EVE Search - [Issue] Nerf local

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Issue] Nerf local

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Drake Draconis Minmatar Shadow Cadre Worlds End Consortium	Posted - 2009.04.28 19:51:00 - [31] Edited by: Drake Draconis on 28/04/2009 19:51:50 Edited by: Drake Draconis on 28/04/2009 19:51:08 Originally by: Efrim Black Originally by: Isaac Starstriker You want me to support Local changes? Change how we gather intel then. Therein lies the problem, cloaked ships would become the next overpowered ship. Then you'll all demand that they be nerfed. Thus nerfing them into pointlessness. So until you come up with a better way for supplying intel, I won't support any changes to local. (Directional scanner doesn't count in its current form). --Isaac 1. Cloaked Signature. Impossible to pin down, but shows up faintly on the combat probes. It won't give away a cloaked ships actual location, but it will give anyone with the nerve to bring a scout the knowledge someone could be peeking in on them. 2. Thus far, the complaint has been intel tools, but I firmly believe that the current intel tools are fine, if actually put into practice. Add 1 signature for cloaked ships, and I'm sold. Otherwise, no support. (And thats hard for me since I really really want to see this) agreed... provided A: Covert Ops Cloaks are immune due to the obvious fact they are uh... Covert ops. B: Other Cloaks are giving off an indication of a presence but only that they know your there but not where. Covert Ops can't be put on just any ship, only those that are allowed to use them... and require training of said ship and unit. I Feel they should continue to have that special ability on them. Much like your metaphorical navy seal attitude. /me in before anti-cloak whiners ========================= CEO of Shadow Cadre http://www.shadowcadre.com =========================
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.04.28 20:35:00 - [32] Originally by: Drake Draconis Originally by: Isaac Starstriker You want me to support Local changes? Change how we gather intel then. Therein lies the problem, cloaked ships would become the next overpowered ship. Then you'll all demand that they be nerfed. Thus nerfing them into pointlessness. So until you come up with a better way for supplying intel, I won't support any changes to local. (Directional scanner doesn't count in its current form). --Isaac 1. Cloaked Signature. Impossible to pin down, but shows up faintly on the combat probes. It won't give away a cloaked ships actual location, but it will give anyone with the nerve to bring a scout the knowledge someone could be peeking in on them. 2. Thus far, the complaint has been intel tools, but I firmly believe that the current intel tools are fine, if actually put into practice. Add 1 signature for cloaked ships, and I'm sold. Otherwise, no support. (And thats hard for me since I really really want to see this) agreed... provided A: Covert Ops Cloaks are immune due to the obvious fact they are uh... Covert ops. B: Other Cloaks are giving off an indication of a presence but only that they know your there but not where. Covert Ops can't be put on just any ship, only those that are allowed to use them... and require training of said ship and unit. I Feel they should continue to have that special ability on them. Much like your metaphorical navy seal attitude. /me in before anti-cloak whiners This comprimise has merit. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Thresh Avery Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.04.29 04:51:00 - [33] Originally by: JanSVK 3, long ago I suggested proxi sensors/probes: you drop probe like a mobile disruptor buble that automaticly relays you info about any ship passing through it's scan range(200 km). Now that's a brilliant idea...
JanSVK	Posted - 2009.04.29 10:12:00 - [34] Originally by: Pian Shu Edited by: Pian Shu on 27/04/2009 18:32:04 Originally by: JanSVK 4, Show me the risk in this situation for the PVPers: Carebears mining/ratting in system. Single PVPer cop-op with covert cyno sneaks into system and checks out the targets (no local, ship cloaked = no way to know for the carebears), PVPer opens covert-cyno his gang jumps in in bombers/Recon, ect.. (no local, ships cloaked = no way to know for the carebears). PVPers own the carebears. Here is the risk. "Carebears" have cloaked protective fleet of recons or other nasties; hunting fleet jumps in and attempts to kill "easy" target, gets free trip to fresh clone instead. Hunters think twice next time. You just suggested that the carebears have to bring in a considerable force/blob of pilots to just sit there and sit there for hours and hours just in case something MIGHT happen. Also with the barges having a paper tank how could you possibly defend agains a hit and run attack (bombs/torp alphastrike) that takes ony a few seconds to execute with the attackers having plenty of time to set it up without having a logistics or other ship perma-repping the barges?
Pian Shu SPORADIC MOVEMENT Cult of War	Posted - 2009.04.29 18:41:00 - [35] Originally by: Cyberman Mastermind It may be hard to believe but miners mine ore because they need the minerals for production or ISK. Also if you setup a bait you do it because you know there are targets roaming around who notice it and I don't know about you but a mining op running while hostile are around would look very suspitious for me. You're missing the whole point. It still adds risk, because you don't know that your target is alone. Whether or not he is actually alone is absolutely not the point. I think a local channel that tells you who is in your system without fail is the absolute stupidest idea ever. Pilot 1: "I've felt a disturbance in the force. It's as if a dozen ships jumped into my system at once and then were suddenly a threat to me" Pilot B: "Yeah, that's just local; better dock."
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2009.04.30 04:31:00 - [36] Originally by: Pian Shu I think a local channel that tells you who is in your system without fail is the absolute stupidest idea ever. Uh huh. A game with a stupid feature like that couldn't possibly last very long. And certainly not six years or more... Hmm, maybe it isn't that big of a deal afterall. But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
JanSVK	Posted - 2009.04.30 08:32:00 - [37] Originally by: Pian Shu Originally by: Cyberman Mastermind It may be hard to believe but miners mine ore because they need the minerals for production or ISK. Also if you setup a bait you do it because you know there are targets roaming around who notice it and I don't know about you but a mining op running while hostile are around would look very suspitious for me. You're missing the whole point. It still adds risk, because you don't know that your target is alone. Whether or not he is actually alone is absolutely not the point. I think a local channel that tells you who is in your system without fail is the absolute stupidest idea ever. Pilot 1: "I've felt a disturbance in the force. It's as if a dozen ships jumped into my system at once and then were suddenly a threat to me" Pilot B: "Yeah, that's just local; better dock." You too . What prevents you from opening the map and checking the number of pilots in system in the last 30 minutes? And you know if the target is alone. Pilot 1: "I've found a carebear mining op." Pilot 2: "Wait it could be a trap!!" Pilot 1: "Checking map ... situation a: "10 ships on scan, average number of pilots in system in the last 30 mins 12. Nope it is note. Opening covert cyno. Jump in." situation b: "10 ships on scan, average number of pilots in system in the last 30 mins 40. It is a trap!!!! X up we need numbers!!! They won't know what hit them. Pilot 2: "ok."
Pian Shu SPORADIC MOVEMENT Cult of War	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:00:00 - [38] Originally by: JanSVK You too Wink. What prevents you from opening the map and checking the number of pilots in system in the last 30 minutes? And you know if the target is alone. You're right, lets get rid of that too ... but at least that's a little more iffy than a smack-dab-in-your-face list. Originally by: Wet Ferret Originally by: Pian Shu I think a local channel that tells you who is in your system without fail is the absolute stupidest idea ever. Uh huh. A game with a stupid feature like that couldn't possibly last very long. And certainly not six years or more... Hmm, maybe it isn't that big of a deal afterall. This is such a ridiculous statement I won't give it more than this derisive mention. Your logic needs work.
Dzil Tritanium Science and Research	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:20:00 - [39] Personally, I like delayed local. Maybe 15 minutes.
Jaina Proudmoar School of Applied Knowledge	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:22:00 - [40] Delayed local for a period of time depending on your ship size.

Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.04.30 17:52:00 - [41] Originally by: Dzil Personally, I like delayed local. Maybe 15 minutes. Delayed local, whether by time or ship size strongly benefits the hunter/roamer/invader and penalizes locals/ratters/minders/defenders. "Recent Speakers" mode is a better solution and works equally for those already in a system and those who are jumping in. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Chinwe Rhei Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:16:00 - [42] Edited by: Chinwe Rhei on 30/04/2009 18:23:32 I am against this proposal right now as it makes finding the target you want to pursue (for example enemy militia or your war targets) pretty much impossible. Having to be in the same grid as someone to know if you want to fight him or not is absolutly ridiculous. The only people who want this are killboard-*****s who don't care who they're engaging because they have no tactical or strategic objectives to their conflicts. Also there's a huge difference between wh-systems where everything needs to be probed and you're pretty safe if you're on your toes, and k-systems where you have fixed things such as stations and belts, where the attacker would have a huge advantage. At the very minimum before this can be implemented you need to: 1) have a way for people in stations to scan the outside grid 2) change asteroid belts so you can't simply jump someone in a couple of seconds (as a suggestion, make asteroid belts like cosmic anomalities, you can detect them with 1 probe or the onboard scanner (maybe having a survey scanner gives a scan time/range bonus to the onboard scanner to make it easier for miners ?), but you do need to scan them first - no more right click warp to them). 3) probing for ships with combat probes and directional scanner gives you pilot information (alliance/corporation/sec status - preferably early in the scan for probes, not when you get a warpable hit).
Karentaki Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2009.04.30 18:46:00 - [43] Edited by: Karentaki on 30/04/2009 18:47:59 I think in order to consider this situation fairly we need to stop putting the onus on people to explain why the idea is so much better than the current system while everyone else quote-snipes them, and instead go for a reasoned debate as to the merits of each system, preferably avoiding subjective generalisations such as 'More fun' or 'Unfair'. Here are a few to get you started: Instant Local: - Makes the game safer for players who want to avoid PvP - Already in game, so no development time needed - Helps war targets find each other Recent Speakers Local: - Realistic - Allows cloaking ships to actually be invisible - Introduces more opportunities for PvP - Proven to work in W-Space - Makes scouting actually require some skill EDIT: Just realised I was an idiot when quoting someone. Quote: EVE is like a sandbox with landmines. Deal with it.
shi'ako	Posted - 2009.04.30 19:01:00 - [44] If their is a faint sig added for cloaked ships, id be 90% sold. Not sure about the cloak/cov ops cloak argument. A way to know whats outside the station before you undock, would i think be needed though if local was finally fix'd. What about a gate activation warning if u hold Sov3+ in a system to all alliance members? or is that protecting those carebear 0.0 players to much still?
B0B Auer	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:37:00 - [45] Edited by: B0B Auer on 01/05/2009 11:38:23 Edited by: B0B Auer on 01/05/2009 11:37:35 Originally by: shi'ako What about a gate activation warning if u hold Sov3+ in a system to all alliance members? or is that protecting those carebear 0.0 players to much still? Very nice idea but I still think cov ops, recon ships, black ops and this cloak transporter should be able to pass such gates without a warning. About the cov ops cloak: you can't warp with activated normal cloak so you're forced to be in local for some seconds every time you warp. ps: sorry for my bad english
Jason Edwards Internet Tough Guy	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:51:00 - [46] Wormspace for 1 is understandable. Whatever. Creating a 5-10 second delay just to lower lag a bit wouldnt hurt at all. It would at least keep you on your toes slightly more. But local itself just cant change. Sorry. In my interceptor there are many systems which I go through where the 30 second session timer from jumping into the new system. Jumping into the next one is still in effect; after warping to the next gate. If local got delayed beyond that. Where it would be legitimately possible for pilots to not make it on the list at all. Then that would be horrible. ------------------------ To make a megathron from scratch, you must first invent the eve universe. ------------------------ Life sucks and then you get podded.
B0B Auer	Posted - 2009.05.01 11:59:00 - [47] Originally by: Jason Edwards Wormspace for 1 is understandable. Whatever. Creating a 5-10 second delay just to lower lag a bit wouldnt hurt at all. It would at least keep you on your toes slightly more. But local itself just cant change. Sorry. In my interceptor there are many systems which I go through where the 30 second session timer from jumping into the new system. Jumping into the next one is still in effect; after warping to the next gate. If local got delayed beyond that. Where it would be legitimately possible for pilots to not make it on the list at all. Then that would be horrible. right that's why delayed local would suck
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.05.01 12:37:00 - [48] Originally by: B0B Auer right that's why delayed local would suck Delayed Local would suck. Recent Speakers Local would rock. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
B0B Auer	Posted - 2009.05.01 15:02:00 - [49] Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Originally by: B0B Auer right that's why delayed local would suck Delayed Local would suck. Recent Speakers Local would rock. maybe but I would like Recent Speakers Local for cloaks only.
Nur AlHuda Callide Vulpis	Posted - 2009.05.01 17:57:00 - [50] I support this idea couse using local as intel is bad. As soon as someone hostile jumps to a system anybody in war with the target using local can imdiately dock in station evading any possible causalities.

Becq Starforged Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.05.01 21:42:00 - [51] Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Until proper intel-gathering measures are implemented, I cannot support this. This. No support until then. -- Becq Starforged The Flame of Freedom Burns On!
Wrhaistek Zhelocomeir	Posted - 2009.05.02 03:21:00 - [52] Definitely do not support this idea. Go to w-hole space if you want a nerfed local.
Mulura Need A Corp Name	Posted - 2009.05.02 04:37:00 - [53] Originally by: Karentaki Edited by: Karentaki on 30/04/2009 18:47:59 I think in order to consider this situation fairly we need to stop putting the onus on people to explain why the idea is so much better than the current system while everyone else quote-snipes them, and instead go for a reasoned debate as to the merits of each system, preferably avoiding subjective generalisations such as 'More fun' or 'Unfair'. Here are a few to get you started: Instant Local: - Makes the game safer for players who want to avoid PvP - Already in game, so no development time needed - Helps war targets find each other - Can Help PVPer's to find PVP Recent Speakers Local: - Allows cloaking ships to actually be invisible - Introduces more opportunities for PvP - Proven to work in W-Space - Makes scouting actually require some skill EDIT: Just realised I was an idiot when quoting someone. Fixed for ya. Having deyaled local, wont be more realistic (wait we have stargates in real life?), It has ALREADY been said that the stargates provide the local list (lore wise/techincal). Most pvp I have done has been done with the help of local, to actually know theres targets in the system, instead of using a probe launcher (to lower my dps, which already is quite pathetic). I Miss My Hull
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.05.02 04:44:00 - [54] Edited by: Santiago Fahahrri on 02/05/2009 04:45:17 Originally by: Mulura Having deyaled local, wont be more realistic (wait we have stargates in real life?), It has ALREADY been said that the stargates provide the local list (lore wise/techincal). It has already been discredited that the stargates provide the local list as pilots who arrive in-system via wormholes and cynos - NOT the gates - show up in the local list. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
B0B Auer	Posted - 2009.05.02 10:30:00 - [55] Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Edited by: Santiago Fahahrri on 02/05/2009 04:45:17 Originally by: Mulura Having deyaled local, wont be more realistic (wait we have stargates in real life?), It has ALREADY been said that the stargates provide the local list (lore wise/techincal). It has already been discredited that the stargates provide the local list as pilots who arrive in-system via wormholes and cynos - NOT the gates - show up in the local list. right! and if you fly into a wh system you read something about a beacon for the local chat.
Agent Known Apotheosis of Virtue	Posted - 2009.05.03 07:07:00 - [56] Originally by: Wrhaistek Zhelocomeir Definitely do not support this idea. Go to w-hole space if you want a nerfed local. This.
Simokon	Posted - 2009.05.03 13:28:00 - [57]
JanSVK	Posted - 2009.05.03 15:13:00 - [58] Originally by: Karentaki Edited by: Karentaki on 30/04/2009 18:47:59 I think in order to consider this situation fairly we need to stop putting the onus on people to explain why the idea is so much better than the current system while everyone else quote-snipes them, and instead go for a reasoned debate as to the merits of each system, preferably avoiding subjective generalisations such as 'More fun' or 'Unfair'. Here are a few to get you started: Instant Local: - Makes the game safer for players who want to avoid PvP - Already in game, so no development time needed - Helps war targets find each other Recent Speakers Local: - Realistic - Allows cloaking ships to actually be invisible - Introduces more opportunities for PvP - Proven to work in W-Space - Makes scouting actually require some skill EDIT: Just realised I was an idiot when quoting someone. My turn: Instant Local: - Makes the game safer for players who want to avoid PvP giving them a real chance of survival when paying attention by giving them a time window to escape certain death. - Already in game, so no development time needed and been working for years and the game is still a success. - Helps all PVPers to find each other. You warp into system and instantly know if there is something to kill and don't need to spend time finding out if the ships on scanner are targets. - Helps alliances to effectivelly defend their space from invaders and protecting vulnerable carebear operations vital for their survval. Recent Speakers Local: - EVE is a game with its own rules. Every rule and mechanic in game is CCPs decision even if they are not realistic. - Allows cloaking ships to actually be invisible and gang carebears easier. - Introduces more opportunities to gank people - You can not compare W-Space with K-Space. - With current probing system you anyway can only find someone if he is long enough on 1 spot (carebear/camp/afk) which introduces more static PVP. - Makes scouting actually require some skill - Dramatically increasing the risk for carebears with no reward as compensation. - No way to know for sure if the ships on scanner is friend or foe till on same grid.
Fille Balle TachyonTubbies Dark Taboo	Posted - 2009.05.04 18:51:00 - [59] NO! No support for you. Two reasons: 1. I don't want to bring a prober everytime I go on a roam 2. I don't want to have a probe launcher fitted to my ratting ships Local is a benefit to both attackers and defenders. It's not like it favours anybody.
Zurin Arctus	Posted - 2009.05.05 20:09:00 - [60] Edited by: Zurin Arctus on 05/05/2009 20:15:29 Not supported. Crawl back under your bridge, troll. If you can't catch people now, it's not local's fault- you are just bad. Having no local, or 'recent speakers' local (which is functionally the same as no local) would make everything in the game more arduous and time-consuming than it is already, and chain people to their directional scanners. Happily, idiots have been arguing that we should get rid of local for ages, and for just as long the community has reviled and ignored them. edit: added more vitriol



Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: 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.