EVE Search - Can we now have local 0.0 removed please?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Can we now have local 0.0 removed please?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 .. 14 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.23 02:58:00 - [361] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Razin Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Did you miss my point that the recon will simply bump the target out of alignment prior to tackling it or was that point invalid in some way? The 'point' about being bumped is banal, goes without saying, and applies to just about everyone playing EVE (aside from those who stay docked and 0.0 farmers) under current Local. With delayed 0.0 Local the farmers will have to accept some risk of this also happening to them. What was the point of mentioning this? I'd have thought the point was blatently obvious. Under the current syste you cannot get bumped out of alignment without at least knowing that there is a potential hostile in local. Under a system of no/delayed local and no cloaking/scanner changes you could be bumped out of alignment without having the slightest chance to detect your attacker, so it would apply in a different and more undefendable way with no local than it does currently. Are you following how this is relevant to a discussion about the different amounts of risk incurring ratting/mining with different local chat mechanics now? Your discussion method is extremely annoying. It's been said (and linked) numerous times in this thread and others on this subject that CCP devs consider scanning changes mandatory for delayed Local implementation. I have also mentioned, and I'll say it again, that some method of detecting a 'cloaked signature' and/or some other nerf to cov-ops cloaks will be needed. As well as some other things, like the ability to see what's on station grid when docked for example. Yet you feel the need to base your argument on a non-existent premise. ...
Herzog Wolfhammer	Posted - 2009.06.23 04:45:00 - [362] I fear the CCP will put in some "little" thing that will make it possible to detect a cloaked ship. And any little thing when being spammed by a blob totally becomes a big thing that completely destroys what the little thing was intended to give a "chance" at breaking. And low/null sec becomes an even bigger ghost town and the pirates consume more Vagisil over the lack of targets and "carebears" living in empire space.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.23 06:00:00 - [363] Edited by: Venkul Mul on 23/06/2009 06:04:52 Originally by: Razin Your discussion method is extremely annoying. It's been said (and linked) numerous times in this thread and others on this subject that CCP devs consider scanning changes mandatory for delayed Local implementation. But it has been said and argued plenty of times in this thread that scanner changes aren't needed or even that the directional scan should be changed in negative ways (less range and so on). So Neutrino is arguing against what is in this thread, not what the Dev say in another thread. This thread is made on the premise that importing the WH mechanic as it is in currently in WH space, without changes, would be the cure for all woes in EVE. And that is exactly what Neutrino, I and some other argue against. Look the thread title: "Can we now have local 0.0 removed please?" not "after a better scanning system is introduced".
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.23 07:33:00 - [364] Originally by: Venkul Mul This thread is made on the premise that importing the WH mechanic as it is in currently in WH space, without changes, would be the cure for all woes in EVE. And that is exactly what Neutrino, I and some other argue against. Look the thread title: "Can we now have local 0.0 removed please?" not "after a better scanning system is introduced". Yea, you pretty much quoted yourself into being wrong there. The thread, was about a macro program called H-Bot (Hunter Bot) for EVE, that uses local as one of its intel tools for when to warp and cloak the ratting ship. The thread wasn't made "on the premise that importing the WH mechanic as it is in currently in WH space, without changes, would be the cure for all woes in EVE.", in fact, the OP doesn't actually care HOW its done, or suggest such a thing, he simply asks for its removal. People like Neutrino have simply been dead set against it, no matter WHAT ideas were spitballed, because it makes it HARD for them to rat/mine/**********inspace. There have been SEVERAL ideas discussed in this threads 13 pages, ranging from increasing the rewards for 0.0, to scanner mechanics, to cloaking changes, ect, all of which when combine would likely balance the situation out and remove the all seeing eye. People like you selectively ignore, OR, don't even bother to read the thread and then leap in with your two cents (which in the end wind up being worth far less valued than 2 cents would be) because you don't want your easy mode ratting/mining disrupted, and don't care how much it would actually do for all the other aspects of EVE.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.23 08:39:00 - [365] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Venkul Mul This thread is made on the premise that importing the WH mechanic as it is in currently in WH space, without changes, would be the cure for all woes in EVE. And that is exactly what Neutrino, I and some other argue against. Look the thread title: "Can we now have local 0.0 removed please?" not "after a better scanning system is introduced". Yea, you pretty much quoted yourself into being wrong there. The thread, was about a macro program called H-Bot (Hunter Bot) for EVE, that uses local as one of its intel tools for when to warp and cloak the ratting ship. The thread wasn't made "on the premise that importing the WH mechanic as it is in currently in WH space, without changes, would be the cure for all woes in EVE.", in fact, the OP doesn't actually care HOW its done, or suggest such a thing, he simply asks for its removal. People like Neutrino have simply been dead set against it, no matter WHAT ideas were spitballed, because it makes it HARD for them to rat/mine/********inspace. There have been SEVERAL ideas discussed in this threads 13 pages, ranging from increasing the rewards for 0.0, to scanner mechanics, to cloaking changes, ect, all of which when combine would likely balance the situation out and remove the all seeing eye. People like you selectively ignore, OR, don't even bother to read the thread and then leap in with your two cents (which in the end wind up being worth far less valued than 2 cents would be) because you don't want your easy mode ratting/mining disrupted, and don't care how much it would actually do for all the other aspects of EVE. OP post: Originally by:** Escador taken from feature side of a EVE "help" tool: Current Version main features - Monitors local channel for hostiles - Warps to safe spot on ôHostile Spottedö and ôLow Tankö events - Optional alarm sound on events - Boosts shield or repaires armor when needed - Cloaks in safe spot and remains cloaked until local is safe - Turns on the active resistance modules when resumes hunting after cloak ++++++++++++ have a roam in deep 0.0 and you will find a endless amount of people using this or similar software.... please remove local 0.0 !!!! escador People like you must learn to read instead of shouting. OP post: there are bots in 0.0 It will be cured removing local Remove local You see any suggestion about alternate scanning systems? The OP is not claiming (indirectly) farming and RMT removing bots? Yes, saying that the OP claimed that it would "cure all the woes in EVE" is an exaggeration, but I hope someone in this thread is capable of recognizing it as a rhetoric form. Your "several" discussion sum up to: - remove local, we don't need any change to scanners, people will adapt; - remove local, then we will see; - my and some other position (and the cited Dev posts): first implement the new scanning system then, when it work without killing the server, remove local; - removing local without a change to scanners is the way to kill 0.0 (Neutrino). So Neutrino is dead set against removing local unless the scanner system change. Even if it is worded differently it is exactly my position.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.23 08:42:00 - [366] Originally by: Razin Your discussion method is extremely annoying. It's been said (and linked) numerous times in this thread and others on this subject that CCP devs consider scanning changes mandatory for delayed Local implementation. I have also mentioned, and I'll say it again, that some method of detecting a 'cloaked signature' and/or some other nerf to cov-ops cloaks will be needed. As well as some other things, like the ability to see what's on station grid when docked for example. And your discussion method is somewhat imprecise which is the cause of this simple misunderstanding. Plenty of the replies in this thread have supported wspace mechanics with no scanner changes at all. Your post about being aligned etc made no mention whatsoever of 'in the context of a scanner that can detect cloaked ships'. There have been many posts in this 13 page discussion considering a variety of mechanics in different contexts, if you make a post that contains no context of its own in reply to a post of mine, I will naturally assume you mean to follow on from the context I have outlined. Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator People like Neutrino have simply been dead set against it, no matter WHAT ideas were spitballed, because it makes it HARD for them to rat/mine/********inspace. It would appear you have not been following the thread closely enough. From this post: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1099728&page=10#277 Originally by:** Neutrino Sunset ... isn't this how combat in Eve should be? So apart from cloaking ships, no local gang combat, brilliant make it like this tomorrow I'll love it. ... <plus idea of how to change the scanner/cloaking mechanics to make it work for ratters/miners while still shafting macroers> To which your own reply was: Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator To add something to what your saying, part of the benefit I see is that this <good stuff about patrolling actually working now> ... I could even accept some of the subtle changes like recons being nondetected on grid, but available to scan at range (though scanning them down should be nigh impossible, kinda defeats the whole purpose). Thats not that bad a trade off to get rid of the all seeing eye that is local. And yes I have chopped your post slightly, this is purely for the purpose of brevity since I don't want to make another multipost reply, I trust I haven't twisted the meaning of your reply in the editing?
Wacktopia Infinity Miners Union Eych Four Eks Zero Ahr	Posted - 2009.06.23 10:31:00 - [367] Edited by: Wacktopia on 23/06/2009 10:33:53 I could live without local in 0.0 and I think most experienced players would probably feel the same. It would be nice to see a system scanner boost in line as some people are suggesting. I will say that local is really useful in 0.0 to actually get talking to the local alliances / corps but clearly the wonders of EveMail also make comms with sov owners possible. Whilst I wouldn't hate it if they did what you are suggesting I would certainly say that it would add a higher barrier to entry into 0.0 space - or a perceived barrier at least. There are a lot of other posts that concern the topic of "get players out of empire and into 0.0" and I wonder if CCP will find confliced interests between trying to encourage more players into nullsec whilst making it more challenging in the way you suggest? Edit: With regard to the OP, would adding a 5 minute delay on the list of members in local not acheive the effect of preventing macro programs from detecting other players in system and give you 5 minutes to prboe and kill them?
Anke Eissmann	Posted - 2009.06.23 11:14:00 - [368] Originally by: Escador taken from feature side of a EVE "help" tool: You know...just by quoting that text from the site you give a whole bunch of people who might not know where to find the tool the ability to find it within just a few seconds...
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.23 11:21:00 - [369] Originally by: Anke Eissmann Originally by: Escador taken from feature side of a EVE "help" tool: You know...just by quoting that text from the site you give a whole bunch of people who might not know where to find the tool the ability to find it within just a few seconds... You know, beside the moral reasons (I never used macro) I would not touch that program even with a pole long several AU for safety reasons. It seem too good to be true and when something is too good to be true it is some form of hoax. Probably it is full of troians and information gathering programs. It that is true and people install it, they get what they deserve.
Angeliena Caldari AWE Corporation Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.06.23 11:45:00 - [370] I just had a brain fart...and it smells like this: Whiff 1: Increase the risk for the macro ratter/miner in 0.0 by delaying local by up to session change timer i.e. 20-something seconds. This should give pvp players a chance to warp to a belt just as they appear in Local. I would think the average "jump, align, warp-to, target-player in belt" time is about equal to the session change timer. As a further tweak -the delay could be modified as follows: for NPC station 0.0 space and Sov 4.0 0.0 space the local delay could be lowered to only 20% of session change time, for Sov 3 and non station NPC 0.0 local delay could be equal to 40% of session change time, for Sov 2 local delay could be equal to 60% of session change time, for Sov 1 local delay could be equal to 80% of session change time, and for uncontested 0.0 space, local delay could be equal to the full duration of the session change timer. Whiff 2: Increase the reward by raising the maximum belt spawn for true 0.0 sec -0.5> to a full complement of five NPC battleships and for -0.5 to -0.25 to four NPC BS groups and for -0.25 0.0 to three NPC BS groups. The above changes should be easy to implement, they should not increase server impairment and the mix of increased risk would be balanced by increase reward so although more macro ratters would be killed, their increased return from killing better NPC spawns would result in a minimal change in net isk flow.
Swalesey	Posted - 2009.06.23 12:21:00 - [371] Sorry if it's been said, I stopped reading epic thread at page 6 :P but can't a macroer just make a repeat directional/probe scan programme to replace the local watching one? And wouldn't that then lead to many more calls on the servers and much more lag?
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.23 14:00:00 - [372] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset <lots of quoting> So, can we agree that there is a set of changes to directional scanner and cov-ops cloak (at a minimum) that would make delayed Local in 0.0 feasible? If so, perhaps the discussion can move on to minimum implementation requirements.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.23 15:04:00 - [373] I don't know, but let's try. Here is my prefered solution so far quoted from this previous post. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1099728&page=10#277 Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Make it so that a cov ops cloak only prevents a ship from being scanned when fitted to a cov ops frigate. You can fit a cov ops cloak on stealth bombers, recons and transports and those ships are invisible on grid and warp cloaked normally but they do show up on a directional scan. Modify the ranges at which ships can be picked up on the directional scanner. It's ******ed that a frigate can detect a titan at the same range as an industrial can detect a shuttle. Make it so that cloaked 'steathy' ships like stealth bombers recons and transports cannot be detected from as far away as non-stealthy ships. Remove cloaks from all other ships, especially T3 cruisers. Make cloaks and scanning work like this and then make local in 0.0 the same as in wspace, not delayed, recent speakers only.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.23 15:07:00 - [374] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Neutrino Sunset <lots of quoting> So, can we agree that there is a set of changes to directional scanner and cov-ops cloak (at a minimum) that would make delayed Local in 0.0 feasible? If so, perhaps the discussion can move on to minimum implementation requirements. Yes, but then the macro would be easily identified as making data base calls 23 hours straight. No human player will ever sit in a belt making scan calls for 23 hours straight (and even if you did, the temp ban they'd give you while they looked over the rest of your database calls would probably do you some good). The point is, the macro bots would then begin to stick out like a sore thumb.
Omarvelous Destry's Lounge Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2009.06.23 19:51:00 - [375] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Razin Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Did you miss my point that the recon will simply bump the target out of alignment prior to tackling it or was that point invalid in some way? The 'point' about being bumped is banal, goes without saying, and applies to just about everyone playing EVE (aside from those who stay docked and 0.0 farmers) under current Local. With delayed 0.0 Local the farmers will have to accept some risk of this also happening to them. What was the point of mentioning this? I'd have thought the point was blatently obvious. Under the current syste you cannot get bumped out of alignment without at least knowing that there is a potential hostile in local. Under a system of no/delayed local and no cloaking/scanner changes you could be bumped out of alignment without having the slightest chance to detect your attacker, so it would apply in a different and more undefendable way with no local than it does currently. Are you following how this is relevant to a discussion about the different amounts of risk incurring ratting/mining with different local chat mechanics now? Originally by: Omarvelous Originally by: baltec1 Or we can have local set like WH space and people can manualy scan as they currently do. He's right. If you're ratting/plexing in 0.0 you should have to scan manually to protect yourself. It's done in wormholes - no reason it can't be done in 0.0. For that matter I'd like to see it in all of the game - traps, and scouting would become a lot more fun. What about these two reasons? 1. Unlike wpsace scanning would provide no protection in 0.0 because hostiles do not need to use probes to scan for the belts, therefore you cannot scan for the probes and the scanner does not detect cloaked ships. 2. The game mechanic of having to manually spam the same button every 10 seconds for the entire time you are logged on is so little fun it makes it not worth playing the game. Important Internet Spaceship League Wants You
Reachok Amarr Tres Hombres	Posted - 2009.06.23 19:52:00 - [376] No local, asteroid belts spawn each day in a different place and have to to be scanned down, and the "Pilots in Space" map feature is returned to instant update. Roaming gangs can't just warp beacon to beacon until they see targets, which to me levels the playing field the best. No local has been discussed already above, no need to further flog that horse. And having the map instant update works for and against you depending on who you are. Roaming gangs see a system with targets, but once arriving they have to locate them. Said targets can periodically check the map and see if there are now more in local than they should have.
Omarvelous Destry's Lounge Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2009.06.23 20:01:00 - [377] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Razin Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Did you miss my point that the recon will simply bump the target out of alignment prior to tackling it or was that point invalid in some way? The 'point' about being bumped is banal, goes without saying, and applies to just about everyone playing EVE (aside from those who stay docked and 0.0 farmers) under current Local. With delayed 0.0 Local the farmers will have to accept some risk of this also happening to them. What was the point of mentioning this? I'd have thought the point was blatently obvious. Under the current syste you cannot get bumped out of alignment without at least knowing that there is a potential hostile in local. Under a system of no/delayed local and no cloaking/scanner changes you could be bumped out of alignment without having the slightest chance to detect your attacker, so it would apply in a different and more undefendable way with no local than it does currently. Are you following how this is relevant to a discussion about the different amounts of risk incurring ratting/mining with different local chat mechanics now? Originally by: Omarvelous Originally by: baltec1 Or we can have local set like WH space and people can manualy scan as they currently do. He's right. If you're ratting/plexing in 0.0 you should have to scan manually to protect yourself. It's done in wormholes - no reason it can't be done in 0.0. For that matter I'd like to see it in all of the game - traps, and scouting would become a lot more fun. What about these two reasons? 1. Unlike wpsace scanning would provide no protection in 0.0 because hostiles do not need to use probes to scan for the belts, therefore you cannot scan for the probes and the scanner does not detect cloaked ships. 2. The game mechanic of having to manually spam the same button every 10 seconds for the entire time you are logged on is so little fun it makes it not worth playing the game. I HATE how the forums have been eating my posts the past couple weeks I'm too annoyed to be eloquent. - Use drones to orbit your hulk to de-cloak ships trying to cloak bump you. - If your worried about current 0.0 being easy to find targets in static belts. If they're not in a cloaking ship then you can see them just as soon as they see you and you can warp out. If they're in a cloaked ship - they have a targeting delay that will screw them over if you're aligned. You should have friends able to defend you when you mine. End game industry should be a joint venture not a solo isk factory. - Complaining about having to spam scan is lol. Pvp in hostile space requires it already. Gate camping requires constant scanning in active systems as well. Fact is current mechanics allow for risk free solo-mining. You use local to warp and cloak without consequence. This needs to be changed. I have an alt that mines ina hulk in low sec and in wormhole space just fine using the tactics I mentioned above. Important Internet Spaceship League Wants You
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.23 20:27:00 - [378] Originally by: Reachok No local, asteroid belts spawn each day in a different place and have to to be scanned down, and the "Pilots in Space" map feature is returned to instant update. Roaming gangs can't just warp beacon to beacon until they see targets, which to me levels the playing field the best. No local has been discussed already above, no need to further flog that horse. And having the map instant update works for and against you depending on who you are. Roaming gangs see a system with targets, but once arriving they have to locate them. Said targets can periodically check the map and see if there are now more in local than they should have. As someone who makes his money in 0.0 belt ratting, I'd like to add this: If we change belts to spawn in random places once a day, and if it was required to scan them down (then player would create bookmark), we should make sure that the default ship scanner can do the job. It would be very upsetting to be forced to equip prove launchers just to do some farming. Also, since the scanning mechanic increases difficulty and time of 0.0 belt ratting, it inevitably cuts into the profit margin - which should not be lowered. NPCs would have to have higher bounties to compensate. Likewise, the removal of local god-mode cuts into the profits of 0.0 farmers - which already have a hard time competing with high sec level 4 missions. Increased risk of 0.0 operation should have increased reward - further increase in 0.0 belt spawn bounty, and slightly better chance of faction spawns (as fewer people dare to hunt) Overall, there's no need to hold back on improving 0.0 rewards, as it encourages more people to risk going there, which in turn creates more lively pvp dynamics. 0.0 belt rats are the main profitable resources that cannot be effectively locked down by alliance power blocks - thus they are open to any single player who is smart and patient.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.23 21:11:00 - [379] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Reachok It would be very upsetting to be forced to equip prove launchers just to do some farming. I agree with your entire post, save this bit here, because tbh, its very upsetting needing to fit a warp scrambler on a caldari ship to stop you warping off, cause all i wana do is a little killing. Do you see the comparison? No, its not the same, but at the same time, it IS the same. You equip the tools to do the job that needs to be done, no matter what. Ravens (the most common form of ratter) has ample space for a probe launcher in its high slots, as does the domi, and most BS currently used in ratting. The thing is, currently, those slots are almost always filled with cloak, salvager or tractor beam.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.23 21:40:00 - [380] believe me, if scrambler took 220 CPU, it would be very upsetting indeed to fit it Give me a belt scanner that uses less than 35 CPU and I won't complain (but any such changes require NPC bounty boost)
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.23 22:52:00 - [381] Originally by: Ephemeron believe me, if scrambler took 220 CPU, it would be very upsetting indeed to fit it Give me a belt scanner that uses less than 35 CPU and I won't complain (but any such changes require NPC bounty boost) Core Probe Launcher I: CPU:15 PG:1
Zamaranth Sesta	Posted - 2009.06.23 23:56:00 - [382] Originally by: EinaruS the "macro" does in fact, because it's a pixelbot that reacts to pixels and calls for some predefined macros. ccp i don't think can find those so only chance to eliminate them from game is make belts harder to find. Couldn't the server periodically put some new names into local even though no one actually entered? Wouldn't that have the bots constantly jumping for cover? I know that would make local somewhat less useful, but local would still perform many of its current intelligence functions letting you know who actually was there in addition to some dummy data. A player who clicked Info, might be able to quickly see enough clues that the supposed newcomer was a dummy entry.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.24 00:37:00 - [383] Originally by: Zamaranth Sesta Originally by: EinaruS the "macro" does in fact, because it's a pixelbot that reacts to pixels and calls for some predefined macros. ccp i don't think can find those so only chance to eliminate them from game is make belts harder to find. Couldn't the server periodically put some new names into local even though no one actually entered? Wouldn't that have the bots constantly jumping for cover? I know that would make local somewhat less useful, but local would still perform many of its current intelligence functions letting you know who actually was there in addition to some dummy data. A player who clicked Info, might be able to quickly see enough clues that the supposed newcomer was a dummy entry. I had an idea for local decoys - an anchorable object that would put the owner's face in local whether the owner is in system or not, until offlined or destroyed. That would have same impact and actually create interesting tactical situations, where you could deceive the enemy that doesn't rely on actual scouting info.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.24 13:55:00 - [384] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset I don't know, but let's try. Here is my prefered solution so far quoted from this previous post. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1099728&page=10#277 Originally by: Neutrino Sunset 1. Make it so that a cov ops cloak only prevents a ship from being scanned when fitted to a cov ops frigate. You can fit a cov ops cloak on stealth bombers, recons and transports and those ships are invisible on grid and warp cloaked normally but they do show up on a directional scan. 2. Modify the ranges at which ships can be picked up on the directional scanner. It's ******ed that a frigate can detect a titan at the same range as an industrial can detect a shuttle. Make it so that cloaked 'steathy' ships like stealth bombers recons and transports cannot be detected from as far away as non-stealthy ships. 3. Remove cloaks from all other ships, especially T3 cruisers. Make cloaks and scanning work like this and then make local in 0.0 the same as in wspace, not delayed, recent speakers only. I agree that some form of #1 is required; however items 2 and 3 are in the 'nice to have' category and don't really seem to balance anything with regards to delayed Local implementation. Especially since #2 makes a class of ships that is being nerfed by #1 more powerful, and #3 is already taken care of by #1.
Doddy Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2009.06.24 13:59:00 - [385] Real fix for this is for everyone to spam effected areas with afk chars tbh. Still Local in its current form is just plain stupid and needs changed regardless of macros.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.24 16:36:00 - [386] It's amazing the way people react when you threaten their comfort zone. Hey, who remembers when the nano-nerf was going to render the whole HAC class worthless?
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.24 17:13:00 - [387] Originally by: Malcanis It's amazing the way people react when you threaten their comfort zone. Hey, who remembers when the nano-nerf was going to render the whole HAC class worthless? Since CCP made the PvPers suffer with the nanonerf patch, it's time they put the hot iron to the Carebears. I want to hear them scream.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.24 19:17:00 - [388] Edited by: wtbrandomnamegenerator on 24/06/2009 19:17:34 Originally by: Malcanis It's amazing the way people react when you threaten their comfort zone. Hey, who remembers when the nano-nerf was going to render the whole HAC class worthless? Nano nerf didn't turn out as bad as it could have, and thats what people have to realize: The nano nerf didn't kill pvp like predicted (though i do miss my fast ships), and this, will not kill 0.0 either. PVP now no longer consists of orbiting another ship for 10 minutes while you 15 dps slowly wears them down, there are more actual forced engagements, and HAC's actually die. Working as intended. With a local nerf, ratting, mining, ect, will consist of actually putting yourself in danger, and fitting a cloak on your ship while ratting won't mean constant safety is assured, and ratters will actually be put at risk. Will work as intended.
steveid Viziam	Posted - 2009.06.24 19:55:00 - [389] The only thing that bthers me about removing local is the social aspect. Could we have region local instead? Its good to be able to see someone as you pass and give them a wave be they friendly or not.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.06.24 20:01:00 - [390] Originally by: steveid The only thing that bthers me about removing local is the social aspect. Could we have region local instead? Its good to be able to see someone as you pass and give them a wave be they friendly or not. Agreed. It shouldn't be removed, just set to Recent Speakers mode. Waves can be thrown just as always. o/ ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 .. 14 :: 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.