the process, and the idea of skills impact on the system. But let me start from the beginning.
Local First of all, my vision of the problem of local chat: local shouldn't be used to gather intel. Period. I personally support the following solution: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=990533 In a nutshell. There are two modes: broadcast and silent. While in broadcast mode you see and can chat with everyone who are also in broadecast mode in the same system. People in silent mode doesn't see anyone in chat at all. This is spiritually close to what is proposed in this thread for d-scan, so I suggest below that local is either works like this or it is in delayed mode.
Scanning games This said, I want to point out my vision of the scanning overall. I'm seeing it as a game between two or more parties with no shoots made. These two parties are usually attacker and defender (of course one may easily think of the other possibilities but l'm going to stop on this case as the most important). In this game the so called defender loses when it's location is revealed. The attacker loses when his identity is revealed before defender has lost. It's really simple.
How it works now We all know how the scanning system is currently working, but I'll examine it from the perspective of the game. The defender is sitting in drake and killing rats or mining rocks in a mining barge and constantly hitting the scan button looking for an unkown vessel or probes on scan overview. The attacker is trying to cloak after jump or drop his scanning probes as fast as he could and rely on God and the laziness of the defender. This is just plain, stupid and as a consquence is not fun at all. I believe many of us wished this activity was less repetitive and involved more intelligence for both the attacker and the defender.
My vision Here comes the author with his idea described in the head post. My point of view is as follows. The system shouldn't require using any ship equipment or largely rely on skills. Then I think that a speparate customizeable overview should be used for all non-grid objects in space (yes, gates, planets and the other warpable objects included too, but it isn't important for the following discusstion). The d-scan window works well for this kind of overview, but needs lots of love from developpers to include customizeable persets (that are independent from general overview) and other stuff (more about it below). In this case an act of active scan happens when pilot hits the scan button: the ship sends a burst of gravitational waves to scan the surroundings and by that act reveals it's own identity in some way. There should be an option to put this activity in the repeat mode when scan is automatically hit every N seconds (where N is customizeable). In this terminology the passive mode is just a strategy when pilot doesn't use the scan button at all, but only watches the scan overview window for active scans (as proposed they appear automatically on overview in some form).
D-Scan result strength Now let me elaborate deeper into my vision on how the new scanning system should work. D-Scan results should also have some kind of "strength" much like probe results. The important difference here that I want to stress is that at 100% it doesn't give you a warpable point like with probes. After all, probes should remain probes and D-Scan is proposed to be used for intelligence. A 100% D-Scan result only shows the maximum intelligence possible: the name of the object, approximate distance and direction on the sky overlay (pretty accurate), and if it's the ship it shows the pilot or says that the ship is empty (for POSes, containers and wrecks shows the owner as well). At 0% it shows only that there is an indefinite object and probably it's mass and very vague information about distance and direction. Then the palette of various result strengths from 0% to 100% may gradually increase the accuracy of distance and direction detection and show the class of an object (ship, deployable equipment or structure) at approx 35% and class of the ship at let's say 75% (of course numbers aren't important ATM).
The look of D-Scan overview Further about D-Scan overview. The overview must automatically collapse all similar results under folders. For example I don't want to see a list of 68 indefinite objects each occupying a separate line, I just want to see one folded line that says there are 168 of them with a total mass of 42b kg. Then I probably don't want to see 12 containers or 50 wrecks as well and so on. That way, only results that are at 100% are showing each on separate line with the rest gathered by their type under folds that I can open any time and look specificaly when I need. This is not everything. Since the delayed nature of the scanning results there should be a column that shows the age of the result. I may want to sort my D-Scan overview by age to see new results appear on top of the list. Moreover, the difference between the current and the previous scan result should be highlighted in color: I want to see new results in some color that is slowly fading out with time.
More in the next post. |
Wormerling
Pegasus Unity Bloody Artillery
190
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 20:02:00 -
[158] - Quote
D-Scan sky overlay These active-passive scan games require some kind of visual notification on the sky. I'm talking about a D-Scan sky overlay. When someone is actively scanning and you catch his signal there is a blink on the skyscaper that is represented by an oval blob of some color (sorry, this is the best I can describe it). The intencity of the blink, the accuracy of the origin point and the fuzziness of the blob depend on the strength of the incoming signal. For instance if someone scans from a distant point you may only receive barely noticeable redness (let's say red is the color) of the sky without a particular direction in the whole plane of the system (much like a milky way is seen on the sky). But if there is a strong scan happening right nearby then you will see a strong blink in a particular direction (like a lighthouse blinks in the night). These blinks doesn't completely fade away from overlay but leave a shadow of color behind. Shadows for each object in the systm sum up and give a static view of the D-Scan results distribution over the skyscaper. I'm sorry for vaguness of the description but when this overlay is on it should look much like planetary resources view projected to the sky that shows approximate distribution of scanning results. Hopefully you'll understand me there.
Range and angle Both active and passive scanning is using these 2 adjustable properties. Objects can't be scanned outside of the cone set by double angle, double range and camera direction. Angle and range here work like falloff for guns, with 50% scanning strength at a distance of range (the same with the angle). The less is the overall volume of the figure the better is the scanning strength of the scan attempt. This implies that if you want to scan distant objects you have to use a long range (which isn't limited to 15au), but that also implies that nearby objects will be seen very faded. On the other hand, if you want to focus on the closer range you won't be able to see the long range results at all. The same with the angle. And the same mechanics also applies to passive scan: you can put it on maxiumum range to catch every active scan in the system, but then you may miss important information if an active scan appears right near to you. It's similar to adjusting your photocamera lens: you can have a great zoom, but you miss short distance objects, or you can adjust it to macro level, but then you can't see anything farther than your nose.
As an addition to range and angle discussion is that an active scan isn't detected from out of the cone described above. In other words, if you didn't found anything, anything didn't found you. Gravitational waves are only send in the particular direction, limited to a particular distance and aren't caught outside.
Passive vs active I can't fully describe why but I feel the following must be the rule of the thumb: the signal strength of the an active scan attempt should be more powerful than the strength of the revealing signal that it sends to the universe. For example, you had an active scan attempt and found an enemy ship at 50% signal strength. You can be sure that the enemy in passive mode receives a base signal from you at strength of 25% (once again, numbers are irrelevant). This signal is a subject to further angle and distance modifiers that depend on the angle and range settings of the enemy ship, but generally the revealing power of the active scan should be stronger than it's unmasking weakness.
Passive scan detection barrier I believe there should be a border below which active scan attempts aren't recognized by passive scanner and are identified a space noise. Let's say if an active scanning attempt reaches you with strength of 10% or less then you aren't notified about it. I believe there should be a little room to stay in the dark with the active scan. That way a cautious pilot may deliberately adjust the strength of the active scan signal to remain unseen by passive observers. This pilot of course won't be getting more information than that there is an object of the approximate mass out there. But don't forget that the passive observer-hunter may also adjust angle and range to amplify weak active scan attempts.
Cloaking I'm very catious besides changing every cloaking mechanics, even if it's only a notification about presence of a cloaky ship. I would stop on the following solution: cloaked ships may do active scan attempts without decloaking on grid overview, but these attempts reveal them on the D-Scan overview for passive observers. People that are actively scanning still can't see any cloaked ships.
Fleet I've seen proposals to share a D-Scan overview with your fleet members. Once again, while this is a nice idea in a nutshell that I'm also carrying for a while, I'm not sure how it should be implemented. In particular if you think carefully how the two or more D-Scan overview results from different ship should compare? The scan result is just an imprint of a particular moment. There might be a ship on your overview that isn't on it's place anymore, this ship may be scanned by your fleet memeber at a different location, then what? both scanning results of the same ship should appear on your overview and the overview of your fleet member? or what? This is a point of great nicety.
Special equipment As I've said I think this ability to passively and actively scan should be available without special equipment. The strength of the active scanning and the sensitivity of the passive scan should depend on the ship scan resolution and signature radius (and/or a mass) of the target ship. I don't think any special modules are necessary, because all equipment that is there to improve or reduce these parameters could be used for the purpose of scanning.
More in the next post. |
Wormerling
Pegasus Unity Bloody Artillery
190
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 20:03:00 -
[159] - Quote
An example Let's say there is a drake ratting in the system. There are two main strategies that drake pilot can take, both have their cons and pros.
The first one is to silently sit there and don't hit the scan button at all. In this case he won't be visible to passive scan observers-hunters. If anyone would try to activate the scan to find drake it's pilot will be immediately notified. However this strategy isn't perfect because drake pilot is run the danger of combat probes, which don't show up on passive scan. That way anyone can probe drake for free.
The second strategy is to set active scan to a fast full strength repeat to look for enemy probes and ships. This time drake pilot is run the danger of cloaked ships that passively see him for free on their overviews. If it's a publicly available spot they can simply warp there and catch drake, if it's a hidden location they will still need to drop probes, but it will be much easier because they already know the position of the drake. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
2120
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 20:20:00 -
[160] - Quote
Very interesting, Wormerling.
Your suggestions would also constitute an overall improvement of the game.
Myself, I kept my ideas modular, since key aspects were not entirely interdependent upon one another. That being said, they do work better as a group.
They happened to evolve at different points, so they are not part of the OP, but are mentioned occasionally in the thread as need indicated.
Here, try this out for size:
Local fixing, so it is still social and yet doesn't offer intel beyond logical limits: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2369739#post2369739
How to hunt cloaked vessels, using as much as possible to balance them fairly: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2668453#post2668453 (Yes, the title specifies the condition that local not hand out their presence for free, a condition which is satisfied by the first thread above)
Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
|
Wormerling
Pegasus Unity Bloody Artillery
191
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 20:41:00 -
[161] - Quote
Oh yes, I know how it happens. There is usually much more that we can say at once. The discussion usually enlights some aspects you forgot to mention. Thanks for links, I'll read them when I got more time. Concepts live within us, evolve and some day you find time to post somthing. I have still to understand your concept more clearly, but as I've said I think our general directions of view match. Thanks. |
gawrshmapooo
Es and Whizz Hedonistic Imperative
22
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 21:58:00 -
[162] - Quote
Furthermore, similar to how submarines rely on passive sonar rather than passive sonar for obvious reasons, going active would make you easier to find, because all the energy involved in active sweeps is easy to track.
Where would combat probes figure in to this? |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
2120
|
Posted - 2013.07.19 22:11:00 -
[163] - Quote
gawrshmapooo wrote:Furthermore, similar to how submarines rely on passive sonar rather than passive sonar for obvious reasons, going active would make you easier to find, because all the energy involved in active sweeps is easy to track.
Where would combat probes figure in to this? Probes of any type have a benefit as well as a cost to use.
Benefit: increased range to detect, as current use already defines.
Cost: with scanning now easier and more likely to occur, they are each another opportunity for someone to become aware that someone is watching. Spotting the probe means a ship that launched them is very likely active nearby, especially if the probe is not in the same spot between consecutive scans.
You just alerted your target that they are being hunted. Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata) Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
2524
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 18:09:00 -
[164] - Quote
Thoughts on active and passive sensor modes:
I would institute active and passive sensor modes.
Passive would emit no energy, and only receive energy from natural and artificial sources. Near a star, where energy is all over and bouncing off of everything, it can be both easier and harder to figure out what you are seeing. Like trying to hear a conversation at an airport, the background noise keeps drowning out what you are looking for. In those circumstances, using an active scanner would be harder for another ship to notice. The artificial signal is buried underneath the wash of energy naturally present.
On the system rim, or other places with low amounts of energy presence that might interfere with sensors, passive mode could be more than enough to use for protection. A sensor signal needs to reach you, and then back again to the sending ship, for an active signal to reveal you. A sensor signal that reaches you, but is not coherent enough to reach back to the sending ship, does not reveal you, but you now know someone with an active sensor array is looking around. Your next move could get you to safety, if they are coming in the wrong direction to avoid you.
I would have detection of warp energy, at the entry and exit points of warp tunnels, give a non specific energy wave to any passive sensor in range. (No significant range here, but if you are close to it you know someone warped in or out close by) (You may not be able to determine if it was coming or going, just a warp burp) Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Phaade
Debitum Naturae WHY so Seri0Us
69
|
Posted - 2013.08.19 18:36:00 -
[165] - Quote
+1 |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
3039
|
Posted - 2013.10.19 13:11:00 -
[166] - Quote
Bumping for another look Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Ex Cinere Scriptor
3062
|
Posted - 2013.10.25 19:23:00 -
[167] - Quote
Nikk Narrel wrote:Bumping for blueberry muffins.
What? Pilots need more than just burritos and hot pockets... just sayin! I have since revised this, to correct an error.
Pilots should also have chocolate cake.
The galley has been updated on level three, get some! Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
joshua mckayne
Bubblewrap.
4
|
Posted - 2013.11.11 00:55:00 -
[168] - Quote
this is one of the better ideas i have seen in regards to intel. i love it! i hope ccp would put this or something similar into the game. |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc Insidious Empire
3219
|
Posted - 2013.11.11 20:25:00 -
[169] - Quote
joshua mckayne wrote:this is one of the better ideas i have seen in regards to intel. i love it! i hope ccp would put this or something similar into the game. Agreed.
It puts player effort as the source for the results, and offers opposing effort a fair chance to counter them. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Wormerling
Pegasus Unity
207
|
Posted - 2013.11.20 07:55:00 -
[170] - Quote
Quote:Passive would emit no energy, and only receive energy from natural and artificial sources. Near a star, where energy is all over and bouncing off of everything, it can be both easier and harder to figure out what you are seeing. Like trying to hear a conversation at an airport, the background noise keeps drowning out what you are looking for. In those circumstances, using an active scanner would be harder for another ship to notice. The artificial signal is buried underneath the wash of energy naturally present. Don't forget that near the sun active scan must emit hundreed times more energy as well, because the scanning ship must receive the signal back and distinguish it as well. It's actually a nice idea as it is: to have areas in the system where scanning is less or more efficient. It doesn't matter how you explain the thing: EVE is not real in any way, it does only matter how it fits into gameplay.
Quote:I would have detection of warp energy, at the entry and exit points of warp tunnels, give a non specific energy wave to any passive sensor in range. (No significant range here, but if you are close to it you know someone warped in or out close by) (You may not be able to determine if it was coming or going, just a warp burp) This is a nice idea as well. I was thinking of it in context of removing warp gates and making a free travel between stars. It worked this way: when you do an interstellar jump you manage to land at a random point in the system. The energy that is emitted upon exit is so strong it can be detected as a warpable point for a passive scanner. The same works for a preparation for an interstellar jump: while drives are heating they emit large amounts of energy and are able to be detected by the scanner. |
|
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
3543
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 16:52:00 -
[171] - Quote
Bump with small note:
This idea can coexist next to current local, because it doesn't give a means to actually hunt cloaked ships, just know that something undefined is using a cloak in your range.
That being said, it can be more relevant for that virtue alone, you know a cloak is operating within your range, not just at some remote corner of the system itself. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Harlon Cordarii
Asurient Collective
13
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 20:35:00 -
[172] - Quote
+1
This is probably one of the best threads I've found in the Ideas section. I wonder how difficult it would be to implement. I like the idea that a ship's sensor strength plays a larger role than just keeping yourself from getting jammed.
It's also worth noting that the lack of single word negative comments such as, "no," is very refreshing. |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
3882
|
Posted - 2014.01.14 18:33:00 -
[173] - Quote
The overview is already in the game.
The players being able to choose whether they want sensor contacts added in is simply a step in it's evolution.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
3955
|
Posted - 2014.02.18 18:01:00 -
[174] - Quote
Give a man a fish, and he may be confused by it.
I mean, seriously, why are you going around handing out fish? Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4042
|
Posted - 2014.03.18 16:27:00 -
[175] - Quote
For those seeking sensor improvement, I think this thread is a good read.
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Grayland Aubaris
Ocellus Technology
36
|
Posted - 2014.03.18 22:43:00 -
[176] - Quote
Not sure if anyone has brought this up, but there used to be a radar of sorts in EVE back in the day ...
EVE online Radar |
Mazzara
Gale Force Contractors
7
|
Posted - 2014.03.18 23:36:00 -
[177] - Quote
+1 I dont care for most peoples anti-local ideas, but yours op is pretty good. Im game! |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4046
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:00:00 -
[178] - Quote
Mazzara wrote:+1 I dont care for most peoples anti-local ideas, but yours op is pretty good. Im game! Much appreciated.
I hope many more come to see this the same way. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
Rahh Serves
Collective Industrial Confederation Silent Forge
0
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:11:00 -
[179] - Quote
i know i m a carebear in your eyes i dont like the idea since i mine and 2-3 sec delay means death without exeption even skiffs are spacedust
and not all people have x accs or are in corps with 100 active members |
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
4047
|
Posted - 2014.03.19 13:25:00 -
[180] - Quote
Rahh Serves wrote:i know i m a carebear in your eyes i dont like the idea since i mine and 2-3 sec delay means death without exeption even skiffs are spacedust
and not all people have x accs or are in corps with 100 active members and no pvp guy i know would protect a mining ship while mining never ever and i play 4 years eve mostly in 0.0 Hello Rahh Serves!
I am a miner, as well. Judging from your reply, this is not what you expect, since you point out that you are a miner in a way that implies I need to consider a different viewpoint.
I believe you are missing some things, which your assumptions have glossed over from your view. We are competing with each other.
Every single miner, is competing with every other single miner.
Maybe you have friends, and are in a corporation. Maybe you give some of that ore to the corporation as dues or tribute, cancelling your effective competition for that ore, at least as far as the other corp members are concerned.
BUT, every rock you mine out, is denied to the next guy. Sure, a similar rock might respawn, and they might use that instead, but until it does, you have denied them access to the ore no longer present as a result of your actions.
As a secondary effect, the more ore that gets mined and sold, the less ore the market needs, and the prices rise and fall based on the market's needs. You sell more ore, the next guy finds the prices that much lower when he shows up. Someone buys up more ore reserves, the prices go back up. Basic supply and demand economics, which means the guy who sells to the highest prices makes the most ISK.
Most players want to be that guy, making the most ISK.
You stop gathering ore to sell, when you stop mining. If your competition explodes due to a hostile, and you don't, you suddenly have an advantage that translates into higher potential profit. If the key to not exploding when others do, is increased effort, that then defines how you compete, in order to make more ISK. At least, as a miner.
o7
Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |