Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 19:27:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Canis Merga on 14/08/2008 19:29:57 In the middle of the nano nerf hype, I hope you will find this refreshing idea worthy to show direction how to change the local in the future.
Previous suggestions were based on ancient ideas, like completely eliminate local channel, or allow people leaving this channel. These are bad in basic imho, because intelligence should work on more levels, than "having" or "not having".
The Neutal Network is a concept, where the main idea is to force the players to organise their local for themselfes. The base idea is simple, if you do nothing, you wont receive any kind of intelligence about people present.
"Do for it" is not as hard as it might sound at first. Equipments, like system scanners at POSes, or proper scan probes, or role ships can provide information on many levels about who is along with you.
The "many levels" means four levels, it's not an accident, that it's the same number, like the sovereignity levels have. Anchorable devices cant provide better quality of information level, than the level of sov. in the system. Recon ships and covert ops class frigates may provide intelligence on three levels (1-2-3), based on if the ship is cloaked, or not, or in case probes were used for the better quality, what kind of them were gathering the information.
In "high sec" systems people may use NPC Faction Networks if their standings are good enough towards the given faction. CONCORD Network should be also present and avaliable for everyone, whose the security status is a non negative number, lower personal sec status means an auto-kick.
Since its kind of impossible having "good enough standings towards all NPC factions", there would be gaps in "low sec" by default, which should be normal. Increasing the sight of a pilot might be avaliable by player networks in low sec also, but not with the current sovereignity system. If it would be possibe having "major sov." and "minor sov." in a system, low sec could turn into paradise for a lot of people. Maintaining low sec networks and renting them for some ISK could be a profession (and ofc source of conflict). Anyways, there is a big potential in this imho.
It should be possible to join multiple Networks at the same time. Joining a system, where there are multiple Networks present always means that player receives the best quality of information automatically. Networks sould be working both on alliance and corporation level. This means joining the Amarr Network is nice, but I'm sure by joining the Imperial Navy's network might be better source in most cases, just like the Khanid Network in in the Khanid Kingdom. Each Faction has it's Main Network, joining its subnetworks (faction member corps) should be optional.
In case of Player Network, the situation is similar to NPC Networks. If a Corporation/Alliance founds a new Network, the first thing which has to be defined is the Nain Network Node, which is the default, custom filtered node, intel sources can be strained off by information type, like POSes only/ships only/probes only, XY CORP assets only, or other restictions, like max 1st and 2nd level only. Subnetworks, which provides quicker, better information can be reserved for true allies/more ISK.
In a system, which is no man's land, if there is no intel source present, there should be no intel at all, except about people on common Networks. I'm sure many people are concerned about the future of roaming gangs, and stuff. Having a friendly recon ship in system solves the problem, you wont fly blind, as long as there is a covert ops/recon ship with you and on a common network.
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 19:27:00 -
[2]
reserved for adding moar stuff
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 19:27:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Canis Merga on 14/08/2008 19:29:57 In the middle of the nano nerf hype, I hope you will find this refreshing idea worthy to show direction how to change the local in the future.
Previous suggestions were based on ancient ideas, like completely eliminate local channel, or allow people leaving this channel. These are bad in basic imho, because intelligence should work on more levels, than "having" or "not having".
The Neutal Network is a concept, where the main idea is to force the players to organise their local for themselfes. The base idea is simple, if you do nothing, you wont receive any kind of intelligence about people present.
"Do for it" is not as hard as it might sound at first. Equipments, like system scanners at POSes, or proper scan probes, or role ships can provide information on many levels about who is along with you.
The "many levels" means four levels, it's not an accident, that it's the same number, like the sovereignity levels have. Anchorable devices cant provide better quality of information level, than the level of sov. in the system. Recon ships and covert ops class frigates may provide intelligence on three levels (1-2-3), based on if the ship is cloaked, or not, or in case probes were used for the better quality, what kind of them were gathering the information.
In "high sec" systems people may use NPC Faction Networks if their standings are good enough towards the given faction. CONCORD Network should be also present and avaliable for everyone, whose the security status is a non negative number, lower personal sec status means an auto-kick.
Since its kind of impossible having "good enough standings towards all NPC factions", there would be gaps in "low sec" by default, which should be normal. Increasing the sight of a pilot might be avaliable by player networks in low sec also, but not with the current sovereignity system. If it would be possibe having "major sov." and "minor sov." in a system, low sec could turn into paradise for a lot of people. Maintaining low sec networks and renting them for some ISK could be a profession (and ofc source of conflict). Anyways, there is a big potential in this imho.
It should be possible to join multiple Networks at the same time. Joining a system, where there are multiple Networks present always means that player receives the best quality of information automatically. Networks sould be working both on alliance and corporation level. This means joining the Amarr Network is nice, but I'm sure by joining the Imperial Navy's network might be better source in most cases, just like the Khanid Network in in the Khanid Kingdom. Each Faction has it's Main Network, joining its subnetworks (faction member corps) should be optional.
In case of Player Network, the situation is similar to NPC Networks. If a Corporation/Alliance founds a new Network, the first thing which has to be defined is the Nain Network Node, which is the default, custom filtered node, intel sources can be strained off by information type, like POSes only/ships only/probes only, XY CORP assets only, or other restictions, like max 1st and 2nd level only. Subnetworks, which provides quicker, better information can be reserved for true allies/more ISK.
In a system, which is no man's land, if there is no intel source present, there should be no intel at all, except about people on common Networks. I'm sure many people are concerned about the future of roaming gangs, and stuff. Having a friendly recon ship in system solves the problem, you wont fly blind, as long as there is a covert ops/recon ship with you and on a common network.
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 19:27:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Canis Merga on 14/08/2008 19:47:57 Also if this system comes live, sending distress signals finally can come into game. The main problem with distress signals in the current system is obvious, if you are already in trouble, you wont call in your enemies too. IF you are able to pick which Networks should transmit the distress signal, only your friends will receive your message. The message in itself is not enough, people on common network with the distress signal frequency also see the location as a warpable beacon.
To avoid "fun with sending distress signals", this should not be a free feature, I guess 1M ISK should be enough to make people "bored" with this.
With the Neural Network, new type of agent missions can be implemented, like travel to hostile territory, probe some stuff, kill some stuff, rest like usual.
If you are still reading, you must be really curious, what are these levels exactly, what kind of difference might be there... well, I have some semi-final pictures and comments, I'll be be busy for a while, until I translate the text and finalize those pictures to show you.
Update is coming soon, feel free to ask questions, I know there might be thing I just skipped...
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 19:28:00 -
[5]
reserved for Q&A and moar details
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 19:28:00 -
[6]
reserved for Q&A and moar details
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 19:32:00 -
[7]
moar reservation
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.14 19:32:00 -
[8]
moar reservation
|
Iskies Wishies
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 13:14:00 -
[9]
more reservation
|
white kight
SwEaTy ArMpIT RaIDeRs
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 13:31:00 -
[10]
You know i actually quite like this suggestion it kinda makes sense. It would probably help lag in huge fleet battles where it would say that a certain amount of an alliance is in system rather than each individual pilot in system.
/signed Sig removed, inappropriate content. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
|
Brutuus Mortuus
Golden Harvest UniCorp
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 13:45:00 -
[11]
I can see that big alliances and corps would make a good use out of this suggestion, controlling all or parts of "local" intel and comms. But small player groups, newbies and the average occasional miners would be completely f****d.
no support. |
Iskies Wishies
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 14:25:00 -
[12]
Not really. If they go to big alliance territory to do their stuff, they will be in disadvantage, of course. In "neutral" areas, tho, like no mans land, where noone has intel, or in faction sov areas, they will have the same chance as anyone else, with the difference that intel is delayed for both parties. If one has good faction standings, he may even have advantage over the newcomers. Example, Serpentis agent runners have higher Serpentis standings, so they get better intel about local in Serpentis controlled systems than the random ganker.
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 14:47:00 -
[13]
Small gang and solo players do not necessarily get into disadvantage with the proposed local change. If they go to big alliance territory to do their stuff, they will be in disadvantage, of course. In "neutral" areas, tho, like no mans land, where noone has intel, or in faction sov areas, they will have the same chance as anyone else, with the difference that intel is delayed for both parties. If one has good faction standings, he may even have advantage over the newcomers. Example, Serpentis agent runners have higher Serpentis standings, so they get better intel about local in Serpentis controlled systems than the random ganker.
|
GulletSplitter
Maasai Tribal Products Independent Faction
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 15:57:00 -
[14]
Hmmm....could make the whole ECM/ECCM thing more exciting too. Having ships/skills that allow folks to hack networks for info/disruption.
I'll give it a thumbs up... |
Tellacula
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 16:07:00 -
[15]
I really like this Idea!
/Signed
|
TheEndofTheWorld
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 16:57:00 -
[16]
The whole point of a local nerf isn't a massive boost for 0.0 alliance, but rather as a nerf for 0.0 alliances...
NOT SUPPORTED
|
Fahtim Meidires
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 17:01:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 15/08/2008 17:02:38 Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 15/08/2008 17:01:26
Originally by: TheEndofTheWorld The whole point of a local nerf isn't a massive boost for 0.0 alliance, but rather as a nerf for 0.0 alliances...
NOT SUPPORTED
Actually, I want local removed for RP reasons. YOU think a local nerf would hurt large alliance.
This is the strongest alternative I've seen so far. Everyone in high-sec gets access to concord intel. Everyone with faction standings gets access to low-sec and NPC 0.0 intel.
Sovereignty holding alliance gets intel and can give it to those who have good standings with them (allies) just like setting up who gets shot by POS guns.
Maybe not as complicated as you have presented, but something along these lines that separates chat and intel.
edited forgot support
|
Apply
HUN Corp. HUN Reloaded
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 17:08:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Brutuus Mortuus I can see that big alliances and corps would make a good use out of this suggestion, controlling all or parts of "local" intel and comms. But small player groups, newbies and the average occasional miners would be completely f****d.
no support.
Originally by: TheEndofTheWorld The whole point of a local nerf isn't a massive boost for 0.0 alliance, but rather as a nerf for 0.0 alliances...
NOT SUPPORTED
I sense a slight contradiction here. (And since when is Republic Military School is a 0.0 alliance?)
BTW Supported.
|
Canis Merga
Silence Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 20:19:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Fahtim Meidires Everyone in high-sec gets access to concord intel. Everyone with faction standings gets access to low-sec and NPC 0.0 intel.
Sovereignty holding alliance gets intel and can give it to those who have good standings with them (allies) just like setting up who gets shot by POS guns.
Thx for the summary (and support ofc). The only aspect I missed from it, the small corporations and non-territorial entities also have their chance to get an own source: with some recon ships they can have an own mobile intel-network, quickly, easily and cheap.
|
Gergragda
Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 21:53:00 -
[20]
Very interesting, even if this is just a "beta" version of what local could be I still support this alternative or something like it being pushed forward. |
|
Lieutenant Isis
Gristle Industries
|
Posted - 2008.08.15 22:54:00 -
[21]
I like the idea. Would like to see CCPs opinion of this and other local nerfs.
Originally by: Roc Wieler I enhance my RP experience by filling my bathtub with red jello, balancing a wooden plank across it, then play EVE naked on my laptop.
|
Becq Starforged
Minmatar Ship Construction Services
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 00:00:00 -
[22]
I have mixed feelings on this. It's an interesting idea, but it also seems geared toward giving a sizable advantage to the defenders and their friends.
-- Becq Starforged Ushra'Khan
The Flame of Freedom Burns On! |
Elektrea
SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 03:47:00 -
[23]
its actually not that bad of an idea ----------
|
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 03:55:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Becq Starforged I have mixed feelings on this. It's an interesting idea, but it also seems geared toward giving a sizable advantage to the defenders and their friends.
It makes sense that people who own the space and who have installed the proper intelligence infrastructure to have an intelligence advantage.
|
Penchance
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 09:26:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Fahtim Meidires
Originally by: Becq Starforged I have mixed feelings on this. It's an interesting idea, but it also seems geared toward giving a sizable advantage to the defenders and their friends.
It makes sense that people who own the space and who have installed the proper intelligence infrastructure to have an intelligence advantage.
I agree completely. In fact, it would we strange not to.
I like this idea, but I'm interested in how recon ships would affect this network idea. Would system survey be some innate ability, would it be improved by some skill and/or do you need to install a module on your recon ship? Penchance: CEO and great perish of battleships |
Serenity Steele
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 11:15:00 -
[26]
Very interesting Idea. 2.2 questions;
1) How do you see this impacting the mobility of players within the EVE Universe? eg. Will players and corporations will tend to stick in one location because of the barrier to establishing such intelligence
2) If players tend to stay in one system/constellation/region what would be the impact of that on: 2.1) Trade (eg. More differentiation in markets) 2.2) Player Experience (eg. I played EVE for 2 years and never left my system/constellation/region)
≡v≡ Strategic Maps in Eve-Online Store | eve-maps.com |
Omber Zombie
Gallente Frontier Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 16:51:00 -
[27]
interesting idea - obviously needs some working on, but bookmarked to check out at a later date ----------------------
CSM 08 Blog |
Tempest Inferno
Davy Jones Locker Einherjar Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 20:44:00 -
[28]
Amazing. Few players are able to give this detailed of an example. I think the CSM should pick this up simply because it is very well thought out. Obviously needs a little bit of tweeking to work effectivly.
One recomendation from me. Have a Level 0 base network in each system regardless of sec status that shows number of ships only. Not friendly or hostile status just the number of ships and how many are entering / leaving.
|
Fahtim Meidires
Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.08.16 20:44:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 16/08/2008 20:44:13 Edited by: Fahtim Meidires on 16/08/2008 20:43:58
Originally by: Serenity Steele Very interesting Idea. 2.2 questions;
1) How do you see this impacting the mobility of players within the EVE Universe? eg. Will players and corporations will tend to stick in one location because of the barrier to establishing such intelligence
2) If players tend to stay in one system/constellation/region what would be the impact of that on: 2.1) Trade (eg. More differentiation in markets) 2.2) Player Experience (eg. I played EVE for 2 years and never left my system/constellation/region)
I don't think it will have this kind of negative effect. It will just cause people to be smarter and more cautious as they move around.
If intelligence was gathered and distributed depending on standing towards the sovereignty holding NPC faction or player alliance, it would still act as an early warning sign to rightful miners/ratters and would give incentive to hold space and interact diplomatically.
|
Irida Mershkov
Trader's Academy Blue Sky Consortium
|
Posted - 2008.08.17 12:04:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Tempest Inferno Amazing. Few players are able to give this detailed of an example. I think the CSM should pick this up simply because it is very well thought out. Obviously needs a little bit of tweeking to work effectivly.
I completely agree with this.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |