EVE Search - [Proposal] 0.0/lowsec local to delayed mode

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[Proposal] 0.0/lowsec local to delayed mode

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.28 21:56:00 - [1] Yeah, that's right. I said it. It works in w-space, it'll work in 0.0 just fine. I hear HTFU all the time from everyone else about every other issue in Eve. It's time the 0.0/lowsec peeps put their ISK where their mouths are and HTFU themselves. The advent of our little PL friends and their effective if exploitive local work around to kill Russian macro ratters and ISK sellers clearly demonstrates how a little lack of local intel can rectify some glaring game play issues. I think that putting local into delayed mode will also help with 0.0 fleet battles and increase the relevance and importance of skilled scouts. Additionally, reduced local intel will allow smaller guerilla groups to effectively harass and fight larger fleets as they'll be able to hide from larger forces while they attempt to distract and evade the main fighting forces of their enemy. The advantages of this change are numerous, the drawbacks few. Most will argue that it's 'impossible' to deal with the lack of local and 'spamming my scanner' all the time is horrible. To this end I point these detractors to w-space where competent pilots thrive in a very hostile and competitive environment. It's clear that anyone who would be against the change to delayed mode for 0.0/lowsec is simply too lazy, too incompetent or just plain soft in the head to survive in such and environment, in which case they don't deserve to fly in 0.0/lowsec anyway. Once people adapt you'll find that fleet fights still happen, small gang PVP will thrive and those who operate with teamwork will be dramatically more effective than those without. Let the whines of "OMG, IT'S TOO HARD" begin... - 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.
How2FoldSoup No Child Left Behind	Posted - 2010.04.28 22:00:00 - [2] First Great idea and i completely agree. It'll be about time too..
Bellum Eternus Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.28 22:02:00 - [3] Supporting my own topic. - 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.
Elridon Hull Tanking Elitists	Posted - 2010.04.28 22:47:00 - [4] Supporting this, wanting this, etc. I doubt it'll actually happen though.
Brengholl	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:20:00 - [5] as i understand it: mashing directional for intel has 2 results and one conclusion 1. strain on the server because of the way directional scaner is coded 2. strain on your hands and mouse -> CCP does not want that kind of gameplay ccp does not want to remove local before a beter intel tool than directional is invented and implemented ... this is my understanding of the whole problem... wich has also been posted a LOT of times before i do support the whole idea (again) BUT solutions to problems 1 and 2 need to be found
Deja Thoris Invicta. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:26:00 - [6] Edited by: Deja Thoris on 28/04/2010 23:26:12 I don't support this. In its current incarnation eve isnt reaady for it. It works in wormholes since there are limited and hard to find entries and exits. With a proposal like this with eve in its current form it would just be local full of cloaky ***gots screaming "boom headshot!!!" every time someone enters local because the game offers no intel tools other than a half baked directional scanner. Edit: Where the heck is the thumb down!?
Jerid Verges Gallente The Society of Innovation The Last Stand	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:28:00 - [7] Does not support delayed Lowsec delayed local just so pirates can get easier kills.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:32:00 - [8] I support it, but we all know that some kind of improvement to the scanning system has to happen before local chat is dropped. CCP has stated something along those lines in the past. The most basic thing that has to happen is automatic Scanner updates - similar to current Overview model. Perhaps even integration of 15 AU Scanner data into Overview Because otherwise, all the competitive people would have to spam the Scan button every second. CCP doesn't want that, and players definitely would not be happy about having to do that.
Grarr Dexx GK inc. Panda Team	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:51:00 - [9] Supported. ___
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.04.28 23:58:00 - [10] Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 28/04/2010 23:57:53 Originally by: Deja Thoris With a proposal like this with eve in its current form it would just be local full of cloaky ***gots screaming "boom headshot!!!" every time someone enters local because the game offers no intel tools other than a half baked directional scanner. This. Find a way to balance it so it doesn't lean so much in favor of the predator and you have my support. Otherwise, no. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
FunzzeR Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.29 00:01:00 - [11] Best "boost low sec" idea I have heard in a while.. And unlike the other ideas, its been proven to be good in wormhole space. Support PRAISE THE SCOTTISH FOLD!! THEIR WILL SHALL BE DONE!!
Lysander Kaldenn Dead Reckoning.	Posted - 2010.04.29 01:37:00 - [12] Full support here.
Herzog Wolfhammer Aliastra	Posted - 2010.04.29 01:45:00 - [13] I am in favor of delayed local as well, but I hope that such a change also comes with a change to D-scanning mechanics because having to scan every 2 seconds see the gank coming is a real pain in the arse. Let's face another issue as well, in regards to the recent controversy: see thread in General regarding someone managing to keep from being visible in local, and allegedly (innocent until proven guilty) using the supposed exploit to hunt botters. In as much as Local is a good tool for both offense and defense, and removal of it would affect both sides equally, one of the ways that bots work via their scripting routines is to monitor local and then go to SS. Removal of local would be a dent in bots on the level of Unholy Rage, and I think most players support that. But the D-scanner mechanics, while no problem for a bot program, is worse than water torture on a real player. It should be noted that I spend a lot of time in WH space and 0.0 in an exploration fit ship, and I have now, as if last week, managed to keep it in one piece for an entire year, not counting the first 2 months of its life when I used it in FW. I can use the D-Scanner well enough to stay off the list of the soft-headed and lazy, but it feels as dumb as marching in place while singing and inserting your friends names in the lyrics. The ability to detect scans and radar signals is 1970s technology. I know, I used to work on those systems in fighter jets. It's a bit odd that, 23000 years into the future, a ship can't pick up on some signals, even low noise in passive detection systems, when being scanned down. Unfortunately, such a system, whatever it's report medium, will get piped right into the latest bot script and the ISK sellers will be back in business (and back off the menu). Hopefully this will get resolved somehow.
adriaans Ankaa. Nair Al-Zaurak	Posted - 2010.04.29 04:06:00 - [14] Originally by: Ephemeron I support it, but we all know that some kind of improvement to the scanning system has to happen before local chat is dropped. CCP has stated something along those lines in the past. The most basic thing that has to happen is automatic Scanner updates - similar to current Overview model. Perhaps even integration of 15 AU Scanner data into Overview Because otherwise, all the competitive people would have to spam the Scan button every second. CCP doesn't want that, and players definitely would not be happy about having to do that. I like the 15 au overview scanner part, and supported, at least for 0.0 to begin with and would not mind it in low-sec either with say such an overview/scanner change. --signature-- Support the Field Command ship boost: Here
Bunyip Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2010.04.29 04:15:00 - [15] While I can't agree to the outright removal of local in 0.0 and/or low-sec, I think you may be on to one point. The following is my idea for local in low-sec and 0.0. In low-sec: Concord doesn't have much presence here, so have the factions control the local chat. The catch is that they're not going to give this permission out for free. Local would be in delayed mode until a person paid a given amount at a station or a new 'agent in space' to use the comms system. Once that price was paid, the user would be able to get local until he logged out or left the system. The price wouldn't have to be high (maybe something like 10k or so). To compensate for this, make all PvP within 250 km of stations and warpgates prohibited. Warp bubbles might be incorporated for use in low-sec to allow for new hunting techniques (the prey could simply warp to a nearby planet then towards the next gate, but that planet might be patrolled too). This idea (minus the warp bubbles) could be transferred to high-sec as well. Advantages: * Station games will be a thing of the past. After all, why would a station allow such combat where people could get injured on the station from stray shots? * Another ISK sink to replace the ones being lost by PI. * Possession of a system means a lot more, where control of incoming and outgoing ships would be more than just gatecamps. * More prey in low-sec, since the entry will be far easier. * More access to choice toys in low-sec, given the new trade hubs possible. Disadvantages: * New mechanics would have to be introduced to allow for this. * Tactics would be thrown into a blender, making pirates actually think for their kills rather than just smartbombing everybody who comes into a system. In null-sec: The sovereign power in the system would get a new "Communications Relay Tower" for Ihubs that would give their pilots local. Whether this could be transferred due to standings or not remains at the discretion of the developers. Everybody else (macroers included) would have to run cautiously. Advantages: * Intel now becomes much easier for the sovereign power. * Intervening space would be more likely to be sovereign, given the lack of intel in nearby non-sovereign systems. * Macroers would have a lot more difficulty operating in 0.0, especially if it's held by another alliance. * Cloak ships could be more of an asset for small-gang PvP, allowing groups to attack by surprise, even if not the sovereign power. Disadvantages: * Expense for alliances to set up the Comms tower by their Ihubs. * Redesign of mechanics necessary to put this into place, including standings-based local if implemented. I feel that this will work a lot better than the additional server queries that constant d-scans would create with the OP's idea. Any constructive criticism is welcomed. "May all your hits be crits." - Knights of the Dinner Table.
Scerolikk Teromni B'haxed Productions DEFI4NT	Posted - 2010.04.29 04:17:00 - [16] This thread again?
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.29 04:43:00 - [17] Originally by: Bunyip Edited by: Bunyip on 29/04/2010 04:24:03 While I can't agree to the outright removal of local in 0.0 and/or low-sec, I think you may be on to one point. My idea for new local systems is available here. I feel that this will work a lot better than the additional server queries that constant d-scans would create with the OP's idea. Any constructive criticism is welcomed. From Bunyips "idea" thread: Quote: To compensate for this, make all PvP within 250 km of stations and warpgates prohibited. Warp bubbles might be incorporated for use in low-sec to allow for new hunting techniques (the prey could simply warp to a nearby planet then towards the next gate, but that planet might be patrolled too). This idea (minus the warp bubbles) could be transferred to high-sec as well. Worst ideas ever. - 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.
Fon Revedhort Monks of War Monks of War.	Posted - 2010.04.29 04:58:00 - [18] Edited by: Fon Revedhort on 29/04/2010 04:58:34 Yeap ---[center] Please resize your signature to the maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.29 05:06:00 - [19] Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer I am in favor of delayed local as well, but I hope that such a change also comes with a change to D-scanning mechanics because having to scan every 2 seconds see the gank coming is a real pain in the arse. Let's face another issue as well, in regards to the recent controversy: see thread in General regarding someone managing to keep from being visible in local, and allegedly (innocent until proven guilty) using the supposed exploit to hunt botters. In as much as Local is a good tool for both offense and defense, and removal of it would affect both sides equally, one of the ways that bots work via their scripting routines is to monitor local and then go to SS. Removal of local would be a dent in bots on the level of Unholy Rage, and I think most players support that. But the D-scanner mechanics, while no problem for a bot program, is worse than water torture on a real player. It should be noted that I spend a lot of time in WH space and 0.0 in an exploration fit ship, and I have now, as if last week, managed to keep it in one piece for an entire year, not counting the first 2 months of its life when I used it in FW. I can use the D-Scanner well enough to stay off the list of the soft-headed and lazy, but it feels as dumb as marching in place while singing and inserting your friends names in the lyrics. The ability to detect scans and radar signals is 1970s technology. I know, I used to work on those systems in fighter jets. It's a bit odd that, 23000 years into the future, a ship can't pick up on some signals, even low noise in passive detection systems, when being scanned down. Unfortunately, such a system, whatever it's report medium, will get piped right into the latest bot script and the ISK sellers will be back in business (and back off the menu). Hopefully this will get resolved somehow. I'd like to see the scanning system completely redone as well, but I don't think it's critical to have that in place before local is put into delayed mode. How about you and I discuss a revamp of the entire scanning concept elsewhere in another thread? I think we need to throw out everything we know about Eve's current setup for scanning and come up with something that would be the most interesting game play wise and then back off from that if we need to due to implementation limits. - 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.
Anna Lifera Gallente Imperial Legion of Amarr	Posted - 2010.04.29 05:25:00 - [20] the only thing a delayed local will give to small gangs is the headstart to ambush solo/defenseless pilots at the belts. u can't hit and run on any gang and kill anything quickly enough except at a gate and even then, they'll still see u gate jump in so there's no surprise at all. it's just another "i want easier ganks because my killboard isn't perfect enough" thread. not supported. --- LOLOLOL If anything, lvl4s require LESS effort then Mining!... At least in mining you have to check every 4 minutes to move the ore to the can. You're an idiot. - Jerid Verges
Goumindong SniggWaffe	Posted - 2010.04.29 05:47:00 - [21] Quote: It works in w-space, it'll work in 0.0 just fine. W-space is not analogous to 0.0 -- Did you get that thing i sent you?
Pheusia The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.04.29 06:19:00 - [22] Put some thought in to improving the scanner and JUST DO IT. Signed, Pheusia
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2010.04.29 06:20:00 - [23] Quote: I'd like to see the scanning system completely redone as well, but I don't think it's critical to have that in place before local is put into delayed mode. Wut? Serious? Removing local is the same as forcing people to smash a button every 10 seconds, that is just terrible game design. The only effect this would have is that indeed all ratters in 0.0 are macros, since everyone else already moved to lvl 4 missions in high sec. If your goal is to empty low sec and 0.0 even more, then sure go ahead. I actually agree local shouldnt be an intel channel. But such changes would break way more than they would fix. Before you do it you first need a good scanner that doesnt make you want to commit ritual japanese suicide, and the pve content needs to be fixed, so you actually got a fighting chance against the roamers. (Sleeper ai that switches agro for example).
foksieloy Minmatar Universal Army Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.04.29 07:13:00 - [24] No support. _______________________ We come for our people!
Zilberfrid	Posted - 2010.04.29 07:30:00 - [25] Maybe for 0.0, not for lowsec. Until lowsec leaves the proposal I won't support.
Vaal Erit Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2010.04.29 09:27:00 - [26] I support having CCP review the local mechanic but not the change listed in the OP. Any removal of local would need to be coupled with a new mechanic like a super directional scanner or whatnot. I've actually tried to gather intelligence without local and it is insanely hard, to the point where it is such a pain as to make the game unfun. Also I would want some more nerfs put on the non-covert cloaks if local is removed. There will be too many fleets hiding with cloaks without local. Originally by: Jim Raynor EVE needs danger, EVE needs risks, EVE needs combat, even piracy, without these things, the game stagnates to a trivial game centering around bloating your wallet with no purpose.
darius mclever	Posted - 2010.04.29 09:46:00 - [27] (I dont know where i saw this, so if someone finds the link please add it) How about this: you jump into a system and wont be shown in local for the say first 30-60seconds. when the time is over, you will be shown in local. All people already in local before you get shown normally after you jump in.
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.04.29 10:55:00 - [28] Originally by: darius mclever (I dont know where i saw this, so if someone finds the link please add it) How about this: you jump into a system and wont be shown in local for the say first 30-60seconds. when the time is over, you will be shown in local. All people already in local before you get shown normally after you jump in. I can see how this helps pirates and opportunistic PVPers, but how does it help everyone else? Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Bevil Smyth Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2010.04.29 11:18:00 - [29] Edited by: Bevil Smyth on 29/04/2010 11:20:48 Originally by: Bellum Eternus I'd like to see the [directional] scanning system completely redone as well All in all whatever ideas get put around, the current state of things is ridiculous, a chat channel user list being the best intel gathering tool in a space game? its just stupid, and fills ur screen with yet another window that shouldnt be there, and ruins the immersion. Things have to change, and have been glossed over for years. ============================ 2003 and still alive!
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2010.04.29 13:06:00 - [30] Originally by: Ephemeron I support it, but we all know that some kind of improvement to the scanning system has to happen before local chat is dropped. CCP has stated something along those lines in the past. The most basic thing that has to happen is automatic Scanner updates - similar to current Overview model. Perhaps even integration of 15 AU Scanner data into Overview Because otherwise, all the competitive people would have to spam the Scan button every second. CCP doesn't want that, and players definitely would not be happy about having to do that. Yep. Supporting on principle - scanner needs some work as part of the plan.
Pheusia Gallente The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.04.29 13:10:00 - [31] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: darius mclever (I dont know where i saw this, so if someone finds the link please add it) How about this: you jump into a system and wont be shown in local for the say first 30-60seconds. when the time is over, you will be shown in local. All people already in local before you get shown normally after you jump in. I can see how this helps pirates and opportunistic PVPers, but how does it help everyone else? Helps them compete against macros...? Signed, Pheusia
Poleander	Posted - 2010.04.29 14:01:00 - [32] thumbs up if it is supposed to work both ways: i.e. person entering the system does not see who is in it and persons in the system do not see who just entered.
Crumplecorn Eve Cluster Explorations	Posted - 2010.04.29 15:09:00 - [33] Support on principle alone, but I'd like to see a lot of work done on the D-scanner before this got implemented. - I wish I was a two foot tall doll with a watering can and heterochromatic eyes
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.04.29 16:14:00 - [34] Originally by: Pheusia Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: darius mclever (I dont know where i saw this, so if someone finds the link please add it) How about this: you jump into a system and wont be shown in local for the say first 30-60seconds. when the time is over, you will be shown in local. All people already in local before you get shown normally after you jump in. I can see how this helps pirates and opportunistic PVPers, but how does it help everyone else? Helps them compete against macros...? So as long as it's in the name of the good 'ol macro fight it's OK that it will screw everyone else. Let's get to it then! Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Kiri Serrensun	Posted - 2010.04.29 16:21:00 - [35] Originally by: Bellum Eternus The advent of our little PL friends and their effective if exploitive local work around to kill Russian macro ratters and ISK sellers clearly demonstrates how a little lack of local intel can rectify some glaring game play issues. "This will defeat macros." is the EVE equivalent of "Tough on crime!". Appended to everything, and meaningless. Just like "This will defeat blobs and encourage small gang PVP." If people don't know how many enemies are around, they won't scout or use dividing tactics or small gangs--they'll take the path of least resistance and blob up. Originally by: Bellum Eternus The advantages of this change are numerous, the drawbacks few. Most will argue that it's 'impossible' to deal with the lack of local and 'spamming my scanner' all the time is horrible. To this end I point these detractors to w-space where competent pilots thrive in a very hostile and competitive environment. W-space also has limits on how big a blob you can bring in. Nothing should change about Local before the directional scanner is made less horrible. I just love having to filter through twenty Small Pulse Laser Batteries every ten seconds when someone is in local, now I have to do it every ten seconds all the time? Yay.
Pheusia Gallente The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.04.29 17:38:00 - [36] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: Pheusia Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: darius mclever (I dont know where i saw this, so if someone finds the link please add it) How about this: you jump into a system and wont be shown in local for the say first 30-60seconds. when the time is over, you will be shown in local. All people already in local before you get shown normally after you jump in. I can see how this helps pirates and opportunistic PVPers, but how does it help everyone else? Helps them compete against macros...? So as long as it's in the name of the good 'ol macro fight it's OK that it will screw everyone else. Let's get to it then! But really, why do you care? No-one's suggesting the hi-sec have delayed local. Signed, Pheusia
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2010.04.29 17:46:00 - [37] Euhm people, some rational thinking please. The only ones who can press a dir scan button every 10 seconds without ordering a rope and a chair on ebay are the macros.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.04.29 18:06:00 - [38] This will bring more skill to EVE PvP which means that people who learn the game well become better than other people, no matter what they do - roam, blob, or farm It will also make the game more exciting, there will be higher thrill level.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.04.29 19:23:00 - [39] It is explained for W-Space as being the lack of communication channels provided by the gate network that causes the local behaviour. This can be adjusted slightly to apply to null-sec where sovereignty is fluid. Give sovereignty holder the ability to influence the extent of local delay or what it shows as a further isk sink for use in central systems (maybe even destructible so a vanguard roam can ruin local prior to invasion). Low-sec is an entirely different beast though. It is Empire sovereign space, Concord is present (albeit only as sentries) and NPC corporations have settled almost all systems. There is no reasonable explanation for a delayed local that will apply to low-sec without being equally applicable to high-sec with very minor alterations. For low-sec I propose a different approach that can be justified more easily and still provide a tactical advantage: One does not show in local as long as one is under gate cloak.
Volir Dot.	Posted - 2010.04.29 20:48:00 - [40] This is dumb. Here is the issue, in W-space, most people are in exploration sites, which must be probed out. So, you can d-scan for probes and prevent ganks. In lowsec and 0.0, however, the majority of people are in asteroid belts and cosmic anomolies. A cloaked ship can easily pinpoint people with the directional scanner without ever launching probes. This would be the death of all non-exploration pve in 0.0 and lowsec. This would make it extremely easy for cloaked ships to gank people. With the increased risk, people would stop belt ratting and running anomalies and instead do the equally-profitable and completely safe alt character L4 mission running in empire. Someone in this thread even claimed that this would level the field. Its surprising how few people have ever opened the eve map and looked at the wealth of data available. I can easily identify ratters and other pve hotspots by using a few simple filters. You can look at the number of pirate ships destroyed over 24 hours, the number of characters active in the last 30 minutes, the number of jumps, and the development index of a system from any where in eve, or even out of eve since all that data is in the API. Local cannot be removed or altered in anyway unless CCP fundamentally alters how people PVE and how cloaks function. In w-space CCP changed how everyone pve'd, by putting the majority of the content into exploration and adding "smart" high dps pve content. Ganking people in a w-space complex is very dangerous, especially if you rely on e-war.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.04.29 20:57:00 - [41] I say we should remove local from SEVERAL 0.0 regions first, increase rewards to adjust for higher risks. Then all the lazy bears can move to old style 0.0, while people who crave more excitement and better money opportunities would come to new 0.0 Both groups can have what they want.
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.04.29 21:44:00 - [42] Originally by: Ephemeron Then all the lazy bears... If by lazy bears you really meant lazy pirates looking for easier ganks then yes, I agree, removing local is the way to go. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.04.29 22:29:00 - [43] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 29/04/2010 22:29:39 Originally by: Volir This is dumb. Here is the issue, in W-space, most people are in exploration sites, which must be probed out. So, you can d-scan for probes and prevent ganks. In lowsec and 0.0, however, the majority of people are in asteroid belts and cosmic anomolies. A cloaked ship can easily pinpoint people with the directional scanner without ever launching probes. This would be the death of all non-exploration pve in 0.0 and lowsec. This would make it extremely easy for cloaked ships to gank people. With the increased risk, people would stop belt ratting and running anomalies and instead do the equally-profitable and completely safe alt character L4 mission running in empire. Someone in this thread even claimed that this would level the field. Its surprising how few people have ever opened the eve map and looked at the wealth of data available. I can easily identify ratters and other pve hotspots by using a few simple filters. You can look at the number of pirate ships destroyed over 24 hours, the number of characters active in the last 30 minutes, the number of jumps, and the development index of a system from any where in eve, or even out of eve since all that data is in the API. Local cannot be removed or altered in anyway unless CCP fundamentally alters how people PVE and how cloaks function. In w-space CCP changed how everyone pve'd, by putting the majority of the content into exploration and adding "smart" high dps pve content. Ganking people in a w-space complex is very dangerous, especially if you rely on e-war. Basically. This and the mass limits are the reasons it basically works in w-space and would be horrible for low-sec & 0.0. Furthermore, you have the following problem: the load of posses with ships in them make it idiotically difficult to actually gather intel using the d-scan without having local as well. Furthermore, covops cloaking ships certainly don't need a boost. And finally; nerfing scouting empowers the blob, and that does not need empowerment tbh. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Tesker Flant	Posted - 2010.04.30 13:38:00 - [44] yupp
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.04.30 23:30:00 - [45] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: Ephemeron Then all the lazy bears... If by lazy bears you really meant lazy pirates looking for easier ganks then yes, I agree, removing local is the way to go. WTF are you even posting in this thread? It doesn't concern you. You never set foot out of 1.0 space anyway. Leave the big boy play areas to the adults. - 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.
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.01 01:55:00 - [46] Originally by: Bellum Eternus Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: Ephemeron Then all the lazy bears... If by lazy bears you really meant lazy pirates looking for easier ganks then yes, I agree, removing local is the way to go. WTF are you even posting in this thread? It doesn't concern you. You never set foot out of 1.0 space anyway. Leave the big boy play areas to the adults. Mr. Bellum, you know this for a fact how? I'm sorry to break it down for ya, but when you create a thread you realize people are allowed to post their opinions in it? You sound mad. The only advice I can give you is you need to calm down and let people disagree with you. mkay? Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Herzog Wolfhammer Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2010.05.01 02:38:00 - [47] C'mon guys. The system needs work and this is not going to help. As much as I could put a boatload of "work" into what I think a good change to local, and scanning, would be, CCP tends to be deaf to these things. Not like they don't care. Lately I have dealt with a game company on DRM matters (No, not "that" company) and seeing what their schedules are like removes any assumption that CPP does not care. EvE is a legacy system and it's hard to change things. Simple as that. The way to look at local is from both directions, and how that affects you depends on your goal. From the gankee's, or potential gankee (everybody is, even the gankers) point of view, local is the tool that lets you know when a threat is in the system. Without it, it is said, you will get instaganked all the way back to the start station, with a big red L tattooed on your clone's ass. So it's said. But what I have seen most of the time is, when going in via a gate, a half dozen pwnage-geared ships show up on that gate, and sometimes another half on the other gate. In 0.0 bubbles go up. I have heard many a tale of 5 BS going after one cruiser, or something like that. But how do they know there is fresh meat? Local told them. (this is why I have yet to use a gate in 0.0. How? Look at my sig). So you see, either someone is going into a system looking for some blood (in game) and will get some aid in finding it, via local, or someone in a system is waiting for blood and will be alerted to it by local. Removing Local will affect them both. Nobody gets an "I Win" button. The predator still needs to find the prey, the prey still needs to look out. Of course, belts cannot be mined or ratted in this case. Really? If you have a team you can. But this is not my opinion. CCP set it up that way. They can't stand lone wolves. If putting a probe launcher on your mining ship, for example, to find hidden belts, even if you pull in enough ISK to pay for the ship twice over per day, is too much of a hit, then you have to learn adaptation. Putting some mods on the ship to make it harder to scan will gimp it. But if it's all about ISK per hour, then is it still a game or is this "Bread-Snatcher Online"? I can do a 0.0 radar site in a horribly gimped exploration fit and once managed to online a hack mod in the middle of combat and keep fighting because there were combat probes appearing in the D-Scan (I managed to get the loot, by the way). Do I pound mission after mission, belt after belt, and rat away until my standings are so high I could Smartbomb a noob station and still not be red? No. I think people don't want to rely on anyone else because they feel it's CCP arbitrarily forcing a game style on them. They don't want to group up, so therefore nobody should have to fit a ship for anything less than making maximum ISK while alone. But this simple does not work. CCP does not want that to work. And who am I to dare such opinions? This is my main. I never joined a corp, I work alone, and accept that CCP absolutely despises lone wolves. But for me that only makes things more interesting. (So keep hating us, CCP). Unless they come up with a mechanic that makes an un-fleeted ship explode on undock this won't matter to people who log in to play, not earn imaginary money. Bottom line is you cannot expect maximum input working alone in a game that is specifically designed AGAINST it. I only have half a billion ISK (not counting all the phat loot I am too lazy to contract). I like the game still. All that should be asked for is, no matter what the outcome, that some improvement to the way of detecting enemy scanning operations be made a little more automatic or easier. There are already ways to make a scanner have to move probes in closer to get a warpable (and thus be detected). The UI for scanning is not very good, and so everybody should just agree to have some agreement on that and leave the rest to CCP (because they change little else).
Kiri Serrensun	Posted - 2010.05.01 08:12:00 - [48] Originally by: Ephemeron This will bring more skill to EVE PvP which means that people who learn the game well become better than other people, no matter what they do - roam, blob, or farm It will also make the game more exciting, there will be higher thrill level. Do some missions or exploration in lowsec, then come back and say with a straight face that the directional scanner is exciting or thrilling.
Daemonspirit Redhawk Tribal Trust	Posted - 2010.05.01 08:37:00 - [49] Delayed local works in WH's because of the difficulty of getting there, the mass limits and the changing nature of the route in/or out every 16 hours. None of those constraints exist in 0.0 or low-sec, so the only effect of delayed local would be to encourage more blobs, and make the game less fun by demanding constant spamming of the d-scan... Last I heard, CCP nerfed the D-Scan because it was one of the causes of lag... Not supported in this incarnation, until/unless CCP implements some other type of intell tool. No. ôEveryone has a right to be stupid; some people just abuse the privilege.ö
Sellmewarez	Posted - 2010.05.01 08:50:00 - [50] Originally by: Daemonspirit Not supported in this incarnation, until/unless CCP implements some other type of intell tool. This. Put a delay in local and the only other solution to gain up to date defensive intel for smaller alliances is sit somebody on a every gate in the system and watch it 23/7. Now i don't know about you, but that doesnt sound like a whole lot of fun or something very many people are willing to do. Additionally over time you are going to get LESS targets due to ratters/miners currently in 0.0 deciding that its to dangerous to pve there and going back to empire. I do support putting a delay on local however there MUST be an reasonable alternative to gathering intel which currently is not in place. Not supported.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.05.01 09:46:00 - [51] There seems to be an unsupported assumption running rampant in this thread: That we need instant, complete intel of a system. Yes, we have it now. Yes, we're used to operating with it. But I am not convinced that it is an absolute necessity. It's just that we've grown so used to our comfort blanket that we cant conceive of being without it. Maybe we should just step back for a moment and think about what EVE would be like without instant, reliable system-wide intel. You see a lot of people complaining that one system is much like another, space is all the same, etc etc. What if the size and layout of a system really mattered? What if different classes of ships had different scanner characteristics? You could introduce variables like range, accuracy, sensitivity, re-scan frequency. You could also modify these variables according to fit. For instance, an active cloak should have a very strong penalty to scanner use. Active ECCM should make one hard to scan, but it should also make your scanner less accurate. A sensor booster would work in the opposite fashion. What if using the scanner made you easier to scan? What if this varied by sensor type? (eg: using LADAR scanners makes you show up more easily to LADAR sensors, but makes no difference to Gravimetric sensors). If we think about the possibilities that dropping local as an omni-intel tool would offer us, I think that the inevitable conclusion would be that there would be a huge amount of actual gameplay potential added. Space would seem big again. Scouting would be more than keeping an alt at a safespot; it would become a player-skill based profession. And I think that we'd get more and better fights, to be honest. These days, 0.0/lo-sec PvP is mostly about evading fights until you can hotdrop the enemy with 3x their numbers. It has become stale and it's time for a shakeup. Engaging the enemy without perfect intel would be risky, it would be exciting, it would be fun. Incidentally, I think local in empire should remain more or less as it is.
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.05.01 10:15:00 - [52] Originally by: Malcanis And I think that we'd get more and better fights, to be honest. These days, 0.0/lo-sec PvP is mostly about evading fights until you can hotdrop the enemy with 3x their numbers. It has become stale and it's time for a shakeup. Engaging the enemy without perfect intel would be risky, it would be exciting, it would be fun. Would be a shame to do this to lowsec tbh. The fun would sortof diminish after engaging bait for 5+ times only to get ganked by 15 cloaky ships; what would be left is either people flying the now mandatory nano-stuff and blobs (with a good helping of now unspottable cloakers). Eve players tend to find simple and effective solutions; blobbing (and cloaking) becomes more effective. For instance, I did preety much everything when it comes to lowsec piracy, from solo (which I like doing best) to small gangs, large gangs and gatecamps. When I plug these changes in the picture, you know, the riskyness of a gatecamp changes very little (since you will have covops scouts giving you exact intel on what jumped and so on, from at least one system away, two in case of, eg. Bellum). Large gangs again are going to have little problems with intel gathering; and they'll have less of a "gtfoooo" factor since you won't see local jump by 11ty billion. As gangs get smaller they get more penalized since less scouts ara available, it's harder to deal with cloaking ships, etcetera. Furthermore, it preety much renders any activity which does not take place away from celestials preety suicidal. In w-space where everything has to be probed down first, this is OK; you have a good chance of saving yourself by watching for probes (and w-space has a number of other things which make the no-local thing work out better). I have yet to find one idea to rework intel in EVE which does not carry negative (from my point of view) consequences. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.05.01 10:25:00 - [53] Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Malcanis And I think that we'd get more and better fights, to be honest. These days, 0.0/lo-sec PvP is mostly about evading fights until you can hotdrop the enemy with 3x their numbers. It has become stale and it's time for a shakeup. Engaging the enemy without perfect intel would be risky, it would be exciting, it would be fun. Would be a shame to do this to lowsec tbh. The fun would sortof diminish after engaging bait for 5+ times only to get ganked by 15 cloaky ships; what would be left is either people flying the now mandatory nano-stuff and blobs (with a good helping of now unspottable cloakers). Eve players tend to find simple and effective solutions; blobbing (and cloaking) becomes more effective. For instance, I did preety much everything when it comes to lowsec piracy, from solo (which I like doing best) to small gangs, large gangs and gatecamps. When I plug these changes in the picture, you know, the riskyness of a gatecamp changes very little (since you will have covops scouts giving you exact intel on what jumped and so on, from at least one system away, two in case of, eg. Bellum). Large gangs again are going to have little problems with intel gathering; and they'll have less of a "gtfoooo" factor since you won't see local jump by 11ty billion. As gangs get smaller they get more penalized since less scouts ara available, it's harder to deal with cloaking ships, etcetera. Furthermore, it preety much renders any activity which does not take place away from celestials preety suicidal. In w-space where everything has to be probed down first, this is OK; you have a good chance of saving yourself by watching for probes (and w-space has a number of other things which make the no-local thing work out better). I have yet to find one idea to rework intel in EVE which does not carry negative (from my point of view) consequences. I specifically mentioned strong penalties to scanning with cloaks fitted, and really there is a limit to the number of gates that one can attentively watch on grid at once. Turn away for 10 seconds, and you could miss someone going through. As for cheap lo-sec ganks.... how is what you describe much different to what we have at present? All that happens at the moment is engage bait -> cyno goes up -> HAHA I PWN U N00BS. Shall we ask CCP to extend local to include everyone within Titan-bridge range? No. Set your own traps.
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.05.01 10:34:00 - [54] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 01/05/2010 10:35:07 Grasping at straws now (particularly with that bit where cloaking recons are just as acessible as a Titan / cap fleet, orly). Look, it's preety simple; RP and stuff aside, how does your system change combat and what benefits over the current situation do you think are likely to come from that? Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Battlingbean Heaven's Gate	Posted - 2010.05.01 11:00:00 - [55] I support no local in 0.0 and maybe even low sec. -People say that it will suck/lag using the direction scan a lot. Well I basically use it ALL the time anyways cause local is rarely clear and everyone else should be too so really whats the difference. -Also how does it make it easier for ganks? Pirates wont even know your there until your on each others scans and then they have to find you. This does however boost cloakers so easiest solution would be to cut the range of directional scanning while cloaked or even make it impossible.
Gryana	Posted - 2010.05.01 11:07:00 - [56] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 28/04/2010 23:57:53 Originally by: Deja Thoris With a proposal like this with eve in its current form it would just be local full of cloaky ***gots screaming "boom headshot!!!" every time someone enters local because the game offers no intel tools other than a half baked directional scanner. This. Find a way to balance it so it doesn't lean so much in favor of the predator and you have my support. Otherwise, no. This
Sellmewarez	Posted - 2010.05.01 11:10:00 - [57] Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 01/05/2010 10:11:15 If we think about the possibilities that dropping local as an omni-intel tool would offer us, I think that the inevitable conclusion would be that there would be a huge amount of actual gameplay potential added. Space would seem big again. Scouting would be more than keeping an alt at a safespot; it would become a player-skill based profession. And I think that we'd get more and better fights, to be honest. These days, 0.0/lo-sec PvP is mostly about evading fights until you can hotdrop the enemy with 3x their numbers. It has become stale and it's time for a shakeup. Engaging the enemy without perfect intel would be risky, it would be exciting, it would be fun. Then it would just make metagaming even more important in 0.0 if there wasn't a game design mechanic for intel. 1. Login spy, join enemy fleet. 2. Analyse fleet numbers and makeup. 3. Relay it to your superiors and organize a counter blob. 4. ????? 5. Profit! Yet you also are forgetting some of the conseqences dropping local without a proper intel tool. The powerblocs will remain as is, even encouraging them to stay together so they can share intel channels. I don't deny the potential for goodfights would be increased, its just that that potential would realistically never materialise.
Asuri Kinnes Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2010.05.01 11:21:00 - [58] Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 01/05/2010 10:11:15 There seems to be an unsupported assumption running rampant in this thread: That we need instant, complete intel of a system. Yes, we have it now. Yes, we're used to operating with it. But I am not convinced that it is an absolute necessity. It's just that we've grown so used to our comfort blanket that we cant conceive of being without it. Maybe we should just step back for a moment and think about what EVE would be like without instant, reliable system-wide intel. You see a lot of people complaining that one system is much like another, space is all the same, etc etc. What if the size and layout of a system really mattered? What if different classes of ships had different scanner characteristics? You could introduce variables like range, accuracy, sensitivity, re-scan frequency. You could also modify these variables according to fit. For instance, an active cloak should have a very strong penalty to scanner use; or perhaps even using the scanner would temporarily disable the cloak! Active ECCM should make one hard to scan, but it should also make your scanner less accurate. A sensor booster would work in the opposite fashion. What if using the scanner made you easier to scan? What if this varied by sensor type? (eg: using LADAR scanners makes you show up more easily to LADAR sensors, but makes no difference to Gravimetric sensors). If we think about the possibilities that dropping local as an omni-intel tool would offer us, I think that the inevitable conclusion would be that there would be a huge amount of actual gameplay potential added. Space would seem big again. Scouting would be more than keeping an alt at a safespot; it would become a player-skill based profession. And I think that we'd get more and better fights, to be honest. These days, 0.0/lo-sec PvP is mostly about evading fights until you can hotdrop the enemy with 3x their numbers. It has become stale and it's time for a shakeup. Engaging the enemy without perfect intel would be risky, it would be exciting, it would be fun. Incidentally, I think local in empire should remain more or less as it is. Well, all that is interesting (to one degree or another) but as it doesn't exist in game now, it doesn't very much apply to what the OP wants, i.e. "remove local in 0.0 and Low-sec..." IMHO - that alone does nothing to make gameplay any better, and (again, imho) would just encourage more blobbing. What Malcanis suggests has some merit, and would give additional tools to hunters and the hunted. But until there are some kind of tools for gathering intell on a system, other than "jump in and pray" I can't support this proposal as I believe it would bring more negatives than positives to the game. OH! And to the OP "people don't deserve to fly in 0.0 and low-sec...." comment? If they pay their subscription, they pretty much "deserve" to fly wherever they hell they want! Please re-size your signature to the maximum allowed of 400 x 120 pixels with a maximum file size of 24000 bytes. Zymurgist
Furb Killer Gallente	Posted - 2010.05.01 11:54:00 - [59] Originally by: Battlingbean -Also how does it make it easier for ganks? Pirates wont even know your there until your on each others scans and then they have to find you. This does however boost cloakers so easiest solution would be to cut the range of directional scanning while cloaked or even make it impossible. That is the entire issues, pirates (especially in 0.0) know exactly in which system the pve'ers are.
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.05.01 15:13:00 - [60] Originally by: Sellmewarez Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 01/05/2010 10:11:15 If we think about the possibilities that dropping local as an omni-intel tool would offer us, I think that the inevitable conclusion would be that there would be a huge amount of actual gameplay potential added. Space would seem big again. Scouting would be more than keeping an alt at a safespot; it would become a player-skill based profession. And I think that we'd get more and better fights, to be honest. These days, 0.0/lo-sec PvP is mostly about evading fights until you can hotdrop the enemy with 3x their numbers. It has become stale and it's time for a shakeup. Engaging the enemy without perfect intel would be risky, it would be exciting, it would be fun. Then it would just make metagaming even more important in 0.0 if there wasn't a game design mechanic for intel. 1. Login spy, join enemy fleet. 2. Analyse fleet numbers and makeup. 3. Relay it to your superiors and organize a counter blob. 4. ????? 5. Profit! How is this different to what happens now?
Anna Lifera Gallente Imperial Legion of Amarr	Posted - 2010.05.01 16:30:00 - [61] Originally by: Malcanis There seems to be an unsupported assumption running rampant in this thread: That we need instant, complete intel of a system. Yes, we have it now. Yes, we're used to operating with it. But I am not convinced that it is an absolute necessity. It's just that we've grown so used to our comfort blanket that we cant conceive of being without it. Maybe we should just step back for a moment and think about what EVE would be like without instant, reliable system-wide intel. You see a lot of people complaining that one system is much like another, space is all the same, etc etc. What if the size and layout of a system really mattered? What if different classes of ships had different scanner characteristics? You could introduce variables like range, accuracy, sensitivity, re-scan frequency. You could also modify these variables according to fit. For instance, an active cloak should have a very strong penalty to scanner use; or perhaps even using the scanner would temporarily disable the cloak! Active ECCM should make one hard to scan, but it should also make your scanner less accurate. A sensor booster would work in the opposite fashion. What if using the scanner made you easier to scan? What if this varied by sensor type? (eg: using LADAR scanners makes you show up more easily to LADAR sensors, but makes no difference to Gravimetric sensors). If we think about the possibilities that dropping local as an omni-intel tool would offer us, I think that the inevitable conclusion would be that there would be a huge amount of actual gameplay potential added. Space would seem big again. Scouting would be more than keeping an alt at a safespot; it would become a player-skill based profession. And I think that we'd get more and better fights, to be honest. These days, 0.0/lo-sec PvP is mostly about evading fights until you can hotdrop the enemy with 3x their numbers. It has become stale and it's time for a shakeup. Engaging the enemy without perfect intel would be risky, it would be exciting, it would be fun. Incidentally, I think local in empire should remain more or less as it is. 1. do u know why ppl need that reliable, instant, intel system that shouldn't require ppl to be an alliance tool to access? it's the only defense that the target has, with the mechanics heavily favoring the attackers and in numbers. 2. why would u only propose changes to scanning to "compensate" for this? r u telling us that pvp is actually getting those fights rather than the fight itself? that that's what it all boils down to? to blob up, catch your enemy and ez kill to pad your killboard? guess what? not everyone hides behind a blob like u do and that's why they shouldn't be forced to. what u're really pushing forward is not more and better fights--it's more ez ganks. getting a fight isn't pvp--it's cat and mouse and your proposal will only encourage more of the "evading fights" that u * about. not to mention, u want to make all covert ops frigates useless for the sole purpose of this as well. 3. let's see, what would it be like without local? blobs, blobs, and...more blobs outblobbing small gangs? in case u haven't noticed, u're forgetting (most likely, on purpose) one factor--the players' behavior. your problem is for some stupid reason, u're convinced with this "sunshine and rainbows" notion that the whole eve playerbase is perfect and "honorable", that they would gladly and "honorably" fight a duel or an even an even-number gang skirmish, that they would never in good conscience, blob anything that they would not take even one loss from and run from every other situation. this might come as a surprise for u but...it doesn't work that way. either wake up and get back to (virtual) reality or keep dreaming and idealizing all u like--it certainly ain't gonna change the players, except hinder pvp or even simply setting foot in low sec/0.0, which goes against ccp's stated goals. --- LOLOLOL If anything, lvl4s require LESS effort then Mining!... At least in mining you have to check every 4 minutes to move the ore to the can. You're an idiot. - Jerid Verges
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2010.05.01 18:19:00 - [62] Originally by: Anna Lifera r u telling us that pvp is actually getting those fights rather than the fight itself? In terms of time and effort, this is by far the most significant part of PvP.
Santiago Fahahrri Galactic Geographic	Posted - 2010.05.01 22:31:00 - [63] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Anna Lifera r u telling us that pvp is actually getting those fights rather than the fight itself? In terms of time and effort, this is by far the most significant part of PvP. Yup. PvP starts way before the first target lock is established.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue MeatSausage EXPRESS	Posted - 2010.05.01 22:43:00 - [64] Originally by: Malcanis Originally by: Sellmewarez Originally by: Malcanis Edited by: Malcanis on 01/05/2010 10:11:15 If we think about the possibilities that dropping local as an omni-intel tool would offer us, I think that the inevitable conclusion would be that there would be a huge amount of actual gameplay potential added. Space would seem big again. Scouting would be more than keeping an alt at a safespot; it would become a player-skill based profession. And I think that we'd get more and better fights, to be honest. These days, 0.0/lo-sec PvP is mostly about evading fights until you can hotdrop the enemy with 3x their numbers. It has become stale and it's time for a shakeup. Engaging the enemy without perfect intel would be risky, it would be exciting, it would be fun. Then it would just make metagaming even more important in 0.0 if there wasn't a game design mechanic for intel. 1. Login spy, join enemy fleet. 2. Analyse fleet numbers and makeup. 3. Relay it to your superiors and organize a counter blob. 4. ????? 5. Profit! How is this different to what happens now? I was going to post this, but Mal beat me to it lol. - 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.
NightmareX Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.05.01 23:47:00 - [65] Edited by: NightmareX on 01/05/2010 23:48:44 As things are now in EVE, i wont support this. Don't even think about getting me to support this, as long there isn't a totally new type of local that works in a different way than the current Local is working. Removing local today will create 90457860989068450984 more problems for just fixing some small things that really isn't a big problem in EVE today. I can see the benefit of having local removed, but like i said, as things in EVE are today, i will say this with big letters: NOT SUPPORTED.
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.02 01:09:00 - [66] Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 02/05/2010 01:12:20 There needs to be a happy medium between the hunted and the hunter. Taking away local skews things too much in favor of the hunter. If removing local is the only change made then it allows the hunter to scan and probe when and as leasurely as he pleases, while someone doing any PVE activity will have to do it ALL THE TIME he is out. And making Eve a game about spamming a button in order to not get ganked is just wrong. And no, having a bigger blob isn't the solution either. This plan needs to be complete. It can't be some half-worked-up plan that only favors the hunters and screws the hunted. It needs to be balanced before we even consider voting on it. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Orb Lati ANZAC ALLIANCE IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.05.02 02:43:00 - [67] If you were to remove local then the game needs to provide a intel tool to replace it, and unfortunately directional scan is not it. My thoughts on that matter is the core probe launcher would be the best tool for a replacement intel tool. Use the Core launcher to launch multiple probes within system that would detect any ship (cloked/visble) within its sphere radius. That information is then relayed back to your scanner window to display player and ship class (frig/cruiser/BC/BS/Capital). Provide a limited active time same with standard probes so they have to be refreshed every 1-2 hours. That opinion would be a good solution, as it would give active pilots the tools to protect them selves, and provide a bane to the macro ratters. And as an added benefit would provide a limited tool for the detection of cloaked ships but not the ability of precisely locating them. IE cloaky ship not moving out of range of a 0.25 au probe is less of a threat that one popping between multiple probe locations. My final thought would be to provide a rank 1/2 skill for this new probe system so you could limit the amount of probes in space, and possibly use the other supporting probe skills to define the extent of information you receive back. A quick supplement to this would be also allow the ship scanner (30 sec delay might need to be reduced?) to be able to do a "ping" to see if there is anything within your immediate vicinity as a counter to cloaked dictors etc as the major impact of a probe based intel system is a massive buff to the tactic of a cloaked dictor on gate. "We worship Strength because it is through strength that all other values are made possible"
RuleoftheBone The Littlest Hobos Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2010.05.02 12:13:00 - [68] Supported. W-space proved the concept.
Anna Lifera Gallente Imperial Legion of Amarr	Posted - 2010.05.02 15:28:00 - [69] Originally by: Malcanis In terms of time and effort, this is by far the most significant part of PvP. and u wonder why ppl evade so many fights, making u have to roam 99% of your time... it's 'cause before it "starts", everyone knows the other side will stack so many odds (fleet size) against them. honestly, do u think ppl will just fly blind, right into a bubble blob? no, they won't. they'll just avoid 0.0 altogether, leaving u with nothing to ez gank. and if u actually thought they would, then i grossly overestimated u, 'cause here's a tip: other players r not mindless rats with names... --- LOLOLOL If anything, lvl4s require LESS effort then Mining!... At least in mining you have to check every 4 minutes to move the ore to the can. You're an idiot. - Jerid Verges
Mynxee Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.05.02 15:42:00 - [70] Originally by: Orb Lati My thoughts on that matter is the core probe launcher would be the best tool for a replacement intel tool. I'm a fan of delayed Local, since I believe that nothing about gathering intel should be easy. Not a fan of EVE played in Lazy Mode. Intel is a vital resource and you should have to work to get it. However, I support Bell's proposal only with a caveat that something better replaces the current d-scanner. Orb Lati's ideas earlier in this thread about adapting current probe mechanics are appealing. Perhaps with deep safes being nerfed, deep space probes could be given an intel gathering capability. Even though I adore my cov ops ships, I like the idea of a probe that can report info about cloaky ships. But only how many are within range of the probe, not their type or location. Just a count. Any such probe should be short-range and require a special skill to use. Forcing trade-offs and difficult choices about what to train is something I favor. Life In Low Sec
The Grouch FinFleet IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.05.03 07:53:00 - [71] Delayed local has a couple problems. . . OK actually its got a lot of problems. However I do like the idea so long as we decide to take it a step further. Here's just a "Spattering" of ideas: Increase belt sizes to over 750km. Rat spawn locations and ore regeneration talored to fit of course. Provide beacons for the 0km point of the belt, then leave others to explore +750km in each direction. ^^^Implement a reduction of visual on-grid distancing. Maybe back to 250km. This allows the hunted to "hide" in the belts and do their work, whether it be ratting or mining. I think that if you incorporate this sort of stuff in, PLUS keep in the deepsafes (WHY THE **** ARE YOU GETTING RID OF THAT BTW JESUS), and you might be getting closer to local removal, especially in 0.0 space. However, 0.0 SOVERIEGN space should get insta-local, because after all, its their space.
Deja Thoris Invicta. Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2010.05.03 11:54:00 - [72] Originally by: RuleoftheBone Supported. W-space proved the concept. No it didnt. W space has many unique differences that make it a totally different kettle of fish. Not least of which are spawning in jump range and the restirctions on numbers. You are misinformed if you think they are comparable.
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.03 13:52:00 - [73] Originally by: RuleoftheBone Supported. W-space proved the concept. W-space proved that no local works in W-space. That's it. The mechanics between K-space and W-space are different and the "success" (or lack thereof) in K-space can and will vary. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2010.05.03 17:39:00 - [74] Edited by: Razin on 03/05/2010 17:42:02 Supported. The game would need a better D-scanner though. ...
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.05.03 19:27:00 - [75] Edited by: Bagehi on 03/05/2010 19:28:22 This would make PVP roams (in their current form) take way too long. I can't imagine waiting at gates for scouts to search every system for something to kill. Waiting for scouts to identify if players have safed up or are docked in the systems with someone in local is bad enough when you've been on a roam for a while. No local isn't the giant boost to PVP you are trying to make it out to be. Roams don't use voodoo to find which systems people are in, they use local. This signature is useless, but it is red.
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2010.05.03 20:15:00 - [76] Originally by: Bagehi Edited by: Bagehi on 03/05/2010 19:28:22 This would make PVP roams (in their current form) take way too long. I can't imagine waiting at gates for scouts to search every system for something to kill. Waiting for scouts to identify if players have safed up or are docked in the systems with someone in local is bad enough when you've been on a roam for a while. No local isn't the giant boost to PVP you are trying to make it out to be. Roams don't use voodoo to find which systems people are in, they use local. This it would just kill roaming not that is that great now. What should be done is to increase income from belts/anoms + make harder to warp to safe.
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.05.03 21:27:00 - [77] I think we should seriously discuss proposal of adding/changing several 0.0 regions with no local, with minor to no scanner improvements. Then when scanner is redesigned significantly and the performance of new 0.0 is evaluated, further discussion should take place on converting all of 0.0 to no local. This would be a more reasonable request than the current "all or nothing" approach Maybe call the new no local regions as -1, and since they should be richer than other 0.0, have all systems there be -1 true sec
Orree Dynaverse Corporation Sodalitas XX	Posted - 2010.05.03 23:13:00 - [78] Originally by: Deja Thoris Edited by: Deja Thoris on 28/04/2010 23:26:12 I don't support this. In its current incarnation eve isnt reaady for it. It works in wormholes since there are limited and hard to find entries and exits. With a proposal like this with eve in its current form it would just be local full of cloaky ***gots screaming "boom headshot!!!" every time someone enters local because the game offers no intel tools other than a half baked directional scanner. Edit: Where the heck is the thumb down!? While I'm not opposed to the greater concept of "no local" in 0.0 or low sec, I agree with Deja on this. :thumbsdown: ---------- "How much easier it is to be critical than to be correct." ---Benjamin Disraeli
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.05.03 23:32:00 - [79] Originally by: Orree Originally by: Deja Thoris Edited by: Deja Thoris on 28/04/2010 23:26:12 I don't support this. In its current incarnation eve isnt reaady for it. It works in wormholes since there are limited and hard to find entries and exits. With a proposal like this with eve in its current form it would just be local full of cloaky ***gots screaming "boom headshot!!!" every time someone enters local because the game offers no intel tools other than a half baked directional scanner. Edit: Where the heck is the thumb down!? While I'm not opposed to the greater concept of "no local" in 0.0 or low sec, I agree with Deja on this. :thumbsdown: OK lets separate the pussies from hardcore people with new regions. Nobody will force you into big scary no-local space, just don't let your fear get in the way of other people's fun
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.04 00:17:00 - [80] Originally by: Ephemeron OK lets separate the pussies from hardcore people with new regions. Nobody will force you into big scary no-local space, just don't let your fear get in the way of other people's fun Confirming that those wanting a balanced implementation are pussies. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.05.04 00:21:00 - [81] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: Ephemeron OK lets separate the pussies from hardcore people with new regions. Nobody will force you into big scary no-local space, just don't let your fear get in the way of other people's fun Confirming that those wanting a balanced implementation are pussies. Since when is refusal to change status-quo considered wanting a balanced implementation? that's like the Republicans on healthcare. My argument was against people who want to do nothing.
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.04 00:32:00 - [82] Originally by: Ephemeron Since when is refusal to change status-quo considered wanting a balanced implementation? that's like the Republicans on healthcare. My argument was against people who want to do nothing. Perhaps if you read Deja's post instead of spewing mindless and childish insults you'd have noticed he is actually FOR a change of the status quo. He even goes as far as suggesting AN IDEA, which you simply refute with "BAH, YUR A *****", instead of adding to it or being somewhat more open. A change like this NEEDS BALANCE, Whether you like it or not. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Ephemeron Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2010.05.04 01:20:00 - [83] Quote: Perhaps if you read Deja's post instead of spewing mindless and childish insults you'd have noticed he is actually FOR a change of the status quo. He even goes as far as suggesting AN IDEA, which you simply refute with "BAH, YUR A *****", instead of adding to it or being somewhat more open. A change like this NEEDS BALANCE, Whether you like it or not. I have read his post carefully again. I see no proposal for change. I only see a refusal for change. This is exactly the Republican defense strategy - deny everything, create an illusion of alternative plan, never show it to anyone, refuse to cooperate, stall. If you manage to come up with a balanced proposal that's not meant to be unattainable for hope of failure, I'll apologize for being too cynical.
Jish Ness	Posted - 2010.05.04 02:52:00 - [84] /signed
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.05.04 10:52:00 - [85] Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 04/05/2010 10:53:59 Originally by: Ephemeron This is exactly the Republican defense strategy - deny everything, create an illusion of alternative plan, never show it to anyone, refuse to cooperate, stall. It's funny that you keep bringing up "republicanism" to attack those that disagree with you. But think about it. Who are the ones wanting to play cowboy shooting everyone without regards to anyone else or without balance? Who are the ones that are willing to make ** go their way without concern on what the majority of players think or without concern on how it might affect the overall health of the game? Who are the players that usually resort to insulting and demeaning someone for proposing an idea even remotely championing carebearism? You got. That's you. The real repuclicans of the game. You are the elite cowboys that don't give a ** about anyone else but yourselves. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Mynxee Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.05.04 11:07:00 - [86] Originally by: Bagehi No local isn't the giant boost to PVP you are trying to make it out to be. Roams don't use voodoo to find which systems people are in, they use local. As a compromise, perhaps there could be some kind of indicator of how many are in local, just a small number on the overview controls or something. At least then, you'd know if Local was empty and not worth effort to look for targets. Life In Low Sec
Naomi Knight Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2010.05.04 11:07:00 - [87] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 04/05/2010 10:53:59 Originally by: Ephemeron This is exactly the Republican defense strategy - deny everything, create an illusion of alternative plan, never show it to anyone, refuse to cooperate, stall. It's funny that you keep bringing up "republicanism" to attack those that disagree with you. But think about it. Who are the ones wanting to play cowboy shooting everyone without regards to anyone else or without balance? Who are the ones that are willing to make ** go their way without concern on what the majority of players think or without concern on how it might affect the overall health of the game? Who are the players that usually resort to insulting and demeaning someone for proposing an idea even remotely championing carebearism? You got. That's you. The real repuclicans of the game. You are the elite cowboys that don't give a ** about anyone else but yourselves. Spot on Matrix^^ Maybe the "elits" should stfu and go to wh space and stuck there if that is so good. Btw have you noticed that none of the supporters actually get their isk from belts/anoms in 0.0/low sec?
Nuts Nougat Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2010.05.04 11:24:00 - [88] Edited by: Nuts Nougat on 04/05/2010 11:24:03 Remove local, put d-scan on automatic mode i.e. autorefresh every 5 seconds if "auto" checkbox ticked. Also, scanner should not show ship type, only it's signature radius, so you never know if you're warping into a carrier, or just an mwding battleship. ---
Kiri Serrensun	Posted - 2010.05.04 14:16:00 - [89] To everyone supporting this "if the d-scanner is fixed", you do realise Bellum didn't include improvements to that in his proposal, right? That you're giving a thumbs-ups to the proposal of ditching Local with no d-scanner change?
Orree Dynaverse Corporation Sodalitas XX	Posted - 2010.05.04 18:08:00 - [90] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Orree While I'm not opposed to the greater concept of "no local" in 0.0 or low sec, I agree with Deja on this. :thumbsdown: OK lets separate the pussies from hardcore people with new regions. Nobody will force you into big scary no-local space, just don't let your fear get in the way of other people's fun LOL..yeah. Here's me FULL OF FEAR!!!!!111!!!1 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. Nice poo-flinging, though. That was impressive. ---------- "How much easier it is to be critical than to be correct." ---Benjamin Disraeli
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 àstupidity in this threadà 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? ThatÆs 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 ægoing softÆ when they donÆt 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 isnÆt the way to go. And if CCP ôisnÆt 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 .
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2010.05.07 16:52:00 - [121] Originally by: Bellum Eternus 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. Unfortunatly i have to agree with you.
NightmareX Dark-Rising IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.05.07 17:37:00 - [122] Originally by: JitaPriceChecker2 Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 07/05/2010 16:52:10 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 . And if there is lets say 500 enemies in one system, that you don't really know is there, but lets just say they are there. What do you do then without local?. Scan them all out and waste a whole day to later find out that they're about to leave local?. Yeah, no local is going to work good.
cadermerin	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:21:00 - [123] silly idea for lazy pvpers to get easier ganks
Bagehi Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Gentlemen's Club	Posted - 2010.05.07 18:41:00 - [124] Edited by: Bagehi on 07/05/2010 18:42:11 Originally by: Jag Kara 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. 1. Do you have any idea how many empty ships are sitting in POSs in most 0.0 systems? Scanning would not fix this unless you could tell if the ship was being piloted or not. 2. So you scan for other WHs in the system... sadly, today there was only one that remained that hadn't collapsed (and you collapsed it when you entered), try again tomorrow. Tomorrow, you find WHs, some come out in high sec (and some of your pilots can't fly there) one comes out on the opposite side of Eve from where you live. No, scanning doesn't solve this. This is why people rarely take roams through WHs. We've done it a few times, and have gotten some people stuck along the way. Originally by: Jag Kara 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. 1. Please read my comment again. My point is exactly that. No local decreases the multiplayer aspect because people would have to spread out a lot more to find targets to kill. 2. Stealth bomber gangs, black ops gangs, these would become the primary roaming gang. Few other PVP ships would be used as they would show up on scans and have to enter through gates that would have scouts watching. 3. You are missing the point. Because enemies can see your fleet moving towards them currently, they have a chance to pull together a defense fleet, so your fleet needs to be larger and more dedicated to actually wanting to flip sov or take a moon. Without local, fleets could reinforce random fixed structures to keep an enemy running around. Managing sov is unpleasant enough without having to deal with this. Originally by: Jag Kara 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. My Tengu can warp cloak, fly through bubbles, can't be scanned, and easily can kill ratters and miners. It is also more than capable ratting. The same could be said of all T3 ships. Basically, no local would make these ships 100x better than they already are. Noobs would hate 0.0 more than they already do because they wouldn't be able to find anything for PVP and would keep getting ganked by ships they have no way of defending against. The idea is to try to get more people to enter 0.0, not turn it into a good'ol'boys club for making fat isk. This signature is useless, but it is red.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [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.