| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kahega Amielden
Suddenly Ninjas
   |
Posted - 2009.08.13 22:37:00 -
[61]
Posting in a Bellum whi
oh right
supported
|
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.08.13 22:55:00 -
[62]
 Originally by: Mister Xerox
Remove local would require a replacement that's almost as useful but not quite. Otherwise people will just leave 0.0 as they have zero ability to protect themselves, or find targets.
Speak for yourself, I'd do just fine in 0.0 even if local was removed without any other improvements to scan mechanics.
"zero ability to protect themselves" - that automatically discredits any point you are trying to make
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2009.08.14 11:05:00 -
[63]
|
fuze
Gallente
Chosen Path
Veritas Immortalis
|
Posted - 2009.08.14 11:54:00 -
[64]
Aside of the relevancy of wanting this I'm not too sure about this being easy to implement.
Imagine massive blobs in a single constellation going at it. Constellation chat would be moving at light speed (fofofo'ing) and the amount of players going out/coming into the chat channel would prolly melt a server.
Maybe CCP Scotty can tell us about this some moar.
|
Exlegion
Caldari
Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.08.14 12:06:00 -
[65]
The D-scanner needs a complete overhaul before even thinking about removing local. As it stands and with the presence of even one neutral in low sec PVE-ers are in the need to constantly (read: every 5 seconds) spam the scanner in order for it to be remotely effective. Removing local means spamming the scanner every 5 seconds ALL THE TIME. Probes + D-scanner have tilted the balance of power too far in the side of the predator. I had created a thread discussing this issue in detail before it was trolled to hell by a couple of "respectable" pirates that deemed it perfectly fair for their target to repeatedly spam buttons to protect themselves against the predator.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.08.14 12:11:00 -
[66]
Supported. An obviously good idea.
I was going to object on the basis of macro ratters instalogging even quicker, but sod it, it makes no difference because they're uncatchable anyway right now, and with constellation I could make 'em log off in a whole constellation rather than just 1 system at a time.
|
Awesome Possum
Insert Obscure Latin Name
|
Posted - 2009.08.14 15:38:00 -
[67]
♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.08.15 12:39:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Exlegion
The D-scanner needs a complete overhaul before even thinking about removing local. As it stands and with the presence of even one neutral in low sec PVE-ers are in the need to constantly (read: every 5 seconds) spam the scanner in order for it to be remotely effective. Removing local means spamming the scanner every 5 seconds ALL THE TIME. Probes + D-scanner have tilted the balance of power too far in the side of the predator. I had created a thread discussing this issue in detail before it was trolled to hell by a couple of "respectable" pirates that deemed it perfectly fair for their target to repeatedly spam buttons to protect themselves against the predator.
No it doesn't. The directional scanner works perfectly fine, even in w-space. Swapping the mode types between constellation and local will allow defensive players to be even more aware of their surroundings at a longer range than before, while limiting the precision of the intel.
Your thread was just a whiny rant. Don't bring that same crap into this thread.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.08.15 12:40:00 -
[69]
Originally by: fuze
Aside of the relevancy of wanting this I'm not too sure about this being easy to implement.
Imagine massive blobs in a single constellation going at it. Constellation chat would be moving at light speed (fofofo'ing) and the amount of players going out/coming into the chat channel would prolly melt a server.
Maybe CCP Scotty can tell us about this some moar.
Constellation chat isn't Regional. It won't be *that* large of a change. As for having to deal with spam, simply turn off blink and minimize the window if you don't want to read it. Nobody is forcing you.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Exlegion
Caldari
Salva Veritate
|
Posted - 2009.08.15 22:54:00 -
[70]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Your thread was just a whiny rant. Don't bring that same crap into this thread.
Relax. I was just sharing my opinion on a public forum.
One of us equals many of us. Disrespect one of us, you'll see plenty of us. - Gang Starr |
Atraxerxes
Caldari
22nd Black Rise Defensive Unit
Balance of Judgment
|
Posted - 2009.08.17 02:38:00 -
[71]
This is still the worst idea in all of EVE.
It is nothing more than a wet dream for all griefers and fleets of less than sizable force.
Essentially you are asking CCP to, in fact buff raiding parties.
Everybody who suggests this has little to no interest in the overall aspect of the game and is just concerned with their own killboard.
You'd essentially kill 0.0 mining or industry.
Nobody could even undock without having some one on the outside to check to see if the coast was clear.
You think gate camping for a gank is boring imagine having to camp a gate only to keep a head count.
Vent would be filled with pilots asking who was in system.
No thank you.
This is truly the worst kind of whinning in the world of EVE. At least carebears don't know any better. Any one calling themselves a PvP'ers who support this, is just a carebear who grew up and didn't leave their mommy's couch (or their teet).
Sorry your HAC gang got hot dropped and pewn'd, but get over it. Making local vanish in 0.0 would wreck the economy of eve as well as making living in 0.0 even more of a job and to do this just so you and your noob buddies can weekend warrior in 0.0 and smack how you got a GOON killmail, I F'ing thing not.
AX
www.FlyReckless.com
|
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.08.17 02:54:00 -
[72]
Atraxerxes, that kind of blind rage posting isn't going to help support your case 1 bit.
How about you calm down, take minute to think about things seriously, and then post some valid arguments.
I'm also curious to know what the carebear side of the population thinks about my scouting beacon idea - it is definitely a compromise for the defender side.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.08.17 06:21:00 -
[73]
Originally by: Atraxerxes
This is still the worst idea in all of EVE.
It is nothing more than a wet dream for all griefers and fleets of less than sizable force.
Essentially you are asking CCP to, in fact buff raiding parties.
Everybody who suggests this has little to no interest in the overall aspect of the game and is just concerned with their own killboard.
You'd essentially kill 0.0 mining or industry.
Nobody could even undock without having some one on the outside to check to see if the coast was clear.
You think gate camping for a gank is boring imagine having to camp a gate only to keep a head count.
Vent would be filled with pilots asking who was in system.
No thank you.
This is truly the worst kind of whinning in the world of EVE. At least carebears don't know any better. Any one calling themselves a PvP'ers who support this, is just a carebear who grew up and didn't leave their mommy's couch (or their teet).
Sorry your HAC gang got hot dropped and pewn'd, but get over it. Making local vanish in 0.0 would wreck the economy of eve as well as making living in 0.0 even more of a job and to do this just so you and your noob buddies can weekend warrior in 0.0 and smack how you got a GOON killmail, I F'ing thing not.
AX
www.FlyReckless.com
Lol.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
Harotak
THE FINAL STAND
The Final Stand.
|
Posted - 2009.08.17 07:20:00 -
[74]
Edited by: Harotak on 17/08/2009 07:20:37
One of the only ideas I've ever read that actually nerf the blob and boost the smaller group of players. Love it.
|
Ahrieman
|
Posted - 2009.08.19 08:21:00 -
[75]
Supported 100%. Nerf the blob and give the rewards to those players willing to fly smart.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.08.23 12:42:00 -
[76]
Originally by: Ahrieman
Supported 100%. Nerf the blob and give the rewards to those players willing to fly smart.
Check your support box. 
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Death of Virtue is Recruiting
|
steejans nix
0beron Construct
|
Posted - 2009.08.23 19:50:00 -
[77]
Well speaking as a carebear I fully support this idea.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.08.27 14:17:00 -
[78]
Needs moar support plx.
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
Nidhiesk
|
Posted - 2009.08.27 15:27:00 -
[79]
I have to say that Atraxerxes is right in some way. the way this is presented, mining will be hurt a lot and anyone in local wont have a clue whats going on on the other side. So, just because of mining, yeah, I dont support it cause mining is already hard right now cause..well mining ships sucks lol.. thats why you need a gang for defence and with what this is proposed..its going to get worse
but when I look at wormhole local and how it works...its awesome...always on the edge cause you need to be aware and alert. wow. I love it... For combat and all the rest I do support it.
But i have say it again, only because of the mining part this is not a good idea.
|
HulkHogan
|
Posted - 2009.08.27 23:48:00 -
[80]
How do I
|
Jarne
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
|
Posted - 2009.08.29 16:18:00 -
[81]
-
Success=Achievements/Expectations
|
Blancanieves
Perkone
|
Posted - 2009.08.29 16:18:00 -
[82]
/signed |
Mashie Saldana
BFG Tech
|
Posted - 2009.08.29 18:58:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Needs moar support plx.
+1
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2009.08.29 21:14:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Atraxerxes
This is still the worst idea in all of EVE.
It is nothing more than a wet dream for all griefers and fleets of less than sizable force.
Essentially you are asking CCP to, in fact buff raiding parties.
Everybody who suggests this has little to no interest in the overall aspect of the game and is just concerned with their own killboard.
You'd essentially kill 0.0 mining or industry.
Nobody could even undock without having some one on the outside to check to see if the coast was clear.
You think gate camping for a gank is boring imagine having to camp a gate only to keep a head count.
Vent would be filled with pilots asking who was in system.
No thank you.
This is truly the worst kind of whinning in the world of EVE. At least carebears don't know any better. Any one calling themselves a PvP'ers who support this, is just a carebear who grew up and didn't leave their mommy's couch (or their teet).
Sorry your HAC gang got hot dropped and pewn'd, but get over it. Making local vanish in 0.0 would wreck the economy of eve as well as making living in 0.0 even more of a job and to do this just so you and your noob buddies can weekend warrior in 0.0 and smack how you got a GOON killmail, I F'ing thing not.
AX
www.FlyReckless.com
Lol.
The URL at the end is ironic, isn't it.
|
Stil Harkonnen
|
Posted - 2009.08.29 23:06:00 -
[85]
Edited by: Stil Harkonnen on 29/08/2009 23:05:45
this would be cool
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2009.09.01 12:37:00 -
[86]
<needs more votes!>
--
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Tier 5 Battleships
|
Dark Soldat
Caldari
The Green Machine
Aeternus.
|
Posted - 2009.09.01 12:56:00 -
[87]
No becuase of one simple reason, THE SCROLLING !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
iP0D
|
Posted - 2009.09.01 13:14:00 -
[88]
It needs more ADD, you mean. Not votes.
1. Socialising is not an argument. It is a social paradigm which stands independant of mechanisms or even features. If there were not a single communications channel in game, people would still communicate and socialize.
2. Macro's would florish, since as long as the current scanning mechanisms remain unchanged all they would have to do is adapt on a technical level, something which most of the newer generations of macro software already do, for example for w-space mining.
3. The tactical argument is invalid, since it is solely based on individual perception, and not on either mindset, best practices or the need of human beings to seek shelter in herds.
Truth be told, the proposed "change" would only drive the player groups with such mindsets (and unfortunately they are the majority) to overcompensate. It's why this "proposal" comes across almost as an old time structural mistake CCP has often made, underestimating the insanity of its players.
Bellum, just think for a moment. Imagine someone up north having to run ice mining operations because the isotope prices in empire are going silly. Picture 50+ mackinaws in a belt.
Now with these proposed changes, they would throw anything into the belt from orca's to logistics to even titans, since people are crazy about not wanting to take uncalculated risks.
You are thinking that because of the changes you suggest you would be able to get in with a small group, do a few ganks, and force them to engage with similar smallish fast ships to defend their losses.
In reality they would just pump as many people as they could into the belt, the system, and the constellation. Both to prevent the risk of getting ganked, and to mop up afterwards should anything get through.
But wait, this is not a theoretical example. This is a common appearance. This is actually already a standard doctrine in a lot of places. The changes you propose would only drive them to go even crazier.
But, to add insult to injury, in spite of all that blobbing and paranoia displayed, they regularly get their behinds spanked, losing dozens of ships in the process, regardless of Local as this imaginary realtime intel tool, regardless of having titans and logistics in the belts, regardless of having multiple blobs running around.
How? A few people running around with black ops and bombers.
Brainpower. Effort. Result.
4. A compromise is only a compromise if parties or ideas meet somewhere in between of respective viewpoints.
Your proposal is not a compromise, it is an attempt to pick up on a playstyle which got traumatised by blobbing and blobs being far richer then the ganker groups. In the mean time plenty of people have picked up and adapted, getting not only results in spite of what those rich blobs throw at them, but having a ball doing so as well.
Anyhow. I'm sorry, but this I just can't support. I agree that changes are required, there is a structural need for EVE having a degree of "fog of war", but not by introducing good oldfashioned kneejerk changes.
Scanning as a mechanism has technical limitations, as visible in the recent changes to the scanning interval. The idea of even half the rich blobbing bears and macro'ers starting to hammer the scanner every two seconds affecting the cluster is rather unnerving, considering CCP had to change that interval already. Thus forcing people to adapt in their own blobbish ways is neither promoting fun gameplay the way you want it, nor is it promoting stable gameplay the way you want it :P
If the technicalities of scanning are changed, perhaps this can get looked at again. EVE does need a different mechanisms in my humble opinion however.
Until someone comes up with a concept which would not be counterproductive to fun, by not taking (disfunctional) mindsets into account, we are going to have to make do with Local and scanning as it is. |
Maewei Balducci
|
Posted - 2009.09.03 22:19:00 -
[89]
NOT supported
I agree with almost all iPOD said.
|
Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic
|
Posted - 2009.09.04 00:19:00 -
[90]
Originally by: iP0D
Brainpower. Effort. Result.
Sounds right to me. Still supported.
~ Santiago Fahahrri
Galactic Geographic |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |