|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
116
|
Posted - 2012.04.15 08:25:00 -
[1] - Quote
OK every time AFK cloaking comes up someone always says, "Just take away local. That way you won't know that you are about to get jumped and you can go out ratting." Personally I think this is a terrible idea that will discourage people from living in nullsec even more.
So to solve this argument once and for all, let's make a new region of nullsec somewhere that's half NPC null and half claimable sov. Give it amazing truesec to lure people out there. Have it follow all of the rules of regular nullsec except that there is delayed local just like W-space.
Now without disturbing the delicate balance of the rest of eve we have a test bed to try out a region of space without local where people can bring regular roaming gangs through gates and hot drop people. And if CCP wanted to try out any experimental anti cloaking modules they could make up some lore reason why they only work in the new test region. |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
116
|
Posted - 2012.04.15 17:30:00 -
[2] - Quote
double post |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
116
|
Posted - 2012.04.15 17:30:00 -
[3] - Quote
Xorv wrote:Your idea won't resolve any arguments of Local, nor will it prove what you want it to prove, everyone will still be fattening up in High Sec not in either of your Null zones.
Oh yeah and...
Remove Local Chat ...everywhere.... If you remove local everywhere then people would still just sit up in highsec fattening their wallets anyway. Just wait till you aren't in a wardeck and run incursions. It only effects people who live in nullsec and rely on Intel to make a living.
Gerrick Palivorn wrote:You know that they've been testing the whole 'no local' thing in multiple regions for a while now...
I'll give you a hint, it starts with W and ends with Space. I actually did mention W-space in my original post. Also in every AFK cloaking thread people say "Delayed local works in wormholes, why not null"
Everyone responds, "Because in null you have hot drops, fixed gates, and constant roaming gangs coming in."
So yeah a no local null region would be different because you could have black ops drops, giant blobs, and every other aspect of regular null in there...... except instant local intel.
HELIC0N ONE wrote:Unless you're putting this new region on a completely seperate server then its going to affect the rest of Eve. Nobody actually lives on the test server so you'd never really be able to get any meaningful feedback on the idea. So yes it would effect eve as a whole. There would be one region with a slightly higher isk per hour profitability than the rest of null, but anyone living there would have to live under the constant danger of getting jumped by a black ops gang. |
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions Solid Foundation
116
|
Posted - 2012.04.15 18:45:00 -
[4] - Quote
Xorv wrote:That's true about High Sec, but it wasn't the point I was making. What I'm saying is if you add a zone with somewhat better PvE but is or is perceived as being dangerous few will go there so long as there's also an option to do PvE in a near completely safe zone. The difference in income has to be astronomically high, or the difference in danger real or perceived has to be one of small degrees. This point of mine is all your exercise would prove, but we already know this so there's no point.
Local needs to be radically changed and removed from Null, and High Sec either needs to become a much more dangerous place or have it's PvE income completely gutted.
OK yeah that's a good point.
The best argument I have heard for "DON"T NERF NULL" is that you can already just run incursions risk free and make way more money than carrier ratting sanctums. |
|
|
|