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

Check My IP Information

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)
Escador Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:37:00 - [1] 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
dellie Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:38:00 - [2] this indeed is getting annoying, sort this out already!!
Leaving Eve Boo Hoo Federation	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:40:00 - [3] Originally by: dellie this indeed is getting annoying, sort this out already!! yes, i am also bored of hearing this particular whine.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:40:00 - [4] This product seems excellent, is it endorsed by CCP?
Awesome Possum Insert Obscure Latin Name	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:43:00 - [5] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti This product seems excellent, is it endorsed by CCP? Progs/addons are not allowed. I bet OP uses 'em though, petitioned! ♥ Wreck Disposal Services
CommmanderInChief Comply Or Die	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:50:00 - [6] which tool BACON?
baltec1 Antares Shipyards Hoodlums Associates	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:52:00 - [7] Originally by: CommmanderInChief which tool BACON? Can I have an egg with mine please.
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam Exalted.	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:52:00 - [8] It's amusing, every time I travel through the Drone Regions there's 2-3 ravens belonging to the same Solar Wing corp (of about 90 members) in every system. Soon as you enter local they safespot and cloak, no chance of catching em. If the hourly Jump Freighters going past their LXQ pipe are any indication, I'd say they were making a good 10bil/day from it - Contagious -
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:55:00 - [9] Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 16/06/2009 20:56:57 Originally by: Rawr Cristina It's amusing, every time I travel through the Drone Regions there's 2-3 ravens belonging to the same Solar Wing corp (of about 90 members) in every system. Soon as you enter local they safespot and cloak, no chance of catching em. Bingo we have a winner, Drone regions is full of this, 1 guy in local with 5 alts (all named Mark Johnson, Mark Jimson etc <--names are not correct but you get the idea) all in ravens and all warp, safespot and cloak when our scout enters.
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.16 20:58:00 - [10] So you are saying they make 10B/day with 90 members all macro'ing? With lvl 2 missions they would probably earn more.

Khorin D'tael Caldari D'tael Contracts	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:01:00 - [11] This wouldn't happen in wormholes. It's also said that macro ratters rent space off the bigger alliances so it's not just them that benifit from it.
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam Exalted.	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:07:00 - [12] Originally by: Furb Killer So you are saying they make 10B/day with 90 members all macro'ing? With lvl 2 missions they would probably earn more. I was trying to be realistic, what with the inefficency of macros, cost of accounts and having to haul drone compounds all over the place, not to mention having to safespot every time someone enters local I would imagine they'd only be making on average 5mil/hour per bot But even that adds up.
Avoida	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:18:00 - [13] Originally by: Rawr Cristina It's amusing, every time I travel through the Drone Regions there's 2-3 ravens belonging to the same Solar Wing corp (of about 90 members) in every system. Soon as you enter local they safespot and cloak, no chance of catching em. If the hourly Jump Freighters going past their LXQ pipe are any indication, I'd say they were making a good 10bil/day from it So figure out what low sec systems their JF's use and go catch them there. I'd bet you money it's Frulegur as nearly every drone region inhabitant uses that one.
Khorin D'tael Caldari D'tael Contracts	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:26:00 - [14] Originally by: Avoida Originally by: Rawr Cristina It's amusing, every time I travel through the Drone Regions there's 2-3 ravens belonging to the same Solar Wing corp (of about 90 members) in every system. Soon as you enter local they safespot and cloak, no chance of catching em. If the hourly Jump Freighters going past their LXQ pipe are any indication, I'd say they were making a good 10bil/day from it So figure out what low sec systems their JF's use and go catch them there. I'd bet you money it's Frulegur as nearly every drone region inhabitant uses that one. Good idea since pilots with JF's never use POS's or an NPC station to jump to and from!
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:26:00 - [15] Originally by: Avoida So figure out what low sec systems their JF's use and go catch them there. I'd bet you money it's Frulegur as nearly every drone region inhabitant uses that one. Because catching a jump freighter is so easy when it jumps to a pos or a station. You think their jump freighters are using this helper tool too??
Cyprus Black Caldari 4 wing Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:33:00 - [16] I'd support local being removed from 0.0 if we had something else to replace it.
Pnandor	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:41:00 - [17] EVE want an easy-radar fashion as local! I think the Corporation & Alliance will lose the control of their systems if local disappearance, They want have the control over everything in their audit and to reduce all to the center for those who do not join in a Corporation & Alliance. They don't welcome any maverick by doing mining work or do assignments in their system. I instead of local it ahould be more radar scan and probe scan as EVE game mechanic should be!
Shaemell Buttleson Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:42:00 - [18] Before anyone starts saying it would give an unfair asvantage against the ratters think again because scouts would have to check a whole system to see if anyones in the system and there would be more chance of a roaming gang being caught out by another camp etc.
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:43:00 - [19] you cant justy say get rid of local you have to come up with something to replace intel gathering for normal ratters like myself. op is on the right lines wrong way to go about it JOIN FOFF NOW CHAT CHANNEL FOR MORE INFO
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:46:00 - [20] Automatically refreshing scanner to replace local so that anyone comes withing 15 AU you see them, done. Simple

Epegi Givo Amarr Moral Equivalent Of War	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:46:00 - [21] Fix: inty goes to a belt, logs out. leave local and wait a bit. then inty pilot logs back in and should appear in the belt. If the ratter was ratting away in that belt then he will be aligning for warp. Lock and disrupt him immediately, and bring in allies to finish him off. if he wasn't ratting there then try the next belt. This also works for Hictors. ------------------------------------- My other alt is a Ferrari
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:48:00 - [22] macro is getting out of hand. also RMT seem to be getting out of hand to
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:49:00 - [23] Originally by: Epegi Givo Fix: inty goes to a belt, logs out. leave local and wait a bit. then inty pilot logs back in and should appear in the belt. If the ratter was ratting away in that belt then he will be aligning for warp. Lock and disrupt him immediately, and bring in allies to finish him off. if he wasn't ratting there then try the next belt. This also works for Hictors. Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah
Escador Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:49:00 - [24] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 16/06/2009 21:47:15 Automatically refreshing scanner to replace local so that anyone comes within 15 AU you see them, done. Simple correct!
Shaemell Buttleson Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:49:00 - [25] Originally by: Epegi Givo Fix: inty goes to a belt, logs out. leave local and wait a bit. then inty pilot logs back in and should appear in the belt. If the ratter was ratting away in that belt then he will be aligning for warp. Lock and disrupt him immediately, and bring in allies to finish him off. if he wasn't ratting there then try the next belt. This also works for Hictors. FFS are you seriously suggesting logon traps are the answer?
baltec1 Antares Shipyards Hoodlums Associates	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:51:00 - [26] Originally by: Armoured C you cant justy say get rid of local you have to come up with something to replace intel gathering for normal ratters like myself. op is on the right lines wrong way to go about it Use your directional scanner.
Epegi Givo Amarr Moral Equivalent Of War	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:53:00 - [27] Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson Originally by: Epegi Givo Fix: inty goes to a belt, logs out. leave local and wait a bit. then inty pilot logs back in and should appear in the belt. If the ratter was ratting away in that belt then he will be aligning for warp. Lock and disrupt him immediately, and bring in allies to finish him off. if he wasn't ratting there then try the next belt. This also works for Hictors. FFS are you seriously suggesting logon traps are the answer? Yeah. They cheat, we cheat.
Viktor Fyretracker Caldari Fyretracker Heavy Industries	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:54:00 - [28] while i dont do the 0.0 thing, in 0.0 it seems logical for covert ops ships to not appear in local cloaked or not since they are suppost to be covert.
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:54:00 - [29] Instead of delayed local like in wormhole space we need timed local for 0.0 space. That way cloaked system campers will appear eventually and players using botting tools to escape as soon as local spikes will get owned. Make it short at about 2~5 minutes delay. This lets a skilled scout get to the botter before the program warps him out but still gives normal ratters a chance as they can rat whilst staying alinged and simply hit the scan button every 20 seconds or so and warp if something shows on the scan or the ui.
Lochmar Fiendhiem Caldari International Multi-Player Consortium	Posted - 2009.06.16 21:58:00 - [30] How to solve this issue. 1) make belts dynamic, but easy to scan. Reset locations once mined out/ each downtime. 2) make local directly linked to sov level. Level 1/2 sov say local updates every 2-3 minutes (probably severe server load for this to happen) and then sov 3/4, local is fully visible to the controlling party and their allies. With constellation sov, local is instant in the entire sov for the owners. Invaders need to find point #3. 3) maybe add an anchorable scanner post or something that is just a tool to enable instant local. Make it hackable, and not placeable within x distance of a moon but no more then x distance from a star. Invading party could scan out the sensor, hack it and then see the local channel. Would need to be done for each system. Make these destroyable as well so the warring party can kill local but have it so up to x number can be anchored for redundancy. Maybe have it so that local can be locked out by the warring party so that if they kill 9 of 10 sensors, and hack the last one, now they have local control until someone anchors another sensor or they fight to regain control of the one the hostiles have control of. Originally by: Halkin bob is dead, goons are great, cheese is cheesy, there we go no need for any more threads

Northrop Caldari Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 22:10:00 - [31] how about: * delay local for 0.0 in general or for a certain time (eg 2-3.. minutes after you enter a system) * give the scanner an autorepeat function * apply different scan ranges, depending on the ship and its role (eg normal frig/cruiser med scan range, t1 hauler/freighter low scan range, inty/cov ops/af high long scan range, shuttle/noobships no scan range.. ect ) * modified system scanner module for pos. if you own sov in a system of a certain level (l3, dunno) you can anchor this mod. every pilot of the corp/alliance which owns the pos gets their scan range increaded to eg. 100au.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards Hoodlums Associates	Posted - 2009.06.16 22:15:00 - [32] Or we can have local set like WH space and people can manualy scan as they currently do.
Vidi Angelus Caldari Crystal Dynamics Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.06.16 22:24:00 - [33] Originally by: Epegi Givo Fix: inty goes to a belt, logs out. leave local and wait a bit. then inty pilot logs back in and should appear in the belt. If the ratter was ratting away in that belt then he will be aligning for warp. Lock and disrupt him immediately, and bring in allies to finish him off. if he wasn't ratting there then try the next belt. This also works for Hictors. If its a bot they'll be pre aligned, they'll warp out long before you warp in from the logoff point. best way to do it its to leave a bubble near the belt & log off, come back after 2 mins.
Northrop Caldari Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 22:30:00 - [34] Originally by: Lochmar Fiendhiem 3) maybe add an anchorable scanner post or something that is just a tool to enable instant local. Make it hackable, and not placeable within x distance of a moon but no more then x distance from a star. Invading party could scan out the sensor, hack it and then see the local channel. Would need to be done for each system. Make these destroyable as well so the warring party can kill local but have it so up to x number can be anchored for redundancy. Maybe have it so that local can be locked out by the warring party so that if they kill 9 of 10 sensors, and hack the last one, now they have local control until someone anchors another sensor or they fight to regain control of the one the hostiles have control of. this sounds interesting. there still remains the problem of farmers in big alliances (which my post earlier does not fully solve either). but: local is based on "subspace beacons/satelites ect". because of these beacons/satelites, we have local in empire, low sec and 0.0. also because of these, or rather because of the lack of them, we dont have local in wormhole space. so: actually show us those beacons. like in factional warfare bunker, make such a beacon appear somewhere in every system. give it a certain amount of health so that its not too easy nor to hard to take down. like the hp of a large bubble maybe.. for dedicated corps and alliances, it will be no problem to a) defend b) take down or c) repair them back up to functionality.
Jobby Minmatar UNITED STAR SYNDICATE	Posted - 2009.06.16 22:33:00 - [35] Macroers pay subscriptions, too. That's all CCP cares about.
Ben Derindar Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire	Posted - 2009.06.16 23:10:00 - [36] Easy solution here: make more 0.0 NPCs warp scramble. /Ben
MrLobster Clawstrawphonebeer	Posted - 2009.06.16 23:26:00 - [37] "Automatically refreshing scanner to replace local so that anyone comes within 15 AU you see them, done. Simple..." Or just have your "local" window only show those that are 15au distance from you (apart from cloaked).
Information Broker	Posted - 2009.06.16 23:30:00 - [38] this almost sounds like a bot...
Raneru Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.16 23:33:00 - [39] Originally by: Lochmar Fiendhiem How to solve this issue. 1) make belts dynamic, but easy to scan. Reset locations once mined out/ each downtime. 2) make local directly linked to sov level. Level 1/2 sov say local updates every 2-3 minutes (probably severe server load for this to happen) and then sov 3/4, local is fully visible to the controlling party and their allies. With constellation sov, local is instant in the entire sov for the owners. Invaders need to find point #3. 3) maybe add an anchorable scanner post or something that is just a tool to enable instant local. Make it hackable, and not placeable within x distance of a moon but no more then x distance from a star. Invading party could scan out the sensor, hack it and then see the local channel. Would need to be done for each system. Make these destroyable as well so the warring party can kill local but have it so up to x number can be anchored for redundancy. Maybe have it so that local can be locked out by the warring party so that if they kill 9 of 10 sensors, and hack the last one, now they have local control until someone anchors another sensor or they fight to regain control of the one the hostiles have control of. This is along the right lines. Personally, I'd rather just make it like WH space with probable belts and delayed local. This would mean that ratters/miners would need to work together as a group (imagine that!) to keep themselves safe. But would also slow down a roaming gang as it isn't simply a case of jump, person in local, scan belt, warp, kill.
Trustworthy Joe	Posted - 2009.06.16 23:54:00 - [40] Originally by: Ben Derindar Easy solution here: make more 0.0 NPCs warp scramble. /Ben its a good temporary fix, but local still needs to be looked at. _______________________ with a name as trustworthy as mine, i cant POSSIBLY be an alt Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails <-- this is your brain on boosters

Nathrezim Gallente Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 00:02:00 - [41] Ive tried to post this 3 times in a row. keep getting asked my log-in details etc.. CCP can't fix the forums, nevermind bothering to monitor 3rd-party-programms working together with their own programm (eve.exe). I don't think they care Escador. There are ways to monitor such stuff, good example is Mythic/GoA on Dark Age of Camelot. Every other day there would be 2-3 bans/account-suspensions on ''radar''-users and bot-users. I doubt CCP care enough to deal with this problem, as someone else stated above me, macroes pay subscriptions too. Cash is flowing in, all is well. Amiright? Hope i get proven wrong in the long run.
Viktor Fyretracker Caldari Fyretracker Heavy Industries	Posted - 2009.06.17 00:07:00 - [42] dunno about more scraming NPCs, not that they effect me thanks to that change awhile back that added the "debuff" icons to the overview i know who to slag first.
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.17 00:08:00 - [43] Local is fine, period. The sofware "help" tool is an another problem, if it exists... I wouldn't be surprised if a pro-local remover use bad methods to have what they want. _______ Local is fine, period.
Nathrezim Gallente Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 00:13:00 - [44] Edited by: Nathrezim on 17/06/2009 00:14:43 Originally by: Sky Marshal Local is fine, period. The sofware "help" tool is an another problem, if it exists... I wouldn't be surprised if a pro-local remover use bad methods to have what they want. IF it exists? I lol'ed there. maybe indeed local is fine and doesnt need a fix. maybe CCP need to do something about it, but i already posted my opinion on that matter, a couple posts above^ Edit : It, meaning the ''help-software''.
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam Exalted.	Posted - 2009.06.17 00:16:00 - [45] Originally by: Nathrezim Edited by: Nathrezim on 17/06/2009 00:14:43 Originally by: Sky Marshal Local is fine, period. The sofware "help" tool is an another problem, if it exists... I wouldn't be surprised if a pro-local remover use bad methods to have what they want. IF it exists? I lol'ed there. I know right - Contagious -
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.17 00:20:00 - [46] Originally by: Sky Marshal Local is fine, period. Local isn't fine and never has been. This has been commented on by many a CCP dev, starting with Oveur who threatened to do something about it I don't remember how many years ago, and more recently (October of last year) CCP Zulupark who shared his plan to have a go at it on SISI in Q1 of this year.
Mrtankk	Posted - 2009.06.17 00:26:00 - [47] Originally by: Escador 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 Please allow me to re-write this for you. Thank you. Dear CCP. I am a PVP'er. My goal in life is to kill ratters and miners. With local, it is very hard to achieve my goal in life. Please remove all tools that they can use to monitor their saftey so that I can kill them without warning, feel better about myself, and complete my lifes goal. Thanks!
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam Exalted.	Posted - 2009.06.17 00:37:00 - [48] Originally by: Mrtankk Originally by: Escador 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 Please allow me to re-write this for you. Thank you. Dear CCP. I am a Ratter. My goal in life is to kill rats and mine. Without local, it is very hard to achieve my goal in life. Please keep all tools that we can use to monitor our saftey so that I can always be safe, feel better about myself, and complete my lifes goal. Thanks! Works both ways - Contagious -
Shist3r	Posted - 2009.06.17 01:00:00 - [49] Originally by: Armoured C macro is getting out of hand. also RMT seem to be getting out of hand to In Paragon Soul (Now Stainless or is it Stain space ?) you have some dude mining with about 50-60 miners alts and several Rorquals. He has scout alts in surrounding systems so catching him is hard. Stain folks have a nice macro botting program going on strip mining the area.
Neesa Corrinne Stimulus Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2009.06.17 01:14:00 - [50] Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson Originally by: Epegi Givo Fix: inty goes to a belt, logs out. leave local and wait a bit. then inty pilot logs back in and should appear in the belt. If the ratter was ratting away in that belt then he will be aligning for warp. Lock and disrupt him immediately, and bring in allies to finish him off. if he wasn't ratting there then try the next belt. This also works for Hictors. FFS are you seriously suggesting logon traps are the answer? Logon traps are endorsed by CCP. A third party tool that watches local, warps you to a safe spot and cloaks your ship until local is clear is NOT endorsed by CCP. So please, exactly how is a logon trap worse?

Maximum KILLDEATHRATIO Minmatar 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2009.06.17 01:20:00 - [51] My God. Its almost as safe as owning tech 2 bpos.
matbrum Best Path Inc. Ethereal Dawn	Posted - 2009.06.17 01:25:00 - [52] Macro ratters can make roams abit tedious but funny. "next system clr?" "one red..." "let me guess, raven on scan?" "rgr, he's gone off scan now" "never would have guessed" Did a big ass roam through insmother, det, and tenerifis a while ago focusing on systems with high NPC kills and have to say the whole thing seems very organised. System after system inhabited by single characters with dumb ass names like sakdfjafkja in ravens seemingly always there. So beyond the macroing itself I would say the fact that entire corps/alliances run an organised macroing effort is taking liberties abit too far. But countering it by nerfing local would just be counter countered by smarter macros! I'd like to see rats and belts not respawning if the system is being abused by constant ratting and mining forcing people to move around. That or actually make null sec worth peoples time and get some newer players out here so entire swathes of space aren't entirely inhabited by these bots.
Faith O'Siras	Posted - 2009.06.17 01:34:00 - [53] What is this EVE HELP TOOL you're speaking of?
Lonzo Kincaid Duty.	Posted - 2009.06.17 01:51:00 - [54] Edited by: Lonzo Kincaid on 17/06/2009 01:54:08 making covert ops the only ships that don't appear in local chat is the only way to do this. Removing locals leaves everybody open to some god awful and unavoidable instant(before you've loaded grid on warp in)-death traps. This way covert ops can be used to monitor people COVERTLY and can be used for clandestine operations, and if you've set up a good scout/intel network you'll receive word of the covert ops support (the damage dealing ships) operating in the area and you can get yourself to a safe and sit there for 30 minutes until they've moved on. However 100% covert ops gangs will be a nightmare to avoid, they're too small to smart bomb your scouts though, so you can still scout them out if they're camping. You should also be able to spot them moving around if you leave scouts on gates, since you'll see them decloak to jump. edit - just realised your scout won't see them if they're cloaked :p guess you could make it timed, or make a sensor-pinging module that detects when a cloaked ship is near (activate it and it "pings" to see if anything is near by cloaked). I dunno, give ceptors and covert ops frigates a bonus/ability to use it. ---------------------- Quote: The rule of thumb is you have to outnumber them 2:1 before you even think about engaging them
Johnathan Roark Caldari Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.17 02:25:00 - [55] removing local wont help that, the macros most likely don't even rely on someone actually in local. Vuk Lau for CSM 3.0
EinaruS Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 04:12:00 - [56] Originally by: Johnathan Roark removing local wont help that, the macros most likely don't even rely on someone actually in local. 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. - A finger...especially the middle one, is worth more than any amount of isk
VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.06.17 04:24:00 - [57] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 16/06/2009 21:47:15 Automatically refreshing scanner to replace local so that anyone comes within 15 AU you see them, done. Simple I suggested this months ago and no one said anything. It's the easiest/simplest solution and would work just fine, but people are lazy, so they don't want it.
Viconia D'Mysterious	Posted - 2009.06.17 08:00:00 - [58] Is there or was there any CCP response with their arguments why they are not making local chat delayed like in wormholes? There is so many arguments against local chat like it is now but I haven't really seen any good arguments for its continued existance. If CCP replied somewhere on this matter anyone knows a link to it? Thx
rubico1337	Posted - 2009.06.17 08:17:00 - [59] how about bubbling up the warpin on a couple of the belts? (or the belt you know he was in last) that might mess up the programing
Deviana Sevidon Gallente Panta-Rhei Guardian Federation	Posted - 2009.06.17 08:38:00 - [60] Ok, now it is time for the no-local whine, because everyone who is ratting and refuses to go leroy on a PvP Gang with his PvE Ship is a Macroer. A few more whines are still needed today. I think the next on the schedule should be Boys playing Girl-Avatars on the Internetz again. It should also be notified, that it was a lot of time since we had a major whine about fixing Bugs is more important then any WiS. A few more whines about L4 Missions and Ninja-Salvaging is also needed. Please keep it coming "mature" community. Quote: Disclaimer: All mentioned above contains my opinion and is therefore an absolute truth (for me anyway, my universe, muhahaha.....ok, done

Dahin Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 09:57:00 - [61] Oh god I used to spend hours upon hours on these farmers down in stain. With the previous probing system it was actually quite possible to grab em under certain circumstances. With the new one, there are none. One good way to get rid of them was introduced a long way back (since last probing system) but it's permanent feature is the "oh, we'll make that work soon(tm): * probing cans: Where do you think all their loot goes to? Steal it or pop it for max grief and no food on the table. * Covert ops (and not recons) not showing in local or being delayed for a about 1-2 minutes is a good idea, but then again I'm a covops pilot and I'm biased in favor on that. Something to remember is that these are not unsupervised bots. There is someone sitting next to the 10e+3 consoles/puters and responds if something actually happens. So no go for ccp intervention (at least in the extent it exists) The major problem with this situation is the 100% invulnerability these people have. And it's not a fundamental bot problem, it's a generic one. Bots just never forget to keep their eyes on local. The real problems with bots is the hisec missionrunners. Many carebears shed tears (of salty goodness might I add) because they just can't compete with the armies of 'wfgwrvsaw'. But then again, if you offer someone absolute immunity, that's what you'll get. Damn it, i miss being flamed in chinese. Give me some remotely possible way to get my hatemails back.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.17 13:40:00 - [62] Needs a dev response.
Antiquus Inflatio Amarr Phoenix Propulsion Labs	Posted - 2009.06.17 13:56:00 - [63] Well it's clear that is someone was clever enough to program a computer to run a macro that makes the magnificent sum of 5m/isk hr, while at the same time not allowing parasites, I mean hard working piratical types the ability to gank them while fiercely battling their savage light drones, this is destroying the game and throws everything out of balance and can no longer be tolerated. The solution is we move Eve to the Nintendo Wii platform immediately, preventing ebil macroers use of their dastardly abilities to program something on a computer..
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.06.17 14:43:00 - [64] Local should be set to Recent Speakers mode, just like in wormhole space.
Escador Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 14:49:00 - [65] Originally by: Antiquus Inflatio Well it's clear that is someone was clever enough to program a computer to run a macro that makes the magnificent sum of 5m/isk hr, while at the same time not allowing parasites, I mean hard working piratical types the ability to gank them while fiercely battling their savage light drones, this is destroying the game and throws everything out of balance and can no longer be tolerated. The solution is we move Eve to the Nintendo Wii platform immediately, preventing ebil macroers use of their dastardly abilities to program something on a computer.. This is again taken from description of a typical EVE "help" tool: "It manages to uninterruptedly hunt npc pirates at Asteroid belts and can touch the impressive 40-50 Million ISK per hour income if used in low security systems" And keep in mind that these people can be running at least 5-10 accounts simultaneously, it will start to add up... But the isk and the macro isn't realy the biggest issue, but the fact they they are untouchable... (except maybe as mentioned with login traps, if you have enough people and time....) esc
Pnandor	Posted - 2009.06.17 15:07:00 - [66] It sounds like some are a little afraid when we talk about down the local? they should be happy just because there will be so much more players and shoot down, if the local disappearance. Or, is some lazy to use the direction the scanner? I hear all the time pirates and troll pokes at carebears and want them to PVP in 0.0 or low sec but now it is completely inverted when people talk about down the local?
Liz Laser Outland Research and Development The Excession Group	Posted - 2009.06.17 15:16:00 - [67] Originally by: baltec1 Or we can have local set like WH space and people can manualy scan as they currently do. Because WH's have been such a success. Making players mash a scan button all day will chase them to games that don't.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 16:34:00 - [68] Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 16/06/2009 21:47:15 Automatically refreshing scanner to replace local so that anyone comes within 15 AU you see them, done. Simple I suggested this months ago and no one said anything. It's the easiest/simplest solution and would work just fine, but people are lazy, so they don't want it. My suggestion is that the scanner would automatically refresh itself, just like the overview, so that any ships that come within say, 20AU would appear, not cloaked ships obviously. This would mean NPC'ers would not have to mash the refresh button every minute.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 16:37:00 - [69] Originally by: Dahin Something to remember is that these are not unsupervised bots. There is someone sitting next to the 10e+3 consoles/puters and responds if something actually happens. So no go for ccp intervention (at least in the extent it exists) That's not the case with this bot, it is unsupervised, it can warp you to a safespot when a hostile enters, cloak you, warp you back to the belts, keep warping around until npcs are found, then kill them. It can even log you off if you run out of ammo.
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services Novus Ordo Mundi	Posted - 2009.06.17 16:56:00 - [70] Originally by: Liz Laser Originally by: baltec1 Or we can have local set like WH space and people can manualy scan as they currently do. Because WH's have been such a success. Making players mash a scan button all day will chase them to games that don't. Well yes it has to be honest! I love the PVP side in WH compared to 0.0!

VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.06.17 17:47:00 - [71] Originally by: Deviana Sevidon Ok, now it is time for the no-local whine, because everyone who is ratting and refuses to go leroy on a PvP Gang with his PvE Ship is a Macroer. A few more whines are still needed today. I think the next on the schedule should be Boys playing Girl-Avatars on the Internetz again. It should also be notified, that it was a lot of time since we had a major whine about fixing Bugs is more important then any WiS. A few more whines about L4 Missions and Ninja-Salvaging is also needed. Please keep it coming "mature" community. This kind of reply is my favorite because it allows the author to feel as though he is superior to the whiners without the keen realization that he, himself is whining (about whiners, ironically) and just as annoying. The suggestion that the game needs some improvement in some area does not necessitate that it's a whine. If there is a part of the game that guarantees a positive outcome for one side or the other (in this case, local allows a program such as the OP has shown can make ratting no NOsec risk free), that should be fixed. There will always be areas to improve in. It does not mean that everyone suggesting these changes is intelligent, well informed, stupid or a whiner in itself. You should evaluate the suggestion on a post to post basis. But then again, that would take effort, which is something that "whiners" aren't willing to exert and their critics (you in this case) are even less so. The OP in this case made an excellent point that macro programs combined with this software is basically risk-proof and several people in this thread have taken the time to offer helpful suggestions rather than just reply with form letters. On topic: removing local does create some issues and would make people work at lot harder, not just in nosec, but in empire wars and lowsec as well. That said, I think perhaps increasing the onboard scanner range (a little, not full system) and having it continually refresh based on range and angle setting would still allow honestly ratting/mining ships to keep a good eye on local.
Lissandra Ketarl	Posted - 2009.06.17 17:59:00 - [72] Is there actually any risk at all of getting banned if a player decides to macro? There should be, but to be honest I'm not seeing it.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 18:04:00 - [73] Originally by: Deviana Sevidon Ok, now it is time for the no-local whine, because everyone who is ratting and refuses to go leroy on a PvP Gang with his PvE Ship is a Macroer. No one in this thread has said that. Originally by: Deviana Sevidon A few more whines are still needed today. No, a lot more contructive posts on how to replace local with somthing useful and a Dev response on their opinions are still needed. Originally by: Deviana Sevidon I think the next on the schedule should be Boys playing Girl-Avatars on the Internetz again. It should also be notified, that it was a lot of time since we had a major whine about fixing Bugs is more important then any WiS. A few more whines about L4 Missions and Ninja-Salvaging is also needed. I'll get these threads started right now. Originally by: Deviana Sevidon Please keep it coming "mature" community. Thanks, we will try.
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.17 18:14:00 - [74] What are CCP doing about it? Good ideas so far: - Cov Ops ships leave local when they cloak (Fine as long as they too lose local as they have 'disconnected') - Remove cloak invulnerability (Only Cov ops ships can be 100% undetectable) - Personal fav - Have a feature that 'auto-updates' the scanner for you. - Reasonable, pretty tidy. Bad ideas: - Drop local and have nothing to replace it - Allow cloaks on non-cov ops ships Side affects: - 75% of roaming gangs will be comprised of cov ops ships - people stop going to places where Local doesn't exit - More spin the ship - More GTC sales (cause I'm not ratting in 0.0 ever again to fund my pvp habbit) - T1 ship prices go up, people start using them a lot more
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.17 18:49:00 - [75] I notice that almost no one i this tread had spent a thought about the secondary effect of the often suggested idea of removing local and substituting it with an automated scan system. The server load of the automated scan system will kill the game as the lag will become unbearable and the servers will crash very often. Before some bright boy stat saying it is not true, it is not an opinion of mine, removing local has been discussed to death in the Assembly hall and the old Game development forum and that is what the Dev have stated. The Dev opinion is very simple "We want to remove local from 0.0 but will not do it until we have a replacement system that will not kill the server with excess load and that is as good as local if used by an intelligent player". A auto updating scanner is not that tool.
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.17 19:08:00 - [76] Originally by: Venkul Mul The Dev opinion is very simple "We want to remove local from 0.0 but will not do it until we have a replacement system that will not kill the server with excess load and that is as good as local if used by an intelligent player". A auto updating scanner is not that tool. Alas, you are of course correct (i.e. local isn't going away unless we are prepared to all be blinded), but let us have 'hope' at least ;0 Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails hi cat here i was thinking earlier about corpses...
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.06.17 19:08:00 - [77] Ok, after reading over that site, thats f'n ridiculous. That thing is virtually untouchable, the demo videos even show you how frickin untouchable you actually are. Regardless on if you feel that locals removal would help or hurt ratters, browse the site, and tell me if you think that program is in the spirit of the game, or even remotely fair play at all. BACON was removed for this very reason, and the only reason it was removed at all, was that its creators decided to go public with it.
Descrambled	Posted - 2009.06.17 19:11:00 - [78] The ratter in me likes using Local as intel tool The pvper in me wish local was gone. The tiny bit of role player in me wants local gone. The Alliance pvper in me wants local gone I am tired of gangs using local as intel tool and just like warping away. No element of surpise unless you can blockade them on both sides Local ruins pvp in a big way. Would be more immersive if scout really had to SCOUT and search all gates and safespots for enemy gangs etc Would make covops more stealthier I love idea of getting rid of local altogether. Use directional scanner that is more realistic for 0.0 operations Ratters- they all Macro mostly anyway. They can just get new macro that automates direction scanner for them
Obsidian Hawk RONA Corporation	Posted - 2009.06.17 19:16:00 - [79] Welcome to EvE, where local hasn't been removed from 0.0 since 2003. On a side note, the idea of being removed from local while cloaked is a good idea. that would make things much more interesting. -------------------------- WTB a sig, or moderation of my sig by all the hot CCP girls.
Digiball Amarr Carbide Industries	Posted - 2009.06.17 19:30:00 - [80] no to the op!

Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.17 19:31:00 - [81] Edited by: Razin on 17/06/2009 19:31:19 Originally by: Obsidian Hawk On a side note, the idea of being removed from local while cloaked is a good idea. that would make things much more interesting. It's only interesting for the cloak-specced ships. It also makes them disproportionally more powerful. No Local for anyone is so much more democratic (paired with the new scanning tools, off course, as per Zulupark). ...
needrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.17 19:34:00 - [82] Originally by: Digiball no to the op! so your saying your you use this macro then? because honestly, if you ACTUALLY PLAY EVE, then nothing stated in this thread would hurt you
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.06.17 19:50:00 - [83] Originally by: Liz Laser Originally by: baltec1 Or we can have local set like WH space and people can manualy scan as they currently do. Because WH's have been such a success. Making players mash a scan button all day will chase them to games that don't. If the player is active then he is already 'mashing' buttons all day unless of course he is a macro user.:-D To keep safe all you need to do is hit the scan once every 20~30ish seconds right along with all the other buttons you normally press. Remember that timed/delayed local makes the hunter do the same thing as you so its not like in that brief amount of time he will direction scan you down to you extact location or even better probe you out. If its a cloaker then as soon as they appear on the ui you hit warp and instalaunch to the spot you should be alinged to as you rat then wait for a while till he gets bored and leaves. Whats this? It makes 0.0 solo ratting a bit more like the dangerous activity it should be? Yes it would so tough luck bubbles and suck it up like the rest of us have to do.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 20:18:00 - [84] Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 17/06/2009 20:20:37 In general I have 2 problems with the "keeping local and letting only covert op ships not show up when cloaked" option. 1)It does not solve the problem in relation to this programme as there will be the split second that you do show in local after you decloak from jumping in and cloak again, this split second would let the bot spot you and warp you out. 2)This means that solo roaming in 0.0 is no longer viable as you would either need to be in a gang with a covert ops or would need to dual account with a covert ops. And thinking about it a bit more, it only solves the problem for this hunting NPC'ers issue and dosen't solve all the other issues about people in fleets still using it as a intel tool and running when a bigger fleet comes calling. No, this issue needs to be looked at with the removal of local and having something usable to replace it, after all I rat in 0.0 too you know.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 20:28:00 - [85] It would be interesting to see a link to the dev post saying that the auto updating scanner would heavily lag the server because we already have the overview which automatically updates when ships come on grid. The auto updating scanner would simply be a second, longer range overview. How much can that really crash the server?
Pnandor	Posted - 2009.06.17 20:35:00 - [86] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti It would be interesting to see a link to the dev post saying that the auto updating scanner would heavily lag the server because we already have the overview which automatically updates when ships come on grid. The auto updating scanner would simply be a second, longer range overview. How much can that really crash the server? I vote for online scanner because it's exist in earth l÷l
Turin Caldari Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.06.17 20:43:00 - [87] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 16/06/2009 21:47:15 Automatically refreshing scanner to replace local so that anyone comes within 15 AU you see them, done. Simple I suggested this months ago and no one said anything. It's the easiest/simplest solution and would work just fine, but people are lazy, so they don't want it. My suggestion is that the scanner would automatically refresh itself, just like the overview, so that any ships that come within say, 20AU would appear, not cloaked ships obviously. This would mean NPC'ers would not have to mash the refresh button every minute. The scanner would have to be FAR FAR more than 20 AU to even consider this. TBH, if your only warning that someone is closing in on you, is a 20 AU warning on your scanner, then you are already dead. It takes a ship 2-3 seconds to go 20AU while in warp. Less for some. At 20AU, you MIGHT have 2-3 seconds to react if you dont want to die. Most likely less. I would put my money on the ratter dieing EVERY time. I mighgt loose on a rare occasion, but over the long haul, I would win a far lot more than I lost.
Jan Deltord	Posted - 2009.06.17 20:48:00 - [88] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti It would be interesting to see a link to the dev post saying that the auto updating scanner would heavily lag the server because we already have the overview which automatically updates when ships come on grid. The auto updating scanner would simply be a second, longer range overview. How much can that really crash the server? Short answer : Lots. Longer answer : At the moment, the overview just has to load whats on your grid. A scan would mean it has to load whats on all grids. If the EvE db is set up the way I think it is, objects in each grid are stored on a single file, so only that file needs to be checked once and then sent to each client listed in that file. On a long-range scan, you'd need to check every object in the System file foir which grid it's on, and then go to those grid files. Inevitably, if local is removed, people in 0.0 would spam their scan button, and you'd get a macro to do it for you. This would then overload the db. Nope, the solution to macros is tougher rats. This toon has sub-2m skill points, and can rat some triple BS spawns and all double BS spawns in 0.0 drone space (which has omni-damage rats who are harder to tank). Thats just ridiculous. If you want to make life harder for macroing ratters, make rats tougher. More scram rats, especially when spawns are chained and have scramming rats preferentially target drones. Anything players hate, add more of. Oh yeah, and mix up damage and vulnerability types, and add occasional out-of-area rats. And Officer Spawns get Sleeper AI.
CommmanderInChief Comply Or Die	Posted - 2009.06.17 20:55:00 - [89] Originally by: Sky Marshal Local is fine, period. The sofware "help" tool is an another problem, if it exists... I wouldn't be surprised if a pro-local remover use bad methods to have what they want. it did exist one i only know was bacon..but thats no longer available..but obviously ppl will have distributed it..
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 21:06:00 - [90] Originally by: Jan Deltord Lots of words. Your missing the point. The auto scanner would not scan everything, you still have the directional scanner to narrow people down. The auto scanner would only show ships. It dosent have to load every object on every grid. Originally by: Turin The scanner would have to be FAR FAR more than 20 AU to even consider this. TBH, if your only warning that someone is closing in on you, is a 20 AU warning on your scanner, then you are already dead. It takes a ship 2-3 seconds to go 20AU while in warp. Less for some. At 20AU, you MIGHT have 2-3 seconds to react if you dont want to die. Most likely less. I would put my money on the ratter dieing EVERY time. I mighgt loose on a rare occasion, but over the long haul, I would win a far lot more than I lost. Yes, but you still have to slow down and drop out of warp, which makes the 2-3 seconds around 10 seconds to drop out of warp and get a lock. But you make a good point, the range of the scanner would have to be tested to see what ranges would make it viable.

wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.17 21:14:00 - [91] Originally by: CommmanderInChief Originally by: Sky Marshal Local is fine, period. The sofware "help" tool is an another problem, if it exists... I wouldn't be surprised if a pro-local remover use bad methods to have what they want. it did exist one i only know was bacon..but thats no longer available..but obviously ppl will have distributed it.. Obviously nothing like this is around now
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.17 21:14:00 - [92] Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 17/06/2009 21:15:46 Ok here is a proposal, obviously server lag issues need to be considered. The overview is split into 2 parts: The top part: Your normal overview, with tabs and settings etc. The bottom part: A much smaller section which only shows ships not on the grid within, for example purposes only, 40AU. Think of the drone window, you have drones in space and drones in distant space, this is the same principal. The second part will show you approaching players, incoming fleets and when they arrive on grid they transfer to the original overview and the game continues as normal. Now, I don't want to blow my own trumpet, but that sounds like a damn fine idea.
Descrambled	Posted - 2009.06.17 21:28:00 - [93] Edited by: Descrambled on 17/06/2009 21:30:50 Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 17/06/2009 21:15:46 Ok here is a proposal, obviously server lag issues need to be considered. The overview is split into 2 parts: The top part: Your normal overview, with tabs and settings etc. The bottom part: A much smaller section which only shows ships not on the grid within, for example purposes only, 40AU. Think of the drone window, you have drones in space and drones in distant space, this is the same principal. The second part will show you approaching players, incoming fleets and when they arrive on grid they transfer to the original overview and the game continues as normal. Now, I don't want to blow my own trumpet, but that sounds like a damn fine idea. yeppers as long as Local the way we know it now is gone. wwill require true skill and effort to acquire intel. Not some system setup to appeal to carebear To be clear- I like this idea
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.17 22:04:00 - [94] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 17/06/2009 22:04:31 Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Obviously nothing like this is around now And ? It would permit to reduce chinese farmers, maybe... The time that macros or "help software" would be adapted to use the Scan Window instead, and macro miners and haulers would still be here. The thing I despite, is that you use this excuse to ask for a removal of Local...
Lady Aja Caldari Eradication Project	Posted - 2009.06.17 22:08:00 - [95] Originally by: Rawr Cristina It's amusing, every time I travel through the Drone Regions there's 2-3 ravens belonging to the same Solar Wing corp (of about 90 members) in every system. Soon as you enter local they safespot and cloak, no chance of catching em. If the hourly Jump Freighters going past their LXQ pipe are any indication, I'd say they were making a good 10bil/day from it warp to safe spot... and cloak.. they will either log or leave system. then there is the fact you can anchor large bubbles on the gate... then they cannot leave in a hurry. if at all.
Mama's Boy	Posted - 2009.06.17 22:15:00 - [96] 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
Lady Aja Caldari Eradication Project	Posted - 2009.06.17 22:16:00 - [97] Originally by: Jobby Macroers pay subscriptions, too. That's all CCP cares about. no they dont so get a clue!!
CHAOS100 Widowmakers	Posted - 2009.06.17 22:24:00 - [98] This whole local issue in 0.0 is focused on only 1 aspect: ratters using local as a warning to run when someone comes in. Yet you also used it to know that the ratter was there in the first place. PVPers use local as much, if not more, than ratters. Your average roaming gang uses it to get warning of impending doom as local fills with a 50 man gang to kill you. You use it to see where the ratting hotspots are in 0.0, and where the ratters are in the first place. Is there a big gatecamp ahead in that 100au system with no planet near the destination gate? Well you could only know with local. Without local you would be scanning down every system to try to find a ship, and when you find a ship on scan, chances are it is probably an empty ship at a pos. Later in the US timezone especially, 0.0 gets a bit sparse of targets. You could go 5 jumps or more without finding anything. It will get a wee bit tedious to scan down every single system to only find a target at a POS, or nothing at all.
Turin Caldari Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.06.17 22:41:00 - [99] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Originally by: Jan Deltord Lots of words. Your missing the point. The auto scanner would not scan everything, you still have the directional scanner to narrow people down. The auto scanner would only show ships. It dosent have to load every object on every grid. Originally by: Turin The scanner would have to be FAR FAR more than 20 AU to even consider this. TBH, if your only warning that someone is closing in on you, is a 20 AU warning on your scanner, then you are already dead. It takes a ship 2-3 seconds to go 20AU while in warp. Less for some. At 20AU, you MIGHT have 2-3 seconds to react if you dont want to die. Most likely less. I would put my money on the ratter dieing EVERY time. I mighgt loose on a rare occasion, but over the long haul, I would win a far lot more than I lost. Yes, but you still have to slow down and drop out of warp, which makes the 2-3 seconds around 10 seconds to drop out of warp and get a lock. But you make a good point, the range of the scanner would have to be tested to see what ranges would make it viable. That depends on the ship. Intercepters and Dicters come out of warp very fast, and can align to a target almost instantly. Furthermore, a Hulk for example, takes at least a good 15 seconds just to get up to speed and warp, and thats already after its aligned. A hulk would NEVER get away. I still stand by mty statement. If I am ratting or mining ( especially mining ), and I see a ship on my scan only 20AU away, at that point, I am dead. They just havent popped my ship yet.
Admiral IceBlock Caldari Northern Intelligence	Posted - 2009.06.17 22:59:00 - [100] CCP should delay local appearance of people that jumps in by the time they are cloaked from jumping. So at most, 30 sec, if you break cloak you appear.

Mifter Hogdido Amarr The 0ri Sc0rched Earth	Posted - 2009.06.17 23:03:00 - [101] Can we now have threads about this locked?
needrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.17 23:04:00 - [102] Edited by: needrandomnamegenerator on 17/06/2009 23:05:33 Originally by: Sky Marshal The thing I despite, is that you use this excuse to ask for a removal of Local... Well, the thing I "despite" is that you use your own laziness as an excuse to allow the continuation of any game mechanic that obviously aids any macro program this obscene. Could it be that you use such a program and don't want anything to disturb your safe haven of ratting? Originally by: CHAOS100 Without local you would be scanning down every system to try to find a ship, and when you find a ship on scan, chances are it is probably an empty ship at a pos. Later in the US timezone especially, 0.0 gets a bit sparse of targets. You could go 5 jumps or more without finding anything. It will get a wee bit tedious to scan down every single system to only find a target at a POS, or nothing at all. Big hint, this happens now, only, you get to see the ship on scanner for about 2 seconds, then its gone, and its nearly ALWAYS a raven. 5 jumps without a target is nothing, try 3 hours of "Raven....off scan <jump> Raven....off scan" Originally by: Mifter Hogdido Can we now have threads about this locked? Yes, when they do something about the obvious problem that is only around because of local.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.17 23:04:00 - [103] Edited by: Razin on 17/06/2009 23:05:11 Originally by: Christopher Multsanti It would be interesting to see a link to the dev post saying that the auto updating scanner would heavily lag the server because we already have the overview which automatically updates when ships come on grid. The auto updating scanner would simply be a second, longer range overview. How much can that really crash the server? Here's what was said by CCP Whisper: Originally by: CCP Whisper We will not do that without: a) having a mechanic available that can be used to gather the same sort of intel local currently gives you. b) ensuring that this mechanic does not totally wang the server when someone deploys more than one of these in a system. To be honest, from my point of view server performance takes priority over shiny scanning feature. It does no-one any good for us to introduce something as a knee-jerk reaction and then watch the server buckle under the load of several thousand scanning buoys, IFF transponders, radar transmitters, AWACS drones or any of the hundred suggestions we have already gotten on how to implement this. Claiming that this somehow means that any auto-scanning implementation would unacceptably lag the server is disingenuous. I do agree with you that an auto-scanning feature on the directional scanner that only detects occupied ships over a range of 20-50 AU with some kind of IFF at closer ranges should be no problem for the server.
Descrambled	Posted - 2009.06.17 23:15:00 - [104] Originally by: CHAOS100 This whole local issue in 0.0 is focused on only 1 aspect: ratters using local as a warning to run when someone comes in. Yet you also used it to know that the ratter was there in the first place. PVPers use local as much, if not more, than ratters. Your average roaming gang uses it to get warning of impending doom as local fills with a 50 man gang to kill you. You use it to see where the ratting hotspots are in 0.0, and where the ratters are in the first place. Is there a big gatecamp ahead in that 100au system with no planet near the destination gate? Well you could only know with local. Without local you would be scanning down every system to try to find a ship, and when you find a ship on scan, chances are it is probably an empty ship at a pos. Later in the US timezone especially, 0.0 gets a bit sparse of targets. You could go 5 jumps or more without finding anything. It will get a wee bit tedious to scan down every single system to only find a target at a POS, or nothing at all. Why cant people use direction scanner for this purpose? Most systems are so small you can cover it with directional scanner at max range 360 angle on first scan. This is how people report ship types in Intel channels anyway! At worst, you might actually have to do a little work and jump around 2-3 times to get a complete scan of all local belts This will add a nice exploraiton factor which is completely absent in this game. Enemies will have to WORK to find targets. PVP will be vastly improved because if gang hiding in a safespot they wont know immediately if opposing gang is in local. This way gasp you can actually surprise your enemy and get the drop on them Only thing I can see life might be a little harder on ratters / miners since this will empower hostiles to get a nice surprise factor going for them
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.17 23:15:00 - [105] Originally by: Turin That depends on the ship. Intercepters and Dicters come out of warp very fast, and can align to a target almost instantly. Furthermore, a Hulk for example, takes at least a good 15 seconds just to get up to speed and warp, and thats already after its aligned. A hulk would NEVER get away. I still stand by mty statement. If I am ratting or mining ( especially mining ), and I see a ship on my scan only 20AU away, at that point, I am dead. They just havent popped my ship yet. Unless you're aligned, that is. Right? Don't tell me you don't know how to stay aligned and do your job.
Face Lifter	Posted - 2009.06.17 23:28:00 - [106] Even with removed local chat, the farmer macro and players who behave like macros will maintain a high chance of invulnerability When a farmer sees unknown ship warp to his belt, he can instantly exit game. Now he will disappear within 1 minute, because even tho he gets attacked, he will not receive aggro timer because he quit before other ship had a chance to complete lock and activate module. Even if the tackler points the farmer and calls his friends, that warp in with 40-30 seconds left on the timer, at least half the gang will get "target is invulnerable" error as they attempt to get target lock. In most cases, the farmer will disappear with his ship. Then when he gets back online, he logs out immediately a 2nd time, then logs back in a 2nd time, and now his ship warps to a safe spot, from which he can safely scan for trouble and cloak. So, removing local without addressing the log off exploit will have very small impact on daily operations of macro farming.
Ms Delerium	Posted - 2009.06.17 23:37:00 - [107] Originally by: Face Lifter Even with removed local chat, the farmer macro and players who behave like macros will maintain a high chance of invulnerability When a farmer sees unknown ship warp to his belt, he can instantly exit game. Now he will disappear within 1 minute, because even tho he gets attacked, he will not receive aggro timer because he quit before other ship had a chance to complete lock and activate module. Even if the tackler points the farmer and calls his friends, that warp in with 40-30 seconds left on the timer, at least half the gang will get "target is invulnerable" error as they attempt to get target lock. In most cases, the farmer will disappear with his ship. Then when he gets back online, he logs out immediately a 2nd time, then logs back in a 2nd time, and now his ship warps to a safe spot, from which he can safely scan for trouble and cloak. So, removing local without addressing the log off exploit will have very small impact on daily operations of macro farming. logoffski was nerfed time ago, now when you log off 2nd time it doesnot matter, it will warp you to original point anyways
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.06.18 00:16:00 - [108] Originally by: Mifter Hogdido Can we now have threads about this locked? macro alt spotted..
Enraku Reynolt Minmatar Mid Knights Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.06.18 01:21:00 - [109] Id agree with no local sov IF and ONLY IF sov 4 or sov 5 let you control your gates if your hostile, you you have to hack the gate to get through, and only cov ops can do this while stealthed, anyone else better be able to tank some guns, or they aint getting through and of course them means we can post some turrets on our gates
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.18 01:36:00 - [110] Originally by: Enraku Reynolt Edited by: Enraku Reynolt on 18/06/2009 01:32:38 Id agree with no local, IF and ONLY IF sov 4 or sov 5 let you control your gates if your hostile, you you have to hack the gate to get through, and only cov ops can do this while stealthed, anyone else better be able to tank some guns, or they aint getting through and of course them means we can post some turrets on our gates So what your saying is you think roaming gangs in EVE are a bad idea period? With this stupid idea (locking gates) and the amassed empires around 0.0, you would be able to roam what? NPC 0.0?

Enraku Reynolt Minmatar Mid Knights Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.06.18 01:39:00 - [111] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Enraku Reynolt Edited by: Enraku Reynolt on 18/06/2009 01:32:38 Id agree with no local, IF and ONLY IF sov 4 or sov 5 let you control your gates if your hostile, you you have to hack the gate to get through, and only cov ops can do this while stealthed, anyone else better be able to tank some guns, or they aint getting through and of course them means we can post some turrets on our gates So what your saying is you think roaming gangs in EVE are a bad idea period? With this stupid idea (locking gates) and the amassed empires around 0.0, you would be able to roam what? NPC 0.0? you can roam, you just have to break in so to speak the door is locked, you have a means to get past that lock but as it stands now, all sov means is your can dump you stuff on your land, but you cant but a fence up to stop your neighbor's cows from eating on your lands ------------------------------------------------ Do not let the world change you. Change the world Here's everything I know about war: somebody wins, somebody loses, and nothing is ever the same
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.06.18 02:00:00 - [112] Originally by: Enraku Reynolt Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Enraku Reynolt Edited by: Enraku Reynolt on 18/06/2009 01:32:38 Id agree with no local, IF and ONLY IF sov 4 or sov 5 let you control your gates if your hostile, you you have to hack the gate to get through, and only cov ops can do this while stealthed, anyone else better be able to tank some guns, or they aint getting through and of course them means we can post some turrets on our gates So what your saying is you think roaming gangs in EVE are a bad idea period? With this stupid idea (locking gates) and the amassed empires around 0.0, you would be able to roam what? NPC 0.0? you can roam, you just have to break in so to speak the door is locked, you have a means to get past that lock but as it stands now, all sov means is your can dump you stuff on your land, but you cant but a fence up to stop your neighbor's cows from eating on your lands Two weeks to a month later everyone who matters will have trained up the required hacking skills and your fence will be gone once moar. Then what?
Enraku Reynolt Minmatar Mid Knights Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.06.18 02:23:00 - [113] Edited by: Enraku Reynolt on 18/06/2009 02:24:51 didnt say it was a perfect idea, just if they get rid of 0.0 local view (which they probly never will) needs a counter balance, and this was the first thought that came to mind plus, since it would only protect the top end systems, roaming gangs can still pick on people at the edges
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 02:35:00 - [114] Locking gates is a silly idea that goes against the whole premise of gate travel in EVE. Gates are neutral and will let anyone through. That's why someone with a -10 ss can jump through to empire, and it's up to the local Law to deal with him. If you don't want undesirables in your system put up some bubbles and a gang at the gates, you lazy bum.
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.18 03:21:00 - [115] I'm still waiting for people to realize that local gone doesn't help them one bit with regards to finding people ratting. I have two accounts, I always sit my alt cloaked on the gate with it on my 2nd screen while I rat. Nothing happens to the in gate without me spotting the flash of light. That is the queue to me warping to a ss waaaaaaaaaaaaaay away from that gate so I can cloak waaaaaaaaaaay before the roaming gang comes through. Result? They leave immediately as they see 'nothing' in local on any scanners except perhaps a wreck or two. Good luck getting kills this way, just going to end up doing lots of jumps and not even knowing you are missing systems full of people ratting. This really IRKS me as I pvp more than I rat. As for thinking an auto-scan will not make the server buckle, are you on drugs? You are clearly not aware of what happens at the transaction level when you perform a 'non-cached' query every second x say 10,000 people undocked. Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails hi cat here i was thinking earlier about corpses...
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2009.06.18 03:27:00 - [116] Originally by: Spurty I'm still waiting for people to realize that local gone doesn't help them one bit with regards to finding people ratting. I have two accounts, I always sit my alt cloaked on the gate with it on my 2nd screen while I rat. Nothing happens to the in gate without me spotting the flash of light. That is the queue to me warping to a ss waaaaaaaaaaaaaay away from that gate so I can cloak waaaaaaaaaaay before the roaming gang comes through. Result? They leave immediately as they see 'nothing' in local on any scanners except perhaps a wreck or two. Good luck getting kills this way, just going to end up doing lots of jumps and not even knowing you are missing systems full of people ratting. This really IRKS me as I pvp more than I rat. As for thinking an auto-scan will not make the server buckle, are you on drugs? You are clearly not aware of what happens at the transaction level when you perform a 'non-cached' query every second x say 10,000 people undocked. So you only rat in dead end systems? Also you are greatly underestimating the patience of the guy that will eventualy bag you regardless of what is changed or not. I do agree about the auto-repeat for scanners though as even a dev stated that having it on for even a small portion of the playerbase would, and I quote, "not be good" for the servers. But really you don't need an auto-repeat just hit the scan button in between the other buttons you push as you rat. With creative placement of the windows you can do it all in a flick of the wrist and a few taps of the finger.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 03:29:00 - [117] Edited by: Descrambled on 18/06/2009 03:30:18 Originally by: Spurty I'm still waiting for people to realize that local gone doesn't help them one bit with regards to finding people ratting. I have two accounts, I always sit my alt cloaked on the gate with it on my 2nd screen while I rat. Nothing happens to the in gate without me spotting the flash of light. That is the queue to me warping to a ss waaaaaaaaaaaaaay away from that gate so I can cloak waaaaaaaaaaay before the roaming gang comes through. Result? They leave immediately as they see 'nothing' in local on any scanners except perhaps a wreck or two. Good luck getting kills this way, just going to end up doing lots of jumps and not even knowing you are missing systems full of people ratting. This really IRKS me as I pvp more than I rat. As for thinking an auto-scan will not make the server buckle, are you on drugs? You are clearly not aware of what happens at the transaction level when you perform a 'non-cached' query every second x say 10,000 people undocked. silly post, you got a cloakie on every gate? Also I just happen to dabble in programming. Surely various systems are spread amongst a server cluster. So dont exaggerate 0.0 is not Jita. Far from it. If they can run server side collision detection then a simple radius check is child's play
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.06.18 03:44:00 - [118] Edited by: Rastigan on 18/06/2009 03:44:29 No local for the aggressor kind of sucks also, spamming the scanner isnt too fun. Simple game changes that would make macro isk farming much harder. Aggression vs NPC's give it atleast a 3 minute timer, so you cant just insta logoff. Combat probes, initially it is MUCH harder to probe ships and structures out than the old probing system, why ? A decent solution would be to have probes actually stay in their location when you leave the system(currently they stack ontop of each other) and reconnect to them.. That way you already have the probes in position for a quick scan when you come back.. I would even suggest being able to probe out cloaked ships, but make the cloak hide the signature so that probing is MUCH harder (and covops cloaks are still unprobable), but this would present a huge problem for supercaps.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.18 03:54:00 - [119] Edited by: wtbrandomnamegenerator on 18/06/2009 03:55:34 Originally by: Spurty I'm still waiting for people to realize that local gone doesn't help them one bit with regards to finding people ratting. Maybe then you'll realize (after actually reading the thread) that this is more to do with a program that use the information local passes on to keep ratters completely safe from any form of harm AT ALL. To make it perfectly clear (since your probably vain enough to read a reply to your own post, even if you haven't actually read this thread): H-Bot, and programs like it, use local, to allow the program to warp, and cloak, as soon as there is a new contact in local, then resume the hunting program as soon as local clears The players who use this, are abusing an in game device to keep virtual total immunity to attack, so the most obvious solution is one of two: 1) No more cloaks on non cloaking ships (*this isn't really a solution, as the macro will simply warp off and log off when you enter system) 2) Make 0.0 local like WH local, and the bot program will then have nothing to key off of. Nobody cares if your too lazy to not use scouts, or scanners to properly assure safety in the part of the game that is supposed to be absolutely unsafe, nobody cares if local will kill your ratting in 0.0 (tbh, for money, you should be in empire farming lvl 4's anyway). What people care about is that there is a rampant abuse of this throughout the larger portion of the game, by a large portion of ratters in every part of EVE.
Nel Tu Minmatar Lone Star Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 05:01:00 - [120] Well ****, if I see hostiles in local I can SS and cloak too. I don't really need a program to do it. /shrug This seems like a little bit of column A and a bit of column B. Yeah they're using macros (though you actually have no real proof. I could go copypasta some help tool description too and say someone is using it ). And people are crying because people are doing things with the macro that you can do without them. Like I said, I can set standings, see red in local and SS/Cloak... it's not difficult. Or am I a macroer now? Leave local alone, it's fine. Instead of altering the game because of an outside program, DO something about it. But then again I haven't said anything that hasn't been said thousands of times before. /popcorn ============== Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.

wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.18 05:20:00 - [121] Edited by: wtbrandomnamegenerator on 18/06/2009 05:20:19 Originally by: Nel Tu Well ****, if I see hostiles in local I can SS and cloak too. I don't really need a program to do it. /shrug This seems like a little bit of column A and a bit of column B. Yeah they're using macros (though you actually have no real proof. I could go copypasta some help tool description too and say someone is using it ). And people are crying because people are doing things with the macro that you can do without them. Like I said, I can set standings, see red in local and SS/Cloak... it's not difficult. Or am I a macroer now? Leave local alone, it's fine. Instead of altering the game because of an outside program, DO something about it. But then again I haven't said anything that hasn't been said thousands of times before. /popcorn Yes, you too can cloak when you see hostiles come into local, only, your reaction times are human, and not the instantaneous warp and cloaks you get now days. Yea, it still happens, but humans at the helm make mistakes, and have reaction times. Oh, and we have no proof, but if it walks like a duck, and talks like a duck....
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 06:16:00 - [122] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti It would be interesting to see a link to the dev post saying that the auto updating scanner would heavily lag the server because we already have the overview which automatically updates when ships come on grid. The auto updating scanner would simply be a second, longer range overview. How much can that really crash the server? There is some other post, but this is the first I have found: Prism X post Quote: Sadly it was way too much work to expect it to work with our current release schedule as well as it having some technical issues (We really can not have people pressing scan every 5 seconds and receive a huge record set over the wire. That's way to close to a nuke node button.) but --> personally, as in me, only me, not CCP, not all of EVE, just me, I only speak for me <-- found the concept to reek of the awesome old sub games I used to play when I was young and stupid..er. The mechanic is different between local (passive system information gathering tool) and scanning (active intelligence gathering tool). With the former your PC get a message when someone enter the system and another when it leave. With the latter you ask every 5 seconds "Who is there?" and get a list of ships and objects that are there. So you send a request to the server to be notified what is in system and then get a long list of items back. Big difference in server load.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 06:28:00 - [123] Ok, I'll say it again, as people seem to be stuck on the idea of the auto refreshing directional scanner, which scans for everything with 14AU. This is not what I am suggesting. My suggestion is: The overview is split into 2 parts: The top part: Your normal overview, with tabs and settings etc. The bottom part: A much smaller section which only shows ships not on the grid within, for example purposes only, 40AU. Think of the drone window, you have drones in space and drones in distant space, this is the same principal. The second part will show you approaching players, incoming fleets and when they arrive on grid they transfer to the original overview and the game continues as normal.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 06:35:00 - [124] Originally by: Turin Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Edited by: Christopher Multsanti on 16/06/2009 21:47:15 Automatically refreshing scanner to replace local so that anyone comes within 15 AU you see them, done. Simple I suggested this months ago and no one said anything. It's the easiest/simplest solution and would work just fine, but people are lazy, so they don't want it. My suggestion is that the scanner would automatically refresh itself, just like the overview, so that any ships that come within say, 20AU would appear, not cloaked ships obviously. This would mean NPC'ers would not have to mash the refresh button every minute. The scanner would have to be FAR FAR more than 20 AU to even consider this. TBH, if your only warning that someone is closing in on you, is a 20 AU warning on your scanner, then you are already dead. It takes a ship 2-3 seconds to go 20AU while in warp. Less for some. At 20AU, you MIGHT have 2-3 seconds to react if you dont want to die. Most likely less. I would put my money on the ratter dieing EVERY time. I mighgt loose on a rare occasion, but over the long haul, I would win a far lot more than I lost. 1) Scanner is 14 AU. 2) if it is automated the game program had a further check to do every x seconds to see if something is in range. That mean a query every x seconds to the server and a reply back with the info. Serious increase in load. 3) to decrease the load for the server the scan need to have a a low number of queries every minute (probably 1 every 5 seconds is too much); 4) it the hunter is warping to you from outside scanner range the delay from the scanner cycle (from 0 to 5 seconds) plus the human reaction time make almost granted that you attacker will be in scram range before you even give the command to warp (I assume that any competent roaming gangs will have sent a covops to check the belts so that they will be capable of warping to you within 5-10K without any trouble). 5) Warp disruption field bubble range is 16 km with no skills and something like 20km with maximum skill and don't require to lock a target, so, as soon as the attacker leave warp you have no way to leave. (T3 with the correct module are immune to the HIC bubble? no idea, asking for info) 6) no difference with a non automated scanning system beside the fact that you can mash "scan" more often. But still I think CCP would put a delay to avoid server death. So yes, even a alert player using the on board scanner would have major problems. I wouldn't like the change. I suppose those living only for the killmail would like it.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 06:54:00 - [125] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Turin That depends on the ship. Intercepters and Dicters come out of warp very fast, and can align to a target almost instantly. Furthermore, a Hulk for example, takes at least a good 15 seconds just to get up to speed and warp, and thats already after its aligned. A hulk would NEVER get away. I still stand by mty statement. If I am ratting or mining ( especially mining ), and I see a ship on my scan only 20AU away, at that point, I am dead. They just havent popped my ship yet. Unless you're aligned, that is. Right? Don't tell me you don't know how to stay aligned and do your job. Last time I checked it, a aligned hulk starting from standstill, with mining modules and no expanders, evasive maneuvering 5, required 22 seconds to enter warp. For all I know nothing has changed in the hulk agility so the time is still the same. If you have some doubt, time it.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 08:09:00 - [126] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Ok, I'll say it again, as people seem to be stuck on the idea of the auto refreshing directional scanner, which scans for everything with 14AU. This is not what I am suggesting. My suggestion is: The overview is split into 2 parts: The top part: Your normal overview, with tabs and settings etc. The bottom part: A much smaller section which only shows ships not on the grid within, for example purposes only, 40AU. Think of the drone window, you have drones in space and drones in distant space, this is the same principal. The second part will show you approaching players, incoming fleets and when they arrive on grid they transfer to the original overview and the game continues as normal. Not a bad suggestion (I hadn't reached that part jet when I replied) but how many pages of overview will you need in a busy system? (and 0.0 has busy systems) Nice if you have one of the cinematographic screens with extra space at the sides, but all the different windows will clutter horribly a normal screen. And you still need to gather the data from a range of several AU around you. Exactly the same problem of a constantly updated scanner. Lots of extra data transmitted between you and the server.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 08:10:00 - [127] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Razin Originally by: Turin That depends on the ship. Intercepters and Dicters come out of warp very fast, and can align to a target almost instantly. Furthermore, a Hulk for example, takes at least a good 15 seconds just to get up to speed and warp, and thats already after its aligned. A hulk would NEVER get away. I still stand by mty statement. If I am ratting or mining ( especially mining ), and I see a ship on my scan only 20AU away, at that point, I am dead. They just havent popped my ship yet. Unless you're aligned, that is. Right? Don't tell me you don't know how to stay aligned and do your job. Last time I checked it, a aligned hulk starting from standstill, with mining modules and no expanders, evasive maneuvering 5, required 22 seconds to enter warp. For all I know nothing has changed in the hulk agility so the time is still the same. If you have some doubt, time it. 17 seconds actually.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.18 08:53:00 - [128] I don't get why so many people are talking about using the directional scanner as being a viable alternative to having local. Cloaked ships don't show up on it, and the scouts for most gangs are generally recons. So in the non-local scenario the scout for a gang jumps into a system where people are ratting and cloaks immediately. He uses his directional scanner to scan the planets and belts, which takes about 2 minutes, if there is anyone there, he warps to them cloaked and tackles them as his gang jumps in. So how does having every ratter in the game mashing the directional scan button help them?
Khorin D'tael Caldari D'tael Contracts	Posted - 2009.06.18 09:23:00 - [129] Removing Local will effect the roaming gangs just as much as the ppl ratting or mining. The ppl that will be effected the most would be ppl using this kind of bot. With that in mind why the hell are ppl so against this?
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.18 09:29:00 - [130] If it's not too much trouble for you to read the post directly above the post you've just made would you care to explain the assertion that no local makes life just as difficult for the hunters as for the hunted?

Khorin D'tael Caldari D'tael Contracts	Posted - 2009.06.18 09:49:00 - [131] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset If it's not too much trouble for you to read the post directly above the post you've just made would you care to explain the assertion that no local makes life just as difficult for the hunters as for the hunted? There are ppl that do hunt in 0.0 in this thread who have said it will be harder for them to find ppl just by virtue of the fact they can see if a system is empty or has ppl in it. So if it's not too much trouble for you to read what they have said I wouldn't have had to explain it to you would I!
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.18 09:59:00 - [132] Yes but you failed to take into account the fact that they were talking garbage.
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.18 10:18:00 - [133] I must say I find it slightly disgusting to see a desire for cheap ganks (which is something every human has or should have imo) be put on the table not by actually focusing on the mechanics but through abusing the RMT and Macro topics. Neither macro abuse nor RMT have anything to do with getting cheap ganks. It's something EVE needs to get rid of, and fast, but it has nothing to do with our desire to get ganks in 0.0 So which is it. Is this about macro's or RMT, or is it about mechanisms to get get cheap ganks in 0.0, these are two very different topics. Yes, you can argue that there are no easy ways to get the cloaking ravens. Welcome to EVE, things require effort, and it is not hard to totally ruin some macro *****'s day with a little bit of effort. I am much more frustrated by the simple observation that those macro ravens in most places are very often the only thing in deep space. The reason we can't find our normal buffet of cheap ganks is because in the past few years people have moved away from actually using 0.0 to live off the lands - so to speak. Chris, you should remember field trips to ASCN :P If I'm not mistaken Esc should remember Xetic. People used space, to live in and make a living off. You had nice ganks without a lot of effort, you could push people to defend because you could burn alliances by burning their space. Now, it is just about the X64's. There is no need to mine like nuts in 0.0 to build dreads, empire is the solution for everything. When the drone regions were introduced it slowly but certainly removed one of the last incentives to make use of 0.0 on a resource level. Yes, there still are places where people live of the lands. But they are very rare, it is simply much easier and more competitive to make use of safe and hassle free input from empire for everything except the moon gold. And that is simply out of reach of the average roaming gang. Going for the X64's is the only thing which guarantees fights (even if by now the de facto strategy of most 0.0 alliances is to take the easy road and do everything they can to make that as risk free as possible - blobbing to the point of choking the node), anything else ... why would alliances bother. They don't depend on those belts. People make ISK on alts doing level 5 and 4's in easy mode, corps get their resources from mission loot refines in easy mode, etc. The trend still continues. Even the use of 0.0 NPC space is dwindling slowly but certainly. If you want to do something about not finding space to burn and plunder and people to torture and ransom and kill in 0.0 the real question is how to make it worthwhile to revive Xetic-like victim alliances for everyone's entertainment :P I wonder what deep space would look like if alliances could only build capital ships in player owned outposts, for starters, using some rare resource type which worked like some sort of glue to enable component production, while Concord had disallowed <insert roleplaying> military grade component production in empire :P Would have some interesting results. Wormhole space without local is nice, but it is way too early to see the impact of that on the actual use of wormhole space. CCP has announced tweaking drop rates to push the output and thus availability of T3 ... this may be a sign, but maybe not. Removing local for standard 0.0 gives exactly what we want: cheap guaranteed ganks. Until people stop using it alltogether. The currently available mechanisms like the scanner are not a solution, I would be very surprised if it would not lead to even more macro stuff .. since clicking scan every 20 seconds is not something many people can bear. And given the way scanning works it wouldn't go too well for the cluster either way. I'd start by seperating the grief. Split it up and make clear what the complain is about, just don't throw ** on a table just to try and spin results :P Macro crap RMT Scanning & Detection & countermeasures repopulating 0.0
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.18 10:19:00 - [134] Originally by: Khorin D'tael Removing Local will effect the roaming gangs just as much as the ppl ratting or mining. The ppl that will be effected the most would be ppl using this kind of bot. With that in mind why the hell are ppl so against this? Any proposal for major change is greeted with hysteria. eg: missile nerf, nano nerf, etc etc etc etc ad infinitum.
frog'us Minmatar	Posted - 2009.06.18 10:26:00 - [135] i see a lot of scan that, autoscan and ****. how much time you guys think the programmer will spend to move the scanning pixel procedure from local window -> scanning window ? like ... 1 minute ? and the recon should not be seen in local when cloacked ideea is pure crap.
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.18 10:26:00 - [136] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Khorin D'tael Removing Local will effect the roaming gangs just as much as the ppl ratting or mining. The ppl that will be effected the most would be ppl using this kind of bot. With that in mind why the hell are ppl so against this? Any proposal for major change is greeted with hysteria. eg: missile nerf, nano nerf, etc etc etc etc ad infinitum. It's only partially correct that observation. People affected will not be just the ones that break the EULA with macro crap, it'll also affect the last groups who still use 0.0 for resources. Change is always met with reluctance, at best, it's built into humans. In EVE even more so as over the years EVE has seen quite a few kneejerk changes which resulted from major forum "pressure", we've got the "nerf" syndrom in that regard. Both macro and RMT crap needs to get tackled. But it is a seperate topic from our normal desires to be ueber and get cheap ganks without much effort :P
Misanth Reaper Industries	Posted - 2009.06.18 10:27:00 - [137] Originally by: Dragon Greg massive wall of text Craploads of words in that post. In a thread that reaches more than two-three pages, unless it's the OP, it's likely that people will just skip the post since there's so much other stuff to read as well.. ..either way, you had some good points. I still remember 0.0 had fighting potential. Roaming PvP gangs could often be 1-3 players, and the ratters would often bring a friend or two and you'd get a fairly equal, small-scale fight. The blobbing has gone way out of hand. And people are too afraid of losing today. However, as you pointed out, RMT and gank-or-not is two different issues, and should be treated as such.
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.18 10:31:00 - [138] Originally by: Misanth Originally by: Dragon Greg massive wall of text Craploads of words in that post. In a thread that reaches more than two-three pages, unless it's the OP, it's likely that people will just skip the post since there's so much other stuff to read as well.. ..either way, you had some good points. I still remember 0.0 had fighting potential. Roaming PvP gangs could often be 1-3 players, and the ratters would often bring a friend or two and you'd get a fairly equal, small-scale fight. The blobbing has gone way out of hand. And people are too afraid of losing today. However, as you pointed out, RMT and gank-or-not is two different issues, and should be treated as such. It's a trend we all built up over the years. We all want to make our ISK without much hassle, and then waste it on making other people explode. We've pretty much all taken the easy road every time in this regard. It's been reinforced by game mechanics to a point where it now has us shoot ourselves in the foot. To this date the only real exception to the rule is CVA and their space. And, surprise, everybody loves CVA and loves going to CVA space. Why is that :P Because CVA space is used, and because CVA has to defend their space. Not just the X64's. CVA = entertainment. Nobody whines about Local when going into CVA space because we get ganks there and good fun.
Vidi Angelus Caldari Crystal Dynamics Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.06.18 10:46:00 - [139] As a 99.9% 0.0 Player, (having spent good time thinking about it) I am currently completely against removing local from 0.0 . There are too many problems that have not yet got acceptable solutions. I believe that if you removed 0.0 now, there would be a mass exodus back to empire from many players (many non pvp players would not stay) I believe the the only currently acceptable solution is delayed local. Unless a player speaks, a player should not appear in local for about 3 Mins (Unless they engage in player combat). when the player jumps in they should not be able to see local until they are visible (unless someone speaks, or engages in player combat).
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 11:00:00 - [140] Originally by: Vidi Angelus As a 99.9% 0.0 Player, (having spent good time thinking about it) I am currently completely against removing local from 0.0 . There are too many problems that have not yet got acceptable solutions. I believe that if you removed 0.0 now, there would be a mass exodus back to empire from many players (many non pvp players would not stay) I believe the the only currently acceptable solution is delayed local. Unless a player speaks, a player should not appear in local for about 3 Mins (Unless they engage in player combat). when the player jumps in they should not be able to see local until they are visible (unless someone speaks, or engages in player combat). I like the idea. The only problem is that is totally unbalanced in the favour of roaming gangs. I can have someone scanned down to a belt in 30 seconds, unless I have to warp to another part of the system. But even then, most good scouts will find you within 3 minutes.

Discrodia Gallente Blood Red Dawn	Posted - 2009.06.18 11:07:00 - [141] Originally by: baltec1 Originally by: CommmanderInChief which tool BACON? Can I have an egg with mine please. QFT ___________________________________________ Discrodia > Annoying idiots in 0.0 is my business. Business keeps picking up. Discrodia > I also like misquoting stuff :D
Vidi Angelus Caldari Crystal Dynamics Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.06.18 11:15:00 - [142] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Originally by: Vidi Angelus As a 99.9% 0.0 Player, (having spent good time thinking about it) I am currently completely against removing local from 0.0 . There are too many problems that have not yet got acceptable solutions. I believe that if you removed 0.0 now, there would be a mass exodus back to empire from many players (many non pvp players would not stay) I believe the the only currently acceptable solution is delayed local. Unless a player speaks, a player should not appear in local for about 3 Mins (Unless they engage in player combat). when the player jumps in they should not be able to see local until they are visible (unless someone speaks, or engages in player combat). I like the idea. The only problem is that is totally unbalanced in the favour of roaming gangs. I can have someone scanned down to a belt in 30 seconds, unless I have to warp to another part of the system. But even then, most good scouts will find you within 3 minutes. On paper, yeah its unbalanced in favour of roaming gangs, and the time before a player is visible can of course be reduced, but you need to consider it against: 1: The Home gang will typically have a significant advantage in numbers. 2: Through the use of Intel channels, red locations will still be reported 3: It works both ways, Red gangs can be trapped in much easier as they will have a harder time seeing the surge of blues moving into the system/ surrounding systems. Instead of a single scout being able to record all traffic moving in and out of one system, it could take several. in essence the roaming gang is flying much more blind. Having to use more of the force for Intel could cause some interesting tactical considerations :)
Zaerlorth Maelkor The Maverick Navy Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.18 11:27:00 - [143] If local is ever taken out and replaced by a better scanner, cloaking needs a serious nerf, or else a small gang of recons will just **** everything and everyone. However, you might want to consider a few things, first of all; I now have one of those annoying sigs. second; you should probably move on to some more interesting things than reading this sig.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 13:01:00 - [144] Edited by: Descrambled on 18/06/2009 13:04:20 Originally by: Venkul Mul Edited by: Venkul Mul on 18/06/2009 08:03:28 Originally by: Turin The scanner would have to be FAR FAR more than 20 AU to even consider this. TBH, if your only warning that someone is closing in on you, is a 20 AU warning on your scanner, then you are already dead. It takes a ship 2-3 seconds to go 20AU while in warp. Less for some. At 20AU, you MIGHT have 2-3 seconds to react if you dont want to die. Most likely less. I would put my money on the ratter dieing EVERY time. I mighgt loose on a rare occasion, but over the long haul, I would win a far lot more than I lost. 1) Scanner is 14 AU. 2) if it is automated the game program had a further check to do every x seconds to see if something is in range. That mean a query every x seconds to the server and a reply back with the info. Serious increase in load. 3) to decrease the load for the server the scan need to have a a low number of queries every minute (probably 1 every 5 seconds is too much); 4) it the hunter is warping to you from outside scanner range the delay from the scanner cycle (from 0 to 5 seconds) plus the human reaction time make almost granted that you attacker will be in scram range before you even give the command to warp (I assume that any competent roaming gangs will have sent a covops to check the belts so that they will be capable of warping to you within 5-10K without any trouble). 5) Warp disruption field bubble range is 16 km with no skills and something like 20km with maximum skill and don't require to lock a target, so, as soon as the attacker leave warp you have no way to leave. (T3 with the correct module are immune to the HIC bubble? no idea, asking for info) 6) no difference with a non automated scanning system beside the fact that you can mash "scan" more often. But still I think CCP would put a delay to avoid server death. So yes, even a alert player using the on board scanner would have major problems. I wouldn't like the change. I suppose those living only for the killmail would like it. Edit: removed pyramid quoting #2 is not correct. You do not have to run checks every x amount of seconds. In programming, you strive to be event driven. "Polling" is always inefficient. So then, you only perform a radius check when triggered by the fact another ship has just warped to a destination (event driven). From there, the game can compute how long it takes to arrive at the destination. You then scan the destination for nearby ships and then send a packet to those clients alerting them a ship is "will be in" range. Since people cannot cancel mid-warp. This only requires 1 PACKET. Just one There should be no increased load. Once client receives packet the EVE UI will then only display an alert when the hostile is within scanner range. #3 is incorrect. See my #2 #4 is incorrect, due to the logic error from #2. Technically the client should know an object is in warp towards it the instant the aggressor initiates a warp that cannot be interrupted or canceled. #5 should be incorrect for most circumstances. Most systems are small and you can already get great coverage with direction scanner ranges. When a hostile first jumps into your system and if Overview was tweaked to use only that onboard system- you will know when a hostile is in system and still safespot. Right now, most ratter safespots as soon as they are aware a hostile is in system regardless of aggressor's ship type. This behavior can still be maintained. Most ratters, like myself, always used direction scanner anyway for Intel reporting of hostile ship types. I also use it to scan blues so I can estimate if they will be ratting or pvping or mining, etc
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 13:11:00 - [145] Edited by: Descrambled on 18/06/2009 13:16:41 Edited by: Descrambled on 18/06/2009 13:11:44 Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor If local is ever taken out and replaced by a better scanner, cloaking needs a serious nerf, or else a small gang of recons will just **** everything and everyone. I am seeing posts from a lot of terrible ratters. When a hostile jumps in system you should always already have directional scanner open anyway. This way you can properly report Intel to allies about the hostiles' ship type, count, and location. Covert ops ships are not magical beings that can always remain cloaked. After they enter a system, for a time, you can scan them until cloak is initiated - The only huge danger I can think of is what to do if you just logged into the game and a cloaker was already in system. You will have no previous knowledge of his whereabouts.
Rastigan Caldari Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2009.06.18 13:33:00 - [146] Originally by: Vidi Angelus I believe the the only currently acceptable solution is delayed local. Unless a player speaks, a player should not appear in local for about 3 Mins (Unless they engage in player combat). when the player jumps in they should not be able to see local until they are visible (unless someone speaks, or engages in player combat). The only thing this would accomplish is eliminate small scale 0.0 mining, and move 0.0 ratting to empire mission running, the easy ganks that this would supposedly get would just turn into frustration of never seeing anyone... An acceptable local delay would be to hide the person jumping in from local till he loses his gate cloak, to make it fair the person holding the gate cloak shouldnt be able to see local till he loses that gate cloak...
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 13:42:00 - [147] hm now to think of it an automated direction scanner would indeed be increased load most likely.... PvP would get helped tons. I'm tired of getting together gangs and we corner another gang. But due to 'Local' the other gang knows we're coming and they just safespot+logout There is just no element of surprise. A good gang will only sacrifice their scouts
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 13:43:00 - [148] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Razin Originally by: Turin That depends on the ship. Intercepters and Dicters come out of warp very fast, and can align to a target almost instantly. Furthermore, a Hulk for example, takes at least a good 15 seconds just to get up to speed and warp, and thats already after its aligned. A hulk would NEVER get away. I still stand by mty statement. If I am ratting or mining ( especially mining ), and I see a ship on my scan only 20AU away, at that point, I am dead. They just havent popped my ship yet. Unless you're aligned, that is. Right? Don't tell me you don't know how to stay aligned and do your job. Last time I checked it, a aligned hulk starting from standstill, with mining modules and no expanders, evasive maneuvering 5, required 22 seconds to enter warp. For all I know nothing has changed in the hulk agility so the time is still the same. If you have some doubt, time it. Aligned means pointing towards a warp-out point and at three quarter speed. This gives you instant warp. Yes, you have to align again when you get out of optimal range of whatever you're targeting, but thems are the breaks. Deal with it.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 13:56:00 - [149] Originally by: Spurty As for thinking an auto-scan will not make the server buckle, are you on drugs? You are clearly not aware of what happens at the transaction level when you perform a 'non-cached' query every second x say 10,000 people undocked. Looks like you've got a serious reading comprehension problem. Are you aware of all the data that an overview has to keep track of? Is all of it 'cached'? Do read up on the proposed (in this thread) requirements for a ship's auto-scanner. ...
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:04:00 - [150] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Originally by: Venkul Mul Last time I checked it, a aligned hulk starting from standstill, with mining modules and no expanders, evasive maneuvering 5, required 22 seconds to enter warp. For all I know nothing has changed in the hulk agility so the time is still the same. If you have some doubt, time it. 17 seconds actually. Good, so now it is a bit faster. Time for a Vexor (I had it handy, so I used it) to do the last 15 AU of a 26 AU jump (the space that will be withing the directional scanner range) and get in normal space: 25 seconds. So with normal reaction and a 5 second scan you can barely avoid it. If the scan time is longer it will become almost impossible.

Vidi Angelus Caldari Crystal Dynamics Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:09:00 - [151] Originally by: Rastigan Originally by: Vidi Angelus I believe the the only currently acceptable solution is delayed local. Unless a player speaks, a player should not appear in local for about 3 Mins (Unless they engage in player combat). when the player jumps in they should not be able to see local until they are visible (unless someone speaks, or engages in player combat). The only thing this would accomplish is eliminate small scale 0.0 mining, and move 0.0 ratting to empire mission running, the easy ganks that this would supposedly get would just turn into frustration of never seeing anyone... An acceptable local delay would be to hide the person jumping in from local till he loses his gate cloak, to make it fair the person holding the gate cloak shouldnt be able to see local till he loses that gate cloak... A Small mining op worth its salt should have scouts the other side of the gates out of the system anyways, So Mining ops would not be affected. As for ratters, There is currently no risk whatsoever for a ratter that has local open. This would increase the risk. Imagine if the bounties were improved, at the cost of the (Now existent) chance of getting ganked by a skilled player. Ratters have a chance at making more money, Gankers have a fairer chance of getting a fight.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:10:00 - [152] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Originally by: Venkul Mul Last time I checked it, a aligned hulk starting from standstill, with mining modules and no expanders, evasive maneuvering 5, required 22 seconds to enter warp. For all I know nothing has changed in the hulk agility so the time is still the same. If you have some doubt, time it. 17 seconds actually. Good, so now it is a bit faster. Time for a Vexor (I had it handy, so I used it) to do the last 15 AU of a 26 AU jump (the space that will be withing the directional scanner range) and get in normal space: 25 seconds. So with normal reaction and a 5 second scan you can barely avoid it. If the scan time is longer it will become almost impossible. Look two posts above yours and see that you can avoid being caught by warping instantly.
frog'us Minmatar	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:13:00 - [153] Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:14:48 There is currently no risk whatsoever for a ratter that has local open. what exactly are the risk for gankers ? facing a pve / mining ship ? they just need to be awarded with a juicy defenless target cause they fly from system to system and use their brains for a 30 sec scan ?
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:25:00 - [154] Originally by: Descrambled #2 is not correct. You do not have to run checks every x amount of seconds. In programming, you strive to be event driven. "Polling" is always inefficient. So then, you only perform a radius check when triggered by the fact another ship has just warped to a destination (event driven). From there, the game can compute how long it takes to arrive at the destination. You then scan the destination for nearby ships and then send a packet to those clients alerting them a ship is "will be in" range. Since people cannot cancel mid-warp. This only requires 1 PACKET. Just one. There should be no increased load. Once client receives packet the EVE UI will then only display an alert when the hostile is within scanner range. Plus the packet you send when you move, Calculating the range and the effect of your movement (you can warp too and the time when you can have someone in ranghe change) and when your packet should be sent? When I start warping? or when I actually enter warp? (a warp can be stopped if you haven't entered in the tunnel) And so on. Your 1 packet solution (to several computers) would probably cause so many bugs and false signals to be hilarious. It is the kind of shortcut that has caused the moon minerals exploit: "don't include a checks, it is extra work". Even more interesting you are sending a packet with the position of all ship in system to the program every X seconds, letting the EVE program on your PC doing all the calculations. Exactly the kind of information that a good hacker and programmer would love to have. I will bet bot makers will crack that packet very fast and the get free access to the location of all people in system. It is that the reason why all the combat calculations are done server side and not end user side. Protection from manipulations. Originally by: Descrambled #3 is incorrect. See my #2 #4 is incorrect, due to the logic error from #2. Technically the client should know an object is in warp towards it the instant the aggressor initiates a warp that cannot be interrupted or canceled. As your postulate of 1 packet is not confirmed, that points are still valid. Originally by: Descrambled #5 should be incorrect for most circumstances. Most systems are small and you can already get great coverage with direction scanner ranges. When a hostile first jumps into your system and if Overview was tweaked to use only that onboard system- you will know when a hostile is in system and still safespot. Ever looked the size of most 0.0 systems? Originally by: Descrambled Right now, most ratter safespots as soon as they are aware a hostile is in system regardless of aggressor's ship type. This behavior can still be maintained. Most ratters, like myself, always used direction scanner anyway for Intel reporting of hostile ship types. I also use it to scan blues so I can estimate if they will be ratting or pvping or mining, etc And this has some relevance?
Suboran Gallente Victory Not Vengeance Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:38:00 - [155] would love to see someone from ccp hunting these macro ravens
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:40:00 - [156] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Descrambled #2 is not correct. You do not have to run checks every x amount of seconds. In programming, you strive to be event driven. "Polling" is always inefficient. So then, you only perform a radius check when triggered by the fact another ship has just warped to a destination (event driven). From there, the game can compute how long it takes to arrive at the destination. You then scan the destination for nearby ships and then send a packet to those clients alerting them a ship is "will be in" range. Since people cannot cancel mid-warp. This only requires 1 PACKET. Just one. There should be no increased load. Once client receives packet the EVE UI will then only display an alert when the hostile is within scanner range. Plus the packet you send when you move, Calculating the range and the effect of your movement (you can warp too and the time when you can have someone in ranghe change) and when your packet should be sent? When I start warping? or when I actually enter warp? (a warp can be stopped if you haven't entered in the tunnel) And so on. Your 1 packet solution (to several computers) would probably cause so many bugs and false signals to be hilarious. It is the kind of shortcut that has caused the moon minerals exploit: "don't include a checks, it is extra work". Even more interesting you are sending a packet with the position of all ship in system to the program every X seconds, letting the EVE program on your PC doing all the calculations. Exactly the kind of information that a good hacker and programmer would love to have. I will bet bot makers will crack that packet very fast and the get free access to the location of all people in system. It is that the reason why all the combat calculations are done server side and not end user side. Protection from manipulations. What huge security hole would this be the onboard scanner isn't that huge of a range. Anyway, to keep things simple we can just go with delayed local. The idea of 0.0 is to protect your space anyway. I'd be content with delayed local mode. Works fine for wormholes. Let's move it over to 0.0 to fix PvP. PvP is supposed to be non-consentual- not "consentual" pvp like we most often have now
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:41:00 - [157] Originally by: frog'us Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:14:48 There is currently no risk whatsoever for a ratter that has local open. what exactly are the risk for gankers ? facing a pve / mining ship ? they just need to be awarded with a juicy defenless target cause they fly from system to system and use their brains for a 30 sec scan ? What's the risk for a PVE/mining ship facing harmless NPCs and asteroids? And you don't even need to scan for them. Other roaming gangs are the risk for the gankers. A passing fleet is a risk for the roaming gang. A titan's DD is a risk for the fleet. A fleet, built with the resources gathered by the NPCer/miner is the risk for the titan. Something like that. ...
frog'us Minmatar	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:48:00 - [158] Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:50:54 Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:50:23 Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:48:59 Other roaming gangs are the risk for the gankers blah blah but you are pvp fitted, you are looking for a fight, right ? why dont you ask the station to eject traders once/2 hours, and to be killable in high sec without concord intervention ? and unable to dock for 15 min after, with a huge arrows on their ass. they have HUGE profits vs ratters/miners, a lot of them use macro to undercut competition, and they dont have to undock.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 14:52:00 - [159] You know the more I think about it the more I like it. Delayed local would fix this issue so elegantly. If you want to be safe while ratting then encourage your corp/alliance to post guards on the gates. Isn't it supposed to be your space anyway? Only code change this would require from CCP is to port over delayed local code from w-holes. Done Let the players work this out for themselves. If they don't like it they can go join the carebears in highsec 0.0 is supposed to be a dangerous place. Not some safe haven for macroers making billions of ISK afk in bed running Haxx all day and night
Holy Lowlander Lone Star Joint Venture Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:02:00 - [160] if you don't 0.0 alliance tinker under your name and you don't know how it is to actually live in 0.0 you shouldn't be in this discussion tbh. If you remove local from 0.0 carebearing and money making gets far too risky , especially when you look at empire where running lvl IV missions or mining veldspar will probably make you more isk because you simply wont lose ships. The arguement about hunting macro ratters is just plain stupid , doing anything against macros that will affect real humans negatively is stupid. Carebears wont just sit in 0.0 without local and watch how they get blown up lol , they will simply go back to empire , and I doubt that is what you want .... also siriously there are plenty of ratters and 0.0 carebears that get killed allready.... Just learn to scan faster ... tl;dr No removing local please ...

Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:07:00 - [161] Originally by: Holy Lowlander if you don't 0.0 alliance tinker under your name and you don't know how it is to actually live in 0.0 you shouldn't be in this discussion tbh. If you remove local from 0.0 carebearing and money making gets far too risky , especially when you look at empire where running lvl IV missions or mining veldspar will probably make you more isk because you simply wont lose ships. The arguement about hunting macro ratters is just plain stupid , doing anything against macros that will affect real humans negatively is stupid. Carebears wont just sit in 0.0 without local and watch how they get blown up lol , they will simply go back to empire , and I doubt that is what you want .... also siriously there are plenty of ratters and 0.0 carebears that get killed allready.... Just learn to scan faster ... tl;dr No removing local please ... Right now its not risky at ALL. I havent died ratting in a whole year on my ratter character. Isn't something wrong with this picture? 0.0 is supposed to be a dangerous place. but all that is a sham
Vidi Angelus Caldari Crystal Dynamics Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:09:00 - [162] Edited by: Vidi Angelus on 18/06/2009 15:14:02 Originally by: frog'us Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:14:48 There is currently no risk whatsoever for a ratter that has local open. what exactly are the risk for gankers ? facing a pve / mining ship ? they just need to be awarded with a juicy defenless target cause they fly from system to system and use their brains for a 30 sec scan ? Do I really have to explain the risks involved in taking a small gang into territory swarming with enemies? For starters: bait traps, Gate Camps, The very fact that they can reship to counter you and you are stuck in what you fly? Really? Quote: why dont you ask the station to eject traders once/2 hours, and to be killable in high sec without concord intervention ? and unable to dock for 15 min after, with a huge arrows on their ass. they have HUGE profits vs ratters/miners, a lot of them use macro to undercut competition, and they dont have to undock Please keep crap like that out of this thread. I can make up a load of hyperbole polarized trash as well, Its not clever, Act like an adult.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:14:00 - [163] Originally by: frog'us Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:50:54 Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:50:23 Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:48:59 Other roaming gangs are the risk for the gankers blah blah but you are pvp fitted, you are looking for a fight, right ? why dont you ask the station to eject traders once/2 hours, and to be killable in high sec without concord intervention ? and unable to dock for 15 min after, with a huge arrows on their ass. they have HUGE profits vs ratters/miners, a lot of them use macro to undercut competition, and they dont have to undock. You too can stay docked if you don't want to be killed. Your choice. In addition, some PVE'ers do rat in a PVP fit. It's entirely possible and is always a nasty surprise for the ganker. Try it, you'll like it. ...
Escador Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:17:00 - [164] Originally by: Descrambled You know the more I think about it the more I like it. Delayed local would fix this issue so elegantly. If you want to be safe while ratting then encourage your corp/alliance to post guards on the gates. Isn't it supposed to be your space anyway? Only code change this would require from CCP is to port over delayed local code from w-holes. Done Let the players work this out for themselves. If they don't like it they can go join the carebears in highsec 0.0 is supposed to be a dangerous place. Not some safe haven for macroers making billions of ISK afk in bed running Haxx all day and night well as people keep pointing out a lot might change when we remove local, but it is impossible to say exactly how... why don't CCP try it, maybe even just 1 or 2 regions for awhile to see what happens... But upping the NPC bounties would be a good idea, so that ratters would have more rewards for the extra risk... another option could be for local to show aprox numbers, and just round figures, like 5, 15, 25, 50, 100, 200 and so on...which ever is closest. as a way to warn about bigger fleets incoming. maybe even working in conjunction with sovereignty to have blues show up in lvl3, and maybe reds in lvl4... one thing is for sure, removing local wouldn't make it a easy gank haven for small roaming gangs...it would be a lot more harder to roam, but a lot more interesting as well...:) esc
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:36:00 - [165] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 18/06/2009 15:37:03 Originally by: Descrambled You know the more I think about it the more I like it. Delayed local would fix this issue so elegantly. If you want to be safe while ratting then encourage your corp/alliance to post guards on the gates. Isn't it supposed to be your space anyway? You seriously think that players have fun by scouting at gates ? Remember that we speak about a game. We login to have fun, not to execute a job, same if sometimes we have to put some effort. Quote: Let the players work this out for themselves. If they don't like it they can go join the carebears in highsec "Work", the word is here. You just want make EVE a second job. You are right after all. If I don't like it, I can go back in Empire (2 things made me go to null sec : Local and WTZ). And after that, as I doubt that only few players will do that, you will whine again... ½ Carebears don't want take risks and stay in High Sec, I don't have targets ! Nerf Missions ! Nerf High Sec ! Remove Concord ! +. Seriously... Just think more than one minute about the consequence of a change... _______ Local is fine, period.
frog'us Minmatar	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:39:00 - [166] Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 15:40:46 In addition, some PVE'ers do rat in a PVP fit. It's entirely possible and is always a nasty surprise for the ganker. well, a pvp ship already engaged with a bs spam for example -> easy target for a pvp inferior ship. try to get a fair deal for both aprts by removing local. until now, is just only ****ed wishes and proposal's. i already said that replacing local with an autoscan, will just mean nothing vs macro's, only real people will get anoyed. noone bother to answer that. what is left ? eve is a harsh world ? lol. try to aply that to your self. wana get free targets ? work hard for it, eve is not fair, eve is a harsh world and we can continue with this kinda crap forever. i hate macros and bots, but at least i dont want to make null and low more **ty than they already are. why dont you go in wh space, and hunt there ? maybe because no more carebears are there ? hail delayed local. the only solution vs macros, is ccp to monitor computer memory for bots program, and ban their account. is obviously they dont do that, even with 100 reports/video/screenshots on their head.
Holy Lowlander Lone Star Joint Venture Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:48:00 - [167] Originally by: Descrambled Originally by: Holy Lowlander if you don't 0.0 alliance tinker under your name and you don't know how it is to actually live in 0.0 you shouldn't be in this discussion tbh. If you remove local from 0.0 carebearing and money making gets far too risky , especially when you look at empire where running lvl IV missions or mining veldspar will probably make you more isk because you simply wont lose ships. The arguement about hunting macro ratters is just plain stupid , doing anything against macros that will affect real humans negatively is stupid. Carebears wont just sit in 0.0 without local and watch how they get blown up lol , they will simply go back to empire , and I doubt that is what you want .... also siriously there are plenty of ratters and 0.0 carebears that get killed allready.... Just learn to scan faster ... tl;dr No removing local please ... Right now its not risky at ALL. I havent died ratting in a whole year on my ratter character. Isn't something wrong with this picture? 0.0 is supposed to be a dangerous place. but all that is a sham if it isn't risky at ALL maybe you should ask yourself why other ratters do die ? I see people killing about 5 ratting ravens a day ... And 0.0 is supposed to be a very rewarding dangerous place , the fact you can get shot up everywhere (traveling to your ratting sight for instance ?) makes it rather dangerous , where is the huge reward for it again ? ooh yes with lvl IV missions .... 0.0 risk vs reward is unbalanced in the way that there isn't enough reward to justify the risk. Not that 0.0 isn't risky enough.
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 15:50:00 - [168] Originally by: Descrambled You know the more I think about it the more I like it. Delayed local would fix this issue so elegantly. If you want to be safe while ratting then encourage your corp/alliance to post guards on the gates. Isn't it supposed to be your space anyway? Good idea lets waste x nr of accounts on watching paint dry while your profit goes down the toilet. Or if you want to be less of an idiot just use your accounts doing lvl 4 in empire for more isk and no risk.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 16:09:00 - [169] Both Dragon Greg and Escador make a very valid point. 0.0 needs big changes. What ever those changes may be. At the moment, really the only people you find in 0.0 are lone ratters. So a 0.0 roam quickly turns into: Send in a scout and try and catch the guy before he safespots or; Send in a scout, scout reports hostile fleet in system twice our numbers, "ok lads, lets turn around". This happens again and again, so to make 0.0 more interesting and rewarding for people on both sides of the argument, things needs to change. NPC's and belts need to be more rewarding to encourage groups of players to work together, i.e mining ops, group ratting. And of course local needs to be gone so there is increased risk for both sets of players. No more "Someone in local! Insta safepot!!" and no more "Bigger gang ahead, run away"
Vidi Angelus Caldari Crystal Dynamics Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.06.18 16:31:00 - [170] Originally by: frog'us -Snip, Not relevant, I Don't support removing local - the only solution vs macros, is ccp to monitor computer memory for bots program, and ban their account. is obviously they dont do that, even with 100 reports/video/screenshots on their head. Doesn't work. Can't scan the memory if the client is inside a virtual computer (which it very likely is in the first place). Memory scanners like warden are for show and only catch bedroom botters, not proffesionals/players with know-how.

Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:02:00 - [171] Originally by: Holy Lowlander Originally by: Descrambled Originally by: Holy Lowlander if you don't 0.0 alliance tinker under your name and you don't know how it is to actually live in 0.0 you shouldn't be in this discussion tbh. If you remove local from 0.0 carebearing and money making gets far too risky , especially when you look at empire where running lvl IV missions or mining veldspar will probably make you more isk because you simply wont lose ships. The arguement about hunting macro ratters is just plain stupid , doing anything against macros that will affect real humans negatively is stupid. Carebears wont just sit in 0.0 without local and watch how they get blown up lol , they will simply go back to empire , and I doubt that is what you want .... also siriously there are plenty of ratters and 0.0 carebears that get killed allready.... Just learn to scan faster ... tl;dr No removing local please ... Right now its not risky at ALL. I havent died ratting in a whole year on my ratter character. Isn't something wrong with this picture? 0.0 is supposed to be a dangerous place. but all that is a sham if it isn't risky at ALL maybe you should ask yourself why other ratters do die ? I see people killing about 5 ratting ravens a day ... And 0.0 is supposed to be a very rewarding dangerous place , the fact you can get shot up everywhere (traveling to your ratting sight for instance ?) makes it rather dangerous , where is the huge reward for it again ? ooh yes with lvl IV missions .... 0.0 risk vs reward is unbalanced in the way that there isn't enough reward to justify the risk. Not that 0.0 isn't risky enough. Granted I have seen other ratters die. most of the time from what I gather its because even though they have noticed a hostile enter, they thought they had a few extra seconds to finish off their Blood pope or whatever. But unfortunately for them it was a quick little interceptor or DIC and next thing they know they are bubbled and podded Other times, like others have mentioned, it was due to human imperfection "omg I fell asleep ratting and woke up in pod" "I thought I was at POS but forgot I was in the belts" etc, etc so granted, 0.0 is a dangerous place for noob ratters
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:04:00 - [172] Originally by: Zeba So you only rat in dead end systems? Also you are greatly underestimating the patience of the guy that will eventualy bag you regardless of what is changed or not. Yes, dead end system and good luck to that guy. He really want to sit at his computer for hours with his gang (cause he'll die to me 1v1 with my ratting fit ;0 ) then thats fine with me. If thats how you believe roams happen, you are sorely mistaken. I never rat without intel of at least 5 systems around me, I don't know anyone dumb enough to do this either. I say that as those that do do this, I don't know em ;-) Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails hi cat here i was thinking earlier about corpses...
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:09:00 - [173] So I'm reading a lot of people who's argument now is that with a delayed local, not removed, much like WH space, your biggest issue would be that the Risk side of things is now too skewed. A simple proposal to fix that type of thing: Double all rat bounties for 0.0, and double all ore yields from mining in 0.0 Basically, put the rocks on steroids, and make the rats worth twice what they are now. If not twice, then at least 50% more than their current worth (*though honestly, with the crappy value they currently hold, I think doubling their cost would be fine). You can't double the amount the ore is worth, since the market is player driven, but you can double or triple the amount the average roid in some crap 0.0 will yield, making it possibly worth your time, as you won't have to move as much. Couple these ideas with exploration sites, and plexes that are already scattered around 0.0, and suddenly your making considerably more isk per hour, even enough to pay a scout, or in teams, to employ multiple scouts, and still make a heavy profit. This would balance the reward side a bit more with the risk side (even an fool of a ratter can bring in 20 million an hour currently, with the really good ones able to crank out about 40-50 mil an hour, the changes would allow for fools to make 40, and the good ones to make upwards of 80). Then we could put local in delayed mode, and should you actually get caught, scouts and all, your loss is generally replaced in a day. You can't have it totally risk free. Sorry, you agreed to that when you said "hey, i think i wana live in 0.0". Right now, thats what ratters have. To the guy who sees 5 ratters a day die, you must have some terrible ratters up around WI space, because there is currently NO REASON a remotely skilled or at the computer human should EVER die with local as it is.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:17:00 - [174] Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 18/06/2009 15:37:03 Originally by: Descrambled You know the more I think about it the more I like it. Delayed local would fix this issue so elegantly. If you want to be safe while ratting then encourage your corp/alliance to post guards on the gates. Isn't it supposed to be your space anyway? You seriously think that players have fun by scouting at gates ? Remember that we speak about a game. We login to have fun, not to execute a job, same if sometimes we have to put some effort. Quote: Let the players work this out for themselves. If they don't like it they can go join the carebears in highsec "Work", the word is here. You just want make EVE a second job. You are right after all. If I don't like it, I can go back in Empire (2 things made me go to null sec : Local and WTZ). And after that, as I doubt that only few players will do that, you will whine again... ½ Carebears don't want take risks and stay in High Sec, I don't have targets ! Nerf Missions ! Nerf High Sec ! Remove Concord ! +. Seriously... Just think more than one minute about the consequence of a change... Oh trust me I've *****ed about this on Teamspeak a LOT. I think this Local chat thing is ridiculous. This is the only MMO where players are omnipotent gods and have complete awareness of every single player in their local system Not big of enough issue for me to quit over. worse come to come to worst I can just relocate to w-space. But I feel this is unfair to us deep 0.0 pvpers to have to suffer because people want to use 0.0 to fatten their pockets Hell, make wormholes more numerous! Put a link to a wormhole in every 0.0 space I dont give a care. make the farmers go there and afk their isk so we can have true dynamic pvp. I'm tired of this consentual pvp crap where each gang has scout on other side, evaluate their chances, and decide whether to fight or logout! Guess a blackops could fix this huh. I honestly dont think CCP would wipe Local so I guess this only way to fulfill my dream of dynamic pvp.
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:50:00 - [175] If you want to make PVP so dynamic, you have to make PVP be done with lesser consequences. Make PVP less consensual will not attract more players to do it, as people hate lose. So we can try to reduce the lose problem. It is out of question to make PVP free, but some things can be done... And one of the problem is Killmails. People hate lose, and more of that, hate to be reported as losers. Killboards become so functional today, that now you can know everything of the loser, and everywhere by syndication. If nothing can save your pitiful performance, you could be more willing to fight. This could also make a nerf of local more acceptable, as after all, nothing is reported. The problem is that e-peen players will not appreciate. _______ Local is fine, period.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:56:00 - [176] Originally by: Descrambled Edited by: Descrambled on 18/06/2009 13:16:41 Edited by: Descrambled on 18/06/2009 13:11:44 Originally by: Zaerlorth Maelkor If local is ever taken out and replaced by a better scanner, cloaking needs a serious nerf, or else a small gang of recons will just **** everything and everyone. I am seeing posts from a lot of terrible ratters. When a hostile jumps in system you should always already have directional scanner open anyway. This way you can properly report Intel to allies about the hostiles' ship type, count, and location. Covert ops ships are not magical beings that can always remain cloaked. After they enter a system, for a time, you can scan them until cloak is initiated - The only huge danger I can think of is what to do if you just logged into the game and a cloaker was already in system. You will have no previous knowledge of his whereabouts. Are you joking? When jumping into a system in a cloaking ship it takes a split second to switch from gate cloak to ship cloak, even if you are on the gate grid when the ship jumps in it only appears on grid for a split second, and the update of the chat window is often delayed by several seconds. You say they remain uncloaked 'for a time' as if it takes them 20 seconds to warm up the cloaking device or something. The notion that you can use the directional scanner to spot a cloaking ship when it jumps into system in the fraction of a second it takes for it to cloak and possibly before local is even updated to show that they've arrived is laughable. And Zaerlorth's post was about the no-local situation, so without local to even let you know that someone has jumped in how would you know when to scan in order to catch them at that split second Sherlock? --- I think there is a growing combat mechanic problem here. In the past when only recons and covops ships could warp cloaked it was arguably the case that since these ships didn't pack much dps things were reasonably ok. In the last few months though this has been turned on its head. Now stealth bombers not only warp cloaked they also fire torpedos giving stealth gangs as much dps as they need. And as if that wasn't enough we now have T3 ships that can warp cloaked, tank and dps like HACs and warp out of bubbles too. It seems pretty obvious to me that this is going to have a huge impact on roaming gang combat, and when T3 becomes ubiqitous (which is CCPs stated objective) your average well equiped roaming gang will consist of nothing other than the ships listed above, probably packing a couple of cynos or blackops cynos for good measure. And when everyone is roaming through nullsec in covops cloaked ships packing all the dps they need and able to warp out of bubbles and blackops cyno around gate camps, with or without local how easy will it be to get a fight then I wonder? Is there a solution to all this? I don't see an easy one and I don't think delayed local will really help. If local is delayed by three minutes that's enough time for a roaming gang to have ganked any ratters in a system, or simply passed through and be 5 jumps away before it would even have updated. And don't get me wrong, I want to be rid of local as much as anyone, interesting gaming warfare tactics revolve around having the concept of imperfect information built into the game, and realtime local ruins that. If I had to name a prefered solution it would be this: ...
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.18 17:57:00 - [177] continued ... 1. Make covops ships better at gathering intel. Increase their lock range and make then able to fit a modifed passive targetting module that allows them to lock targets when cloaked. The drawback is that the only module they can active with a cloaked lock is a ship scanner. Let's make scouting a bit more interactive again. 2. Return stealth bombers to the way they were, improved cloak only and cruise missiles. Fix NPCs and structure turrets so that they cannot insta lock. With their original cloaked speed advantage and using the uncloak lock fire recloak method and cruise missiles stealth bombers had a broad range of targets in both PvP and PvE and they didn't need the covops cloak at all. I'm not saying they are bad now, it's just that in their current incarnation they only increase the propensity for everyone to warp around in cloaking ships which doesn't help anyone get good fights. 2. Make the force recons more fragile, their role should be scouting, blackops cynoing behind enemy lines, and ewar. If fitted for combat they should just about be able to tackle something for long enough for the cavalry to arrive. I'm a Pilgrim pilot myself but from a balance perspective it just takes the **** to be able to do 350dps, fit a 1600mm plate, tackle, disable a ships guns and fit an expanded probe launcher and covops cyno all from one ship that can warp around cloaked. I do love it mind, and I plan to make the most of it, but I don't see how it's good for the game at all. 3. Remove the T3 covert reconfiguration whatever subsytem that's lets them fit covops cloaks and warp out of bubbles. It's imo the worst idea CCP have had since Titans. T3 subsystem balance is iffy enough as it is without adding massively unbalancing abilites like this. I'm sure they won't remove it mind, and I'm equally sure that in 12 months time I'll be flying one of these around just like everyone else. 4. Finally remove local from nullsec. It'll still hurt those that like to rat in afk tanking BS or those using macros, but tbh as long as you are not using a macro and you want to solo rat in dangerous space you are probably better off ratting in a T1 cruiser that fully insured you can recoup the loss of in an hour or two.
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.18 18:21:00 - [178] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Both Dragon Greg and Escador make a very valid point. 0.0 needs big changes. What ever those changes may be. At the moment, really the only people you find in 0.0 are lone ratters. So a 0.0 roam quickly turns into: Send in a scout and try and catch the guy before he safespots or; Send in a scout, scout reports hostile fleet in system twice our numbers, "ok lads, lets turn around". This happens again and again, so to make 0.0 more interesting and rewarding for people on both sides of the argument, things needs to change. NPC's and belts need to be more rewarding to encourage groups of players to work together, i.e mining ops, group ratting. And of course local needs to be gone so there is increased risk for both sets of players. No more "Someone in local! Insta safepot!!" and no more "Bigger gang ahead, run away" Back in the day catching people was never a problem, with a little bit of effort. Today with the much improved scanning system that is even easier. The trouble is that we mix up two very different topics: macro abuse and the actual problem: 0.0 is emptying out more and more. Macro abuse is something which only CCP can really fight. We can annoy them and make macro life close to hell, but only CCP can home in on the kill really. 0.0 emptying out is something we have done to ourselves tbh. We want our monies without the risk as we want to roast other people. On a pilot level that leads to alts and farming missions and trade, on an organisation level that leads to x64's and easy blobs. Removing local? It'll become even emptier. Human nature sucks. No, it needs a much more creative solution, one which for the long term would provide a real solution, but only once 0.0 is populated properly. Not this kneejerk crap of "zomg I want my ADD gank or I ragequit or forum *****" :P Move level 5's to nullsec, enable alliances to install agents at their outposts, make sure the tools of the big boys can only be built in nullsec, revamp NPC's so they become real teamwork target, lots of options. In the end we'll get juicy victim alliances again, and mining and mission hubs. And then getting a gank will be a hell of a lot simpler since we get choice. Reward is just one angle. Keep in mind that we all fall for lazy and as little risk as possible. We need to get a bit forced to adapt in our habits tbh.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 18:57:00 - [179] Originally by: Dragon Greg Removing local? It'll become even emptier. Human nature sucks. This is an opinion that ignores all the drastic changes that were implemented in EVE (starting with severe nerf to tanking and then to battleships back in 2003) and their effect on the player population. It also ignores both the player and the CCP proposed implementation of this change.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.18 19:07:00 - [180] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset continued ... I'm a Pilgrim pilot myself but from a balance perspective it just takes the **** to be able to do 350dps, fit a 1600mm plate, tackle, disable a ships guns and fit an expanded probe launcher and covops cyno all from one ship that can warp around cloaked. I do love it mind, and I plan to make the most of it, but I don't see how it's good for the game at all. Wow, what awesome blatant lies you tell my friend! This is the crux of the problem, people like you stretching the truth to such an extent that you muddle the entire discussion. Lets take this example you've set out here shall we? A pilgrim cannot do 350dps unless you pack 3 heavy pulse lasers in addition to your drones, which won't allow you to fit a 1600 plate. Drones ALONE at ALL 5 SKILLS is actually UNDER 200 dps. That is a FACT, not your wild number flinging. Next, to your high slot configuration that your bantering on about. A pilgrim has FOUR highslots. With Recon 5, you've got some fitting space, but the Expanded Probe Launcher, and Cover Cyno take up a total of 270 of your total 437 CPU, AND only leaves you one high slot for your main offensive weapon, which is a neut, but the CPU loss alone is enough to cripple the rest of the ships fit. You see, I too, am a pilgrim fan, have been flying it solo for quite some time, and have spent VAST sums of money fitting one out. The lies you told in this one section alone mean that every thing else you said was simply rubbish in my mind, and that you, and your posts are no longer worth reading, as you are pursuing a personal agenda, and will lie to see it through to its end.

Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 19:11:00 - [181] Originally by: Descrambled Originally by: Venkul Mul Even more interesting you are sending a packet with the position of all ship in system to the program every X seconds, letting the EVE program on your PC doing all the calculations. What huge security hole would this be the onboard scanner isn't that huge of a range. Anyway, to keep things simple we can just go with delayed local. The idea of 0.0 is to protect your space anyway. I'd be content with delayed local mode. Works fine for wormholes. Let's move it over to 0.0 to fix PvP. PvP is supposed to be non-consentual- not "consentual" pvp like we most often have now My dear, from your description of the mechanic you are proposing the end user get the information on all ship in system and then the EVE program display to him only the locations of those he can see. So someone hacking that informations would get the coordinates of all the ships in system. If the system was doing the calculation server side like I think it should do if something similar was implemented the problem is lag. You can chose your poison but not avoid it.
Hrodgar Ortal	Posted - 2009.06.18 19:25:00 - [182] I'll support this the day my hulk can defend itself against the 5-10 gang that wishes no more than to kill it (since killing mining ships is very brave??). Local is the only defense a miner has. Removing it means removing mining as a profession in anything but high sec.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 19:28:00 - [183] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Wow, what awesome blatant lies you tell my friend! This is the crux of the problem, people like you stretching the truth to such an extent that you muddle the entire discussion. Lets take this example you've set out here shall we? A pilgrim cannot do 350dps unless you pack 3 heavy pulse lasers in addition to your drones, which won't allow you to fit a 1600 plate. Drones ALONE at ALL 5 SKILLS is actually UNDER 200 dps. That is a FACT, not your wild number flinging. Next, to your high slot configuration that your bantering on about. A pilgrim has FOUR highslots. With Recon 5, you've got some fitting space, but the Expanded Probe Launcher, and Cover Cyno take up a total of 270 of your total 437 CPU, AND only leaves you one high slot for your main offensive weapon, which is a neut, but the CPU loss alone is enough to cripple the rest of the ships fit. You see, I too, am a pilgrim fan, have been flying it solo for quite some time, and have spent VAST sums of money fitting one out. The lies you told in this one section alone mean that every thing else you said was simply rubbish in my mind, and that you, and your posts are no longer worth reading, as you are pursuing a personal agenda, and will lie to see it through to its end. You sir, are my hero.
Khorin D'tael Caldari D'tael Contracts	Posted - 2009.06.18 19:29:00 - [184] Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal I'll support this the day my hulk can defend itself against the 5-10 gang that wishes no more than to kill it (since killing mining ships is very brave??). Local is the only defense a miner has. Removing it means removing mining as a profession in anything but high sec. It's an MMO! Can't you have scouts monitering the gates or do you want to be a miner like some ppl want to be a 1 man pwning machine in a MS or Titan and are disapointed when they discover they can't?
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.18 19:36:00 - [185] Sure, people love scout same if they don't want, to permit to others to do what they want to do. When local removers will become more realistic... _______ Local is fine, period.
Hrodgar Ortal	Posted - 2009.06.18 19:56:00 - [186] Edited by: Hrodgar Ortal on 18/06/2009 19:56:35 Originally by: Khorin D'tael Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal I'll support this the day my hulk can defend itself against the 5-10 gang that wishes no more than to kill it (since killing mining ships is very brave??). Local is the only defense a miner has. Removing it means removing mining as a profession in anything but high sec. It's an MMO! Can't you have scouts monitering the gates or do you want to be a miner like some ppl want to be a 1 man pwning machine in a MS or Titan and are disapointed when they discover they can't? Ok, I assume you just volunteered to do that??? Oh right... No you didn't. It is a game, people want to have fun, babysitting someone isn't very fun for anyone. It is a game, not work, the day it is more work than fun you won't see me at least in it. The second local disappears mining will go poof, you will cheer with the fact that 0.0 will be empty but well thats you I guess. What you want isn't that a miner should have friends along, what you want is riskfree kills. Thats the only thing anyone that demands local to be removed want, so far each and every argument boils down to "the people we want to kill warp off". When the balance of power is even between the attacker and defender things might be different but as it stands the attacker has all the advantages when he catches the defender. Balance? Nope not in the slightest. Balance on the other hand is needed to make a GAME! work. Local balances it a bit so that at least the people who are ratting or mining can have a fighting chance to get to keep their ships.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 20:06:00 - [187] Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal When the balance of power is even between the attacker and defender things might be different but as it stands the attacker has all the advantages when he catches the defender. Balance? Nope not in the slightest. Balance on the other hand is needed to make a GAME! work. Local balances it a bit so that at least the people who are ratting or mining can have a fighting chance to get to keep their ships. I'll try to be as constructive as I can with you here. If you get caught by a ship, no matter what ship you are in, if there are more of them, you will die. PVP ship, NPC ship or Barge, it does not matter. The point is, they way the game is now, anyone awake at the keyboard, without a mental defficencey, will never ever get caught, end of.
Obsidian Hawk RONA Corporation	Posted - 2009.06.18 20:25:00 - [188] wheee posting on an epic page 7 on something that wont happen in game. /add fuel to the fire.
Turin Caldari Body Count Inc. Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.06.18 20:29:00 - [189] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Turin That depends on the ship. Intercepters and Dicters come out of warp very fast, and can align to a target almost instantly. Furthermore, a Hulk for example, takes at least a good 15 seconds just to get up to speed and warp, and thats already after its aligned. A hulk would NEVER get away. I still stand by mty statement. If I am ratting or mining ( especially mining ), and I see a ship on my scan only 20AU away, at that point, I am dead. They just havent popped my ship yet. Unless you're aligned, that is. Right? Don't tell me you don't know how to stay aligned and do your job. It is obvious you didnt actually read my post based on what you wrote. Please re-read my post.
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 20:29:00 - [190] I tell a lie!!! I was once caught in a belt while ratting a couple of years ago. Domi v Domi, and I died. And the only reason I was caught was because I was alt tabbed out of the game posting on these forums. But some people I know have said that I am 2 cans short of a six pack, so maybe my point still stands.

VoiceInTheDesert Zebra Corp Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2009.06.18 20:36:00 - [191] Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal Ok, I assume you just volunteered to do that??? Oh right... No you didn't. It is a game, people want to have fun, babysitting someone isn't very fun for anyone. It is a game, not work, the day it is more work than fun you won't see me at least in it. The second local disappears mining will go poof, you will cheer with the fact that 0.0 will be empty but well thats you I guess. What you want isn't that a miner should have friends along, what you want is riskfree kills. Thats the only thing anyone that demands local to be removed want, so far each and every argument boils down to "the people we want to kill warp off". When the balance of power is even between the attacker and defender things might be different but as it stands the attacker has all the advantages when he catches the defender. Balance? Nope not in the slightest. Balance on the other hand is needed to make a GAME! work. Local balances it a bit so that at least the people who are ratting or mining can have a fighting chance to get to keep their ships. I sympathize with you...I really do. But an MMO isn't meant to be played alone and it's unrealistic to assume you should be safe in nosec when you're alone, regardless of what ship you're in. My combat ship isn't any safer solo than your hulk because 00 is full of people who play together. If you want the big rewards, you gotta work with people. And each argument does most certainly not boil down to "the ships we want are warping away." The main issue, for me at least, is with alt scouts sitting in noob ships, docked in station or cloaked in cov ops just sitting in system with no risk keeping perfect count of all your ships in local. If a cov ops pilot sneaks up on a fleet and keeps on the grid with them and actually scouts, that should be the way he gets his numbers and intel. Hell, even with the onboard scanner. But as it stands, alt scouts can just sit in space or in station and effortlessly report back numbers of hostiles. Another annoying effect of local is the ability of wts to instantly see you and dock when you enter system. I have traveled across the galaxy and used 3-4 locator agents on a target only to have him see me in local and dock up when I got close (most of the time because he moved systems unexpectantly right before I got to where my locator said he was. The fact that it protects macro ratters/miners or even legit ratters/miners is really a side issue. It's annoying, but it's not what most people are frustrated with. No one wants legit people who are actually at their keyboard playing the game to get hosed. We all want a solution that's easy on the server, rewards/protects those who are paying attention and gives the shaft to the lazy ones I have described in this post. I think you could agree with that (after all, the more lazy miners we kill, the better profits on the ores you mine, right?)
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.18 20:56:00 - [192] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 18/06/2009 21:01:07 Another one who love waste time to do nothing and think that work is playing...
Grath Telkin Amarr The Illuminati. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2009.06.18 21:10:00 - [193] Edited by: Grath Telkin on 18/06/2009 21:11:03 Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 18/06/2009 21:01:07 Another one who love waste time to do nothing and think that work is playing... Is it wrong that I'm desperately awaiting the reset because of people like you? Edit: To clarify, if you want risk free money making, you belong in EMPIRE (and honestly, from your posting, and obvious lack of back bone, you probably belong there anyway), if you are out in 0.0, you probably deserve to get blown up.
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 21:14:00 - [194] Originally by: Khorin D'tael Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal I'll support this the day my hulk can defend itself against the 5-10 gang that wishes no more than to kill it (since killing mining ships is very brave??). Local is the only defense a miner has. Removing it means removing mining as a profession in anything but high sec. It's an MMO! Can't you have scouts monitering the gates or do you want to be a miner like some ppl want to be a 1 man pwning machine in a MS or Titan and are disapointed when they discover they can't? Why use 3 accounts to scout and one to mine when you can use all 4 to mine or do missions in empire? Do you really think that any player would actively "play" as a scout effectively sitting on a gate in a cov ops watching for enemies all day long (can eve be more boring?). Or maybe you think MMO means must have 4 accounts?
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.18 21:21:00 - [195] Edited by: Mikayla Grey on 18/06/2009 21:21:53 Originally by: Grath Telkin Edited by: Grath Telkin on 18/06/2009 21:11:03 Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 18/06/2009 21:01:07 Another one who love waste time to do nothing and think that work is playing... Is it wrong that I'm desperately awaiting the reset because of people like you? Edit: To clarify, if you want risk free money making, you belong in EMPIRE (and honestly, from your posting, and obvious lack of back bone, you probably belong there anyway), if you are out in 0.0, you probably deserve to get blown up. Chestbeating aside ratting in 0.0 without local is not smart, doesnt take balls, doesnt take skills(or maybe you think tolerating the incredible boredom of scouting is a skill). Its just stupid if your point is to make isk for your pvp ships.
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.18 21:25:00 - [196] Edited by: Spurty on 18/06/2009 21:26:05 reality check, look at all alliance killboards. The day there are zero kills on them for a regular eve day, thats the day local going becomes plausible. Its very far away checking the numbers just now. Why do we even need to break the game and remove local exactly? Its certainly not stopping people from getting kills looking again, at the kill boards. edit: tied up in too many nots
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.06.18 21:47:00 - [197] Edited by: Santiago Fahahrri on 18/06/2009 21:50:01 My corpmates and I would completely continue to rat in 0.0 with Local changed to Recent Speakers mode. Those who have indicated that scouting involves sitting at a gate doing nothing for hours have a very limited understanding of what it takes to be a good scout. As a member of (and primary scout for) a small, independant, 0.0 based corp I completely support changing local to Recent Speakers mode.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.18 21:51:00 - [198] What do killboards have to do with this? Many times Alliances fight each like arranged pvp. One spy on other side tells your side their fleet is in transit. So your side tries to come up with the numbers to meet up Another consentual pvp is when two gangs are on the move. Intel reports where they going. Your fleet commander looks at composition of his gang and figures out if they can fight. The other gang will know of you most likely after you've popped their scout or spotted by the scout Consentual pvp kills dominate Alliance killboards to an extent And sure, there will be some random kills tossed in for good measure meh, starting a thread asking bout Black ops but they so hideously expensive I dont know if I can even try to get the jump on a gang this way. But I guess I'm down to try it.... If that works then it would resolve my wish for surprising cowards
Otellus Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2009.06.18 21:58:00 - [199] The only effect removing local will have is nerf 0.0 even further. All there will be is some POSses mining highend moonstuff and PvP gangs running around bored out of their skulls because there are no targets. Life in 0.0 is already pretty pointless at the moment, removing local will only skew the risk-reward ratio even further towards risks. If CCP is gonna do this, they need to triple or quadruple the bounties on 0.0 rats at the very least.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:10:00 - [200] Originally by: Otellus The only effect removing local will have is nerf 0.0 even further. All there will be is some POSses mining highend moonstuff and PvP gangs running around bored out of their skulls because there are no targets. Life in 0.0 is already pretty pointless at the moment, removing local will only skew the risk-reward ratio even further towards risks. If CCP is gonna do this, they need to triple or quadruple the bounties on 0.0 rats at the very least. The only thing Recent Speakers mode local would nerf is lazy, dumb, or careless pilots.

Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:28:00 - [201] last couple of posters are actually on to something here. Why not make it so that you can fit a module to your ship (which can not be fitted at the same time as a cloak to avoid abuse) that lets you see where active players are using the map? Rather than blinding people, surely giving them more intel so they can get fights would be more the answer.
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:30:00 - [202] no
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:38:00 - [203] Originally by: Armoured C no no to finding fights? Ok .. so CCP, local issue, non-issue. next thread Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails hi cat here i was thinking earlier about corpses...
Joiske	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:38:00 - [204] bah this same ole cheastnut make claoks an active module but also delay the log out timer ok ... here it goes .. ratter warps to ss ... cloak uses some form of fuel to run or has a timer thus cloaker is safe for a period of i dunno 1 min lets say, they decloak and will need to move or riisk being scanned out.... now heres the kicker .. if they attempt to log at the stage of being cloaked make it so that you can not loggoff once you have cloaked ... bit like agression timer you hit cloak you are flagged .. thus any logoff will render your ship vulrable... This should only apply to non covert ships ... all covert ships should retain their cloaking ability .. you cant macro in a covert ... removing local is not an option ... 0.0 will become worse than low sec if you do that ..
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:43:00 - [205] Originally by: Spurty Originally by: Armoured C no no to finding fights? Ok .. so CCP, local issue, non-issue. next thread locakl has nothing to do with finding fights local has something to do with being ganked infact local help with finding fight TBH one guy ratting in a system see 50 man hostile BS gang comming through , it is then reported on the intel channels any competent 0.0 sov alliance would then have a counter fleet set up and on a gate ready for the enevitable slaughtering. so yes no to removing local , although with out local my new tactic of cloaking HIC on gate and cloaking titan 200km off the gate wont really work JOIN FOFF NOW CHAT CHANNEL FOR MORE INFO
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.18 22:47:00 - [206] o'rly .. local has nothing to do with finding a fight? Probably getting this intel from people that only fight when people fly into their gate camps. Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails hi cat here i was thinking earlier about corpses...
needrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.18 23:01:00 - [207] Originally by: Armoured C locakl has nothing to do with finding fights local has something to do with being ganked infact local help with finding fight TBH one guy ratting in a system see 50 man hostile BS gang comming through , it is then reported on the intel channels any competent 0.0 sov alliance would then have a counter fleet set up and on a gate ready for the enevitable slaughtering. so yes no to removing local , although with out local my new tactic of cloaking HIC on gate and cloaking titan 200km off the gate wont really work Yea, your ******ed, THIS is why 0.0 is as empty as it is: 50 man gang spotted, 200 man defense gang formed to stop it, 50 man gang gets blue balled, goes home. Blob warfare at its very soul. If removing local stops that, hell yea, get it gone as soon as possible. With the change proposed so far (recent speaker) 4 or 5 guys (OMG SMALL GANG WARFARE) can slip in to a space and actually have a chance at DOING something to an opposing force before the defense blob forms, whereas, if your space is porous enough to allow a 50 man BS fleet to slip in without SOMEBODY catching it on scan somewhere, you probably don't deserve to have said space. This would alter a lot of tactics currently used in EVE, and I think it would be in a good way. Small gangs with something to do, blobs needing to think instead of just warp and mash fkeys while reading alphabet from their overview. You can point to flaws all day, and other people can point out reasons this should have been done all day, in the end, its our difference in opinion of what the games "dangerous" areas should be like. And yea, double, or even triple the current rat bounties are more than acceptable as a trade off for the slightly increased risk. I know its amazing, but you could use the extra money to PAY the lower sp alts in alliances to scout for you, or do the more mundane jobs like patrol your space with the extra money. The options are pretty hefty at the point that you open up the game.
Armoured C Gallente Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.18 23:12:00 - [208] removing local will make you have no fights you get you ganks which is clearly what you want it for, once that 50 man gang hit station systems it will be camping fest and then they will go home you send a 50 man gang TO GET FIGHTS if the enemy beat yuou with a 100 man fleet well bring a 100 man fleet. talking about blobbing and crap as if to say it bad, it is human nature why we blob, human will continuie blobbing at thie game because it causes greater chance of survival , blobbing is only going to go up but at least with local you can see a blob comming and prepare a counter blob they brought a fleet they want a fight , i think it is only fair that they get given it and go home with there tails between there legs. JOIN FOFF NOW CHAT CHANNEL FOR MORE INFO
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 23:16:00 - [209] Originally by: Turin Originally by: Razin Originally by: Turin That depends on the ship. Intercepters and Dicters come out of warp very fast, and can align to a target almost instantly. Furthermore, a Hulk for example, takes at least a good 15 seconds just to get up to speed and warp, and thats already after its aligned. A hulk would NEVER get away. I still stand by mty statement. If I am ratting or mining ( especially mining ), and I see a ship on my scan only 20AU away, at that point, I am dead. They just havent popped my ship yet. Unless you're aligned, that is. Right? Don't tell me you don't know how to stay aligned and do your job. It is obvious you didnt actually read my post based on what you wrote. Please re-read my post. Aligned means having your ship pointing at the warpout point at three-quarter speed. Which is what you do when you're in a dangerous environment where you may need to warp out on a moment's notice. Just pointing your ship somewhere at 0 speed saves a little time, but it isn't being aligned. Especially for destinations off the solar ecliptic. ...
Hiroshima Jita	Posted - 2009.06.18 23:21:00 - [210] Am in favor of removing local so its in delayed mode like in wormholes. But I require: #1 Not to have to mash the scanner button for all eternity henceforth. Self explanatory. It means an automated scanner or something else that will take over some of the functionality. #2 Windows in station, or even for the station to give me a list of shiptypes of whatevers on grid with it. Undocking into a station camp with no warning is bull****. Normally you can redock. Sometimes not. It would be stupid to sit in station after the change thinking, "I'm in a assualt frigate. Once I get into open space I should be fine. But I'm not in friendly space and my friends aren't around to look outside for me. I don't know how many people are in local. There could be 100 people outside the station waiting to instapop me for all I know." Optional #3 Some way to uncloak people at range. It would have to stretch several AU to be able to effect safespots. I do not want to play cloaking online, but I will fit cloaking devices to my ships and fly the rapier if/when local changes and cloaking becomes FOTM. If nothing else the role of uncloaking people could take the form of a new t2 ship, which I'm sure would make alot of people happy. Changing local would have the positive benefit of making macros keel over dead. It would make it possible to sneak around underneath an innatentive group's nose. On the negative side it would also promote massive cloaking gangs. Right now if someone has 5 friends in system and nothing on scan, you can make a judgement call whether or not to engage them. With the change any fight could instantly become a gank with no way of ever knowing the possibility was there. You could get the same effect, although slightly slower by putting the fleet in a deep safespot at least 15 AU from the bait. Also roaming gangs would puke chunks. You hit many many systems that are empty when roaming and with the change you would have to painstakingly search each one. And the number of large ships like battleships used in combat would plummet. Currently a good set of scouts can make moving around not to bad. After the change any moment your bs could have stumbled into a deathtrap your scout went happily by. Cloaking online I already mentioned. On that note. If there was a new ewar ship class that was dedicated to more scanning it would be a good thing. Modules that could extend onboard scanner range, cut through cloaks and give other info about ships not ongrid would be extremely valuable in the new environment. And a shiptype that gave bonuses to those modules would be useful. Covops coulde begin to fill the role, but a slightly larger ship with a couple more abilities...

Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.18 23:32:00 - [211] Originally by: Razin Aligned means having your ship pointing at the warpout point at three-quarter speed. Which is what you do when you're in a dangerous environment where you may need to warp out on a moment's notice. Just pointing your ship somewhere at 0 speed saves a little time, but it isn't being aligned. Especially for destinations off the solar ecliptic. Being aligned can mean one of two things, being aligned while not moving or being aligned while moving. Clearly in the example you have quoted, Turin is talking about being aligned while not moving. Are you simply ignoring that fact or are trying to tell me miners must be aligned at full speed while mining?? Because you know, they wouldn't get much mining done.
needrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.18 23:33:00 - [212] Originally by: Armoured C removing local will make you have no fights you get you ganks which is clearly what you want it for, once that 50 man gang hit station systems it will be camping fest and then they will go home you send a 50 man gang TO GET FIGHTS if the enemy beat yuou with a 100 man fleet well bring a 100 man fleet. talking about blobbing and crap as if to say it bad, it is human nature why we blob, human will continuie blobbing at thie game because it causes greater chance of survival , blobbing is only going to go up but at least with local you can see a blob comming and prepare a counter blob they brought a fleet they want a fight , i think it is only fair that they get given it and go home with there tails between there legs. rationalizing blobbing doesn't make it any less fun, or any less skill intensive than the snore fest it is. after what your corp just pulled out of, your still ok with massive lagfest fleet fight ALL THE TIME, and that being the only player vs player interaction left in this game? one would think you'd be on the bus to put small gang warfare back in eve (because if you think its around now, your in deep need of therapy)
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.18 23:47:00 - [213] Edited by: Razin on 18/06/2009 23:47:52 Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Originally by: Razin Aligned means having your ship pointing at the warpout point at three-quarter speed. Which is what you do when you're in a dangerous environment where you may need to warp out on a moment's notice. Just pointing your ship somewhere at 0 speed saves a little time, but it isn't being aligned. Especially for destinations off the solar ecliptic. Being aligned can mean one of two things, being aligned while not moving or being aligned while moving. Clearly in the example you have quoted, Turin is talking about being aligned while not moving. Are you simply ignoring that fact or are trying to tell me miners must be aligned at full speed while mining?? Because you know, they wouldn't get much mining done. I insist that my definition is prevalent, especially for the situation. Aligned miner does not need to be at full speed, only enough to minimize the time to warp to an acceptable value. Mining ships are slow, and having two opposing safe spots at a belt is enough to stay safe reversing alignment every few minutes to stay within optimum of your rock. I haven't mined since 2004 so I'm not entirely sure, but I'm thinking the miner's current work load shouldn't be too high to allow for some additional speed and direction management once in a while.
Belmarduk Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2009.06.19 00:05:00 - [214] Leave local as it it but make logouts so that one does NOT go into offline-warp immediantley. One ALLWAYS should be ingame for lets say 3-5 min after logging in space. (eg aggrotimer) That would kill 2 flies with one slap. Loggoffskis would become obsolete AND Macroratters could be scanned out and blown from their **ing ships WinWin Situation If you crash during pvp you are dead anyway If you crash while ratting doing missions and dont survive the time you need to login again you were doing something wrong anyway Tbh after writting this I REALLY like this idea ! Might need a bit of finetuning but this might be the solution. Greetings Belmarduk Mainchar:
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.19 00:09:00 - [215] Edited by: Mikayla Grey on 19/06/2009 00:10:56 Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Edited by: Santiago Fahahrri on 18/06/2009 21:50:01 My corpmates and I would completely continue to rat in 0.0 with Local changed to Recent Speakers mode. Those who have indicated that scouting involves sitting at a gate doing nothing for hours have a very limited understanding of what it takes to be a good scout. As a member of (and primary scout for) a small, independant, 0.0 based corp I completely support changing local to Recent Speakers mode. Sadly its you that are deluded in what a scout would need to do to protect ratters/miners.(Get into a 0.0 alliance with sov and see for yourself). Since the only place a scout can see an incoming cloaker gang is on the gate you would have to stay there. (Without local cloaks become vastly more powerful and as such vastly more popular)All the fun and games when doing fleet ops and travelling is completely irrelevant for the case of scouting for normal ratting in 0.0. And nomatter what the scouts do your isk making will suck if you use accounts to scout instead of running lvl 4 missions before even considering the possibility of ship loss. Originally by: needrandomnamegenerator one would think you'd be on the bus to put small gang warfare back in eve (because if you think its around now, your in deep need of therapy) CCP made WH space specifically for small gangs, complete with pain in the ass logistics to keep it that way. Why are you not there?
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.19 00:12:00 - [216] Originally by: Mikayla Grey CCP made WH space specifically for small gangs, complete with pain in the ass logistics to keep it that way. Why are you not there? Yah, you totally get it. For those that can't extrapolate what happens when you lose local and there is no limit on the size of a roaming gang, imaging 400~800 goonies in one big fleet romping around 0.0 Good luck with that now. Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails hi cat here i was thinking earlier about corpses...
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.19 00:14:00 - [217] Edited by: wtbrandomnamegenerator on 19/06/2009 00:14:56 Originally by: Belmarduk Leave local as it it but make logouts so that one does NOT go into offline-warp immediantley. One ALLWAYS should be ingame for lets say 3-5 min after logging in space. (eg aggrotimer) That would kill 2 flies with one slap. Loggoffskis would become obsolete AND Macroratters could be scanned out and blown from their **ing ships How on earth would leaving you ingame after you log off fix the macro program that relies on local to warp and cloak the ships? Originally by: Mikayla Grey Originally by: needrandomnamegenerator one would think you'd be on the bus to put small gang warfare back in eve (because if you think its around now, your in deep need of therapy) CCP made WH space specifically for small gangs, complete with pain in the ass logistics to keep it that way. Why are you not there? First, please link me the dev comment that says they specifically made WH space for small gangs? I must have missed that. Second, how does a system set up that can take you extraneous amounts of time to get out of help small gang pvp? What, we roam for 3 hours and see 6 systems because scanning for wormhole signatures takes so long to do? That is probably the most flawed argument I've ever actually seen in print. You've got a lot of balls calling somebody else deluded.
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.19 00:22:00 - [218] Edited by: Mikayla Grey on 19/06/2009 00:24:07 Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator First, please link me the dev comment that says they specifically made WH space for small gangs? I must have missed that. Second, how does a system set up that can take you extraneous amounts of time to get out of help small gang pvp? What, we roam for 3 hours and see 6 systems because scanning for wormhole signatures takes so long to do? That is probably the most flawed argument I've ever actually seen in print. You've got a lot of balls calling somebody else deluded. Try playing EVE. Limiting logistics is the only thing that will limit gangsizes. Why do you think they made WH gates limited? Just to be a pain in the ass? No its to keep the gangsizes small. But it guess its much easier to demand that everyone else gets two scout accounts than spend some time scanning.
Belmarduk Amarr Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2009.06.19 00:22:00 - [219] @ wtb - longname: What makes you think a cloaked ship on a safespot is safe ? Mainchar:
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.19 00:31:00 - [220] Edited by: wtbrandomnamegenerator on 19/06/2009 00:33:30 Originally by: Mikayla Grey Try playing EVE. Limiting logistics is the only thing that will limit gangsizes. Why do you think they made WH gates limited? Just to be a pain in the ass? No its to keep the gangsizes small. No, its just the only way your willing to think about limiting gang size, there's a difference Edit: you still haven't linked anything from CCP defining WH space as made for "small gangs" Originally by: Mikayla Grey But it guess its much easier to demand that everyone else put a little more effort into staying safe in unsafe space. fyp

Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.06.19 00:41:00 - [221] Originally by: Mikayla Grey Edited by: Mikayla Grey on 19/06/2009 00:10:56 Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Edited by: Santiago Fahahrri on 18/06/2009 21:50:01 My corpmates and I would completely continue to rat in 0.0 with Local changed to Recent Speakers mode. Those who have indicated that scouting involves sitting at a gate doing nothing for hours have a very limited understanding of what it takes to be a good scout. As a member of (and primary scout for) a small, independant, 0.0 based corp I completely support changing local to Recent Speakers mode. Sadly its you that are deluded in what a scout would need to do to protect ratters/miners.(Get into a 0.0 alliance with sov and see for yourself). Since the only place a scout can see an incoming cloaker gang is on the gate you would have to stay there. (Without local cloaks become vastly more powerful and as such vastly more popular)All the fun and games when doing fleet ops and travelling is completely irrelevant for the case of scouting for normal ratting in 0.0. And nomatter what the scouts do your isk making will suck if you use accounts to scout instead of running lvl 4 missions before even considering the possibility of ship loss. Dunno what to tell you beyond: I've been in null sec for almost three years. I can't stand empire space. I've been in large alliances and I've now moved on to a small independent corp. In both situations I have personally been the scout in charge of defending the ratters and miners. The small corp I'm in now spends all it's time in null sec without sov. We get hunted all the time by alliances who think we have no right to do what we do. We do it anyway. We would NEVER consider high sec and missions. We would LOVE local to be changed to Recent Speakers mode as it is in wormhole space. Your opinion doesn't match up with what my experience has taught me. When a "hunter" comes into system he's like a hungry man entering a restaurant. Local is like a menu. Does a menu benefit the hungry hunter or does it benefit the steak? It benefits the hunter. Smart pilots will benefit from the change to local. Dumb pilots will suffer from the removal of the training wheels. I fly with smart pilots. We can't wait for this to happen. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.19 01:28:00 - [222] Yes, trouble is that to get ganks you do not need smart targets, you want dumb targets. Since the dumb and lazy ones - the majority - will seek other ways and tail back to empire that will mean less targets, again. I understand what you're saying, and kudos for making it work, but this thread started out from the view of "I can't get my quick fix when I log in and don't see anything but macro ravens and the odd smart guy who knows how to evade me" :P
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.19 02:54:00 - [223] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Neutrino Sunset continued ... I'm a Pilgrim pilot myself but from a balance perspective it just takes the **** to be able to do 350dps, fit a 1600mm plate, tackle, disable a ships guns and fit an expanded probe launcher and covops cyno all from one ship that can warp around cloaked. I do love it mind, and I plan to make the most of it, but I don't see how it's good for the game at all. Wow, what awesome blatant lies you tell my friend! This is the crux of the problem, people like you stretching the truth to such an extent that you muddle the entire discussion. Lets take this example you've set out here shall we? A pilgrim cannot do 350dps unless you pack 3 heavy pulse lasers in addition to your drones, which won't allow you to fit a 1600 plate. Drones ALONE at ALL 5 SKILLS is actually UNDER 200 dps. That is a FACT, not your wild number flinging. Next, to your high slot configuration that your bantering on about. A pilgrim has FOUR highslots. With Recon 5, you've got some fitting space, but the Expanded Probe Launcher, and Cover Cyno take up a total of 270 of your total 437 CPU, AND only leaves you one high slot for your main offensive weapon, which is a neut, but the CPU loss alone is enough to cripple the rest of the ships fit. You see, I too, am a pilgrim fan, have been flying it solo for quite some time, and have spent VAST sums of money fitting one out. The lies you told in this one section alone mean that every thing else you said was simply rubbish in my mind, and that you, and your posts are no longer worth reading, as you are pursuing a personal agenda, and will lie to see it through to its end. You are an idiot and should probably stop posting on this or any other forum. Calling people a liar when you are self-evidently clueless about ship fitting will only serve to make you look stupid. Putting pulse lasers on a Pilgrim is r3tarded, neuts are also fairly pointless. I didn't mean that you could do 350dps and fit a CovOps cyno using the same setup, if you'd had the manners to enquire I could have made that more plain for you. I make the damage for 5 Hammerhead IIs on a Pilgrim with lvl V skills 238, (158 on an unbonused ship). Adding up the damage for 5 Hammerhead II, 2x Neutron Blaster II firing Void with 2 Hybrid Burst Aerator I find it comes to 349dps, that's without any implants and T1 rigs. What's more you can quite easily sacrifice tank and get even more dps while retaining the plate. The midslots of this setup are equally unconventional but it does have tackle and a speed mod. Would you like to apologise now, or in lieu of that a promise to never post in the same thread as me ever again would be acceptable?
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.19 03:05:00 - [224] Originally by: needrandomnamegenerator Yea, your ******ed, THIS is why 0.0 is as empty as it is: 50 man gang spotted, 200 man defense gang formed to stop it, 50 man gang gets blue balled, goes home. Blob warfare at its very soul. If removing local stops that, hell yea, get it gone as soon as possible. With the change proposed so far (recent speaker) 4 or 5 guys (OMG SMALL GANG WARFARE) can slip in to a space and actually have a chance at DOING something to an opposing force before the defense blob forms, whereas, if your space is porous enough to allow a 50 man BS fleet to slip in without SOMEBODY catching it on scan somewhere, you probably don't deserve to have said space. You seriously think that remove local will reduce blobs ? In the contrary, this will make them mandatory. You are blind ? So it will be risky to go out with small size gangs and roam as you can be destroyed stupidly without be able to know it and avoid it. So instead of a 100 gang size, let go with 200 gang size. With that, we will be nearly SURE that there will not have any problem... Until the day we have to go to 300 gang size as the ennemy will do the same. Humans don't like risks dammit. And they don't like LOSE. You have to take this factors in consideration. Be blind is worse than anything else, and lose is out of question. So people will adapt to it, by blobbing even more to reduce the risks to lose.
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.19 03:35:00 - [225] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 19/06/2009 03:38:54 Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Your opinion doesn't match up with what my experience has taught me. When a "hunter" comes into system he's like a hungry man entering a restaurant. Local is like a menu. Does a menu benefit the hungry hunter or does it benefit the steak? It benefits the hunter. Hum... 3 kills and 10 losses in three years and a Corp who don't make more than 13 kills and 77 losses, but indeed, you have guts, as nearly all mails are in null secs, I have to admit. Your comparaison is not good. Yes, the hunter will be blinded. Yes, the hunted too, but this last one will get NO benefits. The hunter would not have a menu anymore, but can still know where is the food. Map statistics, belts warp beacons, Cosmic Anomalies who require 10s of scan... This only benefit the hunter. He just have to warp to some belts and scan a few if it don't have the luck of the first warp, then change system if required... But if he correctly used the map, I doubt that he would find nothing. The hunted have to do a permanent scan button session, or a permanent replacement solution, and be alert each second. Personaly... Fun + (Reward - ((Effort + Killboard Bad Influence + (Risks * Fears)) / Local) - Annoyances... _______ Local is fine, period.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2009.06.19 03:45:00 - [226] Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 19/06/2009 03:38:54 Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Your opinion doesn't match up with what my experience has taught me. When a "hunter" comes into system he's like a hungry man entering a restaurant. Local is like a menu. Does a menu benefit the hungry hunter or does it benefit the steak? It benefits the hunter. Hum... 3 kills and 10 losses in three years and a Corp who don't make more than 13 kills and 77 losses, but indeed, you have guts, as nearly all mails are in null secs, I have to admit. Your comparaison is not good. Yes, the hunter will be blinded. Yes, the hunted too, but this last one will get NO benefits. The hunter would not have a menu anymore, but can still know where is the food. Map statistics, belts warp beacons, Cosmic Anomalies who require 10s of scan... This only benefit the hunter. He just have to warp to some belts and scan a few if it don't have the luck of the first warp, then change system if required... But if he correctly used the map, I doubt that he would find nothing. The hunted have to do a permanent scan button session, or a permanent replacement solution, and be alert each second. Personaly... Fun + (Reward - ((Effort + Killboard Bad Influence + (Risks * Fears)) / Local) - Annoyances... You've got your math, I've got my freedom. This is a recent screenshot of the My Bookmarks setting on my map (all made by me). http://deepspacegypsy.deviantart.com/art/April-2009-121341357 Is there a right answer? Nope. Is local a good thing as-is? Nope. Is local better in w-space? Yep. ~ Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.19 03:46:00 - [227] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Neutrino Sunset continued ... I'm a Pilgrim pilot myself but from a balance perspective it just takes the **** to be able to do 350dps, fit a 1600mm plate, tackle, disable a ships guns and fit an expanded probe launcher and covops cyno all from one ship that can warp around cloaked. I do love it mind, and I plan to make the most of it, but I don't see how it's good for the game at all. Wow, what awesome blatant lies you tell my friend! This is the crux of the problem, people like you stretching the truth to such an extent that you muddle the entire discussion. Lets take this example you've set out here shall we? A pilgrim cannot do 350dps unless you pack 3 heavy pulse lasers in addition to your drones, which won't allow you to fit a 1600 plate. Drones ALONE at ALL 5 SKILLS is actually UNDER 200 dps. That is a FACT, not your wild number flinging. Next, to your high slot configuration that your bantering on about. A pilgrim has FOUR highslots. With Recon 5, you've got some fitting space, but the Expanded Probe Launcher, and Cover Cyno take up a total of 270 of your total 437 CPU, AND only leaves you one high slot for your main offensive weapon, which is a neut, but the CPU loss alone is enough to cripple the rest of the ships fit. You see, I too, am a pilgrim fan, have been flying it solo for quite some time, and have spent VAST sums of money fitting one out. The lies you told in this one section alone mean that every thing else you said was simply rubbish in my mind, and that you, and your posts are no longer worth reading, as you are pursuing a personal agenda, and will lie to see it through to its end. You are an idiot and should probably stop posting on this or any other forum. Calling people a liar when you are self-evidently clueless about ship fitting will only serve to make you look stupid. Putting pulse lasers on a Pilgrim is r3tarded, neuts are also fairly pointless. I didn't mean that you could do 350dps and fit a CovOps cyno using the same setup, if you'd had the manners to enquire I could have made that more plain for you. I make the damage for 5 Hammerhead IIs on a Pilgrim with lvl V skills 238, (158 on an unbonused ship). Adding up the damage for 5 Hammerhead II, 2x Neutron Blaster II firing Void with 2 Hybrid Burst Aerator I find it comes to 349dps, that's without any implants and T1 rigs. What's more you can quite easily sacrifice tank and get even more dps while retaining the plate. The midslots of this setup are equally unconventional but it does have tackle and a speed mod. Would you like to apologise now, or in lieu of that a promise to never post in the same thread as me ever again would be acceptable? Yes, please, backpedal faster All your hypothetical fits aside, your still full of crap, and I didn't alter your original statement, so its easily readable by anybody with any sense what you were claiming about the pilgrim. Its "apologize", and no, I'm good with what I said.
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.19 04:12:00 - [228] Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri http://deepspacegypsy.deviantart.com/art/April-2009-121341357 Is there a right answer? Nope. Is local a good thing as-is? Nope. Is local better in w-space? Yep. And, by your math, I'm part of the hunted, right? And yet I still want this change... why would that be? Did I say that you didn't go to 0.0 ? So indeed, it is not the good answer. But yes, local is fine. But yes, local in W-Space is fine but for W-Space. And I guess that you want it because you can't estimate correctly the consequences, as you seem have a curious way to play at EVE. _______ Local is fine, period.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.19 04:32:00 - [229] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Yes, please, backpedal faster All your hypothetical fits aside, your still full of crap, and I didn't alter your original statement, so its easily readable by anybody with any sense what you were claiming about the pilgrim. Its "apologize", and no, I'm good with what I said. Omg you really are a charmer aren't you! You can't get much dumber than correcting somebodys spelling incorrectly when you can't even spell yourself. I don't know what backwater you're from but out here in the real world it's 'apologise' http://www.thefreedictionary.com/apologise Also it's not 'your full of crap' it's 'you're full of crap', and 'Pilgrim' not 'pilgrim'. Re. what we were actually talking about, I have shown you a fit for a 350dps Pilgrim with a cloak, expanded probe launcher and a 1600mm plate. It doesn't bother me in the slightest to conceed that it would have been easy to misconstrue my post to assume I meant that this tank/gank Pilgrim has a Covert Cyno on it as well, after all anybody with any sense could have just asked about that instead of resorting to petty name calling, and that aside my reply has easily substantiated what my post was about, not that I ever expected the likes of you to have the good grace to admit it. At any rate is there really any need to be such an utter d1ck about it? Now why don't you just scuttle back into whatever hole you crawled out from and let the intelligent people here continue with their discussion.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.19 05:15:00 - [230] The guy up a few posts is full of crap talking bout Alliances rely on Local to fight wars. You get your intel from your spies and this is how you find out when the fleet is forming, what they bringing, and when they coming. If you waited to acquire intel from Local it would be wayyyyyyyy too alte to get good numbers for a blob. Come on now....

Hrodgar Ortal	Posted - 2009.06.19 05:22:00 - [231] Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Originally by: Razin Aligned means having your ship pointing at the warpout point at three-quarter speed. Which is what you do when you're in a dangerous environment where you may need to warp out on a moment's notice. Just pointing your ship somewhere at 0 speed saves a little time, but it isn't being aligned. Especially for destinations off the solar ecliptic. Being aligned can mean one of two things, being aligned while not moving or being aligned while moving. Clearly in the example you have quoted, Turin is talking about being aligned while not moving. Are you simply ignoring that fact or are trying to tell me miners must be aligned at full speed while mining?? Because you know, they wouldn't get much mining done. They don't care about mining not being a viable profession as the only thing they want and what it all boils down to is "we want more helpless ganks to fill our KB"
Hrodgar Ortal	Posted - 2009.06.19 05:40:00 - [232] Originally by: VoiceInTheDesert stuff And removing local makes lazy miners disappear without making the risk/reward of mining so stupidly skewed it is no point? A example: Lets say the small roaming gangs you people claim to champion is 5 players. To defend against that limiting the risk of losing expensive hulks (a hulk especially fit to tank costs from about 190m and up and can't shoot back or fit anything else than a active shieldtank) you would need at least the same number of combat ships as the people who want to kill the hulks bring. Then we have the issue of where to mine, you can't do it in a non dead end system since then you would have to have even more ships escorting but lets say a dead end system. Mining bistot you can get a payoff, if only mining that, of about 25m/h and hulk. So at which point does the payoff from mining give enough to pay for escorts? If you have one or two miners needing 5 escorts is that profitable enough? 3.5m/h each nice payoff right? IIRC you can make 30m/h running lvl4's in empire while boring as hell combat pilots will not sit watching a gate and hope they are fast enough to kill a cloaking ship before it can do damage. (cyno in black ops jumpbridge and what not) And having a mining op of 10 miners and at least 10 escorts isn't a small op. A small op is a few miners which mean you wont be able to have a profitability high enough to pay for the escorts. Everyone needs to profit form industrial ops, maybe a fact lost for you. As I've said, all the complaining about local always boils down to: "We want more riskfree ganks". You want to skew the risk/reward even further away from reward in 0.0 which will inevitably mean 0 chance of any kills for you. Fun? Nope, it will make 0.0 deserted apart from moon mining.
Holy Lowlander Lone Star Joint Venture Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.06.19 06:10:00 - [233] I think this has to be the worst arguement ever 3/4 of the people posting here don't really know what they are talking about , relying on one thing to fix all their issues with eve without any negative side effects , dream on I really hope CCP will ignore this whine ... _______________ Please resize your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Jukhta Mein Frontier Voyagers Crimson Dragons	Posted - 2009.06.19 06:53:00 - [234] Originally by: Holy Lowlander I think this has to be the worst arguement ever 3/4 of the people posting here don't really know what they are talking about , relying on one thing to fix all their issues with eve without any negative side effects , dream on I really hope CCP will ignore this whine ... ...
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.19 07:58:00 - [235] Originally by: Holy Lowlander I think this has to be the worst arguement ever 3/4 of the people posting here don't really know what they are talking about , relying on one thing to fix all their issues with eve without any negative side effects , dream on I really hope CCP will ignore this whine ... Well, seeing as how CCP have specifically stated that they WANT local removed from 0.0, then I'm betting it doesn't matter what you hope. They just want a new scanner mechanic to go along with it. Even the company that makes the game admits local is broken, but the hard heads in this thread can't see past their own arguments. We have one guy even saying "all you want is cheap ganks", well, all you seem to want is "risk free isk making", and "let the macro's be because it would make us do more work to implement changes to stop them", so I guess were at a stale mate as far as the argument goes.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.19 08:47:00 - [236] It seems to me that most of the people here have been saying quite clearly that they also would like to see local removed, but that it should come with an elegant change to the scanner mechanic that wouldn't make ganking miners and ratters in lowsec and 0.0 as easy as shooting fish in a barrel. Which as you say is exactly what CCP want to do. But no one here has been able to come up with a new mechanic that really solves this problem well, which shouldn't come as any surprise because even the makers of the game haven't been able to come up with anything in that regard either. What is creating the most heat in this thread are the endless whines from those who want to gank miners and ratters plenty of who seem prepared to say almost anything to imply that adding any mechanic at all to give ratters and miners a chance in a no-local situation is not even a necessary consideration, which considering the potential for a shift in balance favouring the side of the gankers comes across as very self-indulgent. Your last post tries to use the fact that CCP wants to remove local to dismiss the viewpoint of other posters, but while your last post admits that CCP only want to do this in the context of having better scanner mechanics, throughout this thread you have flamed any suggestions along the lines of scanner mechanic changes or changes to cloaking, and instead you have advocated the wspace recent speakers model with no mechanic changes at all, which you know full well is not what CCP want for 0.0 and lowsec. So it just doesn't come across as if you're trying to have an honest discussion. Perhaps this is just a communication problem and symptomatic of the difficulty of having a discussion on the Internet though, I'm sure that irl you're probably a really nice fellow and all.
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.19 08:59:00 - [237] You did not seriously expect an honest discussion in the general discussion area did you ... it is the de facto place for forum lobbying :P
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.19 09:33:00 - [238] Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri Dunno what to tell you beyond: I've been in null sec for almost three years. I can't stand empire space. I've been in large alliances and I've now moved on to a small independent corp. In both situations I have personally been the scout in charge of defending the ratters and miners. The small corp I'm in now spends all it's time in null sec without sov. We get hunted all the time by alliances who think we have no right to do what we do. We do it anyway. We would NEVER consider high sec and missions. We would LOVE local to be changed to Recent Speakers mode as it is in wormhole space. Thats why i told you to try an alliance with sov. If you think its fun to "ninjarat" thats fine by me, but its a very ineffective way to make isk. From a perspective of isk/hr it is stupid do do what you do. Quote: When a "hunter" comes into system he's like a hungry man entering a restaurant. Local is like a menu. Does a menu benefit the hungry hunter or does it benefit the steak? It benefits the hunter. It benefits both equally. Without local the hunter in a cov ops is effectively invisible unless you keep 24/7 scouts on gates. He will know the good ratting systems, and within a few seconds a decent cov ops pilot will find you in your belt using the directional scanner. Beeing invisible he can chose the moment to uncloak and put a point on you before his gang warps to him. Quote: Smart pilots will benefit from the change to local. Dumb pilots will suffer from the removal of the training wheels. I fly with smart pilots. We can't wait for this to happen. Sorry smart pilots will put their alts in empire as its much more efficient to get isk that way for their pvp ships. You dont have to be smart to stay safe, just tolerate a lot of boredom and be willing to earn **** isk/hr. Even in good ratting systems with easy access to stations its barely worth it compared to lvl 4 missions.
Soporo Caldari	Posted - 2009.06.19 09:36:00 - [239] Posting in a We Want Moar Cheap And Easy Ganks thread. Alternately known as Drive Moar Players To Empire, Kill 0.0 Mining, and Make Recons the ****zle thread.
Shaemell Buttleson Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.19 09:44:00 - [240] Last night we had a small gang (4 of us) I was sat on a gate uncloaked in a Rapier and the other 3 were the other side. I had a new local show and then another and then had 2 intis target me 30 seconds later while being off the gate. I knew or at least suspected they were baiting me and told the others to hold on a sec. Unfortunatly 1 person jumped through to engage at which point Local spiked by another 15 or so. I didnt engage and jumped through and the guy who hadn't waited lost his ship. Anyway to cut a long story short or shorter I didn't engage because I saw the hostile gangs size and got away because I used Local. I more often than not fly Intis and scout for the gang and if I see local is empty I say straight away on comms and move to the next gate. If I see 1 person in local I tell the guys to hold and begin scanning down. I have just given 2 examples of why a small roaming gang would be effected if Local is removed so please all you Miners and mission runners or belt ratters or whatever you do please get off your high horses and say we just want cheap ganks without risk because we will be effected just as much as you. We will get caught out just as much as you and potentialy lose ships which are just as expensive and probably harder to replace because we don't have a steady income like you more industrial types.

Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.19 10:08:00 - [241] You have given an example which demonstrates how the balance between one combat gang and another combat gang might be retained were local to be removed. But obviously there is more than one type of combat in Eve, and as everyone here has been pointing out the kind of combat that stands to become imbalanced is not one combat gang vs another combat gang, but rather one combat gang or solo gankers vs ratters and miners. So I don't see what this adds to the debate. I'm not sure what point your example about the Inty scout is trying to make either. With no local you would use a cloaked scout, a quick look around with the directional scanner and 30 seconds later you would know what you would have known by looking at local. Unless perhaps you are trying to suggest that the thirty seconds it takes for you to make that scan makes your job so much more difficult that it balances out the fact that if there are any targets in the system they have no way to detect you at all, which would be stretching the bounds of credibility somewhat.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.19 10:49:00 - [242] Originally by: frog'us Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:14:48 There is currently no risk whatsoever for a ratter that has local open. what exactly are the risk for gankers ? There is no risk in attacking people who make no effort to protect or defend themselves. From the tone of your question it seems that you think this is somehow wrong.
Zirketch Kruug Minmatar Sincarnate Holding Black Core Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.19 10:55:00 - [243] Firstly, after the second page I couldn't be bothered reading more whines so my suggestion may have been covered already. Here goes... (could be flawed so please comment) As I understand it all channels are connected throught a "Deep-Space" signal, i.e. all ships are permanently connected to this signal. So some options could be something like: 1) Automatically connect to deep-space signal on entry to system, i.e. presence in local is displayed (your ship pings the tower on entry and ID confirmed). 2) Never connect to "Deep-Space" Signal, i.e. no presence in any channel. 3) Manual connection to "Deep-Space Signal, Local is blind to you and you are blind to local. Thus as soon as you chatter in in any private channel you have connected to the tower and your presence is broadcast. Since many in eve use TS or Vent this is easily avoided, but eve-voice will give a presence marker. This method could possibly be coupled with Sov in system/Constalation, i.e. some control for the occupying force, Attacking force would need to field a "Deep-Space signal scrambler" (new module/ship possibly). Just a few thoughts but on the whole I agree local needs to modified in 0.0 and possibly lowsec. Zirk.
Jukhtress Mein	Posted - 2009.06.19 11:19:00 - [244] In any real life military context and in almost all gaming contexts, industrial types are always escorted or protected in some form with military ships. I don't see why this should be any different in Eve. If the carebear/escort says: thats a waste of time and resources - every 1 escort spent doing escorting duties is 1 less miner, and it's totally boring, then they are merely trying to be greedy.
Deathhawk Hammersmith Hardmen Exquisite Malevolence	Posted - 2009.06.19 11:25:00 - [245] hmm makes sense actually i never thought about it being a macro but it is ****ing annoying im all for removing local in 0.0 its awesome in wh space
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.19 11:47:00 - [246] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset throughout this thread you have flamed any suggestions along the lines of scanner mechanic changes or changes to cloaking, and instead you have advocated the wspace recent speakers model with no mechanic changes at all, which you know full well is not what CCP want for 0.0 and lowsec. First, I'm going to need you to quote one place I've flamed anybody suggesting a change to scanning mechanics Second, I'll need you to back that by quoting me flaming someone suggesting a change to cloaking mechanics Last "which you know full well is not what CCP want for 0.0 and low sec"....well, honestly, I've never mentioned changing low sec, its still under the province of the empires, and assumed it would have whatever RP spin signal generators that empire would have. 0.0 is supposed to be totally unsafe, unless you make it safe, so, make it like that. I also, unlike you who obviously has the ear of some dev, do NOT know full well if they want it to be like WH space, but its good that you have the developers ear like you do, so perhaps YOU could tell us (since you know full well what they want) what they want for 0.0 and low sec. Also, no, I'm a jerk IRL too, and I get paid to be one, but it was a nice sentiment.
elscorcho Shujenka Operation Enterprise	Posted - 2009.06.19 11:49:00 - [247] I'm scared enough about moving into 0.0 with my corp, please don't take local away from me! :( ____________________________________ I also go by the name 'luvs2spooge'.
Aylara	Posted - 2009.06.19 12:37:00 - [248] OMG, it's full of bots. Remove the damn local chat already. I didn't see people complaining about the lack of local in WH space. 0.0 is for the people that want a challenge, a harsh environment, the endgame not the Carebear Bonanza. The Empire is there for all the people that want to play in reasonable safety. Remove the local chat.
Djana Libra Caldari Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.19 12:45:00 - [249] Remove it from low-sec and empire as well please
TradePirate	Posted - 2009.06.19 13:07:00 - [250] Edited by: TradePirate on 19/06/2009 13:08:37 After recently being in 0.0 to get my sec back, I encountered 2 such bots in 2 systems next to one another. Literally every belt was killed, never looted, EVEN the faction wrecks (Odd isnt it?) I say these bots should be totally banned and their main accounts, or allow everyone to use them because its such an unfair advantage, especially for those like me that have to pay to play with ISK (PLEX) at this moment because of financial troubles, and even the plex prices are hiked up beyond affordability by greedy resellers (Possibly those who use bots) to get those insane amounts of isk to keep buying and reselling plex. I think PLEX should have a static cost in game as it involves RMT. 300 million for 30 days, 100m for 10 day seems reasonable not 150.

Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.19 14:14:00 - [251] @wtbrandomnamegenerator I find it hard to believe that you don't think we've already **ted up this thread quite enough yet, or that anyone here really wants to see a rerun of your vitriolic posting. But so be it. Originally by:** "needrandomnamegenerator" Yea, your ****ed, THIS is why 0.0 is as empty as it is: Here is you calling Armoured C a **, who while he hasn't actually proposed any specific new scanner mechanic of his own had voiced the opinion that a new mechanic would be needed before local could be sensibly removed. Originally by:** "wtbrandomnamegenerator" Wow, what awesome blatant lies you tell my friend! This is the crux of the problem, people like you stretching the truth to such an extent that you muddle the entire discussion. ... you, and your posts are no longer worth reading, as you are pursuing a personal agenda, and will lie to see it through to its end. And here is you calling me a liar when I expressed the opinion that force recons are currently too combat capable for a no-local system to be reasonable. As far as whether CCP want 0.0 to be like wspace or not you stated yourself in your previous post that: Originally by: "wtbrandomnamegenerator" CCP have specifically stated that they WANT local removed from 0.0, ... They just want a new scanner mechanic to go along with it. Which by definition is NOT what is in wspace since there they have 'recent speakers' local and no scanner mechanic changes. So when you flame me for claiming that you know full well that the current wspace mechanic is not what CCP want for 0.0: Originally by: "wtbrandomnamegenerator" I also, unlike you who obviously has the ear of some dev, do NOT know full well if they want it to be like WH space You have really only served to contradict yourself. Originally by: "wtbrandomnamegenerator" I'm a jerk So it would seem.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.19 14:21:00 - [252] Originally by: TradePirate I think PLEX should have a static cost in game as it involves RMT. 300 million for 30 days, 100m for 10 day seems reasonable not 150. Can you cite some successful examples of command economies mandating artificially low pricing and succeeding? Various government have tried this in the past, generally with good prices and always (as far as I now) with identical results: Famine and/or a massive black market. Why do you think your idea would not mean that the legitimate supply of PLEX would not dry up overnight?
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.19 14:56:00 - [253] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: "needrandomnamegenerator" Yea, your ****ed, THIS is why 0.0 is as empty as it is: Here is you calling Armoured C a ****, who while he hasn't actually proposed any specific new scanner mechanic of his own had voiced the opinion that a new mechanic would be needed before local could be sensibly removed. Man, that's pretty weak. I mean, the Pilgrim stuff might have been a genuine misunderstanding due to the way you wrote it up, but with this other stuff you're just digging a hole for yourself. wtbrandomnamegenerator's rudeness notwithstanding. ...
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.19 15:13:00 - [254] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset @wtbrandomnamegenerator I find it hard to believe that you don't think we've already **ted up this thread quite enough yet, or that anyone here really wants to see a rerun of your vitriolic posting. But so be it. Originally by:** "needrandomnamegenerator" Yea, your ****ed, THIS is why 0.0 is as empty as it is: Here is you calling Armoured C a **, who while he hasn't actually proposed any specific new scanner mechanic of his own had voiced the opinion that a new mechanic would be needed before local could be sensibly removed. Originally by:** "wtbrandomnamegenerator" Wow, what awesome blatant lies you tell my friend! This is the crux of the problem, people like you stretching the truth to such an extent that you muddle the entire discussion. ... you, and your posts are no longer worth reading, as you are pursuing a personal agenda, and will lie to see it through to its end. And here is you calling me a liar when I expressed the opinion that force recons are currently too combat capable for a no-local system to be reasonable. As far as whether CCP want 0.0 to be like wspace or not you stated yourself in your previous post that: Originally by: "wtbrandomnamegenerator" CCP have specifically stated that they WANT local removed from 0.0, ... They just want a new scanner mechanic to go along with it. Which by definition is NOT what is in wspace since there they have 'recent speakers' local and no scanner mechanic changes. So when you flame me for claiming that you know full well that the current wspace mechanic is not what CCP want for 0.0: Originally by: "wtbrandomnamegenerator" I also, unlike you who obviously has the ear of some dev, do NOT know full well if they want it to be like WH space You have really only served to contradict yourself. Originally by: "wtbrandomnamegenerator" I'm a jerk So it would seem. See, when i quote you, its in context, usually with the entire line of gibberish you've spoken. Your nice enough to pull out the bits and pieces you find relevant to your argument. Lets examine shall we (cause no, we've not yet shat it up enough) My comments to AC had nothing to do with any discussion about any type of scanner mechanic, we were speaking about how local prevents, or helps fights ( I say it prevents them, he says its neeeded to have them), but since you took only the smallest snipet, you chose to inject it with something the actual posts had NOTHING to do with. Bravo As to your post, I called you a liar when you listed out a long line of things that you made the impression that you could do ALL AT ONCE on your ship. Not force recons in general, you were speaking specifically about the pilgrim, and how you could do this, and that, and some of this, all at once and how you thought it was probably OP'd. I called you out on your truth stretching (I called it lying because honestly, thats what you were doing, if not intentionally misleading people who may have not flown the ship before) Again, stellar score on your part Last to your "you know full well blah blah blah". No, in point of fact, neither you, nor I, know what the devs want for 0.0, in fact, one could surmise that WH space was a test bed for future 0.0 changes, but you automatically jump to the conclusion of "THATS NOT WHAT THE DEVS WANT". Well how the hell do you know what they want? Did one of them tell you? Have you vital inside information that none of us have? I doubt it. In the end, you were unable to provide proof of me flaming anyone for suggestion that scanner OR cloaking mechanics should change, simply because I NEVER DID, you misconstrued and generally misrepresented (on the AC bit its actually an out right baseless lie) things that I said to fit your argument (shocker), most likely because your unable to come up with a decent argument to support your ever weakening position (really, lies and manipulations do little to make your point). Thanks for playing along
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.19 15:56:00 - [255] What nonsense. But you are right on one point. You didn't really flame anyone who made a specific scanner change suggestion, it would have been far more accurate for me to say that you've just trolled and denigrated pretty much everyone who's disagreed with you. Better now? The section in my post you objected to started: Originally by: Neutrino Sunset 2. Make the force recons more fragile, their role should be scouting, blackops cynoing behind enemy lines, and ewar. So when you say I wasn't talking about force recons in general you're just plain wrong I'm afraid, suck it up. The talk about the Pilgrim was just a part of that section that was an example of what the ship could be made to do. If you got the impression that I had a fit that could do everything I stated with a Cyno fitted at the same time you had the perfect opportunity to ask me about it, but no you chose to call me names instead. If you think it suits your purpose to imagine that I deliberately intended to mislead you and that calling people names is the best way to open a discussion then go right ahead, just don't expect me to put up with your nonsense though. And yes, we don't really know what the devs want regarding local, I doubt they know themselves tbh, but they have stated that they want better scanning mechanics before they would consider removing local, and I haven't asserted that you or I know anything more than that. And before you ask no I can't be bothered to find for the dev post for you, look for it yourself. And as for 'playing along', ****ting up a thread that had the potential for a decent debate might be good fun for the likes of you, but for me it's pretty weak sport tbh so I'd rather you went and played with yourself. 0/
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.19 16:01:00 - [256] Isn't this sad? I always thought EVE was the one place where players were empowered to kill macroers and farmers. Even if it meant incurring the wrath of CONCORD This new hack removes my freedom to kill macroers. This is just ridiculous people are ok with this. CCP please investigate the macroers posting in this thread!
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.19 16:36:00 - [257] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset You have given an example which demonstrates how the balance between one combat gang and another combat gang might be retained were local to be removed. But obviously there is more than one type of combat in Eve, and as everyone here has been pointing out the kind of combat that stands to become imbalanced is not one combat gang vs another combat gang, but rather one combat gang or solo gankers vs ratters and miners. So I don't see what this adds to the debate. It adds to the debate because roaming gangs don't go out in 0.0 just looking for lone ratters and miners but looking for fights with other gangs. You simply can't ignore it, because removing local in 0.0 affects everyone in 0.0. Small roaming gangs traveling 20 jumps would be in far more danger than a ratter that stays in one system all night and may never be visited by anyone. Without local, the chance of being ganked by a larger blob would increase massively. The point Shae was making is that local is used as intel tool far too much and is normally used to avoid a fight or gank a smaller gang. Only very few, experienced, confident people want a fair fight. The point he was making was even though he would be in far greater danger, local needs to be gone, things need shaking up.
Lunas Feelnob	Posted - 2009.06.19 16:53:00 - [258] Bob sucks! Sir Molle and DB Preacher.... Oh wait wrong forum.
Lunas Feelboob Caldari The Lunas Feelnoob Fan Club	Posted - 2009.06.19 17:13:00 - [259] Edited by: Lunas Feelboob on 19/06/2009 17:14:28 i agree!
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.19 17:50:00 - [260] Edited by: Dragon Greg on 19/06/2009 17:52:21 Originally by: Christopher Multsanti It adds to the debate because roaming gangs don't go out in 0.0 just looking for lone ratters and miners but looking for fights with other gangs. You simply can't ignore it, because removing local in 0.0 affects everyone in 0.0. Small roaming gangs traveling 20 jumps would be in far more danger than a ratter that stays in one system all night and may never be visited by anyone. Without local, the chance of being ganked by a larger blob would increase massively. The point Shae was making is that local is used as intel tool far too much and is normally used to avoid a fight or gank a smaller gang. Only very few, experienced, confident people want a fair fight. The point he was making was even though he would be in far greater danger, local needs to be gone, things need shaking up. Until the day where it would actually hurt players to blob it will remain the first thing people jump into, pretty sad but basic human behaviour. It's not just a matter of changing Local channel, or scanning mechanics, or turning EVE into some sci fi sonar version of submarines in space. The biggest component of it all is pushing our own buttons. The argument of intel tool holds only until the first killmail, after that gets posted gang composition and numbers are known. Sadly instead of matching it to have some fun 99.999999999% of EVE will do the only thing they know: they will raise 800+ people (so to speak, you get the point) to deal with a 20 man gang - just in case that gang has backup or a hotdrop ready - or they will do nothing at all since the hostile gang can't touch the Holy X64 Tree. It's like Titans. We don't admit that one or two of them will keep us on our toes and away from blind blobbing, we whine about how a dozen doomsdays suck, we cry about how a dozen doomsdays under a jammer is killing the game. But when push comes to shove we consciously choose to field the ships in ever increasing numbers. And even in the light of changes coming we stay stuck in that doctrine. Do we stop building them, or buying them, no. We step it up to put more supercaps in the oven just in case the doomsday damage gets diminished or revamped so we need more to compensate. Sorry, but it is not a matter of one fix for all. It isn't either a matter of everybody getting his or her fix. What we've got instead is a big pile of highly interacting mechanisms (part feature and part behaviour) which needs changing. It's pretty clear by now that CCP are looking at changing 0.0, in a number of ways. Personally I hope they do not just features, but also take our own insanity into account. The holy grail has always been risk and reward, perhaps it is time to add a third leg: pain, and no, no pun intended. How many doomsdays will we field when by the third we toast our own cynojammer. How big a blob will we field should a gang composition overload ship computers resulting in say a speed decrease or time to kick into warp (find some technically adept roleplayer to work that angle :P). How many miners will we see running around when we can only build capital components with ores solely available in 0.0 space. The alternative to proper changes with long term vision is going back to Napoleontic warfare. Hostile X and Y meet in Chribba's bar in Amarr, smack each other in the face, and agree to bring their guys to fight it out over the weekend in region Z while having a good idea what who will bring and when. Could be fun, just doesn't taste like EVE imo.

Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.19 18:07:00 - [261] Originally by: Dragon Greg The argument of intel tool holds only until the first killmail, after that gets posted gang composition and numbers are known. Sadly instead of matching it to have some fun 99.999999999% of EVE will do the only thing they know: they will raise 800+ people (so to speak, you get the point) to deal with a 20 man gang - just in case that gang has backup or a hotdrop ready - or they will do nothing at all since the hostile gang can't touch the Holy X64 Tree. This already happens, and won't change no matter what happens to Local, or much else in EVE's game mechanics. Those who liked large numbers will continue to form large fleets, and those who liked solo/small gang will stay with their style. Because that's how people in THIS GAME* behave. Don't try to apply general psychology to a very specialist subset of the gaming population. It will not work. *Speaking about roaming and spontaneous ops only. Obviously there are ops that require large or small task forces by their nature. ...
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.19 18:17:00 - [262] Originally by: Razin This already happens, and won't change no matter what happens to Local, or much else in EVE's game mechanics. Those who liked large numbers will continue to form large fleets, and those who liked solo/small gang will stay with their style. Because that's how people in THIS GAME* behave. Don't try to apply general psychology to a very specialist subset of the gaming population. It will not work. *Speaking about roaming and spontaneous ops only. Obviously there are ops that require large or small task forces by their nature. aha, ok. Roaming and spontaneous ops, I agree on that view. Sadly psychology is always a part of the game, because, well, it's played by people. Unless it's sheep playing it. When psychology is not taking into account in game mechanics, you get situations like how we deal with sovereignty .. Yes, you are right. There are very specialist subsets of the gaming population. Each with their own mindset. Yet in EVE there's quite a bunch of those interacting together. There is a lot less room or opportunity for such ops these days then there was last year tbh. Unless you order in a slice of CVA ofcourse.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.06.19 19:17:00 - [263] The success of w-space has proven the viability of removing local without changing the scanning mechanics. It works just fine having local in delayed mode with the current scanner. There is zero reason to not change 0.0 local to delayed mode.
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.19 19:21:00 - [264] Originally by: Bellum Eternus The success of w-space has proven the viability of removing local without changing the scanning mechanics. It works just fine having local in delayed mode with the current scanner. There is zero reason to not change 0.0 local to delayed mode. Repeating the same statement with alts and mains over and over does not make it any more true or false man :P W-space is a very different mindset, slowly but certainly. Until we give it decent time to see how it really works out (noticing the upcoming changes to drop rates since the place isn't yielding enough ..) any "judgement" is premature. That being said, I do wish the economist had datamined that aspect, even preliminary, and put it in the QEN. Would give better insights then just private observations across the board.
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.19 20:34:00 - [265] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 19/06/2009 20:35:07 Originally by: Bellum Eternus The success of w-space has proven the viability of removing local without changing the scanning mechanics. It works just fine having local in delayed mode with the current scanner. There is zero reason to not change 0.0 local to delayed mode. Why people don't use their brain more than one minute before posting... In WH, you don't have gates. Just one or more WH that not everyone can use as everyone don't have skills or the good ship size to find/use it. So the risk to encounter others players is low as it is difficult to reach them. Also, their positions change all the time and so this motivate people for fast operations, to not be lost. The first time - and last time - I encountered players, one month ago, I saw 3 people. They disappear few minutes after and I never see life again in all next WHs I do. The only thing I found since, is an abandoned POS last week... Of course, it is not a generality, but apart maybe in Class 1... So maybe the reason that no one complain about local in WH, is because the risk to encounter someone is LOWER than ANY null secs ? So that the risk is very low ? So no, WH hasn't prove the viability of removing local, as a WH is totally different of a standard solar system.
Drakolus Amarr Canadian Imperial Armaments Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.19 20:37:00 - [266] I like the idea presented, uh, page 2 I think? Maybe instead of nerfing local (which has some merits but also flaws) put some scrams and points on more rats. If we are specifically looking to counter Macro-ratters having the BS's occasionally have points would increase your chances of catching them in a belt. By no means would it be a guarantee, to many factors go into it, but it would take it from zero chance to at least some chance. I've tried the "wait 5 minutes" and then shotgun the belts approach, I have not anchored bubbles in the belts and I have tried a logonski once but so far no luck. At least if you slap points on semi-survivable rats (not all, but have it chance based) there will always be a chance that the macro is trying to finish them off while you get lucky and warp in on him. Even as a regular 0.0 ratter I would be willing to take this risk in order to provide the chance that more Macros would die as a result as well.
Joshua Calvert Caldari Safespot Industries	Posted - 2009.06.19 20:59:00 - [267] Remove local everywhere. Peace and love, Josh
Enraku Reynolt Minmatar Mid Knights Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2009.06.19 21:05:00 - [268] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: frog'us Edited by: frog''us on 18/06/2009 14:14:48 There is currently no risk whatsoever for a ratter that has local open. what exactly are the risk for gankers ? There is no risk in attacking people who make no effort to protect or defend themselves. From the tone of your question it seems that you think this is somehow wrong. funny, thought the reason they warp and cloak was to hide...which is defending themselves ------------------------------------------------ Do not let the world change you. Change the world Here's everything I know about war: somebody wins, somebody loses, and nothing is ever the same
Reachok Amarr Tres Hombres	Posted - 2009.06.19 21:15:00 - [269] Well, I had a long well thought out reply to this, clicked on preview, got a 505 error - all was lost. So, long story short: Take local, give me back instant update on pilots in space. Provides strategic information in real time but won't tell me who's next door without either me going there or investing a scout to look.
Hrodgar Ortal	Posted - 2009.06.19 22:03:00 - [270] Originally by: Drakolus I like the idea presented, uh, page 2 I think? Maybe instead of nerfing local (which has some merits but also flaws) put some scrams and points on more rats. If we are specifically looking to counter Macro-ratters having the BS's occasionally have points would increase your chances of catching them in a belt. By no means would it be a guarantee, to many factors go into it, but it would take it from zero chance to at least some chance. I've tried the "wait 5 minutes" and then shotgun the belts approach, I have not anchored bubbles in the belts and I have tried a logonski once but so far no luck. At least if you slap points on semi-survivable rats (not all, but have it chance based) there will always be a chance that the macro is trying to finish them off while you get lucky and warp in on him. Even as a regular 0.0 ratter I would be willing to take this risk in order to provide the chance that more Macros would die as a result as well. I guess you don't know that rats in 0.0 do scram. But hey, you've probably never lived there so can't expect you to know that.

Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.06.19 22:53:00 - [271] Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 19/06/2009 20:35:07 Originally by: Bellum Eternus The success of w-space has proven the viability of removing local without changing the scanning mechanics. It works just fine having local in delayed mode with the current scanner. There is zero reason to not change 0.0 local to delayed mode. Why people don't use their brain more than one minute before posting... In WH, you don't have gates. Just one or more WH that not everyone can use as everyone don't have skills or the good ship size to find/use it. So the risk to encounter others players is low as it is difficult to reach them. Also, their positions change all the time and so this motivate people for fast operations, to not be lost. The first time - and last time - I encountered players, one month ago, I saw 3 people. They disappear few minutes after and I never see life again in all next WHs I do. The only thing I found since, is an abandoned POS last week... Of course, it is not a generality, but apart maybe in Class 1... So maybe the reason that no one complain about local in WH, is because the risk to encounter someone is LOWER than ANY null secs ? So that the risk is very low ? So no, WH hasn't prove the viability of removing local, as a WH is totally different of a standard solar system. It's amusing as hell when people lead off a statement with an insult and then expect others to view their idea with neutrality. Ignoring your wormhole experience, my experience in w-space has been vastly different with contact with hostiles being commonplace. Wormholes are camped/bubbled just the same as gates and there seems to always be someone poking their nose through trying to steal my stuff, kill my ships and generally annoy me. W-space shows that no local is perfectly viable. The only difference is that people going into wormhole space accept the fact that there isn't local to hold their hand, while all the other #ssholes in the game depend on it as a crutch and are horrified at the idea of life without it. Gameplay works just fine without it. Nothing needs to be added to the game to replace it once it's gone. Why people don't use their brain more than one minute before posting...
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.06.19 22:58:00 - [272] Originally by: Dragon Greg Originally by: Bellum Eternus The success of w-space has proven the viability of removing local without changing the scanning mechanics. It works just fine having local in delayed mode with the current scanner. There is zero reason to not change 0.0 local to delayed mode. Repeating the same statement with alts and mains over and over does not make it any more true or false man :P W-space is a very different mindset, slowly but certainly. Until we give it decent time to see how it really works out (noticing the upcoming changes to drop rates since the place isn't yielding enough ..) any "judgement" is premature. That being said, I do wish the economist had datamined that aspect, even preliminary, and put it in the QEN. Would give better insights then just private observations across the board. W-space is only a 'different mindset' because the the players going there accept that there isn't any local to be used as a crutch. If local never existed the way it does currently, you wouldn't be seeing forum posts whining for the addition of such a tool, now would you?
Alt lock	Posted - 2009.06.19 23:04:00 - [273] I"ll add my one cent please remove local 0.0 !!!! Thank you for your time
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.19 23:18:00 - [274] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset But you are right So long as we agree on one point! Seriously though, the above is what it felt like you were doing to every statement I made, and as you can see, probably by your initial reaction to reading that, its not really cool. I have no problem increasing the reward for 0.0, in fact, I almost insist it happen, as 0.0 should be exponentially more attractive than LVL4 high sec missions, but currently, its just NOT, like, at ALL. If your brave enough to live on the frontier, you should be paid as such from your activities (perhaps vastly increasing the Mercoxit component in t2 production to add value to a little used ore), BUT, on the same foot, dangerous space should be DANGEROUS for those settlers and capsule pilots who venture out there, which currently, its NOT. Not even close. Like, babysitters are more dangerous than null sec currently, and the art of fleet warfare takes little to no tactical skill other than knowing your alphabet. My manner may be displeasing, but honestly, its what I literally do all day for a job. You don't have to be nice, unless I missed the passing of the global "nice" laws. My only goal in this discussion is to make people realize that there is a deep needed change to 0.0 living, IN ALL ASPECTS, and I will use every verbal method (including poor spelling, bad grammar, and general douche baggery) to get it done. Also, who's to say I'm not playing with myself Also also: Originally by: Dragon Greg Originally by: Bellum Eternus The success of w-space has proven the viability of removing local without changing the scanning mechanics. It works just fine having local in delayed mode with the current scanner. There is zero reason to not change 0.0 local to delayed mode. Repeating the same statement with alts and mains over and over does not make it any more true or false man :P Bellum is in fact not an alt, just fyi. He's been around for quite a bit
Otellus Imperial Shipment	Posted - 2009.06.19 23:39:00 - [275] I don't think pointing to WH space as proof that without local it still works,is valid. There are considerable differences: 1. Loot. WH space has much more valuable loot. risk may be greater, but so is reward. 2. Entering WH space is more difficult than entering another system. 3. WH space is still a novelty. People go there to try it out. Once the novelty wears off, it is all about the risk-reward ratio. Finally, people keep forgetting that the hunter has a huge advantage when there is no local. Noone can ever rat without worrying about a dozen cloakers sitting in system. Particularly in the good 0.0 systems, noone can rat anymore. But go ahead, remove local in 0.0 and see how fast you people are back here, whining about an even greater lack of targets because only people who are stupid or insane would still rat in 0.0 under those circumstances. All you will have left is a few POSses mining R64 moons, and everyone in empire running level 4s.
Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.20 00:15:00 - [276] Originally by: Bellum Eternus W-space is only a 'different mindset' because the the players going there accept that there isn't any local to be used as a crutch. If local never existed the way it does currently, you wouldn't be seeing forum posts whining for the addition of such a tool, now would you? Which leads straight back to the problem of how many have that mindset. In order to have ganks you need targets. To make a reasonable claim in this regard on the succes of w-space we really need the datamining from CCP on usage, kills, etc. Right now we have nothing like that, only stories and private experiences, nut nothing quantifiable. Well, aside of CCP soon tweaking drop ratios since the prices are staying too high through limited output from w-space. Which in all fairness could be because w-space resources harvesting / management is too cumbersome, too risky, too boring, too little used, and a world of other possibilities. I'm sorry, but claiming a succes of w-space is very, very premature. I think we all remember the popularity of the introduction of FW, look how that went some say, while others say that was to be expected since it was designed as a game niche. Thing is, w-space was designed as a game niche as well. Like I said, shame the economist isn't providing interesting datamining.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.20 04:48:00 - [277] Returning to a point initially made by Shaemell Where is was argued that removing local would be just as dangerous for roaming gangs as for ratters and miners. And explained further by Christopher Originally by: Christopher Multsanti Small roaming gangs traveling 20 jumps would be in far more danger than a ratter that stays in one system all night and may never be visited by anyone. Without local, the chance of being ganked by a larger blob would increase massively. The point Shae was making is that local is used as intel tool far too much and is normally used to avoid a fight or gank a smaller gang. Only very few, experienced, confident people want a fair fight. The point he was making was even though he would be in far greater danger, local needs to be gone, things need shaking up. I see what you're saying but I don't agree that no local creates an imbalance of risk for roaming gangs in the way it would for miners and ratters. So you have a roaming gang in 0.0 looking for a fight, with no local whether it spots the enemy first or the enemy spots it first is down to who has the better scouts. Whoever has the largest gang to start with is entirely down to chance, but if the roaming gang is spotted by the local defence gang first then the locals have the opportunity to get more people in gang and/or switch into more appropriate ships. So that's a defence advantage for the home team and an incentive for the roaming gang to do whatever they are going to do quickly, promoting hit and run style operations. The chances of getting ganked by a larger force are governed by who kept the largest number of ships where they were not spotted by the enemy scouts. Considering that these reinforcements can appear by undocking from station, cynoing/jump bridging in, or just jumping in from a system 2 jumps away, that aspect of the game will be pretty much down to the skill and judgement of the FCs. I don't see how any of this implies that the playing field is not level for both gangs, or at least level enough with the home team having a few advantages. In fact is this not exactly the way it should be? In this situation the imperfect information available to both sides opens up the possiblity for smarter tactics, the side that wins that tactical chessgame will either gank or avoid the other, which is exactly as it should be. What's more the roaming gang went out looking for a fight in the first place, if they get one (even if they were outmanouvered and ganked) they will have got exactly what they went out looking for. As far as the combat gangs bumping into each other goes if there is any problem with any of this at all it is that a roaming gang without any cloaking ships might as well stay home, in space where there is any meaningful organized resistance they will either be avoided or ganked. Hence the point I made several pages back that if no local were indroduced with the scanning and cloaking mechanics remaining as they are now there would be little point flying anything other than a stealth bomber, recon or T3 cloaker in a roaming gang, (the exception being if you needed something that looked like very obvious bait for some reason). But putting the proliferation of cloaking ships to one side 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. ...
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.20 04:52:00 - [278] But now on to the problem. A significant number of people live in 0.0, many of those earn their isk through mining and ratting. Christopher made the point that roaming gangs don't go looking for miners and ratters. This is simply not true, perhaps they don't where he lives. In my experience roaming gangs are looking for anything they can kill that generates a killmail, and why not it's good for morale. What's more when one alliance is making a move on another alliance they will very often specifically target their miners and ratters because they know that if guys can't make isk in 0.0 they will have to go back to empire which demoralizes the target alliance and reduces the number of pilots they have in 0.0 to form defense gangs, which makes moving into their space that much easier. And that's what it comes down to, making isk. If you live in 0.0 and you are not an industrialist you probably make your isk ratting or mining. If you are a combat pilot you probably prefer to make your isk during the quiet times when you log on only to find that none of your mates are online, because if you have mates online you'd probably want to go do some PvP. With no local and no scanner/cloaking changes and roaming gangs of recons/cloakers a few guys ratting or mining together have very few ways to keep it profitable. Here's a quick rundown of what they can do to protect themselves. Have a scout. What this means is that for an entire operation you have at least one guy cloaked on a gate sitting in front of his PC doing absolutely nothing at all watching to see if any ships pass though. This is what all the people in this thread are really talking about when they are attacking other people for 'lazy play' or 'not defending themselves'. It might seem like a reasonable suggestion from their perspective but think of it from a gameplay perspective for a minute. Do you really think that from the viewpoint of CCP it's acceptable that after all the effort they've put into the dynamic of this game the gameplay for anyone should be reduced to just sitting there doing nothing watching a gate? I for one don't. Team up. Form a 'ratting blob' and roam from system to system killing rats. In theory you should maintain your isk/hr ratio, and if there are enough of you, you should be too hard a target for your average roaming gang, or at least you'll be able to put up a bit of a fight. If there is a problem with this it is that most pilots like PvP and anytime you can get a decent gang together that is what they would much prefer to be doing, also it doesn't work for mining. Fly something cheap. A T1 cruiser will take any 0.0 BS spawn and it's actually more fun cos it's a bit of a challenge. You won't maintain the isk/hr you would in a bigger ship but it's respectable and platinum insured the isk loss is between 4-10m isk depending on how it's fit. For a bit more isk you can use a BC. How well this method works depends on how often your space is visited by hostiles. If you live in the drone regions you could probably rat profitably a BS if you have no hostiles visit you from one week to the next. If you live in Providence you will find that hostile gangs will travel though most of the useful ratting systems several times in the course of a single evening (I live there so I know this to be true). In this sort of environment with no local you probably stand to get ganked every other night. This also doesn't work for mining since mining in something cheap returns pointlessly low isk/hr. I can't think of anything else, and the options outlined so far look pretty poor. ...
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.20 04:55:00 - [279] So if you log on in 0.0 and there's no one else online and you want to make some isk in a no local situation what are you going to do. It seems to me that you have the choice of the 'fly something cheap' method and hope for the best, which stands a good chance of actually costing you money rather than making it, or you can clone jump back to empire where you will then live for at least the next 24 hours running level 4s, which is what I fear most people would do, simply because it's the most sensible thing to do in that situation. The challenge if we want to avoid further depopulation of people actually making a living in 0.0 is to introduce no local in such a way that makes it no longer the case that if you log on and find that you don't have a blob of mates handy clone jumping back to empire isn't necessarily the only sensible thing to do. And the reason why this discussion is going around in circles instead of at least discussing ideas of how to make that work proposed by CCP is that even they haven't proposed anything because they can't think of anything. So here is another of mine idea for you to ridicule. 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. So now you can still mooch around in your covops frigate completely undetected but if you tackle anything you'd better have your gang really close by to come and bail you out, tbh you should probably expect to die if you try tackling in a cov ops frigate. You can skulk around in a recon but you have to stay out of the detection range of whatever you are stalking, once you make your move and warp onto whatever you hope to kill your prey has the chance to detect you if he is alert. Adding different ranges at which different ships can be directional scanned adds more imperfect intel to the game which is exactly what is needed to create the potential for more advanced and intelligent tactics. With no local and the ability for a gang to jump into system and warp recons directly to a cov ops frigate which has just bumped a raven out of alignment macroers would be hard pressed to stay alive against any determined attempt to take them down. This same technique can of course be used against ratters or miners but if a well rounded roaming gang has managed to sneak undetected deep into alliance territory to where their carebears are beavering away that seems like fair reward for effort expended.
VicturusTeSaluto Metafarmers	Posted - 2009.06.20 05:03:00 - [280] OMG it's Bellum!

wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.20 07:30:00 - [281] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset holy crap I read all that To add something to what your saying, part of the benefit I see is that this would force alliances to actually PATROL their own space, or keep smaller amounts of space. You can't keep your citizens safe if you don't patrol pipes and constellations every few hours actually LOOKING to see if someone is in your space. Currently, somebody, somewhere (usually cloaked in a raven, or sitting in a tower) reports you in LOCAL and a defense gang forms up. This would cause alliances to be more proactive in defending their space. 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. I still like the t3 cloakers though, they do trade quite a bit, but the same restrictions you put on a recon (scanning at range, but invisible on grid) should apply to them as well. In trade, the rat bounties could be boosted (2x-3x minnimum), and then you tinker with mercoxit deposites, and amounts needed for t2 production of ships, and you have an environment that rewards the people that populate the area, yet allows for more dynamic interaction of defense and assault forces.
Zaldoc	Posted - 2009.06.20 10:46:00 - [282] So funny to read all these arguments for making it easier to kill stuff in 0.0,without realizing they end up hurting themselves and their alliance.... It takes isk and minerals to pvp and hold or attack a region,making such changes would render that almost impossible...
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.20 11:21:00 - [283] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: Dragon Greg Originally by: Bellum Eternus The success of w-space has proven the viability of removing local without changing the scanning mechanics. It works just fine having local in delayed mode with the current scanner. There is zero reason to not change 0.0 local to delayed mode. Repeating the same statement with alts and mains over and over does not make it any more true or false man :P W-space is a very different mindset, slowly but certainly. Until we give it decent time to see how it really works out (noticing the upcoming changes to drop rates since the place isn't yielding enough ..) any "judgement" is premature. That being said, I do wish the economist had datamined that aspect, even preliminary, and put it in the QEN. Would give better insights then just private observations across the board. W-space is only a 'different mindset' because the the players going there accept that there isn't any local to be used as a crutch. If local never existed the way it does currently, you wouldn't be seeing forum posts whining for the addition of such a tool, now would you? Good point. "CCP I DEMAND YOU ADD AN INSTANT REAL-TIME INTEL TOOL" Imagine the responses...
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.20 11:23:00 - [284] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Neutrino Sunset holy crap I read all that To add something to what your saying, part of the benefit I see is that this would force alliances to actually PATROL their own space, or keep smaller amounts of space. You can't keep your citizens safe if you don't patrol pipes and constellations every few hours actually LOOKING to see if someone is in your space. Currently, somebody, somewhere (usually cloaked in a raven, or sitting in a tower) reports you in LOCAL and a defense gang forms up. This would cause alliances to be more proactive in defending their space. 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. I still like the t3 cloakers though, they do trade quite a bit, but the same restrictions you put on a recon (scanning at range, but invisible on grid) should apply to them as well. In trade, the rat bounties could be boosted (2x-3x minnimum), and then you tinker with mercoxit deposites, and amounts needed for t2 production of ships, and you have an environment that rewards the people that populate the area, yet allows for more dynamic interaction of defense and assault forces. Mercoxit isn't the bottleneck in T2 production. Increasing availability would merely drop the price. Now if Drone hauler spawns dropped moon minerals...
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.20 11:27:00 - [285] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset So if you log on in 0.0 and there's no one else online and you want to make some isk in a no local situation what are you going to do. It seems to me that you have the choice of the 'fly something cheap' method and hope for the best, which stands a good chance of actually costing you money rather than making it, or you can clone jump back to empire where you will then live for at least the next 24 hours running level 4s, which is what I fear most people would do, simply because it's the most sensible thing to do in that situation. Listen, maybe I'm super-brave or something, but I really wouldn't have any qualms about ratting in a delayed-local environment. The risk isn't much higher than jumping through a gate without a scout, and I can think of several very easy ways to mitigate it. And plexing would be, if anything, safer than it is now.
Drakolus Amarr Canadian Imperial Armaments Aggression.	Posted - 2009.06.20 14:26:00 - [286] Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal Originally by: Drakolus I like the idea presented, uh, page 2 I think? Maybe instead of nerfing local (which has some merits but also flaws) put some scrams and points on more rats. If we are specifically looking to counter Macro-ratters having the BS's occasionally have points would increase your chances of catching them in a belt. By no means would it be a guarantee, to many factors go into it, but it would take it from zero chance to at least some chance. I've tried the "wait 5 minutes" and then shotgun the belts approach, I have not anchored bubbles in the belts and I have tried a logonski once but so far no luck. At least if you slap points on semi-survivable rats (not all, but have it chance based) there will always be a chance that the macro is trying to finish them off while you get lucky and warp in on him. Even as a regular 0.0 ratter I would be willing to take this risk in order to provide the chance that more Macros would die as a result as well. I guess you don't know that rats in 0.0 do scram. But hey, you've probably never lived there so can't expect you to know that. Bolded the important word so you can try and learn about reading comprehension there nubsauce. And yeah, definately have not lived in 0.0, definately, not for say...the last 2-3 years or so. _____________________________________________
Christopher Multsanti Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.20 15:59:00 - [287] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Christopher made the point that roaming gangs don't go looking for miners and ratters. This is simply not true, perhaps they don't where he lives. Originally by: Christopher Multsanti It adds to the debate because roaming gangs don't go out in 0.0 just looking for lone ratters and miners but looking for fights with other gangs.
VanNostrum The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2009.06.20 17:45:00 - [288] Local: 24 Horde players enter Arathi Highlands
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.20 18:27:00 - [289] Originally by: Malcanis Mercoxit isn't the bottleneck in T2 production. Astoundingly, I am aware of that fact. I'm suggesting that they purposely MAKE it one of the bottlenecks. TBH, not many people purposely mine mercoxit, because so little is used in t2 production. This actually sticks out as a way to increase its worth and the worth of the space its in in one simple fix. By MASSIVELY increasing the amount used in each t2 ship.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.20 19:00:00 - [290] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Malcanis Mercoxit isn't the bottleneck in T2 production. Astoundingly, I am aware of that fact. I'm suggesting that they purposely MAKE it one of the bottlenecks. TBH, not many people purposely mine mercoxit, because so little is used in t2 production. This actually sticks out as a way to increase its worth and the worth of the space its in in one simple fix. By MASSIVELY increasing the amount used in each t2 ship. Hmmm that would be done as part of an industry expansion I think. I'd rather add moon minerals to hauler spawns.

Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.20 19:20:00 - [291] Originally by: Malcanis Listen, maybe I'm super-brave or something, but I really wouldn't have any qualms about ratting in a delayed-local environment. The risk isn't much higher than jumping through a gate without a scout, and I can think of several very easy ways to mitigate it. And plexing would be, if anything, safer than it is now. As pointed out how high the risk is depends on where you are, don't you agree? If you were to rat in a good ratting system in Providence with no local and the current scanner mechanics you would get ganked about every other evening. If you don't want to take my word for it just ask anyone from Ushra Khan since they run recon and stealth bomber gangs through there pretty much every evening. That wouldn't make you super brave or anything, just not too bright. If you have something meaningful to add such as your 'several very easy ways to mitigate it' why not share that with us all, otherwise your comments just look like pointless chest beating?
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2009.06.20 20:32:00 - [292] Originally by: Malcanis Hmmm that would be done as part of an industry expansion I think. I'd rather add moon minerals to hauler spawns. TBH that's a great idea. 10/10.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.20 21:53:00 - [293] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Malcanis Listen, maybe I'm super-brave or something, but I really wouldn't have any qualms about ratting in a delayed-local environment. The risk isn't much higher than jumping through a gate without a scout, and I can think of several very easy ways to mitigate it. And plexing would be, if anything, safer than it is now. As pointed out how high the risk is depends on where you are, don't you agree? If you were to rat in a good ratting system in Providence with no local and the current scanner mechanics you would get ganked about every other evening. Yeah, no, I rather think I wouldn't. The ways to reduce the risk of being ganked are pretty obvious with a bit of thought, but as I use them already, I prefer not to publicise them - why should I? I'll just say that if you already rat while assuming that there are hostiles close by who want to kill you and as long as I'm in friendly space and hostiles still have to go through gates and intel channels still work..., then delayed local would actually increase my safety factor insofar as the hostiles wont automagically know I am in system.
Nicolo da'Vicenza Amarr Dissonance Corp Libertas Fidelitas	Posted - 2009.06.21 03:53:00 - [294] Speaking as a nullsec carebear himself, this is what seems sensible to me. What about keeping local as an intel tool, but the only way people pop up on it is if you drop an anchorable scanning module that reports back to you and your fleet everything within a limited AU radius? One that would-be gankers could scan down and blow up to "prep the field". Cautious miners would place them 0.1 AU outside a belt, station or gate to be aware of any hostiles. Or of course a well-prepared ganker could do the same thing as well to be instantly alerted of prey. 0.0 alliances get a system-wide local scanner available for them to anchor, like a cynojammer, (only more delicate) when they reach a high enough level of sov in that system. So a dedicated roaming gang could offline local for a few hours to wreak utter chaos, provided it wants to put the work in.
Obsidian Hawk RONA Corporation	Posted - 2009.06.21 03:56:00 - [295] posting in a 10 page it ain't going to happen thread. -------------------------- WTB a sig, or moderation of my sig by all the hot CCP girls.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.21 05:04:00 - [296] Originally by: Malcanis Yeah, no, I rather think I wouldn't. The ways to reduce the risk of being ganked are pretty obvious with a bit of thought, but as I use them already, I prefer not to publicise them - why should I? I'll just say that if you already rat while assuming that there are hostiles close by who want to kill you and as long as I'm in friendly space and hostiles still have to go through gates and intel channels still work Well it's up to you of course but if you suggest that you know ways of avoiding being ganked in a no local environment that go beyond what has already been covered by everyone else in 10 pages of discussion but that you're too coy to outline them what do you expect everyone to think of that? That you're so much smarter than everyone else or that you've probably overlooked something someone else has already covered and so are not as smart as you think you are? Also this is a discussion forum, to come in here and imply that someone else is wrong, that you know something that they don't, but that you're too coy to say what it is just makes you look like someone who loves the sound of his own voice tbh. Your talk about friendly space, gates and intel channels makes it sound very much like you are talking about some variation of the scouts on gates tactic, but in a place like Providence even with great intel channels that will not keep you safe in a no local situation and here's why. Providence has about half a dozen entry points, in a no local environment (or delayed local where the hostiles don't stay in any one system for the length of the local dalay, and why would they) even if hostiles are detected coming in by being observed at the entry point gate, keeping eyes on them once they have passed the entry point scout is going to be well nigh impossible. Your alternatives are what? 1. Having scouts on many internal gates as well, (perhaps there is a metagaming solution to this, but a metagaming solution does not count as an in game solution). 2. Defense gangs tailing every hostile gang, which if they are in cloaking ships and are unscannable is going to be very difficult too. Providence normally has more gangs of hostiles roaming through it than it has defense gangs, this is because everyone knows Providence is well populated and that they can come here and stand a decent chance of getting a fight. 3. Don't know. Anyone feel free to pitch in with ideas. How are you going to handle gangs which log off deep in your space? Originally by: Malcanis delayed local would actually increase my safety factor insofar as the hostiles wont automagically know I am in system. Hostiles won't know that you are in system if they choose to not look at the map or for the 30 seconds or so it takes them to scan the system. You seriously think that's going to keep you safe when they will be cloaked and you will not? I suppose the short answer to your question 'I prefer not to publicise them - why should I?' is because otherwise I won't believe you know something I haven't already considered, I generally hold the opinion of someone who is willing to discuss their viewpoint far higher than someone who is not. I wonder if I'm alone in that regard or whether that is the same for most people, what do you think?
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.21 08:22:00 - [297] Edited by: wtbrandomnamegenerator on 21/06/2009 08:22:43 Originally by: Obsidian Hawk posting in a 10 page it ain't going to happen thread. Since CCP has already said they intend to do it - http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=905941 How does it feel to be that confident, and still totally wrong? Originally by: Neutrino Sunset 3. Don't know. Anyone feel free to pitch in with ideas. How are you going to handle gangs which log off deep in your space? Patrols. Seriously, it sounds silly, but its good for the game. To safely and confidently control space, your going to need to patrol your space. Period. No more alliances taking control of whole regions then not using 60% of the space. If you can't be bothered to patrol your space, then your space is relatively uninhabitable, because its not safe for your citizens. IF you want to hold a piece of space, and make use of it, you will need to regularly (NOT just once a day) Patrol your space. This could (in the case of somewhere like providence) mean something like a pair of frigates, on a long range patrol of providence, or even 3 or 4 pairs, that go out on a tour of certain pipes, or even just constellations, poking around to see what they see, and reporting any anomalies they find in intel channels. If you have a GOOD piece of space, this could mean a simple sentry at a vital choke point, to watch the area, but if you have multiple entry points to your space, then its going to require a bit more work. I'm well aware that there are a few cons, but the pro's seem to far out weigh the cons in the general dynamics it brings to all different aspects of space holding in 0.0, and space assault in 0.0. Right down to the throw down fleet battles, where your able to actually HIDE your numbers, keep reserves ready to go in and mop up in a big fight, spring traps, ect.
Zaldoc	Posted - 2009.06.21 09:22:00 - [298] Maybe they had second thoughts about that,because all i get is a page can not be found whit that link
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.21 09:31:00 - [299] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Patrols. Seriously, it sounds silly, but its good for the game. To safely and confidently control space, your going to need to patrol your space. Period. Patrols would be horribly inefficient and miss most of the gangs. No you need dedicated scout accounts on gates. Maybe alliances will have to use their moongold on scout accounts and make some sort of intelbot.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.21 09:43:00 - [300] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Malcanis Yeah, no, I rather think I wouldn't. The ways to reduce the risk of being ganked are pretty obvious with a bit of thought, but as I use them already, I prefer not to publicise them - why should I? I'll just say that if you already rat while assuming that there are hostiles close by who want to kill you and as long as I'm in friendly space and hostiles still have to go through gates and intel channels still work Well it's up to you of course but if you suggest that you know ways of avoiding being ganked in a no local environment that go beyond what has already been covered by everyone else in 10 pages of discussion but that you're too coy to outline them what do you expect everyone to think of that? That you're so much smarter than everyone else or that you've probably overlooked something someone else has already covered and so are not as smart as you think you are? Also this is a discussion forum, to come in here and imply that someone else is wrong, that you know something that they don't, but that you're too coy to say what it is just makes you look like someone who loves the sound of his own voice tbh. Your talk about friendly space, gates and intel channels makes it sound very much like you are talking about some variation of the scouts on gates tactic, but in a place like Providence even with great intel channels that will not keep you safe in a no local situation and here's why. Providence has about half a dozen entry points, in a no local environment (or delayed local where the hostiles don't stay in any one system for the length of the local dalay, and why would they) even if hostiles are detected coming in by being observed at the entry point gate, keeping eyes on them once they have passed the entry point scout is going to be well nigh impossible. Your alternatives are what? 1. Having scouts on many internal gates as well, (perhaps there is a metagaming solution to this, but a metagaming solution does not count as an in game solution). 2. Defense gangs tailing every hostile gang, which if they are in cloaking ships and are unscannable is going to be very difficult too. Providence normally has more gangs of hostiles roaming through it than it has defense gangs, this is because everyone knows Providence is well populated and that they can come here and stand a decent chance of getting a fight. 3. Don't know. Anyone feel free to pitch in with ideas. How are you going to handle gangs which log off deep in your space? Originally by: Malcanis delayed local would actually increase my safety factor insofar as the hostiles wont automagically know I am in system. Hostiles won't know that you are in system if they choose to not look at the map or for the 30 seconds or so it takes them to scan the system. You seriously think that's going to keep you safe when they will be cloaked and you will not? I suppose the short answer to your question 'I prefer not to publicise them - why should I?' is because otherwise I won't believe you know something I haven't already considered, I generally hold the opinion of someone who is willing to discuss their viewpoint far higher than someone who is not. I wonder if I'm alone in that regard or whether that is the same for most people, what do you think? really, the countermeasures are pretty elementary, but they can be countered in turn. That provides a good reason not to publicise them, dont you think? Perhaps the string of ratting ship losses of mine you can find will prove me wrong?

Shaemell Buttleson Euphoria Released	Posted - 2009.06.21 11:05:00 - [301] Just to get back to the subject of this software you can buy (which I really hope has some sort of malware in it) here is a list of the latest files you can get for it. ->friendly detection not working (fixed) ->modules activation delay after cloak ->custom "stop bot" button (it's no longer limited to SPACE) ->stop firing current target and shoot scrambler when scrambled ->msg box detection optimized ->mobile warp disruptor detection and escape ->email alerts on events (faction spawn, hauler spawn, low armor, scrambled, mobile wd detected, stuck in rocks) ->not engaging drones on VMware (fixed) Seems like more NPC's scrambling wont help too much and the ideas of anchoring bubbles is being got round as well.
Deviana Sevidon Gallente Panta-Rhei Guardian Federation	Posted - 2009.06.21 11:29:00 - [302] With local removed, my Days of Ratting would be over. There are Regions with multiple entrances that cannot all be secured permanently. With local removed, trying to rat in such a Region would be suicide. One or two Recons or a small Stealth Bomber Gang would totally ruin the Day for everyone who is trying to make some ISK in the Belts and even Exploration would be a lot more dangerous. Comparing 0.0 with W-Space does not work, since a W-Space-System very rarely sees multiple Gangs of Hostiles on a single evening. With local removed, there would be nothing to protect you from Cloakers, you would not even know that there would a Cloakers until they land right on top your Mining or Ratting Ships. The only consequence would be, that most people would leave 0.0 and the only ones still staying are those that earn their ISK with Moon-Gold or Scamming in Jita and those who simply buy their ISK. Quote: Disclaimer: All mentioned above contains my opinion and is therefore an absolute truth (for me anyway, my universe, muhahaha.....ok, done
iP0D	Posted - 2009.06.21 11:30:00 - [303] Edited by: iP0D on 21/06/2009 11:30:33 Originally by: Shaemell Buttleson blabla It would help quite a bit if you actually tried to tackle a problem through a decent discussion, and one topic at a time, without throwing a multitude of matters together like a spiked **tail solely for the purposes of trying to lite a fire under a serious topic without having to actually discuss it. Simply by polluting an important topic with stuff that barely touches on it and only serves to incite drama. If you are concerned about macro abuse, which everybody should be in my opinion, make a thread about it, and make the case. Don't spin crap for another important topic just by shouting around like a wannabee demagoge or ADD kid It's quite clear you have not bothered to read the replies to the original post, I am guessing you don't want to either, since every little vent is pretty similar to the old forum pushing that used to force CCP into kneejerk changes Now back on topic, just which is it ... 1. macro abuse? 2. the state of Local? 3. the state of 0.0? Yes, all three topics touch on each other (you must like that word) but they remain seperate topics, especially if you are interested in actually arguing your case! Warning: effort required. Edit: why in the world this forum censores **tail is beyond me since it is just a normal drink ...
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.21 13:32:00 - [304] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Patrols. Seriously, it sounds silly, but its good for the game. I agree patrols should be a good answer. But with the current scanner and cloaking mechanics though and no local I don't think they would really work. Providence is already pretty well patrolled. There are generally at least two defense gangs roaming around and a few other guys in cov ops frigates providing continuous intel from the main entry points. As things stand most of the intel of whose just arrived in a system and where they have gone to comes from observing them in local chat. If local were removed a scout at the entry point would not be able to take his eyes off the gate for an instance without risk of missing an incursion, but once the cloaking ships have cloaked and warped off without local the only way of knowing where they had gone would be to have scouts on all the other gates too, which to my mind is unworkable for the gameplay related reasons I went into in my long post. In a no local environment if the patrolling ships were not also cloakers then rather than them hunting the intruders they would most likely end up being the prey since without cloaking changes or scouts on practically every gate they will have no effective means to detect where the enemy are or what is the size of their force. Originally by: Mikayla Grey No you need dedicated scout accounts on gates. Maybe alliances will have to use their moongold on scout accounts and make some sort of intelbot. I suspect your point is an attempt at reverse psychology. Separate accounts monitored by bots being both metagaming and an exploit is obviously not a solution to a failing game mechanic that is going to be acceptable to the majority of the players, let alone CCP. I would very much like it if in a no local environment patrols would provide a reasonable measure of security, without changes to the scanning/cloaking mechanics though I don't see how they would. Originally by: Malconis really, the countermeasures are pretty elementary, but they can be countered in turn. That provides a good reason not to publicise them, dont you think? Perhaps the string of ratting ship losses of mine you can find will prove me wrong? If the countermeasures you had in mind to cloaked intruders roaming virtually undetectably around (bar scouts seeing them for a split second at various gates) can in fact be countered (something you neglected to mention when you were telling me I was wrong), does that mean you are now saying that you don't have any solution to cloaked gangs roaming freely around in a no local environment that cannot be countered? In which case you would now seem to be saying something pretty close to what I was saying all along.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.21 15:11:00 - [305] Originally by: iP0D If you are concerned about macro abuse, which everybody should be in my opinion, make a thread about it, and make the case. Now back on topic, just which is it ... 1. macro abuse? 2. the state of Local? 3. the state of 0.0? Yes, all three topics touch on each other (you must like that word) but they remain seperate topics, especially if you are interested in actually arguing your case! Just FYI, this IS about the macro problem, and the root of that problem is LOCAL, because thats what the macro's KEY OFF OF. Perhaps you can't pick that up, but I'll make you a brief outline: There are programs like H-Bot. They are undetectable by CCP. Repeat, there is NOTHING CCP CAN DO TO CATCH THEM, the programs were designed to leave little to no footprint for CCP to trace. If you think otherwise, contact blizzard, after FOUR YEARS of trying to catch Glider users, they resorted to court litigation and sued the maker of glider into compliance. Rat hunting macro aside, the program uses LOCAL AS ITS SOURCE OF INFORMATION TO KEEP THE BOT SAFE FROM HARM FROM OTHER PLAYERS. Ratters using said macro HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE OF GETTING CAUGHT EVER. The discussion has tunred instead, to the consequences and needed fixes that come with removing that main support system for the macros, LOCAL, and the consequences of that action (The state of 0.0). So then, before you attack him for outlining somethings for people to lazy to follow links that were posted earlier, you should perhaps use your powers of deductive reasoning to try and grasp the WHOLE THREAD, instead of insisting that it be about one topic. TBH, this thread went from people screaming about "NEVER GONA HAPPEN" (wrong btw, ccp says it WILL HAPPEN) to a semi coherent discussion about the changes needed to 0.0 in general and the things that would have to happen so that the citizens of 0.0 won't be thrown to the wolves. I know at 11 pages it starts to be hard to follow a long flowing discussion, but try to follow along at home.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.21 15:59:00 - [306] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset If the countermeasures you had in mind to cloaked intruders roaming virtually undetectably around (bar scouts seeing them for a split second at various gates) can in fact be countered (something you neglected to mention when you were telling me I was wrong), does that mean you are now saying that you don't have any solution to cloaked gangs roaming freely around in a no local environment that cannot be countered? In which case you would now seem to be saying something pretty close to what I was saying all along. Whatever you're trying to prove, I'm sure you've done it to your own satisfaction. I'm still not fazed by the prospect of delayed local.
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.21 16:16:00 - [307] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 21/06/2009 16:19:00 Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Just FYI, this IS about the macro problem, and the root of that problem is LOCAL, because thats what the macro's KEY OFF OF. Blablabla... You should perhaps use your power of deductive reasoning to find the real reasons that someone use a macro. The root is not Local, but a gameplay who need to apply the same repetitive actions all the time to be able to do something (as you always need ISK and ressources). And also the demand of ISK. If no one would buy ISK by any ISK seller, there would have less macro users. If mining wasn't so boring, macros wouldn't be a good option anymore. Same if remove Local would help to fight them, they will just have to move to Empire, mining with a total security same if less ISK/Hour, or wait for a new version of a H-Bot who can do missions. That would be only a matter of time. So the only consequence that Local would do, is permit to some of the removal supporters to find easy targets, emptying null sec systems, and that would change NOTHING against macro users. Dammit...
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.21 16:54:00 - [308] Edited by: Mikayla Grey on 21/06/2009 16:55:29 Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Mikayla Grey No you need dedicated scout accounts on gates. Maybe alliances will have to use their moongold on scout accounts and make some sort of intelbot. I suspect your point is an attempt at reverse psychology. Separate accounts monitored by bots being both metagaming and an exploit is obviously not a solution to a failing game mechanic that is going to be acceptable to the majority of the players, let alone CCP. I would very much like it if in a no local environment patrols would provide a reasonable measure of security, without changes to the scanning/cloaking mechanics though I don't see how they would. Call it what you like but I will be surprised if it dont happen if local is removed. Who cares if its metagaming and a exploit. Macro ratters are the same, and scouting on gates would be a lot more boring than ratting. Similar stuff has already been tried by alliances. It wont be long until the tools are there. Patrols will never provide adequate security.
Cerberal Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2009.06.21 17:18:00 - [309] Edited by: Cerberal on 21/06/2009 17:22:54 Removing local would be GAME CHANGINGLY AWESOME Thats all i have to say about that. oh also Originally by: Deviana Sevidon With local removed, my Days of Ratting would be over. There are Regions with multiple entrances that cannot all be secured permanently. With local removed, trying to rat in such a Region would be suicide. One or two Recons or a small Stealth Bomber Gang would totally ruin the Day for everyone who is trying to make some ISK in the Belts and even Exploration would be a lot more dangerous. Comparing 0.0 with W-Space does not work, since a W-Space-System very rarely sees multiple Gangs of Hostiles on a single evening. With local removed, there would be nothing to protect you from Cloakers, you would not even know that there would a Cloakers until they land right on top your Mining or Ratting Ships. The only consequence would be, that most people would leave 0.0 and the only ones still staying are those that earn their ISK with Moon-Gold or Scamming in Jita and those who simply buy their ISK. Mehbe CCP could add a midslot mod that detects "Cloaked signatures" within your radius, like within half an AU, and doesnt show you the direction.
Huge Bruno Minmatar	Posted - 2009.06.21 17:25:00 - [310] So what do we have here? One side saying local is fine as it is and is probably used to using it as an intel-tool, not what the devs. intended. One side trying to convince others that CCP must remove local chat. Saying that will solve the "problem" of macro-runners. Another side trying to point out that there are solutions to removing local and still not making everyone safe / un-safe. Here are the facts people... CCP never intended local-chat to be used as an intel-tool. CCP has never officially condoned macroing in EVE. Pirates wants easy kills. Macroers want privacy in their systems. Now, on one hand I don't like the fact that macroer are out there griding ISK etc all day long to fill their wallets and potentially make them so rich that they can afford to buy plex's for their entire corp/alliance allowing them to play the game for "free". On the other hand I don't enjoy seeing pirates running around just ganking everything just to destroy the other kids sandcastle, so to speak. This problem is actually two problems that often interweave and overlap, and this is one potential solution: Make local delay-mode or remove it or in some other manner make it obsolete as an intel-tool for roaming gangs. Either enforce the rules on macroing and remove some of the worst cases, ie. track down who's doing it and not only ban the actual macro's but remove the accounts that share IP etc. (Ie. put criminals in jail instead of just removing their crowbar). OR.... allow it, and build tools around it, now before you flame me to death, lots of stuff IS already "macroed" in this game, ie. contruction of stuff, research, moon-mining etc. Mining ore or ratting NPC's in belts is one of the least skill-demanding "professions" in eve, and thus something that would be nice if also new players could get into more, but since new players are so restricted by a lack of skills and space they can not - forcing them to do it manually, which creates a barrier between rich and poor/old and new... Now before you flamers go in-game and check how old this char. is mind you... this is an alt. ;-)

Dragon Greg	Posted - 2009.06.21 17:29:00 - [311] sigh
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.21 18:38:00 - [312] Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 21/06/2009 16:19:00 Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Just FYI, this IS about the macro problem, and the root of that problem is LOCAL, because thats what the macro's KEY OFF OF. Blablabla... You should perhaps use your power of deductive reasoning to find the real reasons that someone use a macro..... The root is not Local, but a gameplay who need to apply the same repetitive actions all the time to be able to do something (as you always need ISK and ressources). If within 2 months of playing this game (the time it takes to relatively be in a ratting raven, covetor) you haven't realized that ISK grinding is THIS MMO'S TIME SINK (they all have at least ONE heavy time sink, its how they keep you in the game) then perhaps you have bigger issues. WoW makes you grind on Boars (stolen from south park), as did many of the games that came before it. CoH/V makes you grind on "villans", EVE makes you grind on isk. Complaining about the time sink needed to perform well in this game is just plain bull*. You don't like grinding things, you don't play MMO's, because ALL MMO's HAVE A GRIND OF ONE TYPE OR ANOTHER. Cheating to get it done is still that: Cheating. Originally by:** Sky Marshal Same if remove Local would help to fight them, they will just have to move to Empire, mining with a total security same if less ISK/Hour, or wait for a new version of a H-Bot who can do missions. That would be only a matter of time. This is something else entirely that CCP need to address, the safety of empire, and the money that can be made therein. In a game pretty much based on the worn out phrase of Risk vs Reward, empire is broken as is, and needs adjustment, so that 0.0 is infinitely more profitable for the lone pilot than empire ever could be, but right now, thats broken. The case SHOULD BE that if the macro botters make it to empire, it should be distasteful at best for them because the profits they make should be a trifle of what COULD be made in 0.0, only, the macro's shouldn't be able to proliferate in 0.0 as the mechanics should make it EXTREMELY difficult for a macro bot to safely survive in 0.0. What you are describing are symptoms of a game wide adjustment that needs to be made, and in no way defends the keeping of the all seeing eye, and the macro assisting tool that is local chat. Also, obligatory "damnit".
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.21 18:51:00 - [313] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Perhaps you can't pick that up, but I'll make you a brief outline: There are programs like H-Bot. They are undetectable by CCP. Repeat, there is NOTHING CCP CAN DO TO CATCH THEM, the programs were designed to leave little to no footprint for CCP to trace. If you think otherwise, contact blizzard, after FOUR YEARS of trying to catch Glider users, they resorted to court litigation and sued the maker of glider into compliance. Rat hunting macro aside, the program uses LOCAL AS ITS SOURCE OF INFORMATION TO KEEP THE BOT SAFE FROM HARM FROM OTHER PLAYERS. Ratters using said macro HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE OF GETTING CAUGHT EVER. The problem is that removing local will NOT cure that. The bots will had a SPAM SCAN feature and warp as soon as something enter range. Bots have no problem spamming scan every few seconds, while player will have problems. End result maybe a few more bot killed, a lot of more players killed until most of them stop operating in 0.0, leaving it to the bots. Great result.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.21 19:21:00 - [314] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 21/06/2009 16:19:00 Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Just FYI, this IS about the macro problem, and the root of that problem is LOCAL, because thats what the macro's KEY OFF OF. Blablabla... You should perhaps use your power of deductive reasoning to find the real reasons that someone use a macro..... The root is not Local, but a gameplay who need to apply the same repetitive actions all the time to be able to do something (as you always need ISK and ressources). If within 2 months of playing this game (the time it takes to relatively be in a ratting raven, covetor) you haven't realized that ISK grinding is THIS MMO'S TIME SINK (they all have at least ONE heavy time sink, its how they keep you in the game) then perhaps you have bigger issues. WoW makes you grind on Boars (stolen from south park), as did many of the games that came before it. CoH/V makes you grind on "villans", EVE makes you grind on isk. Complaining about the time sink needed to perform well in this game is just plain bull*. You don't like grinding things, you don't play MMO's, because ALL MMO's HAVE A GRIND OF ONE TYPE OR ANOTHER. Cheating to get it done is still that: Cheating. Originally by:** Sky Marshal Same if remove Local would help to fight them, they will just have to move to Empire, mining with a total security same if less ISK/Hour, or wait for a new version of a H-Bot who can do missions. That would be only a matter of time. This is something else entirely that CCP need to address, the safety of empire, and the money that can be made therein. In a game pretty much based on the worn out phrase of Risk vs Reward, empire is broken as is, and needs adjustment, so that 0.0 is infinitely more profitable for the lone pilot than empire ever could be, but right now, thats broken. The case SHOULD BE that if the macro botters make it to empire, it should be distasteful at best for them because the profits they make should be a trifle of what COULD be made in 0.0, only, the macro's shouldn't be able to proliferate in 0.0 as the mechanics should make it EXTREMELY difficult for a macro bot to safely survive in 0.0. What you are describing are symptoms of a game wide adjustment that needs to be made, and in no way defends the keeping of the all seeing eye, and the macro assisting tool that is local chat. Also, obligatory "damnit". Yes there's got to be a certain amount of grinding. However there is no rule or requirement that the grind be so easy and simple that it takes a human to optimise it. Ratting, mining, missioning could all be made significantly more challenging.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.21 19:29:00 - [315] Originally by: Venkul Mul The problem is that removing local will NOT cure that. The bots will had a SPAM SCAN feature and warp as soon as something enter range. Bots have no problem spamming scan every few seconds, while player will have problems. End result maybe a few more bot killed, a lot of more players killed until most of them stop operating in 0.0, leaving it to the bots. Great result. Well, the current directional scanner doesn't see cloaked ships, so there's that. However, one of the suggested mandatory features of the replacement scanning tools is the ability to detect a cloaking signature to keep the ships that use a cov-ops cloak from becoming overpowered in a delayed Local environment. One way to tackle this problem is to add some disadvantages to using a directional scanner (within the framework of the 'new scanning tools' that include a passive auto-updating scanner, and the active directional scanner that will have the ability to detect a cloak signature). Some of those disadvantages could be shorter range (as compared to passive auto mode) and increased visibility of the scanning ship to other ships in the system, making it easier to scan down and warp to with just the default ship's scanning tools. That's just the rough idea. Hopefully something could be implemented along those lines. ...
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2009.06.21 19:33:00 - [316] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 21/06/2009 19:34:27 Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator If within 2 months of playing this game (the time it takes to relatively be in a ratting raven, covetor) you haven't realized that ISK grinding is THIS MMO'S TIME SINK (they all have at least ONE heavy time sink, its how they keep you in the game) then perhaps you have bigger issues. Complaining about the time sink needed to perform well in this game is just plain bull*. If you need more money than it is required to have 3 or 4 ships of the same type, or if you lose your ships at a rate that you can't spare money, then perhaps you have bigger issues. It is not bull as long that you want have fun of a game. Or in EvE, some players want fight. It is something that give few minutes of fun, for hours of work to have them. I don't care than other MMOs do that too, and you forgot something very important : They have a difference with EvE, it is that lose mean nothing. So after an annoying grind moment, you success to buy or use your stuff, and you can do everything you want without problems, and you can lose nearly nothing. In EvE, lose mean something (and we appreciate him for that), so it force people to grind with no limit in contrary of others MMOs, to repair taken damages or spare money in all cases. If you are so accustomed to this that you are unable to see the difference, then perhaps you have bigger issues. Quote:** The case SHOULD BE that if the macro botters make it to empire, it should be distasteful at best for them because the profits they make should be a trifle of what COULD be made in 0.0, only, the macro's shouldn't be able to proliferate in 0.0 as the mechanics should make it EXTREMELY difficult for a macro bot to safely survive in 0.0. And so extremely difficult to a normal player to safely survive in 0.0 too. Great... Players can't adapt to everything. There are already macro players in Empire, who mine Ice fields and others things. They don't seem affected by the fact they do less money than null secs. Anyway, maybe CCP will remove local (but I hope it will never be the case), but not without give us a tool to have the same thing. Macros will be adapted to this new tool, problem not solved. Just that we will make EvE more annoying. I think that I speak to a french politician : P - We will filter the Internet (remove local) to stop access to pedophile websites (macro) ! The "LOPPSI rev2" law will be created shortly ! U - Hum... You don't resolve the origin of the problem (gameplay, ISK buyers,... ), and this can be countered (scan spam, new tool,... ), and some can use this filter to their interest (easy targets), this can generate bad consequences (emptying null sec), and the police will have problems to find and arrest them (patrols). P - Are you blind ? You support pedophiles, right ?!? U - ... _______ Local is fine, period.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.21 19:34:00 - [317] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Venkul Mul The problem is that removing local will NOT cure that. The bots will had a SPAM SCAN feature and warp as soon as something enter range. Bots have no problem spamming scan every few seconds, while player will have problems. End result maybe a few more bot killed, a lot of more players killed until most of them stop operating in 0.0, leaving it to the bots. Great result. Well, the current directional scanner doesn't see cloaked ships, so there's that. However, one of the suggested mandatory features of the replacement scanning tools is the ability to detect a cloaking signature to keep the ships that use a cov-ops cloak from becoming overpowered in a delayed Local environment. One way to tackle this problem is to add some disadvantages to using a directional scanner (within the framework of the 'new scanning tools' that include a passive auto-updating scanner, and the active directional scanner that will have the ability to detect a cloak signature). Some of those disadvantages could be shorter range (as compared to passive auto mode) and increased visibility of the scanning ship to other ships in the system, making it easier to scan down and warp to with just the default ship's scanning tools. That's just the rough idea. Hopefully something could be implemented along those lines. I actually like that, when your looking, you can detect the cloaked anomaly, but have reduced range, when your just passively scanning, you miss them, but have a wider scan range
Pan Crastus Anti-Metagaming League	Posted - 2009.06.21 19:37:00 - [318] The delayed local is the best solution IMO. If you think it's too dangerous for ratters who are watching local now - you're trying to solve the wrong problem. You don't keep your space safe by watching local, you do it by keeping hostiles out, patrolling etc. So if hostiles enter your system, it's perfectly fine if they can find you quickly. How to PVP: 1. buy ISK with GTCs, 2. fit cloak, learn aggro mechanics, 3. buy second account for metagaming
iP0D	Posted - 2009.06.21 20:19:00 - [319] Gah make up your minds people. There is no difference between local and delayed local for the perspective of the miner or ratter or hauler (or whatever flies around not shooting stuff). The endresult for him is the same, especially since there still is no viable mechanism for scanning and alerting. Truth be told the only one who will be safe is the one using macro bots, because those can very easily incorporate hitting a scan button every few seconds and respond accordingly. Real humans playing the game are not robots. Thing is, we're only interested in getting our gank dinner served when we tune in to EVE. Since we don't really want to ask ourselves why the fun of having targets in space of years ago has gone away and all we see is macros. And then we mix the two things together and wonder why people just dont take a serious matter seriously. 0.0 is not the same or even similar to W-space. We don't have a clue yet whether W-space is going to succeed or end up like a mini theatre like Faction warfare (no offence but there ain't a lot left of how it started out). All we know is that CCP are tweaking it to yield more, which makes me worry for the viability of succes of W-space. So, leave such comparisons alone until in a few months when we've got something to compare. Not everyone in 0.0 is a macro :P When you wander around in the drone regions and track the ravens and the freighters in LXQ you wonder, but there are humans in space. Drone regions are the wrong example, since that plays IS macro and RMT central. It is just people only show for big stuff, since there is little else to do, and even less point in doing much in nullsec since money is much easier and better in other places. Without risk whatsoever involved. Stupid ain't it. So, if you want **** in space to shoot, take a good look at why there's so little there, and think of stuff which changes that. Now, macro's and bots and whatnot. Sofar it's still pretty fine to mess them up in empire. Hulks, mackinaws, sweet. In nullsec it gets a bit tricker, but hey since the humans are either gone or not bothering to defend stuff which they don't have to use for low paying income, let's hunt the macro raven. Not easy. But possible. Takes quite a bit of effort however, and effort is something everyone who loves the gank is allergic to. There's got to be a better way to get rid of macro crap, looking at pirate implants cheaper then jita and Plex prices maybe CCP are winning the war, or at least a battle. Would be fun if we could do something against them in the mean time as well. But NOT by making it worse, that's just stupid man. Y'know, couple of years ago macro crap was just as bad. No really. Even before the drone regions and stuff. Macro ravens everywhere. Stain was just as full of macropocs. We just noticed them a LOT less, even got excited about them a LOT less cause we had people to blow up in nullsec. Wars which meant actually fighting and hauling loot, instead of grinding pos. I just can't get my head around a topic which tries to spin drama by shouting about macros to remove on of the last few things which keeps potential gank victims using nullsec. Isn't it just way counterproductive man. Or does thinking about getting people back to nullsec in hordes again to serve as targets take effort maybe. Crap I agree, local is a powerful thing. Never stopped us from farming Xetic didn't it. Didn't stop us either from farming FREGE in the drones. Don't you miss those days. So make up yer mind. Let's attack the macro problem for real, or let's change nullsec so it fills up and then shut the trap by killing local. Not this wishy washy wannabee demagoge drama stuff.
Mikayla Grey Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.21 23:08:00 - [320] Originally by: Pan Crastus The delayed local is the best solution IMO. If you think it's too dangerous for ratters who are watching local now - you're trying to solve the wrong problem. You don't keep your space safe by watching local, you do it by keeping hostiles out, patrolling etc. So if hostiles enter your system, it's perfectly fine if they can find you quickly. You dont keep your space by patrolling. You keep your space by POS warfare. Most alliance pilots already have high sec isk grinders so maybe it wont matter much that 0.0 is just a pos bashing arena.

Lord WarATron Amarr Shadow Reapers	Posted - 2009.06.21 23:21:00 - [321] Edited by: Lord WarATron on 21/06/2009 23:22:15 In a game where losses are now worth less in time to recover due to to insurance, and compare this to some guy repairing his gear in wow. Not a lot different. Just get with the flow Now exceuse me while I skin some mobs (salvaging) and then use leatherworking or enchanting to put these on the ship. Of course, I better kill recipie mobs for items to build stuff. But wait, wont it make sense if we make some Elixirs? (Boosters). We are pretty much there already, only thing missing is the graveyard!
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.22 01:13:00 - [322] I would think stopping this macro would be in CCP's best interests. People using this exploit are helping bloat this economy pretty crazy. Am I trippin? I could've sworn prices for T2 ships was much cheaper last year. I can recall distinctly buying Taranis for bout 13 mil. Now I'm paying bout 20 mil for one. What the hell???? Soon this game will become practically unplayable for honest folk because they cant hope to grind out all this crazy ISK due to this inflated ecnomy
Speaker Dead	Posted - 2009.06.22 01:44:00 - [323] Originally by: Descrambled Edited by: Descrambled on 22/06/2009 01:20:41 I would think stopping this macro would be in CCP's best interests. People using this exploit are helping bloat this economy pretty crazy. Am I trippin? I could've sworn prices for T2 ships was much cheaper last year. I can recall distinctly buying Taranis for bout 13 mil. Now I'm paying bout 20 mil for one. What the hell???? This is a 50% price hike! Soon this game will become practically unplayable for honest folk because they cant hope to grind out all this crazy ISK due to this inflated ecnomy First of all, since you don't understand what happened to T2, let me clarify. T2 prices jumped due to the breaking of the moon mining exploit. That and the war in Delve forced certain Moon minerals a lot higher, driving the price of T2 ships up in the process. If your going to make statements to justify a position, at least try to find out the facts. This problem is not confined to drone lands either, these guys exist everywhere in 0.0. You find a quiet spot, and you find a macro ratter. The suggestions I've seen though are no answer, you'd make it impossible for anyone to rat in 0.0, even in their own systems, so your punishing non-macro users for the macroer's. I don't know why people think that delayed local or no local will stop the macro ratters at all. You don't think they can write the code to use the scanner? Or put probes on there overview? For every idea you come up with, the coders will find a dozen ways around it....I'd quit worrying so much about what other people are doing, and try actually playing the game for your own enjoyment. I for one enjoy messing with them, and there are ways to catch them if your willing to waste the time. I have setup in a system now where there's a macro ratter, I leave an alt there when I'm out fighting, and his macro can't operate....sooner or later he'll try to move, and we'll kill him at the gate. There are other ways to catch them too, if your good with a scanner. it's simply a matter of dropping probes as soon as you enter system, narrow down his SS, it may take a few tries, but once you have it, he's screwed.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.22 01:49:00 - [324] I know about all those other reasons but I also attribute this inflated economy to ths game being overrun with macro And that is cool you are willing to hassle the macroers but not everyone is so noble. Some will surely get smart and stick to systems that have jumpbridges they can use to bypass camps. They can also dock at a local POS then use a quick frigate to bypass the camps. Then grab a ratter ship in another system
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.22 02:28:00 - [325] A loss in Eve is still costly. Lose a rigged Command Ship and you are looking at >300m isk. It takes most people weeks to earn that kind of isk. Arazus in Rens are 130m isk now. For a skilled character that can fly a wide variety of ships useful to his corp the amount of grind required to actually field the ships is unpaletable to the extent that folks will take whatever shortcuts are provided. Are what shortcuts are there? Oh that's right CCP sells isk for RL cash. I know they wrap it up in a game code mechanism to make it look like something more respectable, but at the end of the day someone who doesn't want to grind for isk coughs up RL cash which goes in CCP's pocket and in return thay get x million isk on a plate. Isn't that at least partially creating a market for these macros? Sure you could buy isk directly from ChineseIskFarmer194548 but the transaction has a good chance of being spotted and your account will end up with either the isk removed or banned. On the other hand sell a GTC and bingo, you've just created the incentive for one extra guy to run an isk grinding bot that cannot be detected, drives up the prices of everything for the rest of us, and encourages requests for ill concieved game mechanics in a vain attempt to counter it. That said I've yet to see anything to suggest that this idea wouldn't remove local in a way which makes combat in space more interesting for all of us, while at the same time making it quite easy to gank macroers. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1099728&page=10#279
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2009.06.22 02:39:00 - [326] Yes, remove it. So instead of: Quote: - Monitors local channel for hostiles We see: Quote: - Monitors directional scanner for ships outside of specified distance Don't worry, the constant extra database calls and inconvenience of legitimate players will be worth it.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.22 03:11:00 - [327] Originally by: Wet Ferret Yes, remove it. So instead of: Quote: - Monitors local channel for hostiles We see: Quote: - Monitors directional scanner for ships outside of specified distance Don't worry, the constant extra database calls and inconvenience of legitimate players will be worth it. Sweet, any player constantly making database calls for 23 hours of the server day would red flag for inspection from a GM, for strangely enough, botting. See, something so simple as what you just said, means the macro cover is blown, because with the change as your stating, all the macro players become a hundred times more obvious.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.22 03:38:00 - [328] It is common sense knowledge that any nerf to local would go together with improvement of the scanning system The simplest and most obvious change would be to have a dynamically updating scanner - nobody has to click "scan" every 2 seconds. CCP people would never force people to do that, if not for game design reasons, then for the sake of their server performance. You cannot argue against local nerf by assuming that scanning system will not be improved.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.22 04:45:00 - [329] Edited by: Descrambled on 22/06/2009 04:46:24 Originally by: Wet Ferret Yes, remove it. So instead of: Quote: - Monitors local channel for hostiles We see: Quote: - Monitors directional scanner for ships outside of specified distance Don't worry, the constant extra database calls and inconvenience of legitimate players will be worth it. Good ratters have directional scanner open anyway. This way you can give good intel on hostile ship types. For all you know w/o having scanner open the hostile might be in pod/shuttle and you are hiding for nothing. Works wonderful for small systems where gates are within scanner range Some bigger systems most gates will be on same side so you can still do this and be a help to your Alliance Only a poor ratter will never use directional scanner. This type of ratter deserves to get ganked Granted, without overview players will be paranoid and all of sudden start spamming directional scanner for incoming ships. Some of us ratters already do this though. Cause in my system we always have red cloaked or something. So I would spam scanner to see if he incoming....
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.22 04:59:00 - [330] Originally by: Ephemeron The simplest and most obvious change would be to have a dynamically updating scanner - nobody has to click "scan" every 2 seconds. CCP people would never force people to do that, if not for game design reasons, then for the sake of their server performance. Sadly you are incorrect. In wspace where local is already nerfed CCP are already forcing people to do exactly this. The server appears to be able to handle the additional load without issues but as a game mechanic it is as laughable as anything they have previously come up with. It also contravenes statements they have made previously where they stated they would not introduce this mechanic without scanner changes, (although they would probably argue that that statement only applied to existing space not newly added space like wspace). The only thing that mitigates the effect of this and prevents it being a competely unworkable situation in wspace is oddly enough an area where the Sleeper AI is actually worse than normal rat AI. Namely target switching. Consider normal rat AI. When engaged by a ratter they target him and him alone. If player pirates arrive to gank the ratter the NPC does not switch targets to engage the player pirates who are actually helping him out. With Sleepers however they switch targets amongst the player ships on the field on the basis of who is outputting the most dps or is using logistics/ewar. However they appear to take little notice of who or what is actually being attacked. Hence when player pirates arrive to gank the gang ratting, the Sleepers actually engage the player pirates who are helping them out. This ridiculous behaviour however happens to be the only thing that provides at least some defense against recons being able to sneak in and tackle the ratters with little or no defense, since recons cannot effectively tank Sleeper dps. And even this is only a partial defense since a pirate gang in recons can just wait until the ratter has cleared most of the Sleepers before engaging. For the pirates it looks like this will work best against solo ratters in low end wspace. For the ratters it looks like solo ratting in low end wspace is nothing short of a lottery. You might make a few isk, or you might get jumped by a pirate gang in recons and it doesn't look like there is much you can do about it. I expect at this point someone will jump in and say there is plenty solo ratters can do to protect themselves in wspace. The favoured suggestion will probably be having scouts permenantly sat on wormhole entrances (which means not solo ratting at all). Recons aside the current situation in wspace does however still leave every ratting gang in wspace spamming the scan button for the entire duration of the operation. And while I'm have no idea whether wspace currently is or will be a success, imo the rewards for solo or small gang operations are currently not worth the risk and the endless manual scanning is an utter drag. Conversly I expect that for roaming pirate gangs it's an absolute blast, so the many calls for the same thing to be implemented in 0.0 in this thread do not surprise me in the least. Originally by: Descrambled Cause in my system we always have red cloaked or something. So I would spam scanner to see if he incoming.... Are you talking about in a situation where local is just removed with no other mechanic changes, or a situation where local is removed with scanner/cloaking changes? If the former then obviously you would be wasting your time since your scanner won't detect anything, if the latter what mechanic changes do you support?

Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.22 05:17:00 - [331] Neutrino Sunset, it isn't proper to claim that WH design would be simply extended to all of 0.0 without any scanner improvement. CCP already hinted that a nerf to local would have to be accompanied with boost to scanners. And as I said, the simplest and most effective boost, at least one of the many additional boosts, is the auto-scan feature.
Spurty Caldari Ore Mongers BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2009.06.22 05:23:00 - [332] Ephemeron, you are correct on the concept, but implementation will bring the SQL servers to their knees :( CCP should indeed go very very very slowly with this if it happens. They will certainly not be able to test it out (properly) until it hits TQ.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.22 05:59:00 - [333] Originally by: Spurty Ephemeron, you are correct on the concept, but implementation will bring the SQL servers to their knees :( CCP should indeed go very very very slowly with this if it happens. They will certainly not be able to test it out (properly) until it hits TQ. There's no real need for scanner info to use SQL queries. Fortunately, getting scan info does not involve creation, modification, or destruction of real game objects.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.22 06:12:00 - [334] Originally by: Descrambled I know about all those other reasons but I also attribute this inflated economy to ths game being overrun with macro I.e. I know the reasons but prefer to invent mine. Originally by: Descrambled And that is cool you are willing to hassle the macroers but not everyone is so noble. Some will surely get smart and stick to systems that have jumpbridges they can use to bypass camps. They can also dock at a local POS then use a quick frigate to bypass the camps. Then grab a ratter ship in another system Jumpbridges use is not free for all. To use them require to be friendly with the owning Alliance. If the macro users are "friends" of alliance owning the territory the problem is one of widespread cheating, not of local/no local.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.22 06:49:00 - [335] Originally by: Ephemeron Neutrino Sunset, it isn't proper to claim that WH design would be simply extended to all of 0.0 without any scanner improvement. I didn't. You said CCP would never implement a local change that would force people to scan manually, if not for game design reasons then for server performance reasons. I haven't said that they would necessarily use the wspace model in 0.0, but if they do choose to implement a different model it will presumably be for reasons other than server load issues or horrid gameplay mechanics since they have already implemented that solution in wspace and are apparently satisfied with it from both a server load and gameplay perspective. How is implementing an auto scan feature on its own any kind of solution to arriving at a workable no local implementation for 0.0 when it doesn't detect cloaked ships at all, which are already the pirate's gankmobile of choice? Unless of course retaining the ability for anyone to earn a living in 0.0 is not a desirable objective.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.22 07:43:00 - [336] It is my opinion that cloaked ships should not appear in local or on any built-in ship scanner It is also my opinion that 0.0 is biased too much in favor of the defenders and farmers. The fact that we see so many macro farming Ravens in 0.0 is proof that it is too easy. Any change to local should shift the balance slightly toward attackers and raise the bar on personal skill level required to operate successfully. I think most people wouldn't mind if empire local was unchanged, those who can't stomach the increased difficulty can stay in empire. A sign of successful implementation would be a significant decrease in the macro farmer Ravens in 0.0, CCP can easily verify that.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.22 08:13:00 - [337] Ephemeron, I think there is a slight error in your post, this is the correct version: "A sign of successful implementation would be a significant decrease in the character presence in 0.0, CCP can easily verify that." Where character include both regular players and macro users.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.22 08:18:00 - [338] Originally by: Ephemeron The fact that we see so many macro farming Ravens in 0.0 is proof that it is too easy. This statement is logically equivalent to the statement: 'The fact that there are so many players cheating and using bots, is proof of the fact that the game is too easy for those players not cheating and using bots.' Could you explain how this is so, because on face value such an assertion would appear to be baseless. Originally by: Ephemeron A sign of successful implementation would be a significant decrease in the macro farmer Ravens in 0.0, CCP can easily verify that. Would 0.0 being not only devoid of macroers but also devoid of anyone else trying to earn a living ratting or mining in 0.0 also be a sign of a successful implementation? Would nobody flying anything in small gangs in 0.0 other than cloaking ships also be a sign of a successful implementation? If having no local and no way to detect cloaked ships would merely 'raise the bar on personal skill level required to operate successfully'. Could you enumerate the skill based techniques which would still allow solo or small gangs of ratters and miners to operate successfully?
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2009.06.22 08:30:00 - [339] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Ephemeron The fact that we see so many macro farming Ravens in 0.0 is proof that it is too easy. This statement is logically equivalent to the statement: 'The fact that there are so many players cheating and using bots, is proof of the fact that the game is too easy for those players not cheating and using bots.' Could you explain how this is so, because on face value such an assertion would appear to be baseless. I think that such a statement is true on the face of it. If the game is easy enough that bots can compete with players, then by definition it is too easy. If the game was difficult and unpredictable enough that human ratters, miners & marketers have a large advantage over bots then we'd see many fewer bots. Currently mining, ratting and to a great extent missioning reward inhuman patience far more than they do intelligence or skill. We see bots proliferating in these activities. Q.E.D.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.22 08:59:00 - [340] Bots can complete with players in a wide range of tasks. In FPS games bots are generally superior than players due to reflex response times. In MMOs bots are superior to players due to stamina and patience. In neither case does that mean that 'by definition' the games are too easy. The PvE grind in MMOs being particularly mind numbing is symptomic of the fact that to reduce the potential for cheating most game decisions need to be made on the server side, which given the vast numbers of people playing at once on a single server cluster reduces the complexity of the decisions that can be made and hence drastically restricts the sophisication of NPC AI. Arguing that is shouldn't be this way is like arguing that gravity shouldn't pull things downwards. This is the way it is, and it is within the limitations of this environment that solutions must be found to things like implementing workable gameplay mechanics and deterring the use of bots. Making certain aspects of the game overly difficult for human players purely on the grounds that it might deter those using bots is not likely to be in line with the priority order of the developers of the game. That order is likely to be something like this: Make the game as engaging and enjoyable as possible. Make the game as balanced as possible. Achieve the above in such a way as to minimize the potential for cheating. The reasons for the priorities being in this order is simple. If they go to such lengths to minimize cheating that the game is no longer fun then they will have failed to meet the one priority that trumps all those listed above. Namely the one which goes: Increase subscriptions and make more money.

Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.22 13:09:00 - [341] Edited by: Descrambled on 22/06/2009 13:11:16 Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Ephemeron The fact that we see so many macro farming Ravens in 0.0 is proof that it is too easy. This statement is logically equivalent to the statement: 'The fact that there are so many players cheating and using bots, is proof of the fact that the game is too easy for those players not cheating and using bots.' Could you explain how this is so, because on face value such an assertion would appear to be baseless. Originally by: Ephemeron A sign of successful implementation would be a significant decrease in the macro farmer Ravens in 0.0, CCP can easily verify that. Would 0.0 being not only devoid of macroers but also devoid of anyone else trying to earn a living ratting or mining in 0.0 also be a sign of a successful implementation? Would nobody flying anything in small gangs in 0.0 other than cloaking ships also be a sign of a successful implementation? If having no local and no way to detect cloaked ships would merely 'raise the bar on personal skill level required to operate successfully'. Could you enumerate the skill based techniques which would still allow solo or small gangs of ratters and miners to operate successfully? I like that you make Intelligent arguments. However, people are saying the devs would not take away God mode (aka Local) without a new scanner system. New tactics for pvp will emerge. Such as, it will become even more viable to employ Blackops to get the drop on enemy gangs and so forth. You will also be able to surprise enemy gangs a bit easier and run them off. Another viable strategy will be to put 1 or 2 tacklers on the gate and hide rest of gang. Once other gang jumps in you can nail them. Right now, you cannot hide allied forces too well because Local grants god mode. So what gangs do is send out scout and they simply use Local to acquire Intel. You would think cloaks would hide players from Local but that doesn't work either Earlier you said that you could not see how this would improve gang vs gang pvp. I think you're wrong. It will FIX it to be even better. Will open up new Tactics I'm not can say anything about ratters under this new system. Yes, they might get farmed way too easy due to lack of God mode (aka Local). They could use a bit more danger however since many ratters probably never have died. To be honest and frank, the ratter in me is sort of terrified at the thought of no more supernatural awareness. The pvper in me is excited however, because now we would see much more interesting fights between gangs
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.22 13:24:00 - [342] Edited by: Descrambled on 22/06/2009 13:32:43 Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Originally by: Ephemeron Neutrino Sunset, it isn't proper to claim that WH design would be simply extended to all of 0.0 without any scanner improvement. I didn't. You said CCP would never implement a local change that would force people to scan manually, if not for game design reasons then for server performance reasons. I haven't said that they would necessarily use the wspace model in 0.0, but if they do choose to implement a different model it will presumably be for reasons other than server load issues or horrid gameplay mechanics since they have already implemented that solution in wspace and are apparently satisfied with it from both a server load and gameplay perspective. How is implementing an auto scan feature on its own any kind of solution to arriving at a workable no local implementation for 0.0 when it doesn't detect cloaked ships at all, which are already the pirate's gankmobile of choice? Unless of course retaining the ability for anyone to earn a living in 0.0 is not a desirable objective. Don't cloakies suffer a targeting delay after decloak? Why can't you already be aligned to safespot this way when he appears you can initiate warp. The targeting delay after deactivating cloak merely needs to be long enough to allow the fully aligned Battleship / BC / Miner to escape I always rat fully aligned. Of course being a Domi pilot even if a hostile gets into my belt I can hit them with ECM drones which has saved my bacon Now if they take away ECM I could imagine ratting becoming much much more scarrier Cloakies will become a much bigger threat though and like you pointed out, the rats are no help when jumped either. Which makes sense, but it's no help.... Yeah several force recons can ruin a ratters day though 0.0 might become unbareable for PVE for many I'd assume
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.22 14:05:00 - [343] Originally by: Spurty Originally by: Ephemeron CCP already hinted that a nerf to local would have to be accompanied with boost to scanners. And as I said, the simplest and most effective boost, at least one of the many additional boosts, is the auto-scan feature. Ephemeron, you are correct on the concept, but implementation will bring the SQL servers to their knees :( Considering volumes of evidence and counterarguments you've provided on the subject, you are clearly wrong about this.
Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.22 14:28:00 - [344] Wait a second I confused myself- it wont matter if its several recons because you should be fully aligned while ratting anyway. I'm just unsure how long it is before an Arazu, etc can target you after they decloak. Isn't it at least 10 seconds? Isn't this plenty of time for a fully aligned BS to escape. Correct me if I am wrong here. It will be 1 week before I can get into an Arazu
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.22 15:55:00 - [345] The sensor recalibration time for a cov ops cloak is 10 seconds. Cloaking lvl V reduces it to 5 seconds. Fighting while aligned at full speed is not an option for short ranged turret boats, or for miners. Normally if the target is aligned a recon will bump it as he decloaks, tackling it and calling in the troops is then pretty straightforward.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.22 16:04:00 - [346] I have some bad news for you Descrambled, it looks like ECM drones are about to get hit with the nerf hammer. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1056041 I think some people took exception to the fact that other people were able to use them to escape being ganked.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.22 17:04:00 - [347] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset I have some bad news for you Descrambled, it looks like ECM drones are about to get hit with the nerf hammer. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1056041 I think some people took exception to the fact that other people were able to use them to escape being ganked. To stop anybody else believing your bias, i'll post what the dev ACTUALLY SAID for the reason that the drones are getting fixed. It actually has NOTHING to do with gankers, but I guess we shape the facts to fit our arguments (or form outright lies to twist the facts in your case): Quote: The heavy Wasp EC-900's have 2 points of strength to all sensor types and a 20 second duration, equivalent to un-bonused Tech 1 multispectral jammers. Unlike the capacitor thirsty multispectral jammers they do not require any energy. Further more due to their small signature radius, once their victims gain the ability to target again, it takes quite a long time to acquire a lock in order to neutralize them. Most of the time you're facing multiple ECM Drones, which can be quite tricky to target and destroy, it becomes quite annoying. Electronic warfare doesn't really work properly against them, nor does small amounts of damage as the pilot is always able to scoop the drones and redeploy them. In some ways the drones are superior to targeted ECM jammers, as the drones operate even though you yourself are being target jammed. Smartbombs are able to counter them quite well, however this tactic only works while piloting larger ships that can field large smartbombs.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.22 17:28:00 - [348] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset Fighting while aligned at full speed is not an option for short ranged turret boats, or for miners. Normally if the target is aligned a recon will bump it as he decloaks, tackling it and calling in the troops is then pretty straightforward. You don't need to be aligned at full speed to warp instantly. Ships warp at the point when their speed reaches 75% of their maximum speed. This means you can time your ship to see how fast you need to be going to warp 5 seconds after initiating warpdrive. For mining ships that have a very low top speed to begin with this will be slow enough that they will be able to keep mining while staying aligned and at speed almost continuously. A farming raven will have absolutely no problem staying aligned and at 75% speed while fighting NPCs. If you are farming in a short range turret boat then you are taking your fate into your own hands. These are fairly newbie concepts. If you don't understand them perhaps you have no business posting in a thread with a relatively complex subject matter.
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.22 18:12:00 - [349] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator To stop anybody else believing your bias, i'll post what the dev ACTUALLY SAID for the reason that the drones are getting fixed. Actually there was another thread where people were asked to vote for what they wanted fixing/nerfing next. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1051722 ECM drones scored highly with many people, with some folks complaining about people using them to escape. Everything the dev said was subsequent to that. This was just an off the cuff remark primarily indended for Descrambled since he brought up ECM drones, no real need for you to go flying into attack mode again. Originally by: Razin You don't need to be aligned at full speed blah blah blah ... These are fairly newbie concepts. If you don't understand them perhaps you have no business posting in a thread with a relatively complex subject matter. 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? How does this hypothetically aligned miner get the ore into his jetcan wiseguy? You should probably lay off making disparaging remarks about other peoples understanding until you are at least able to follow the discussion and respond with something pertinant to the points being discussed.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2009.06.22 18:33:00 - [350] As as counter balance to nerfed local in 0.0, I'd be supportive of increased bounty of all belt rats - a slightly greater reward for slightly greater risk. Overall, local nerf with scanner improvement does not represent major increase of risk for people who learn to use the game tools effectively. It is a major increase of risk only for those who do not learn new tactics. As someone who makes most of his money ratting in 0.0, I don't anticipate any problems continuing ratting.

Descrambled Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2009.06.22 18:44:00 - [351] Originally by: Neutrino Sunset I have some bad news for you Descrambled, it looks like ECM drones are about to get hit with the nerf hammer. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1056041 I think some people took exception to the fact that other people were able to use them to escape being ganked. Oh snap then it will be time for me to pay closer attention Thanks bout the cloak delay post as well.
Omarvelous Destry's Lounge Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2009.06.22 19:36:00 - [352] 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.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.22 19:41:00 - [353] 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? Originally by: Neutrino Sunset How does this hypothetically aligned miner get the ore into his jetcan wiseguy? The miner will have to optimize efficiency vs. safety. The rest is game mechanics. Originally by: Neutrino Sunset You should probably lay off making disparaging remarks... You've already been told that you should probably stop twisting facts and manufacturing evidence to prop up your arguments. I was simply trying to be less 'disparaging'.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.22 20:00:00 - [354] Originally by: wtbrandomnamegenerator Originally by: Neutrino Sunset I have some bad news for you Descrambled, it looks like ECM drones are about to get hit with the nerf hammer. http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1056041 I think some people took exception to the fact that other people were able to use them to escape being ganked. To stop anybody else believing your bias, i'll post what the dev ACTUALLY SAID for the reason that the drones are getting fixed. It actually has NOTHING to do with gankers, but I guess we shape the facts to fit our arguments (or form outright lies to twist the facts in your case): Quote: The heavy Wasp EC-900's have 2 points of strength to all sensor types and a 20 second duration, equivalent to un-bonused Tech 1 multispectral jammers. Unlike the capacitor thirsty multispectral jammers they do not require any energy. Further more due to their small signature radius, once their victims gain the ability to target again, it takes quite a long time to acquire a lock in order to neutralize them. Most of the time you're facing multiple ECM Drones, which can be quite tricky to target and destroy, it becomes quite annoying. Electronic warfare doesn't really work properly against them, nor does small amounts of damage as the pilot is always able to scoop the drones and redeploy them. In some ways the drones are superior to targeted ECM jammers, as the drones operate even though you yourself are being target jammed. Smartbombs are able to counter them quite well, however this tactic only works while piloting larger ships that can field large smartbombs. forgetting a crucial part: Originally by: CCP Nozh Ok, Do I understand the problem correctly? How would you like to see this fixed? These are the questions you should be answering. Discuss! Nice calling other people biased when you are much more biased. Neutrino has linked the thread so anyone could look what Nozh was saying, while you have purposefully cut away what wasn't supporting your position.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.22 20:05:00 - [355] Originally by: Razin You don't need to be aligned at full speed to warp instantly. Ships warp at the point when their speed reaches 75% of their maximum speed. This means you can time your ship to see how fast you need to be going to warp 5 seconds after initiating warpdrive. For mining ships that have a very low top speed to begin with this will be slow enough that they will be able to keep mining while staying aligned and at speed almost continuously. Mining ships have a slow acceleration, and what matter is how fast you accelerate to the needed speed, not how high is the needed speed. So barges/exhumers being slow don't help at all. The difference between acceleration and speed is a even more newbie concept.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.22 20:23:00 - [356] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Razin You don't need to be aligned at full speed to warp instantly. Ships warp at the point when their speed reaches 75% of their maximum speed. This means you can time your ship to see how fast you need to be going to warp 5 seconds after initiating warpdrive. For mining ships that have a very low top speed to begin with this will be slow enough that they will be able to keep mining while staying aligned and at speed almost continuously. Mining ships have a slow acceleration, and what matter is how fast you accelerate to the needed speed, not how high is the needed speed. So barges/exhumers being slow don't help at all. The difference between acceleration and speed is a even more newbie concept. You're confused. The miner's low intrinsic speed helps to stay within optimum of his rock while being aligned for the longest possible time before having to adjust alignment. ...
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.22 21:31:00 - [357] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Razin You don't need to be aligned at full speed to warp instantly. Ships warp at the point when their speed reaches 75% of their maximum speed. This means you can time your ship to see how fast you need to be going to warp 5 seconds after initiating warpdrive. For mining ships that have a very low top speed to begin with this will be slow enough that they will be able to keep mining while staying aligned and at speed almost continuously. Mining ships have a slow acceleration, and what matter is how fast you accelerate to the needed speed, not how high is the needed speed. So barges/exhumers being slow don't help at all. The difference between acceleration and speed is a even more newbie concept. You're confused. The miner's low intrinsic speed helps to stay within optimum of his rock while being aligned for the longest possible time before having to adjust alignment. And you haven't piloted a mining ships in years. Test your idea before speaking of it like it was the "final solution" for mining in 0.0. Originally by: Razin I haven't mined since 2004 so I'm not entirely sure, but I'm thinking the miner's current work load shouldn't be too high to allow for some additional speed and direction management once in a while.
Venkul Mul Gallente	Posted - 2009.06.22 21:34:00 - [358] Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Razin Originally by: Venkul Mul Originally by: Razin You don't need to be aligned at full speed to warp instantly. Ships warp at the point when their speed reaches 75% of their maximum speed. This means you can time your ship to see how fast you need to be going to warp 5 seconds after initiating warpdrive. For mining ships that have a very low top speed to begin with this will be slow enough that they will be able to keep mining while staying aligned and at speed almost continuously. Mining ships have a slow acceleration, and what matter is how fast you accelerate to the needed speed, not how high is the needed speed. So barges/exhumers being slow don't help at all. The difference between acceleration and speed is a even more newbie concept. You're confused. The miner's low intrinsic speed helps to stay within optimum of his rock while being aligned for the longest possible time before having to adjust alignment. And you haven't piloted a mining ships in years. Test your idea before speaking of it like it was the "final solution" for mining in 0.0. Originally by: Razin I haven't mined since 2004 so I'm not entirely sure, but I'm thinking the miner's current work load shouldn't be too high to allow for some additional speed and direction management once in a while. Just to expand on that: 180 seconds at 75m/s are 13.500 meters. The range of a stripminer is 15.000 meters. You don't want to bee to near any asteroid or you will risk to get struck. Combine that in a belt full or asteroids and look what is the result.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.23 00:36:00 - [359] Originally by: Venkul Mul Just to expand on that: 180 seconds at 75m/s are 13.500 meters. The range of a stripminer is 15.000 meters. You don't want to bee to near any asteroid or you will risk to get struck. Combine that in a belt full or asteroids and look what is the result. A radial course is not the most efficient for this purpose. If you try a tangential course you will find that your travel distance is almost doubled. That's almost 6 minutes before adjustment is needed. Just some basic geometry. ...
Neutrino Sunset Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Tread Alliance	Posted - 2009.06.23 02:33:00 - [360] 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.

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

jedi2005 THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY Cult of War	Posted - 2009.06.24 20:07:00 - [391] Originally by: Ephemeron 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. And thats why you will just not get with no local. Why do you think there are so many carebears in wh space ? Because they find it safe there, because there is almost no pvp, because most pvp'rs, just find it to much hassle to first try to find the carebear, through scanning them down, before being able to fight them. (and then scanning for exits and then scan a bit more for carebears and more scanning for exits and so on ..)
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.24 20:53:00 - [392] Originally by: Santiago Fahahrri 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/ The delayed Local could have standings-based settings. That is, you get to chose who will be able to see you based on the same type of settings that mod the overview. That way you and your friendlies get to see and wave to each other, among other benefits.
Regat Kozovv Caldari Alcothology	Posted - 2009.06.24 21:01:00 - [393] Originally by: Razin The delayed Local could have standings-based settings. That is, you get to chose who will be able to see you based on the same type of settings that mod the overview. That way you and your friendlies get to see and wave to each other, among other benefits. Friend 1: o/ Friend 2: o7 Enemy 1: DIE <pew pew> I have a feeling local would still be pretty quiet. Would work for seeing who of your friends are in system though. =)
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2009.06.25 14:02:00 - [394] Originally by: Regat Kozovv Friend 1: o/ Friend 2: o7 Enemy 1: DIE <pew pew> I have a feeling local would still be pretty quiet. Would work for seeing who of your friends are in system though. =) Indeed.) Seeing friendlies in Local would, off course, be the most useful aspect of this kind of setup.
wtbrandomnamegenerator	Posted - 2009.06.26 14:20:00 - [395] Had an idea about what to do about being docked in station and not seeing who's outside. Add a station service, that allows you to either- A) Scan (as in normal ship scanner) the outside of the station or B) actually view the outside of a station (same view you would get from "look at" command now). Allow this station service to be disabled like fitting, cloning ect, but perhaps half the HP of the current services (maybe as much as production, or lab services now). Would add to the ability of a roaming gang to blind and disable the defenders (in poorly defended areas) and would allow the residents of a station to know what the hell they are undocking into.
Reprimander Failswarm	Posted - 2009.06.26 14:36:00 - [396] delayed local in 0.0 is 100% the way to go it's ridiculous that a channel exists which provides you with so much vital intel at a glance when you enter a system and spot 100 BS on scan, it should be a tense moment as you locate who the fleet belongs to -- it opens up whole new dimensions of gameplay which simply do not exist now and it redefines the role of the scout (and scouting) into something much more involving and important


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