EVE Search - [Issue] Nerf local

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)
Ausser Cybertech Industrials Agency	Posted - 2009.04.26 13:48:00 - [1] There were allready two threads on this topic, but they are older than 60 days and closed because of inactivity. So, once again: Please nerf local intel All regional chats (system, constellation and region) should have no visible list of players who are in system to prevent easy intel. The probing system can still be used for intel. If this is hard to implement because of some reason, consider just to change the client to not to draw this player list on the screen. So the information is still present in client but hidden from users. Abuse by external tools like BACON would still be possible, but could be fixed later. And please nerf local intel soon, not in five years.
Dariah Stardweller	Posted - 2009.04.26 15:55:00 - [2] I do not support this :)
Isaac Starstriker Amarr Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.04.26 16:02:00 - [3] lol try again... No support. --Isaac Isaac's Haul*Mart - Open
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2009.04.26 16:12:00 - [4] Until proper intel-gathering measures are implemented, I cannot support this. ----- Bloodmoney Incorporated is recruiting!
Bary OBama	Posted - 2009.04.26 16:14:00 - [5] Disagree.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.04.26 16:47:00 - [6] I support this. Better intell and scanning tools would be nice, but they are not required to make this change work. The Local list is a crutch leaned on by far too many pilots for the wrong reasons. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Windjammer Gallente	Posted - 2009.04.26 20:20:00 - [7] Strongly disagree. Utter rubish. Once again completely ignoring the realities that miners and other none hunting pilots face on a second by second basis. Windjammer
ITTigerClawIK Galactic Rangers Galactic-Rangers	Posted - 2009.04.26 21:39:00 - [8] i wouldnt mind anyone in a cov ops ship to be hidden untill they speak in local at least then i can actully scout covertly but yea this owuld be welcome to Sig space reclaimed in the name of me -courtesy of Tiggy ([email protected])
Ausser Cybertech Industrials Agency	Posted - 2009.04.26 22:14:00 - [9] Originally by: Windjammer Once again completely ignoring the realities that miners and other none hunting pilots face on a second by second basis. These people could place probes covering the gates and hit the scan button from time to time. It requires some effort and attention, and you dont get it for free. So it 'feels more real'. And best thing is: It will be difficult to place and maintain the probes using a macro program, so macro users are pretty nice screwed and will be hunted down more often.
Herschel Yamamoto Bloodmoney Incorporated	Posted - 2009.04.26 23:02:00 - [10] Originally by: Ausser Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Until proper intel-gathering measures are implemented, I cannot support this. What would be "proper intel-gathering" measures for you? The problem i can see here is: We will not get such "proper intel" because there is no need atm. And there is no need because of local. But we cannot remove local because there is no "proper intel".... Causality chain closed. So we will never get rid of fun and atmosphere breaking local untill we accept to live for a while without intel. Once local is gone we get better suited and balancable intel tools. "Proper intel tools" would largely duplicate the function of local, without it all being based on a stupid chat channel. One of the more interesting proposals I've heard along these lines(though still very much a first draft) is here, with some modifications I suggested here - empire-controlled space will give players intel access based on standings with the respective empires, player-controlled space will allow POSes to anchor scanning arrays that give you intel, and you'll be able to fit some sort of scanner module that gives you the same. It's more powerful than current local, but actually has requirements on use. And I don't regard this as a chicken/egg problem at all, though I will admit that I phrased my above post badly. I don't necessarily want the intel tools implemented before local is nerfed, though some might be, but they will need to be designed first, and ready to go. It should be a general swap of the two, all at once. ----- Bloodmoney Incorporated is recruiting!
Bary OBama	Posted - 2009.04.26 23:33:00 - [11] Originally by: Ausser It requires some effort and attention, and you dont get it for free. Yet you want effort free kills of ratters and miners. Just go ratting, it's about the same level of effort but you get more kills.
Cyprus Black Caldari Elitist Jerks Dara Cothrom	Posted - 2009.04.27 04:18:00 - [12] I'd use the thumbs down checkbox if I had one. Definitely not supported. I had a list of reasons why this is an obviously terribad idea, but I doubt the OP would understand. ______________ Some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn.
JanSVK	Posted - 2009.04.27 08:41:00 - [13] Originally by: Ausser Edited by: Ausser on 26/04/2009 22:22:22 Originally by: Windjammer Once again completely ignoring the realities that miners and other none hunting pilots face on a second by second basis. These people could place probes covering the gates and hit the scan button from time to time. It requires some effort and attention, and you dont get it for free. So it 'feels more real'. And best thing is: It will be difficult to place and maintain the probes using a macro program, so macro users are pretty nice screwed and will be hunted down more often. Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto Until proper intel-gathering measures are implemented, I cannot support this. What would be "proper intel-gathering" measures for you? The problem i can see here is: We will not get such "proper intel" because there is no need atm. And there is no need because of local. But we cannot remove local because there is no "proper intel".... Causality chain closed. So we will never get rid of fun and atmosphere breaking local untill we accept to live for a while without intel. Once local is gone we get better suited and balancable intel tools. You don't want local? Go to w-space! Current problems: 1, Probing in PVP is only usefull to find carebears in plexes and such. You can not probe ships without an Expanded Probe launcher (220 tf). It should be the other way around. 2, Hit the scan button from time to time? You have to be very very lucky to find a force recon, bomber, or any ship using cov-op cloak which is visible for like 1 second during an op taking hours. 3, Carebear ships have virtually no chance agains PVP ships, espetially miners and haulers. 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. Proper intel gathering suggestions: 1, auto reloading ship scanner 2, fof(friend or foe) or fou(fried or unknow) identification when using probes or ships scanner. 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).
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.04.27 09:08:00 - [14] Originally by: Ausser There were allready two threads on this topic, but they are older than 60 days and closed because of inactivity. So, once again: Please nerf local intel All regional chats (system, constellation and region) should have no visible list of players who are in system to prevent easy intel. The probing system can still be used for intel. If this is hard to implement because of some reason, consider just to change the client to not to draw this player list on the screen. So the information is still present in client but hidden from users. Abuse by external tools like BACON would still be possible, but could be fixed later. And please nerf local intel soon, not in five years. I'm pretty sure that CCP are already working on this and the holdup is more to do with designing a viable active intel replacement than anything else.
Lewyrus Jugis Modo Utopia Skunk-Works	Posted - 2009.04.27 11:12:00 - [15] Not supported. No alternative means for gaining similar-level intel. POS-scanners of some sort (that fill local for those who have enough high standing) could work, if they not tie it to sov (think about npc regions), but they would also give defenders a significant advantage. You "delayed-local-everywhere" guys play this game with local minimized, right? It could backfire, you know. How many times do you look at local without noticing it?
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.04.27 12:58:00 - [16] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 27/04/2009 13:00:07 Not supported. Nerf of Local would make indeed EvE 'more real'. Problem : Reality is not fun, and more a game become real, more he become harder, so less fun. A game must be a good compromise of difficulty and effort to please everyone, and Local permit it. Local is fine, period.
RedSplat RennTech	Posted - 2009.04.27 13:06:00 - [17] Infallible local Intel tool RUINS any pretense at stealth. Secretly MirrorGod. Apparently Originally by: CCP Mitnal I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting. Originally by: CCP Mitnal it does get progressively longer.
steave435 SniggWaffe	Posted - 2009.04.27 13:27:00 - [18] Definetly needed. Having local as an intel tool really makes no sense at all, mineing and ratting groups should just use their directional scanners combined with combat probes and actual scouts on gates. 1 combat probe dropped at max range (a few spread around system if the system is too big) will inform you of any new ships that appear.
Voltas Stormtide Shadow Company	Posted - 2009.04.27 14:35:00 - [19] Edited by: Voltas Stormtide on 27/04/2009 14:35:09 Having experienced the adrenaline rush of hunting for and being hunted in the local channel free environment of wh space, I fully support this implementation across at least 0.0, if not all of eve. There are the aforementioned problems assosiated with the resisdents of the systems struggling to get intel, but it is a two sided coin. This game is ultimately about teamwork and time and time again it has been proven that the side that works together best prevails. If this means better use of scouting and intel gathering so be it. In 0.0 this could include the use of tactical bubbles to slow down the approach of the enemy giving time to assess their numbers. I think there should be the facility while docked in station to switch to an external station camera to see what is outside - it would be very simillar to when you look at an object with the camera locked but free to rotate. Maybe no overview but the ships would reflect your current overview brackets. As is stands the directional scan is a bit weak, but i have heard other players propose some sort of active scan mode (consider what we have now as a passive mode) that would perform regualar "pings" of the area alerting the player to other ships in the vicinity. All in all I think some people will need to adapt their play style a little bit and stop treating eve as a single player game but it should do a lot to prevent the hordes of cloaking macro ravens in 0.0 cloaking before anyone gets a look in. 100% support
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.04.27 14:54:00 - [20] Originally by: Voltas Stormtide I think there should be the facility while docked in station to switch to an external station camera to see what is outside - it would be very simillar to when you look at an object with the camera locked but free to rotate. Maybe no overview but the ships would reflect your current overview brackets. This would be a beneficial change (and I still support "Recent Speakers" mode for 0.0 Local) ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
LaVista Vista Conservative Shenanigans Party	Posted - 2009.04.27 15:58:00 - [21] I love running around in wormholes while cloaked. Delayed local is great. However there's certainly a case to be made about the fact that new intel-gathering systems needs to be implemented before anything else.
Pian Shu SPORADIC MOVEMENT Cult of War	Posted - 2009.04.27 18:31:00 - [22] 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.
B0B Auer	Posted - 2009.04.27 19:41:00 - [23] Edited by: B0B Auer on 27/04/2009 19:45:34 Let's make it like in Wurm Online: If you're cloaked, you're "cloaked" in local too I like idea of scout a system withoung being in local any maybe you add a 60 seconds timer until you're in local if you don't recloak so you can launch probes.
Feilamya	Posted - 2009.04.27 21:21:00 - [24] Edited by: Feilamya on 27/04/2009 21:21:10 Maybe introduce delayed local gradually. start by with 0.0 only, or cloakers only...
Cyberman Mastermind	Posted - 2009.04.28 07:56:00 - [25] Originally by: Pian Shu Here is the risk. "Carebears" have cloaked protective fleet of recons or other nasties; Ha ha, yeah. The protectors are doing it for free, I assume? Or are the "carebears" going to work for free, so they can pay for their protection? I'm sure there's lots of people willing to sit around for hours, waiting until someone jumps them.
TraininVain	Posted - 2009.04.28 11:00:00 - [26] tup
Cipher7	Posted - 2009.04.28 11:49:00 - [27] If you want to nerf local, give all ships built in probe launcher, built-in probes. Otherwise no.
Pian Shu SPORADIC MOVEMENT Cult of War	Posted - 2009.04.28 19:04:00 - [28] Edited by: Pian Shu on 28/04/2009 19:07:16 Originally by: Cyberman Mastermind Ha ha, yeah. The protectors are doing it for free, I assume? Or are the "carebears" going to work for free, so they can pay for their protection? No, the point is now you can see immediately if the miner is a bait ship (because he'll have friends which show up in local). If you remove local as an infallible intelligence tool, you won't know if the miner is bait until his friends show up. The definition of risk is: Originally by: Wiktionary A possible, usually negative, outcome, e.g., a danger. With infallible knowledge of who is in the system, there is no risk. Without that knowledge, risk is achieved. Originally by: Cyberman Mastermind I'm sure there's lots of people willing to sit around for hours, waiting until someone jumps them. They do this now, it's called a gate camp.
Isaac Starstriker Amarr Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.04.28 19:08:00 - [29] 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 Isaac's Haul*Mart - Closed
Efrim Black Gallente Shadow Cadre	Posted - 2009.04.28 19:26:00 - [30] 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)
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
Solo Player	Posted - 2009.05.06 22:39:00 - [61] I'm a carebear. I avoid PvP. I detest local. If it's fun or useful is not relevant. It simply does not fit the game world so it needs to go.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.05.07 02:59:00 - [62] Sigh... ...
Gaia Devir	Posted - 2009.05.07 10:55:00 - [63] Edited by: Gaia Devir on 07/05/2009 10:57:34 Number of users in Local Chat ruins the game. At least in 0.0. Ruins all strategy. All pvp in EvE is based on local chat. Its the main source of information for a fleet commander. I dont have the right words to say it... but its very meta-game intel. When I play eve... I like to feel inmersed in a space ship universe and Local ruins it. It dosnt have a meaning. Where does this information comes to your character... jedi powers? Scanner and Probbing should do the work. You just need to add on the scanner if a ships has an user inside or not. Thats it. Dosnt have to say, who is the character or if he is friendly or not. For me, a player fully dedicated to pvp, Local chat intel is the worst thing in EvE.
Caldron Forge Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2009.05.11 16:14:00 - [64] I think this is a good Idea. Would make combat more interesting. Using ship scanners, Probes, or corps having system scanners at POS's would be a good substitute. only if you chat in local would you show up. Or if you are an outlaw.
Marzaris Onbarny	Posted - 2009.05.11 19:38:00 - [65] I dont support this, no change. WH space is fine with no local (fits into story and was planned that way) changing empire to that I disagree. Leave Known space alone.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.05.11 19:52:00 - [66] Originally by: Solo Player I'm a carebear. I avoid PvP. I detest local. This! Originally by: Gaia Devir For me, a player fully dedicated to pvp, Local chat intel is the worst thing in EvE. And This! ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Keitoshi Yamada Mjolnir Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.11 22:08:00 - [67] Fully supported. Delayed Local like W-Space would be AWESOME. It's safer in a lot of ways for both players and pirates... /aswell/ as more dangerous for both. Sure, we'd get less local chatter, but it wouldn't change highsec much, and it'd make lowsec easier for carebears to mine without having to worry about pirates as much. Sure, pirates could find them, but they'd have to probe them out. This would raise lowsec incentive to an almost high enough level to be worth it. Do this, and remove meta 0 loot from missions, and lowsec will be totally worth it. Giving us delayed local in all space makes military reconnaissance more of a job and less of something that's easily available. You'll actually need good pilots to recon, and the team with better recon will be able to sneak up on fleets that would normally outnumber them. Local chat should be used for occasional general chit-chat in highsec, for advertising contracts, or for showboating... Not as a spy tool. Delayed chat fixes this. Look at W-space. Sure, there are lots of pirates, but your odds of getting ganked are still lower. It changes the tactics on both sides. The only people who really lose with delayed local are the large fleet griefers that depend on local to blob everyone they see in local.
Hexor V I.M.M	Posted - 2009.05.12 09:47:00 - [68] Originally by: Zurin Arctus 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 Your a damn moron. You obviously have no experience with MacroRatters or people who are most likely using "bacon" if that crap is still around OR are in the category yourself. When you jump into a system and within 2 seconds the raven poofs off the scanner and cloaks that is total bull***. At that point it's impossible to kill and I am not bad*. To the carebears crying about not being able to tell when pirates are coming after you, start supporting better intel tools. But realize the same pirates also won't be able to see you in your precious local. At least when your rats MWD'd off of belts you could still kill them. OP supported, get local out of here. ____ YHBT
Blake Zacary Volatile Nature Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2009.05.12 11:09:00 - [69] Not supported.Just the thought of having to click every few seconds to check out local is mind numbing and boring.Lets make changes that make the game more fun and stop trying to do things that turns it more into a job ! Not to mention things like hunting down wartargets in empire would become virtually impossible. Undocking would give anyone outside the station too much of an advantage(especially if they were a cloaked gang). Plus it would probably result in a lot less systems being used in 0.0 as most would start ratting/mining in the dead end constellations with a scout giving them plenty of warning. Also if you use a system that is well traveled even by you're own corp/alliance you would have to repeatedly get safe everytime you pick a ship up on scan,since there is no way to tell wether it's a friend or foe.Same when you're traveling or scouting how could you properly hunt targets down ,there would be no more big roams you would get bored continually scanning and hunting down every scan hit within about 3 jumps (probably take a few hours to travel that as well,checking out every hit,especially if you had to get the ship on grid just to see if it's friendly or not)
Erika Bronz The Wyld Hunt Saints Amongst Sinners	Posted - 2009.05.12 12:49:00 - [70] Edited by: Erika Bronz on 12/05/2009 12:49:38 Originally by: ITTigerClawIK i wouldnt mind anyone in a cov ops ship to be hidden untill they speak in local at least then i can actully scout covertly but yea this owuld be welcome to what he said
Hardin Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2009.05.12 15:13:00 - [71] Not supported. If people think that removing local will help increase the incidence of PvP they need their heads examined. The majority of people playing EVE are risk averse, removing local will simply ensure that those risk averse players will do more to limit their exposure to risk. In other words they will stay docked or in POSes unless they really need to travel and when they do travel they will blob up even more than they do now to provide mutual protection... In busy systems the scanner is pretty useless for detecting potential inbound hostiles and the result will not be that more people will be caught in belts - but that less people will be in belts to start with... In my view the removal or local will actually damage PvP by reducing opportunities not enhance it... ----- Alliance Creation/Corp Expansion Services http://internetspacewars.blogspot.com/
Keitoshi Yamada Caldari Mjolnir Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.12 20:48:00 - [72] Originally by: Hardin Not supported. If people think that removing local will help increase the incidence of PvP they need their heads examined. The majority of people playing EVE are risk averse, removing local will simply ensure that those risk averse players will do more to limit their exposure to risk. In other words they will stay docked or in POSes unless they really need to travel and when they do travel they will blob up even more than they do now to provide mutual protection... In busy systems the scanner is pretty useless for detecting potential inbound hostiles and the result will not be that more people will be caught in belts - but that less people will be in belts to start with... In my view the removal or local will actually damage PvP by reducing opportunities not enhance it... This would damage it in some areas and enhance it in others, you are either blind to the truth behind how awesome it would be, or have all of your fun hunting these 'at-risk' people because it's super easy for you. Having it this way makes it more challenging for pirates, but also make it more safe for both. It won't lower PvP because most pirate gangs I run into have at least one member with combat probes, it would just raise necessity for mining gangs to have one aswell. Technically, this all makes life harder for the miners, not the pirates, because they have to counter probe to be safe. Pirates are already probing to find out /where/ people are, anyway. It's easier to probe for offense than it is defence. I'm also not saying we /remove/ local. I like delayed local. All of this also brings back more of "the unknown" to space. Sure, it'll /feel/ safer, but you won't be able to do a thing without be mad paranoid.... Instead of how it is now, where most don't even bother /trying/ to do anything, because it's too easy for one side. It needs to be balanced for both sides, without stupid security rules or anything. The best way to help this is by, instead of adding some lame mechanic that nerfs piracy in lowsec or some**, nerf local to be delayed, this puts both pirates and miners on an even playing surface. The current way local is... imho, it's cheating, and I'm not even saying this because I get ganked a lot. I use local as my hunting tool. There is something seriously wrong there. Originally by:** Blake Zacary Not supported.Just the thought of having to click every few seconds to check out local is mind numbing and boring.Lets make changes that make the game more fun and stop trying to do things that turns it more into a job ! Not to mention things like hunting down wartargets in empire would become virtually impossible. Undocking would give anyone outside the station too much of an advantage(especially if they were a cloaked gang). Plus it would probably result in a lot less systems being used in 0.0 as most would start ratting/mining in the dead end constellations with a scout giving them plenty of warning. Also if you use a system that is well traveled even by you're own corp/alliance you would have to repeatedly get safe everytime you pick a ship up on scan,since there is no way to tell wether it's a friend or foe.Same when you're traveling or scouting how could you properly hunt targets down ,there would be no more big roams you would get bored continually scanning and hunting down every scan hit within about 3 jumps (probably take a few hours to travel that as well,checking out every hit,especially if you had to get the ship on grid just to see if it's friendly or not) And I heavily disagree here, sure, some systems will /feel/ more empty, but overall system traffic will go up because less people will be scared to go out, and highsec traffic will probably lower slightly, spreading the EVE population out a bit. IMHO, if this were to happen, we'd see a lot of highsec corps move to lowsec because it won't be a useless, low-reward, suicide trip.
SpaceSquirrels	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:05:00 - [73] I support this. What other pvp game tells you the number of people and who is around? Death spam in local is one thing. However it takes away from the game having this. _________________________ I disagree...
Keitoshi Yamada Caldari Mjolnir Inc.	Posted - 2009.05.12 21:12:00 - [74] Originally by: SpaceSquirrels I support this. What other pvp game tells you the number of people and who is around? Death spam in local is one thing. However it takes away from the game having this. IT'S TRUE How awesome was it in UO getting snuck up on by a player-assassin in the woods?! You had NO idea he was in 'local'. I can't think of a single MMO that made it anywhere with openworld PvP and a list of everyone near you... Not saying that EVE isn't makin' it, it most definitely is, but instant local doesn't make sense, especially when you start getting out into lowsec and further... Maybe keep highsec instant to keep highsec wars good? This will also add a different form of risk, because no one's hidden in highsec, so suicide gankers wouldn't start ruling the world again, and wars could be fought the way they've always been fought... until you have to chase your targets into lowsec for a real fun game of can and mouse...
Hexor V I.M.M	Posted - 2009.05.13 03:29:00 - [75] Originally by: Hardin Not supported. If people think that removing local will help increase the incidence of PvP they need their heads examined. The majority of people playing EVE are risk averse, removing local will simply ensure that those risk averse players will do more to limit their exposure to risk. In other words they will stay docked or in POSes unless they really need to travel and when they do travel they will blob up even more than they do now to provide mutual protection... In busy systems the scanner is pretty useless for detecting potential inbound hostiles and the result will not be that more people will be caught in belts - but that less people will be in belts to start with... In my view the removal or local will actually damage PvP by reducing opportunities not enhance it... CVA carebear. "In busy systems the scanner is pretty useless for detecting potential inbound hostiles and the result will not be that more people will be caught in belts - but that less people will be in belts to start with..." You obviously do not know how to work your scanner well my friend. "In other words they will stay docked or in POSes unless they really need to travel and when they do travel they will blob up even more than they do now to provide mutual protection..." I'd rather this than every raven havign an 'I win' cloak.. Isn't caravans more what this game should have???

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.