Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.05.04 19:22:00 -
[91]
Quote: I said I support the concept of it because I agree it would be fun (read: I'm not scared). I simply said I do not think the game in its current state will support a reasonable implementation of what is being requested.
And do you also believe that a couple new no-local 0.0 regions should NOT be added, because if you can't enjoy them, nobody else can?
|
Orree
Dynaverse Corporation Sodalitas XX
|
Posted - 2010.05.04 19:33:00 -
[92]
Edited by: Orree on 04/05/2010 19:34:05 I don't believe I even discussed that possibility in any way. It wasn't proposed in the OP.
I doubt seriously CCP would ever do it, but I certainly wouldn't care if they did.
The OP put forth the notion that all 0.0 and low-sec should have delayed local because it works in W-space. That's about as fallacious an argument as you're likely to find on the subject of delayed local in 0.0/low-sec. That is what I have commented about. Nothing more.
Dial back the froth, take a chill pill and quit assuming things about me. You don't know me, what I like or what I want. To the extent I think it's necessary and germane to the topic at hand, I'll provide such information.
---------- "How much easier it is to be critical than to be correct." ---Benjamin Disraeli |
churrros
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 01:21:00 -
[93]
Edited by: churrros on 05/05/2010 01:22:09 Edited by: churrros on 05/05/2010 01:21:02 With the current local chat, there is no point of seting up an ambush, because you know a ship just ratting in a belt is a bait ship if there is 10 other reds in the same system(or a couple jumps away, which can be easily known without probing or watching gates)
I say just delete the participant list on local chats.
|
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 01:35:00 -
[94]
Originally by: churrros
With the current local chat, there is no point of seting up an ambush, because you know a ship just ratting in a belt is a bait ship if there is 10 other reds in the same system(or a couple jumps away, which can be easily known without probing or watching gates)
I say just delete the participant list on local chats.
Yeah, bait&blob needs a boost pls fix ccp ok.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Marquis Zenas
I.X Research
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 09:40:00 -
[95]
Only supported if static belts are removed and made part of the exploration system. That way, everyone has to work for what they are after -------------------------- Sigless |
Cpt Branko
Retired Pirate Club
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 11:27:00 -
[96]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 05/05/2010 11:27:46
Originally by: Marquis Zenas Only supported if static belts are removed and made part of the exploration system. That way, everyone has to work for what they are after
WHs already defacto require that you use a covops cloaking ship or alt with covops cloaking ship to catch people. Which is cool, because you have variety and stuff, and people who like that system have something to do.
However, I really do not support making all of EVE the same as WHs. The current system enables you to find targets w/out a heavily specialized ship (or alt), but it also enables those targets to see you coming if they're watching local which makes for a rather reasonable system.
But yeah, removing local would have to go hand in hand with something like that, else you completely break all non-exploration stuff.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Marquis Zenas
I.X Research
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 11:48:00 -
[97]
Originally by: Cpt Branko ... snip to save space ...
I remember reading an old devblog which mentioned that they were planning to remove static belts and add them into the exploration system but allowing the basic system scan to scan down some of the lower end belts while leaving the higher ends only findable via probes. -------------------------- Sigless |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 14:12:00 -
[98]
Could probably make some noise here (questions for today's CCP Hammerhead interview). ...
|
Jag Kara
United Investment
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 17:17:00 -
[99]
It works in wormholes, why not lowsec/nullsec. Not to mention, it makes covert ops ships much more valuble in gangs because of scanning power. This would fit perfectly with the deep safe changes coming. In Soviet Russia, carebears gank YOU! |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.05.05 17:30:00 -
[100]
Again, "no local" would destroy regular PVP. Do you know why there are occasional carrier losses in w-space? Because w-space is so safe that you can rat in carriers. That's what "no local" does. Catching people ratting is rare. In fact, I would guess more people die to sleepers than to PVP in w-space.
This signature is useless, but it is red.
|
|
NightmareX
Dark-Rising IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 11:11:00 -
[101]
Originally by: Jag Kara It works in wormholes, why not lowsec/nullsec. Not to mention, it makes covert ops ships much more valuble in gangs because of scanning power. This would fit perfectly with the deep safe changes coming.
But wormholes are not like normal systems, so you can't really compare those 2.
And supporting this topic now is just plain stupid, since the op have no ideas on what can replace local.
And EVE wont really work without a local as things are now.
So not supported by me though.
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 12:22:00 -
[102]
Give a comprehensive explanation on how you are planning on implementing:
* A totally new and improved ship scanning system. * How it will balance cloaking. * How it will affect defender / attacker balance. * And more...
If it doesn't impress as the changes to exploration then your idea is just the equivalent of a kid jumping up and down screaming to mommy buy me candy by me candy.
|
Li Oiti
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 14:32:00 -
[103]
Against.
If we pay for sovereignty what do we pay ? Upgrade or if I'm right the maintenance of the system ...then jumpgate and communication.
I'm agree if you link this point to the sovereignty and the standing.
Why the roamer can know who is in ? I'm paying for the TCU and gate not them.
If you don't have standing then you jumpp in 0.0 as in Wormhole. If you are in good term if the owners you know who jump in.
If I go RPG to the end....why Blockade unit must be set in the system If I pay the bill for the gate. I don't want bad people to enter in. But this will kill roaming gangs...but be more in a rpg line.
|
Exostema
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 16:17:00 -
[104]
Supported for removal of local. Constellation chat would then have a use and might actually get used!
|
Jag Kara
United Investment
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 16:43:00 -
[105]
Originally by: NightmareX But wormholes are not like normal systems, so you can't really compare those 2.
And supporting this topic now is just plain stupid, since the op have no ideas on what can replace local.
And EVE wont really work without a local as things are now.
So not supported by me though.
How are wormhole systems not the same as a normal system? Both have planets, belts, complexes, moons (but not moon mining of course), POSs, and gates (yes, wormhole ones move, but still the same mechanic.) I can't find one difference between nullsec and wormhole sec aside fron the moving gates and general lack of capships. As for lowsec to wormholes, the only difference is bubbles/bombs/etc. and the previously stated differences. Are you saying that moving gates makes such a big difference so as to make it impossible to remove local?
As for replacement of local, the mechanic is already there. It's called scanning.
Fit Expanded Probe Launcher Send Combat Probe to center of system Scan ??? Profit
Not that difficult to bring a prober.
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab Give a comprehensive explanation on how you are planning on implementing:
* A totally new and improved ship scanning system. * How it will balance cloaking. * How it will affect defender / attacker balance. * And more...
If it doesn't impress as the changes to exploration then your idea is just the equivalent of a kid jumping up and down screaming to mommy buy me candy by me candy.
*No need, as probes and scanning work as they are now. *From the cloaky gang aspect, it gives them a much more defined role. From the defender aspect, it will stop carebears and wimps from crying about AFK cloakers. Other than that not much change. You already couldn't find them, now you just have peace of mind. *Both get a nerf and boost. Attackers can now stage attacks and be less likely to be detected, until the attack is on the way, but at the same time, defenders can ambush and trap attackers much easier. In Soviet Russia, carebears gank YOU! |
NightmareX
Dark-Rising IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:06:00 -
[106]
Jag Kara. Please answer me this.
As you say, you can just use the Probe Launcher and stuffs. Well yeah, that kinda work to some point. But do you really think there is someone that want to spend a whole day to find out where every of the players in a system are?.
Specially when you think about bigger fleets. It would sucks horribly to scan out some targets to later find out that you had wasted hours to scan out players that was in different spots, but suddenly are at the same grid as the others right after?.
When you think deeper into this, this will for sure never ever work by just removing local without replacing it with something else that can replace local.
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:10:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Jag Kara *No need, as probes and scanning work as they are now.
The DB, server and network developers would be lynching the game designers and CSM guys from the rooftop of CCP HQ.
I don't think you entirely comprehend what you're asking. Neither is Bellerus.
|
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 18:11:00 -
[108]
Edited by: Bagehi on 06/05/2010 18:12:18
Originally by: Jag Kara How are wormhole systems not the same as a normal system? Both have planets, belts, complexes, moons (but not moon mining of course), POSs, and gates (yes, wormhole ones move, but still the same mechanic.) I can't find one difference between nullsec and wormhole sec aside fron the moving gates and general lack of capships. As for lowsec to wormholes, the only difference is bubbles/bombs/etc. and the previously stated differences. Are you saying that moving gates makes such a big difference so as to make it impossible to remove local?
The difference is the safety from roaming gangs. 0.0 has roaming and more PVP because: 1. Roams have local, allowing them to identify if there are targets to probe/search for in a system. It also allows them to identify when they are being followed by a defense scout. 2. Roams don't have to worry about the WH collapsing. Getting stuck on the other side of Eve 30-50 jumps from home can be rather annoying.
Roams rely on local, not voodoo to find systems with targets.
Originally by: Jag Kara
*No need, as probes and scanning work as they are now. *From the cloaky gang aspect, it gives them a much more defined role. From the defender aspect, it will stop carebears and wimps from crying about AFK cloakers. Other than that not much change. You already couldn't find them, now you just have peace of mind. *Both get a nerf and boost. Attackers can now stage attacks and be less likely to be detected, until the attack is on the way, but at the same time, defenders can ambush and trap attackers much easier.
1. Would you suggest people wander blindly around looking for things to kill? With the current scanner and no local, that is what would happen. Of course, this would be a boost to solo combat to some extent. Solo PVP ship against ratter/miner that it. 2. This would be a huge boost to stealth bombers. As I'm in love with stealth bombers, I'm not going to complain much, but I'm confident many would be crying for blood (nerfs) over this. 3. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that things people attack would last long enough for defenders to respond. Attacking fixed targets would be 100x easier without local. Metagaming would dramatically increase as spies would become the primary method for finding fleets.
P.S. Everyone would fit ECCM to be unscannable.
This signature is useless, but it is red.
|
King Rothgar
Amarrian Retribution
|
Posted - 2010.05.06 20:25:00 -
[109]
Edited by: King Rothgar on 06/05/2010 20:25:33 I support putting it into delayed mode but as said, there really needs to be an improved directional scanner to go with it. I pirate, I do fleet fights and yeah, I even run some low sec missions. The first two would benefit from such a change, the last would become horrible.
As it stands, my mission base is pretty secure, mostly blues there and local tells me if a neutral or hostile comes in. I don't warp off and dock like a pansy each time a neut/hostile enters but it does put me on alert for probes. At which point I start the usual scan every 5 seconds deal till they leave or I confirm it's a non-threatening ship. Without local I'd have to sit there and hit scan every 5 seconds from the time I leave station till the time I come back. Yes I can do it but I'm far more likely to stop traditional missioning instead. This is keeping in mind I solo lvl5's so 30 minutes of missioning gives me a solid 70-100M isk (single clienting). Even that wouldn't be tolerable.
Eve needs a radar and radar warning system as has existed in militaries around the world for 50+ years. If something like that is implemented so I get automated updates and some sort of warning of probes (even if only a few seconds before a warpable point), I would fully support removing local. In any case I think this should be a high priority for CCP.
Thus far you shall read, but no further; for this is my sig. |
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 02:02:00 -
[110]
Meh. I was going to post a few points refuting some of the stupidity in this thread (other peoples, lol) but I just can't be bothered anymore. Eve is never going to be developed in a direction I'm going to be happy playing. -
Originally by: Bellum Eternus That is the beauty of Eve, it's a crucible in which great minds are formed and the rest are ground to dust.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. |
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 07:15:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Meh. I was going to post a few points refuting some of the stupidity in this thread (other peoples, lol) but I just can't be bothered anymore. Eve is never going to be developed in a direction I'm going to be happy playing.
If it makes you any happier, CCP themselves have said they're not entirely content with local being used as an intel tool.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 07:37:00 -
[112]
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Meh. I was going to post a few points refuting some of the stupidity in this thread (other peoples, lol) but I just can't be bothered anymore. Eve is never going to be developed in a direction I'm going to be happy playing.
If it makes you any happier, CCP themselves have said they're not entirely content with local being used as an intel tool.
That's not really what I'm talking about, but I've heard them mention that on a few occasions.
Eve is just going to continue down a path that makes the game softer and friendlier to stupid people who make mistakes and don't want to pay for them. That's disappointing to me because I know that as each year passes, the game isn't going to be more refined and made a sharper leaner more uncompromising more competitive game- quite the opposite: its' going to become even more carebear oriented with all the 'toning down' and 'hand holding'.
I wish I were wrong, but sadly, I know I'm not. I'd like to see anyone prove it otherwise. -
Originally by: Bellum Eternus That is the beauty of Eve, it's a crucible in which great minds are formed and the rest are ground to dust.
Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam. |
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 08:04:00 -
[113]
Quote: Eve is just going to continue down a path that makes the game softer and friendlier to stupid people
Coming from the one who want easy kills of targets who cant be expected to have a chance at actually surviving the fight?
Originally by: Jag Kara How are wormhole systems not the same as a normal system? Both have planets, belts, complexes, moons (but not moon mining of course), POSs, and gates (yes, wormhole ones move, but still the same mechanic.) I can't find one difference between nullsec and wormhole sec aside fron the moving gates and general lack of capships. As for lowsec to wormholes, the only difference is bubbles/bombs/etc. and the previously stated differences. Are you saying that moving gates makes such a big difference so as to make it impossible to remove local?
You are joking, right?
If i want to kill WH pve'ers i first need to find a wormhole that is actually occupied and being used at the moment. That can be quite a long work, especially not in prime time they are quite often deserted, even the ones with a POS in them. To find one you can go through a string of WHs, but you got decent chance it collapses somewhere behind you leaving your horribly lost.
Contrary to what you claim (have you ever been in one?), WH systems do NOT have belts. You will have to probe everything down.
Even if you manage to find a wormhole system with active pve'ers, you wont be able to find it again tomorrow. It is a completely random process that involves alot of luck of finding a WH system with active people in them. This contrary to normal space, if i want to go to find a ratter in normal space i look at the map, development indices, etc, and i see i should set destination to hed. The route there will stay always the same.
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 10:57:00 -
[114]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Originally by: Malcanis
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Meh. I was going to post a few points refuting some of the stupidity in this thread (other peoples, lol) but I just can't be bothered anymore. Eve is never going to be developed in a direction I'm going to be happy playing.
If it makes you any happier, CCP themselves have said they're not entirely content with local being used as an intel tool.
That's not really what I'm talking about, but I've heard them mention that on a few occasions.
Eve is just going to continue down a path that makes the game softer and friendlier to stupid people who make mistakes and don't want to pay for them. That's disappointing to me because I know that as each year passes, the game isn't going to be more refined and made a sharper leaner more uncompromising more competitive game- quite the opposite: its' going to become even more carebear oriented with all the 'toning down' and 'hand holding'.
I wish I were wrong, but sadly, I know I'm not. I'd like to see anyone prove it otherwise.
Outside of hi-sec, where and how is this the case? Given that CCP only a year ago increased the map by 50% and made the whole of that extra space in to delayed local, I'd say that you should have more grounds for optimism than pessimism.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 11:31:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus ąstupidity in this threadą
The irony of your posts is amusing.
Originally by: Bellum Eternus Eve is just going to continue down a path that makes the game softer and friendlier to stupid people
The only way Eve will head down that path is if CCP started listening to lazy players such as yourself, always wanting to buff YOUR toys and handicap your targets. Have you noticed that all you do is whine about making things easier for you? And then you have the galls to complain about people wanting this game on easy mode? ThatĘs YOU. You are the one wanting to play Eve on easy mode, Bellum.
Originally by: Bellum Eternus quite the opposite: its' going to become even more carebear oriented with all the 'toning down' and 'hand holding'.
Until you realize that YOU are the carebear begging CCP to make YOUR profession easier than the rest this is all pointless. Seriously, Bellum, you sound bitter. You throw tantrums when people disagree with you. You accuse CCP of ęgoing softĘ when they donĘt buff/nerf the things you want. You have to take a few steps back and look at the bigger picture. Realize that this game needs balance. And that suggesting half-baked ideas like removing local without keeping things balanced isnĘt the way to go. And if CCP ōisnĘt listeningö to you that it might be because what you think is an awesome idea might not be that awesome. The clues are there. You just have to open your eyes to see them. Or, you could just continue calling people wussies and carebears for not agreeing with your ideas, which honestly, I think is more likely :P. But the only one that ends up looking like a carebear is you.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Syris Anu
Evolutionary Pressure
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 14:39:00 -
[116]
|
Sunbird Huy
Caldari WEPRA CORP Circle-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 15:39:00 -
[117]
Oh hai Bellum... Funny, you propose same thing, when I wrote this stuff up a while ago, you flushed it down the toilet.
And I wrote up how exactly would those local removals work. First of all, Local would display people only in scan range from stations and POS's adapted to LOCAL scanning.
Local in delayed mode. We can go on about this, yet it is so easy to do. It's just that CCP don't care about this, just as they don't care about lagg. While I'd just adore to go nuke those LOCALSCANWARPOFFCLOAKRAVENBOTS, my hopes are not high...
thumbsdown for the OP, thumbs up to the one that presents complete idea for LOCAL nerf for 0.0 . TLDR. ttfn
|
Klandestin
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 16:16:00 -
[118]
It's probably been brought up befor in this thread but i'm too lazy to read the backlog, removing local even if scanning mechanisms where improved would still provide a major problem, military 5 systems are visible on your map, which means you now immidiatly know where your targets are (as is already the case but atleast currently you'd have an accurate idea of how safe it is to rat)
|
Jag Kara
United Investment
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 16:38:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Bagehi Edited by: Bagehi on 06/05/2010 18:12:18 The difference is the safety from roaming gangs. 0.0 has roaming and more PVP because: 1. Roams have local, allowing them to identify if there are targets to probe/search for in a system. It also allows them to identify when they are being followed by a defense scout. 2. Roams don't have to worry about the WH collapsing. Getting stuck on the other side of Eve 30-50 jumps from home can be rather annoying.
Roams rely on local, not voodoo to find systems with targets.
Yeah, but again, scanning fixes these. 1. You specifically say you use local to 'identify' targets. You can do the same with a single probe. You may not get them 100% right off the bat, but you can hit the entire system (teon, not included for obvious reasons.) Thus, you don't need to spend any more time on the hunt to find someone. 2. No, roams don't have to worry, but you got in that wormhole by scanning. Thus you prove that scanning is the solution with said arguement.
Originally by: Bagehi 1. Would you suggest people wander blindly around looking for things to kill? With the current scanner and no local, that is what would happen. Of course, this would be a boost to solo combat to some extent. Solo PVP ship against ratter/miner that it. 2. This would be a huge boost to stealth bombers. As I'm in love with stealth bombers, I'm not going to complain much, but I'm confident many would be crying for blood (nerfs) over this. 3. You seem to be under the mistaken impression that things people attack would last long enough for defenders to respond. Attacking fixed targets would be 100x easier without local. Metagaming would dramatically increase as spies would become the primary method for finding fleets.
1. Wait, you mean this isn't a multiplayer game? (or at least a game where you bring an alt with you everywhere?) 2. I don't fly them much, but it may be a boost to any cloaky ship, not just stealth bombers. 3. Stront your pos or actually watch your systmes. Stop afking your empire and you don't have a problem. As for spies, they already exist, ergo solution is already there.
Originally by: Bagehi P.S. Everyone would fit ECCM to be unscannable.
It is difficult to become 100% unscanable in anything larger than frigate, and even then, the person has to give up most, if not all mid slots. In Soviet Russia, carebears gank YOU! |
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2010.05.07 16:50:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Furb Killer
You are joking, right?
If i want to kill WH pve'ers i first need to find a wormhole that is actually occupied and being used at the moment. That can be quite a long work, especially not in prime time they are quite often deserted, even the ones with a POS in them. To find one you can go through a string of WHs, but you got decent chance it collapses somewhere behind you leaving your horribly lost.
Contrary to what you claim (have you ever been in one?), WH systems do NOT have belts. You will have to probe everything down.
Even if you manage to find a wormhole system with active pve'ers, you wont be able to find it again tomorrow. It is a completely random process that involves alot of luck of finding a WH system with active people in them. This contrary to normal space, if i want to go to find a ratter in normal space i look at the map, development indices, etc, and i see i should set destination to hed. The route there will stay always the same.
Obviously you have no idea , you can leave scanning alt in any wormhole system , and grief residents to death , until they leave , quit etc.
It is only slightly more difficult to do than to come through gates.
I will always support removing of local .
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |