EVE Search - removing local from 0.0, introducing new ship scanning mechanic

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

removing local from 0.0, introducing new ship scanning mechanic

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
rubico1337	Posted - 2009.06.28 19:10:00 - [31] Originally by: silken mouth i like the idea. i'd like to see it as: 1. a probe, requires a launcher and times out 2. a anchorable structure, requires anchoring and appears as warable beacon on overview 3. a pos structure, which we already have and which are bought back by npc right now. regarding iff, if you see the spike, say hello in local, no reply means it is hostile.... a POS structure would require alot of tweaking to make it not so mind numbingly boring as shooting at a POS, but on the whole i think its a good start
Ausser Cybertech Industrials Agency	Posted - 2009.06.28 19:38:00 - [32] Originally by: silken mouth regarding iff, if you see the spike, say hello in local, no reply means it is hostile.... I would not say hello in local. Would probe and warp there cloaked to identify. I suppose every system will have some kind of random ambient noise so you cannot tell if there is allready someone in the system when you arrive. Untill this is a really large fleet causing a significant strong signal. The guy allready inside will know since he can see the difference (maybe).
Hrodgar Ortal	Posted - 2009.06.29 16:59:00 - [33] Would kill all small scale mining to force everyone to have a probelauncher. Removing local without any other real change removes the possibility to mine without a large fleet to protect the miners and since mining is not that good a isk maker it would mean even fewer of them actually mine. And the suggestion to make black ops and cov ops etc immune to being seen in intel tools while good in theory would overpower those classes of ships compared to all others way to much since they retain most of their offensive capabilities while being invisible.
Cailais Amarr Diablo Advocatus	Posted - 2009.06.29 18:54:00 - [34] I like this idea overall - although I'm not sure it should be dependant upon using launched probes. Some basic scanning system should be available to everyone, regardless of avatar age or skill base (and no the directional scanner doesnt really cut it in its current form). what might be a good idea is to use rubico's base concept of a frequency spectrum that a player can 'focus' in on in the same format as the directional scanner (e.g a floating boxed area that can be moved along the freq graph). Better scanning skills / ship modules etc would make interperating the results easier - perhaps by giving a 'result'. C. Originally by: Capa So if you wake up one morning and it's a particularly beautiful day, you'll know we made it.
Ausser Cybertech Industrials Agency	Posted - 2009.06.30 01:17:00 - [35] Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal Would kill all small scale mining to force everyone to have a probelauncher. Removing local without any other real change removes the possibility to mine without a large fleet to protect the miners and since mining is not that good a isk maker it would mean even fewer of them actually mine. If what you sayed would become true, then there would be a nice side effect: Since supply of ore would temporarily suffer, the value of ore would rise, thus causing to protect a miner to pay off. Good for teamplay. Originally by: Cailais what might be a good idea is to use rubico's base concept of a frequency spectrum that a player can 'focus' in on in the same format as the directional scanner (e.g a floating boxed area that can be moved along the freq graph). I had the same thought. The frequency spectrum could show some kind of spikes and sideband artefacts, depending what is going on in the system. We could have both, rubico's graph in the time domain, and Cailais spectrum in the frequency domain. Also a third variation, a combination of both is possible, it looks like a waterfall. Intensity of the signal is shown as brightness of a pixel, the spectrum on the x-axis and time on the y-axis. Call it Ausser's waterfall. Originally by: Cailais Better scanning skills / ship modules etc would make interperating the results easier - perhaps by giving a 'result'. I dont like to tie skills for this. It gimps newbies and gives everyone else a too good result, effectivley gimping the whole nice feature. Better not to have any skills there. Modules are nice. You have to fit them to get advantage from.
Hrodgar Ortal	Posted - 2009.06.30 04:01:00 - [36] Originally by: Ausser Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal Would kill all small scale mining to force everyone to have a probelauncher. Removing local without any other real change removes the possibility to mine without a large fleet to protect the miners and since mining is not that good a isk maker it would mean even fewer of them actually mine. If what you sayed would become true, then there would be a nice side effect: Since supply of ore would temporarily suffer, the value of ore would rise, thus causing to protect a miner to pay off. Good for teamplay. On the surface you might think so. But in reality it won¦t. You would only be able to have very very large mining ops, something around 10-20 hulks with rorquals/orcas etc. To protect that you would need 40-50 pvp ships, so in total around 50+ players which share the income from 10. Currently you can if you mine only high ends make around 20-30m/h. However you can't have 10 miners mine only high ends in the same belt so profit per hour and miner goes down from solomining, the profit would probably end up around 15m/h and miner so in total 150m with todays prices. Lets guess the prices double (not likely at all) so it stays at 30m/h and miner, a total income would in that case be around 300m/h which is shared among the 50 players who then make 6m/h. Running lvl4's seem to yield about 30-40m/h for a similar skillset as pvp. You tell me what people will more likely do? Mining isn't exactly very popular as it is and increasing the risk exponentially (can't fit a proper tank for pvp on a hulk) will mean noone risks their hulks in no or low sec. People are risk averse and when the risks become impossible to calculate they will stay where it is safe and they can get predictable income and risks. This goes for ratters and so on as well. Removing local without a workable mechanic to allow people to have an idea of who is in system will invariably result in 0.0 being nigh on abandoned apart from moon mining ops by major alliances.
Angor KAHONAS	Posted - 2009.06.30 05:51:00 - [37] I agree, but forget the probe just remove local or make it a subscribable channel, if your in it ppl can see you and you can see other people in it but if you dont join the local channel then you dont show up... wh space is how eve SHOULD have been all along tbh... _______________________________ [ 2007.06.07 21:07:22 ] FrankyWave > ransom me guys I am joining XElas !!!
Vailence	Posted - 2009.06.30 09:51:00 - [38] If u all thinking about removing local - remov it everywhere. For balance ) 1. Low sec is aprox the same as 0.0 space 2. Hi sec is full of off-wars Dont do a half of job. How u like Motsu, Ashab and other runners hubs with local 2k or slightly less? )
Ausser Cybertech Industrials Agency	Posted - 2009.06.30 16:50:00 - [39] Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal Originally by: Ausser Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal Would kill all small scale mining to force everyone to have a probelauncher. Removing local without any other real change removes the possibility to mine without a large fleet to protect the miners and since mining is not that good a isk maker it would mean even fewer of them actually mine. If what you sayed would become true, then there would be a nice side effect: Since supply of ore would temporarily suffer, the value of ore would rise, thus causing to protect a miner to pay off. Good for teamplay. On the surface you might think so. But in reality it won¦t. You would only be able to have very very large mining ops, something around 10-20 hulks with rorquals/orcas etc. To protect that you would need 40-50 pvp ships, so in total around 50+ players which share the income from 10. Currently you can if you mine only high ends make around 20-30m/h. However you can't have 10 miners mine only high ends in the same belt so profit per hour and miner goes down from solomining, the profit would probably end up around 15m/h and miner so in total 150m with todays prices. Lets guess the prices double (not likely at all) so it stays at 30m/h and miner, a total income would in that case be around 300m/h which is shared among the 50 players who then make 6m/h. Running lvl4's seem to yield about 30-40m/h for a similar skillset as pvp. You tell me what people will more likely do? Mining isn't exactly very popular as it is and increasing the risk exponentially (can't fit a proper tank for pvp on a hulk) will mean noone risks their hulks in no or low sec. People are risk averse and when the risks become impossible to calculate they will stay where it is safe and they can get predictable income and risks. This goes for ratters and so on as well. Removing local without a workable mechanic to allow people to have an idea of who is in system will invariably result in 0.0 being nigh on abandoned apart from moon mining ops by major alliances. Your argumentation chain is good and valid. I would run mining ops a little different - not bringing 10 miners + 50 pvp. Let's stick of the 10 miners + ror. I would add two carriers and one BO to them. Equipped with rr and cyno. Now these guys will not be able to stand and fight back an assault of a roaming gang. But the two carriers together with the ror will be able to stand long enough to get reinforcments on field using the cyno. The numbers of possible reinforcments depends on cooperation of such mining squads. Once one squad gets into trouble you can show up with many carriers, stealth bombers, recons and such stuff, piloted by the other suqads. All squads need to be in one fleet to jump to the squad in trouble verry quickly. The attacker has a hard time to estimate the possible reinforcment strength. For 5 mining squads you show up with somewhere arround 50-70 combat ships. And it still can scale up. Cou can integrate gatecamps and ratters (in bo+sb/recon) into the model, these guys will be happy to jump/bridge into a real fight. You are not invulnerable (by evading the fight) but you can fight back (by cooperation and teamwork). The problematic part i can see here are the mates in the hulks in the squad that gets attacked first. These hulk pilots are in serious danger, due to how vat and ship swapping works atm. It's likley they dont reach the carriers/ror to switch to combat ships. The serious problem i see here is not to loose the hulk - this would not a big deal. But when you get attacked and you cant fight any more cos you cannot acces your combat ship then the game/fun is over for the hulk pilot. I see a need to address this issue by a revamp to bays and vats.
Ancy Denaries Caldari Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.06.30 19:03:00 - [40] Frigging brilliant. We want this, now. Hell, I'm sending you isk rubico1337, if I can remember it when I get home. Damn sweet idea! (mostly because I've had something similar in mind :D) ----- Why doesn't anyone ever read the forums before posting? EVE is a game of adaptation and planning. Adapt or die.
Ancy Denaries Caldari Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.06.30 19:04:00 - [41] Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal Would kill all small scale mining to force everyone to have a probelauncher. Then make it so that anyone in fleet/corp/alliance can connect to the same probe and make the probe have a limited range? Or drop several probes that you can "connect" to and watch different areas of the system? ----- Why doesn't anyone ever read the forums before posting? EVE is a game of adaptation and planning. Adapt or die.
Ausser Cybertech Industrials Agency	Posted - 2009.06.30 21:50:00 - [42] Originally by: Ancy Denaries Originally by: Hrodgar Ortal Would kill all small scale mining to force everyone to have a probelauncher. Then make it so that anyone in fleet/corp/alliance can connect to the same probe and make the probe have a limited range? Or drop several probes that you can "connect" to and watch different areas of the system? I had some thoughts on this too. Range of Probes Gameplay Aspect We could have different types probes, from system wide (like rubico suggests) which have same sensitivity system wide, down to close range probes with high sensitivity for near objects but where sensitivity fades with distance to the probe. I'm not sure about which game play issues would come up with the close range probes. At least, it would be likley ppl drop lots of close range probes close to stargates. Thus an invader would have to quickly leave such hot-spots to evade detection. Could be funny when well balanced and really suck when overpowered. *I would like more community feedback about gameplay of ranged probes and their balancing.* Implementation Aspect On implementation side, close range / limited range probes would require more processing than system wide probes. For system wide probes, the server just assembles information from the whole system and sends this in the same form to all clients that have a probe in space. For limited range probes, the server has to assemble wave pattern control instructions for each probe individually, since each probe could show a different result. Sharing of Probes I call this the 'Military Intelligence Network'. I had some thoughts about and as rubico showed up with his idea it was pretty clear both fit excellently together. In the current world of eve, all intel tools (probes, dir scanner, overview, members in space list, ...) work independant of each other. E.g. the probe scanner dont know the player identity and ship name, even if the target is in range of overview and dir scanner. Some informations are shared fleetwide (e.g. fleet members in space on system map), some are shared corp wide (e.g. members in space). Thus, there is some kind of networks is in game allready. But these are not roleplayed, there is no general concept or sturcture or framework for sharing intel atm. If you like, look into the IFF thread by Photus (linked in post #14) for some first steps how Military Intelligence Networks could look like. What kind of intel sharing for rubico's probes would you like to have? How would this look like? What would be overpowered? Community feedback & ideas welcome.
Ancy Denaries Caldari Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.07.02 09:28:00 - [43] Goddamnit, why can't we subscribe to threads in this forum ----- Why doesn't anyone ever read the forums before posting? EVE is a game of adaptation and planning. Adapt or die.
Cuirychi Devan	Posted - 2009.07.02 10:58:00 - [44] If local will be removed, we MUST get a radar scanner, full stop.
Zan Atropus	Posted - 2009.07.02 11:48:00 - [45] Edited by: Zan Atropus on 02/07/2009 11:48:31 christ i hate ****ing eve forum time outs....
Zan Atropus	Posted - 2009.07.02 11:51:00 - [46] Originally by: Ausser Edited by: Ausser on 22/06/2009 08:59:38 ... There should be some kind of deployable, scannable and destroyable jammer that causes the graph just display junk (loud). So if you want to deploy you cap fleet, you deploy the jammer in the target system, and arround, to partially hide your operation and to force the foe into active investigation (to encourage active gameplay is allways a good thing). .... There are already way to many POS modules that make it easy for alliances to exist, Cyno jammers, System scanning arrays, Jump bridges....so no bad idear, no pos module that makes it harder for anyone then it already is to kill people. The new system should be balanced in such a way that its equally usefull for both attacking and defending forces.
Ausser Cybertech Industrials Agency	Posted - 2009.07.02 11:54:00 - [47] Originally by: Cuirychi Devan If local will be removed, we MUST get a radar scanner, full stop. Dedicated radar with location result like shown in the image is a clompletley different thingy. It differs from rubicos wave pattern as well as from Photus IFF. IFF would be the closest, but only for some targets that allow you to see them. You could start a dedicated thread to describe and discuss these kind of radar intel device in special. Maybe we end up with a third intel tool for the whole picture.
Bluestreak2k5	Posted - 2009.07.02 14:43:00 - [48] Why don't you just add the ability to local to remove any blues to corp or to alliance from display. You can set your own controls number for showing, like no one above a +1.0 to corp or alliance, etc.
Ancy Denaries Caldari Solaris Operations	Posted - 2009.07.06 01:18:00 - [49] bump ----- Why doesn't anyone ever read the forums before posting? EVE is a game of adaptation and planning. Adapt or die.

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.