EVE Search - Expand the success of w-space to 0.0

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Expand the success of w-space to 0.0

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Clair Bear Perkone	Posted - 2009.04.14 07:38:00 - [61] Originally by: Marcus Druallis Do you realize how much of a pain in the ass it is going to be to find targets without local? I do not support this at all. Absolutely trivial. Here's the algorithm for optimal killboard padding: 1. Find a low truesec system with lots of belts. Easiest way is to look at Ombey's maps and look for stations. 2. Put a covops at a safe covering more than one belt with a scanner. Might have to move once in a while. 3. Logonski gank fleet in belt with an incoming ratter. 4. Gank. 5. Logoffski, optionally warping to another belt first. Repeat until ratters stop spawning. Move to another alliance's ratting/mining ground. You wouldn't even need a highly skilled fleet to do this. A 3-4 million SP BS pilot would make a suitable alt for this.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.04.14 08:00:00 - [62] So far I've seen a pretty narrow set of responses. Basically, a few people are worried that gate camps will be worse than they are now, and due to lack of local small gangs won't be able to find fights and large blobs will prevail. Additionally, some players are asking for all sorts of automated replacements for the local channel to substitute the functionality one for one. Personally I think that w-space is CCP's prototype for the eventual removal of local from 0.0. I think that local should be removed from lowsec as well, but not from empire. Removing local won't change how players conduct themselves very much in the long run when compared to how things are today. If you jump into a gate camp currently, you're dead, with or without local. If there is a planet near a gate, you're usually warping to the planet to get a gate scan before you jump through, with or without local. If you don't have a scout in your gang, you're probably going to die to a blob, with or without local. There won't be an increase in metagaming. There won't be any functional difference in how you gather intel with scouts, other than they'll actually have to get eyes on a target instead of just looking at the local list. Adding complexity and a little bit of skill and requiring a little more effort on the part of a good scout isn't a bad thing. The people who aren't going to like the removal of local are the people who want it easy. The people who want to rat in complete safety. The people who want to mine unguarded. The people who want their alliance space as safe as sitting in Yulai somewhere. Removing the local crutch will only benefit the smarter, better, more skilled players. Players will still be able to quickly find populated systems via the galactic map, just as they've always done. In my opinion smaller gangs will actually have an easier time of it in 0.0 because the blob won't be able to find them as easily. Right now it is all too easy to know for sure where someone is and lock them down. With some careful flying a smaller gang could slip past a blob if local were removed. Is the w-space template workable for 0.0? I think so. Players don't operate any differently in w-space than they do in 0.0. At least not the ones that are successful. W-space players get along just fine without local. I don't think that the gate structure of 0.0 will significantly change how the removal of local is applied to 0.0 vs. w-space, particularly with the continued existence of the galactic map and all of it's formidable information. Too many players want the continued existence of their little cushy country club in space. No alliance worth it's salt will have a problem adapting. Everyone is so worried about how it's going to negatively affect them. Start thinking about how it's going to negatively affect everyone else as well, in addition to the positive advantages. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
El Mauru Amarr Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.14 08:31:00 - [63] I kinda think lots of Bellum's whines are total failsauce, but I have to agree with him on this one. local needs to go (into delayed mode) for 0.0. Keep the local count (number of people in system) updated and everybody will be happy. -
oniplE Point of No Return	Posted - 2009.04.14 08:33:00 - [64] Originally by: Bellum Eternus If there is a single aspect of w-space that is overwhelmingly successful it is the fact that it's local channel operates in delayed mode. Thats both an opinion and an assumption. W-space hasnt proven itself yet and even if it had there's no telling if that is because it doesnt have local. As for removing local in 0.0: No. I dont want to scan a 100au system with several people just to find out its empty. PVP will become like 2 gangs of blind people trying to find each other in space. x
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2009.04.14 08:47:00 - [65] Originally by: oniplE Originally by: Bellum Eternus If there is a single aspect of w-space that is overwhelmingly successful it is the fact that it's local channel operates in delayed mode. Thats both an opinion and an assumption. W-space hasnt proven itself yet and even if it had there's no telling if that is because it doesnt have local. As for removing local in 0.0: No. I dont want to scan a 100au system with several people just to find out its empty. PVP will become like 2 gangs of blind people trying to find each other in space. If this were the case then finding people to kill in w-space would be almost impossible. But it's not, is it? People die in w-space every day, even though it's far more remote and empty than any 0.0 area. Any competent player will be able to find people to shoot. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. Death of Virtue is Recruiting
Valkazm Amarr Russian Specnaz Red Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.14 08:47:00 - [66] Edited by: Valkazm on 14/04/2009 08:49:41 Edited by: Valkazm on 14/04/2009 08:48:10 first of all why only 0.0 then this would go for high sec low sec aswell etc .. And i strongly disagree this only benifits the hunter .. adding to being ablee to scan down a target using probes in 10 or so seconds this would completly kill 0.0 . The risk would be to great to mine ratt or do anything with no eyes whats so ever . low sec would be empty aswell . I know alot of you empire dwellers have opinions about crap that dosent effect you . But this ruins my game im a fleet fighter and need to recoup my losses with enemies constantly trying to kill me now and then beacuse traveling through 0.0 is easy why ? Beacuse only 10% of eve want that kind of game to begin with or play a more risky game with higher stakes .
El Mauru Amarr Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.14 08:49:00 - [67] Edited by: El Mauru on 14/04/2009 08:51:37 Edited by: El Mauru on 14/04/2009 08:50:23 Originally by: oniplE As for removing local in 0.0: No. I don't want to scan a 100au system with several people just to find out its empty. PVP will become like 2 gangs of blind people trying to find each other in space. The only really useful info-tool (and imho an essential one) is local-count, which needs to stay. *edit for the spelling wizard -
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2009.04.14 09:06:00 - [68] sorry but small gangs is a forced thing in w space in 0.0 only the largest of entities will be able to dominate thier sectors or occupy any area they want significantly or intercept incomming fleets better. 0.0 will clear out of most of the people who hate getting forced into patrols, gaurd duty, and any tennants paying the rent if there is no intel tool of any sort. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 6Apr09
oniplE Point of No Return	Posted - 2009.04.14 09:39:00 - [69] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: oniplE Originally by: Bellum Eternus If there is a single aspect of w-space that is overwhelmingly successful it is the fact that it's local channel operates in delayed mode. Thats both an opinion and an assumption. W-space hasnt proven itself yet and even if it had there's no telling if that is because it doesnt have local. As for removing local in 0.0: No. I dont want to scan a 100au system with several people just to find out its empty. PVP will become like 2 gangs of blind people trying to find each other in space. If this were the case then finding people to kill in w-space would be almost impossible. But it's not, is it? People die in w-space every day, even though it's far more remote and empty than any 0.0 area. Any competent player will be able to find people to shoot. Fact is finding targets will become A LOT harder. Finding targets with a small gang is hard enough as it is, i dont want it to get slowed down even more. The "surprise-attack" effect of a removed local won't last very long either, everyone in 0.0 will be spamming their scan button, great stuff. Originally by: El Mauru Edited by: El Mauru on 14/04/2009 08:51:37 Edited by: El Mauru on 14/04/2009 08:50:23 Originally by: oniplE As for removing local in 0.0: No. I don't want to scan a 100au system with several people just to find out its empty. PVP will become like 2 gangs of blind people trying to find each other in space. The only really useful info-tool (and imho an essential one) is local-count, which needs to stay. *edit for the spelling wizard If local count stays, there's no point in removing local. Cuz then the only info you DONT have is WHO is in local. You'd have to probe them out and warp to them only to find out they are blue, which sucks even more than scanning empty systems. x
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.04.14 09:41:00 - [70] Originally by: Bellum Eternus So far I've seen a pretty narrow set of responses. Basically, a few people are worried that gate camps will be worse than they are now, and due to lack of local small gangs won't be able to find fights and large blobs will prevail. Additionally, some players are asking for all sorts of automated replacements for the local channel to substitute the functionality one for one. Personally I think that w-space is CCP's prototype for the eventual removal of local from 0.0. I think that local should be removed from lowsec as well, but not from empire. Removing local won't change how players conduct themselves very much in the long run when compared to how things are today. If you jump into a gate camp currently, you're dead, with or without local. If there is a planet near a gate, you're usually warping to the planet to get a gate scan before you jump through, with or without local. If you don't have a scout in your gang, you're probably going to die to a blob, with or without local. There won't be an increase in metagaming. There won't be any functional difference in how you gather intel with scouts, other than they'll actually have to get eyes on a target instead of just looking at the local list. Adding complexity and a little bit of skill and requiring a little more effort on the part of a good scout isn't a bad thing. The people who aren't going to like the removal of local are the people who want it easy. The people who want to rat in complete safety. The people who want to mine unguarded. The people who want their alliance space as safe as sitting in Yulai somewhere. Removing the local crutch will only benefit the smarter, better, more skilled players. Players will still be able to quickly find populated systems via the galactic map, just as they've always done. In my opinion smaller gangs will actually have an easier time of it in 0.0 because the blob won't be able to find them as easily. Right now it is all too easy to know for sure where someone is and lock them down. With some careful flying a smaller gang could slip past a blob if local were removed. Is the w-space template workable for 0.0? I think so. Players don't operate any differently in w-space than they do in 0.0. At least not the ones that are successful. W-space players get along just fine without local. I don't think that the gate structure of 0.0 will significantly change how the removal of local is applied to 0.0 vs. w-space, particularly with the continued existence of the galactic map and all of it's formidable information. Too many players want the continued existence of their little cushy country club in space. No alliance worth it's salt will have a problem adapting. Everyone is so worried about how it's going to negatively affect them. Start thinking about how it's going to negatively affect everyone else as well, in addition to the positive advantages. QFT However, I really want CCP to seriously rework the scanner before this is done. Actually, I want them to rework it anyway.
Executive Energy	Posted - 2009.04.14 10:01:00 - [71] Edited by: Executive Energy on 14/04/2009 10:03:16 I haven't seen anyone point out the benefits for the carebears yet. You can now find yourself a nice little out of the way 0.0 to quietly setup in. Sure getting there might be a challenge, but no risk no reward right? Removing local would be the best thing to happen to eve, for both pirates AND carebears. They should have done this years ago. As for the 0.0 owners having such an advantage.... rubbish. Removing local would make infiltrating their space and picking off their ratters easier. I bet 1 zillion isk all the "don't remove local!!" types are ratting away with cloaking ravens, and they log the second another player appears in local. THIS IS REWARD WITHOUT RISK. Oh, and remove the #$&*^$(#&$(&#)$&# level 4 missions from empire as well. God damn hello kitty online.
Kalintos Tyl Minmatar	Posted - 2009.04.14 10:45:00 - [72] 0.0 carebears will whine hard about removing of local in 0.0. Hwo they can isnta warp and cloack if someoen shows in suystem without lcoal ?:P 60D GTC - shattared link
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2009.04.14 11:15:00 - [73] Originally by: Kalintos Tyl 0.0 carebears will whine hard about removing of local in 0.0. Hwo they can isnta warp and cloack if someoen shows in suystem without lcoal ?:P I mean really, how dare they not engage you in their ratting setups? Damn you CCP! Damn you and your PVE content! But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.04.14 11:17:00 - [74] Originally by: Wet Ferret Originally by: Kalintos Tyl 0.0 carebears will whine hard about removing of local in 0.0. Hwo they can isnta warp and cloack if someoen shows in suystem without lcoal ?:P I mean really, how dare they not engage you in their ratting setups? Damn you CCP! Damn you and your PVE content! Confirming that it is impossible to rat in a PvP setup
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.04.14 11:18:00 - [75] Originally by: Kalintos Tyl 0.0 carebears will whine hard about removing of local in 0.0. Hwo they can isnta warp and cloack if someoen shows in suystem without lcoal ?:P Won't somebody PLEASE think of the macro-ratters!!!
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2009.04.14 11:21:00 - [76] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Is the w-space template workable for 0.0? I think so. Players don't operate any differently in w-space than they do in 0.0. At least not the ones that are successful. W-space players get along just fine without local. I don't think that the gate structure of 0.0 will significantly change how the removal of local is applied to 0.0 vs. w-space, particularly with the continued existence of the galactic map and all of it's formidable information. You conveniently ignore the most important difference between w-space and k-space. Static content! It's much more than just stargates. You, of all people, should know how easy it is to find players in belts (and which belt they're at, even without scan probes). You also know that this would swing the pendulum far, far in favor of the attacker (the attacker being you, of course). But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2009.04.14 11:22:00 - [77] Originally by: Malcanis Confirming that it is stupid to rat in a PvP setup Fix'd Honestly, unless you're baiting, why the hell would you? But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
Spurty Caldari Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.04.14 12:20:00 - [78] removing local just blinds everyone, scanning doesn't work well enough to replace it. WH space is pretty fail as an example, it has much less than 50% the residency that 0.0 has. Most likely as its horrible to live in without local plus the fact its not worth the effort for those that need to just replenish their inventories of ships to pvp in. Get ready for empire to swell again, more so than ever before and people with low sec status to whine so much you can't find a forum without a page full of it as they can't run missions. Removing local = fast track to empty <WHERE EVER LOCAL LEFT SPACE>. Only a fool would stay to make isk. Originally by: Butter Dog I think you'll find that 10 seconds > 1 month
Br41n Pinky and the Brain corp	Posted - 2009.04.14 12:29:00 - [79] If they do a delay in 0.0 they should do the same in low-sec and high-sec systems. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Pinky: Gee, Brain. What are we going to do tonight? Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take over the world. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.04.14 12:39:00 - [80] Originally by: Wet Ferret Originally by: Malcanis Confirming that it is stupid to rat in a PvP setup Fix'd Honestly, unless you're baiting, why the hell would you? I rat in 0.0 with fittings that work for PVP because I want to be versatile and able to respond to threats and opportunities as they present themselves. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2009.04.14 12:52:00 - [81] Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri I rat in 0.0 with fittings that work for PVP because I want to be versatile and able to respond to threats and opportunities as they present themselves. Would you mine in a PvP fit too? Wouldn't want to get caught unprepared... Perhaps I should have added a disclaimer *yet I realize that no matter how stupid something is... in EVE, someone is out there doing it. (I'm just giving you a hard time btw. It's so hard not to troll these "change the game to further my agenda" threads) But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
Lonzo Kincaid Black Nova Corp KenZoku	Posted - 2009.04.14 13:02:00 - [82] Originally by: Bellum Eternus If there is a planet near a gate, you're usually warping to the planet to get a gate scan before you jump through, with or without local. people only scan the other gate when they see people in local, if the system is empty they'll just warp over to it. Without local it's gunna get tedious fast having to do it in every system. It'll probably be easier using a noob alt 2 jumps ahead, which is gunna suck at killboard padding via camps. ---------------------- Hey bro
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2009.04.14 13:14:00 - [83] Originally by: Bellum Eternus The people who aren't going to like the removal of local are the people who want it easy. The people who want to rat in complete safety. The people who want to mine unguarded. The people who want their alliance space as safe as sitting in Yulai somewhere. Compared to doing lvl 4's ratting is barely worth it in a few systems. If you have to setup a dedicated scout account to rat, its definetly not worth it. The smart and "skillful" people will buy a empire alt to make isk and keep their pvp char in the 0.0 "battlegrounds". Quote: In my opinion smaller gangs will actually have an easier time of it in 0.0 because the blob won't be able to find them as easily. Right now it is all too easy to know for sure where someone is and lock them down. With some careful flying a smaller gang could slip past a blob if local were removed. The blob will have plenty of scouts, and have a big advantage over a small gang. Quote: W-space players get along just fine without local. I don't think that the gate structure of 0.0 will significantly change how the removal of local is applied to 0.0 vs. w-space, particularly with the continued existence of the galactic map and all of it's formidable information. Lol. Quote: Too many players want the continued existence of their little cushy country club in space. No alliance worth it's salt will have a problem adapting. Everyone is so worried about how it's going to negatively affect them. Start thinking about how it's going to negatively affect everyone else as well, in addition to the positive advantages. Adapting: move your isk generating char to empire and do lvl4. Positive: my recon gang will be extremely overpowered. Negative: i wont actually live in 0.0 anymore just use it as a battleground. (The mega alliances might setup a intel network that makes it as safe as before). And yea this is my sig. Real PVP'ers only use f1.
Esmenet Gallente	Posted - 2009.04.14 13:15:00 - [84] Edited by: Esmenet on 14/04/2009 13:16:51 double And yea this is my sig. Real PVP'ers only use f1.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.04.14 13:58:00 - [85] Originally by: Bellum Eternus ...Additionally, some players are asking for all sorts of automated replacements for the local channel to substitute the functionality one for one. Not one for one. A limited replacement for several good reasons listed. Read. Originally by: Bellum Eternus If there is a planet near a gate, you're usually warping to the planet to get a gate scan before you jump through, with or without local. You didn't read the thread at all. ...
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.04.14 14:00:00 - [86] There's a whole lot of fear of change going on in this thread. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Ruze Ahkor'Murkon Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2009.04.14 14:05:00 - [87] Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri There's a whole lot of fear of change going on in this thread. That's part of game design. Despite what political activists have been touting for years, change is not always a good thing. Especially when it's dealing with a product that you enjoy and have supported for years. Game design is all about that. Some companies get it. Some companies don't. SOE, for instance, consistently tries to change their games in ways that are just contrary to their current audience. Bad marketing? Poor thought process? At what point is it too far? I personally don't think changing local in 0.0 would be going too far, but what if it is? If entire alliances broke apart because of the change, do you honestly feel it's a worthwhile one? Some players may not care if some other player gets screwed over, specifically if it's an older player who's spent the last several years supporting and nursing the game (because they liked it and enjoyed playing). Without those players, this game wouldn't exist today. I'm iffy. I don't see it as a big issue, but I do recognize that there's more to disagreement than someone trying to hold on to an i-win button. Originally by: 5pinDizzy Troll Score-o-Meter --------Failure----------\|\|\|-----------Succes------- 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1--0--1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.04.14 14:10:00 - [88] Originally by: Ruze Ahkor'Murkon At what point is it too far? I personally don't think changing local in 0.0 would be going too far, but what if it is? If entire alliances broke apart because of the change, do you honestly feel it's a worthwhile one? Wouldn't be the first time the 0.0 alliances have crumbled or been steamrolled effectively because of a game mechanic change. Anyway it happens all the time. 0.0 alliances die or fold at the rate of about 1 every 1-3 weeks. Putting 0.0 local into delayed mode might briefly increase this process, but it wouldn't really change the long term rate that much IMO.
Ruze Ahkor'Murkon Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2009.04.14 14:17:00 - [89] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Ruze Ahkor'Murkon At what point is it too far? I personally don't think changing local in 0.0 would be going too far, but what if it is? If entire alliances broke apart because of the change, do you honestly feel it's a worthwhile one? Wouldn't be the first time the 0.0 alliances have crumbled or been steamrolled effectively because of a game mechanic change. Anyway it happens all the time. 0.0 alliances die or fold at the rate of about 1 every 1-3 weeks. Putting 0.0 local into delayed mode might briefly increase this process, but it wouldn't really change the long term rate that much IMO. Agreed. Originally by: 5pinDizzy Troll Score-o-Meter --------Failure----------\|\|\|-----------Succes------- 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1--0--1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.04.14 14:20:00 - [90] Originally by: Ruze Ahkor'Murkon Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Ruze Ahkor'Murkon At what point is it too far? I personally don't think changing local in 0.0 would be going too far, but what if it is? If entire alliances broke apart because of the change, do you honestly feel it's a worthwhile one? Wouldn't be the first time the 0.0 alliances have crumbled or been steamrolled effectively because of a game mechanic change. Anyway it happens all the time. 0.0 alliances die or fold at the rate of about 1 every 1-3 weeks. Putting 0.0 local into delayed mode might briefly increase this process, but it wouldn't really change the long term rate that much IMO. Agreed. Thinking about it you could offer delayed local in exchange for a method of locking down corp/alliance assets such that 2 or more directors were required to release them and just about every alliance would gladly accept IMO. The exceptions being those (and we all know who they are) who depend on their sweatshop ratting pet alliances which rely on BACON-style apps to auto-hide from other players.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: 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.