EVE Search - Isn't it about time local was changed to delayed mode already ?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Isn't it about time local was changed to delayed mode already ?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

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

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Shawna Gray Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:27:00 - [91] Edited by: Shawna Gray on 15/08/2010 22:27:19 Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 22:19:43 Originally by: Shawna Gray Originally by: Gneeznow I'm sure it'll happen CCP always listen to their playerbase oh wait no they dont and it takes them years to fix even the smallest things. Its not like removing local in 0.0 has huge support. Akita is probably just trying to get some reactions. [sarcasm]Oh yeah, it doesn't have any support whatsoever indeed. That's why it's NOT on the list of issues raised by any of the CSMs to CCP, ever.[/sarcasm] U mad? Yes a few forum *****s does not mean a lot of support. Even on those proposals there are usually exceptions like keeping local if you got sov.
sentinel22uk Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:30:00 - [92] Originally by: Shawna Gray Originally by: sentinel22uk You enter a system and everybody immediately safes up/cloaks/docks, do you have any idea how much time and effort it takes to kill one person solo anymore ? Does it matter? 0.0 is hardly balanced around solopvp. Quote: A simple delayed local in null sec would solve every problem every person who wants to fight faces, and in turn would send prices of 0.0 gained materials sky high. IMO every person who lives in 0.0 to PvP would enjoy this, if you want to be in a safe heaven stay in highsec, don't come to 0.0 to mine arkonor and expect to be safe. You didnt think this through. Quote: EDIT: Plus people are talking about a delayed local making it impossible to rat in lowsec... Why ? Nobody would know you were there, they would only see your ship on D-scan ( within 14.4AU of course ). Its not much effort to scan through belts. Quote: If you want to reap the profits of 0.0 and the meager profits of lowsec, people should learn to live in these environments and adapt their techniques. For example, instead of using that big hefty dominix to kill belt rats, use a nano-fast align shield tanked battlecruiser/hac and warp as soon as you see anything on d-scan within 1-4 AU. Why bother when your empire alt can run missions, trade and do invention etc instead. The utter stupidity of spamming d-scan every 2 seconds is certainly more than enough to keep me away from any belts. Quote: If you get caught by a instalocking stealth bomber de-cloak, then fair game. Cloaks would be nerfed soon after local disappears. 0.0 is already more of a battleground than a place where you live. CCP is actually trying to encourage more characters to move out there, not less. You're completely contradicting yourself there Shawna
Shawna Gray Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:31:00 - [93] Originally by: sentinel22uk You're completely contradicting yourself there Shawna Explain please.
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:34:00 - [94] Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 15/08/2010 22:35:31 Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Gneeznow I'm sure it'll happen CCP always listen to their playerbase oh wait no they dont and it takes them years to fix even the smallest things. That's why this is not in assembly hall nor in features&ideas, because there's no point in trying to talk to CCP. It's obvious nothing will change anyway. I honestly don't know if you're purposely acting this way. NOT EVERY IDEA BEING SPOUTED OUT THERE IS GOOD FOR THE GAME. Just because there's a loud minority rallying behind some idea that happens to benefit their playstyle (surprise surprise ) means that CCP should automatically pass it. This isn't a game where ideas are passed through a democratic process (and thank God for this, really). Yes, CCP is kind enough to listen to its playerbase. That doesn't mean they have to ACCEPT all the stupid ideas being thrown out there. Let them think up a BALANCED solution into replacing local. Because in the end, you know what? I can almost guarantee you this won't be the free shooting-fish-in-the-barrel-change you think it's going to be. It really won't. CCP isn't stupid enough to shoot itself on the foot because of a loud obnoxious minority hell-bent in unbalancing the game to their benefit. I think they have proven this over and over again. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
sentinel22uk Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:36:00 - [95] I would but its way to much of an effort. And the locator agents is a bad bad bad idea, I like the thought of the delayed lowsec, delayed 0.0 with option of having a local installed via sov.
Sinister Dextor	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:38:00 - [96] Every single ship has a cloak fitted, everybody spams D scanner, everybody afraid to decloak, anybody that shows up on scan is obviously bait and surrounded by cloaky fleet, so on and so on. Would be dull and counter-productive.
sentinel22uk Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:41:00 - [97] Edited by: sentinel22uk on 15/08/2010 22:47:32 Every ship already has a cloak fitted ? At least now you can sneak up on them and get a kill ? In my view, wormhole pvp is a lot more fun than the warp click jump roams of 0.0. I have over 2000 kills on battleclinic, and 0.0 recently bored me to death, due to the mechanics of the game not allowing for any actual "fun" in roams or small gang PvP, however I still do enjoy the 254 man sniper hac pos fleet fights. Then even if you want to try do some small gang work and kill some ratters, its impossible, you can find them but they just cloak because they can see you in local like I stated in my earlier posts on this thread. I still find camping gates the most exhilarating thing about 0.0, at least when a wars not on of course ...
Schani Kratnorr x13 IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:43:00 - [98] Originally by: Akita T Isn't it about time local was changed to delayed mode already ? You know, like in w-space. Not just 0.0, but ALL of it. Radical and cruel ? Maybe. But very EVE-y. Waah waah AFK cloaker syndrome ? HTFU. But but but ? NO. If CCP were to change things it would, as you say, be a radical change. Such a change would likely change the ISK/hour generation of EVE, and as such would require a re-balance of the economy. In my view such a change would be very detrimental to the game. Not saying no, but I doubt CCP would be willing to dedicate the resources to implement.
Shawna Gray Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:43:00 - [99] Originally by: sentinel22uk Every ship already has a cloak fitted ? At least now you can sneak up on them and get a kill ? And thats why cloaks will be nerfed at the same time as local or soon after.
Sarina Berghil Minmatar New Zion Judge Advocate	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:47:00 - [100] I've personally lived/played in w-space permanent for 15 months, so I have some personal experience on the matter. I like the experience of active intel gathering. In the sense that if you want to know about movements, you have to do something for it. It encourages teamplay and adds extra tactical dimensions, most notably for covert ships. However I do believe that any reduction in intel will decrease the amount of pvp happening. It becomes much harder to attack targets that try to refuse battle. I think a delayed local, coupled with other forms of active methods for gathering of intelligence could be an interesting move in k-space. Counter-intelligence efforts could play an obvious role as well. I don't think the current game mechanics are ready for this yet. The scanning interface of probes and directional as the main methods of intel are too clumsy yet. Most notably these tools don't respond well to large amounts of traffic. (anyone trying to use directional in Jita would know what I mean)

sentinel22uk Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere	Posted - 2010.08.15 22:51:00 - [101] I wouldn't see anything this radical ever happening to the state of local anytime this decade though. Although I hear there was a time before highsec ( and local ? ) so I guess anything can happen.
Sky Marshal IMpAct Corp	Posted - 2010.08.15 23:04:00 - [102] Edited by: Sky Marshal on 15/08/2010 23:14:08 Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Sky Marshal Local is fine, period. Really ? Explain then how exactly is a backwater STEALTH assault supposed to be STEALTHY when the second you enter local everybody else knows you're there ? The only "solution" you have now is to BECOME one of the "annoyances" people call AFK cloaker. Yeah, it's fine allright. Fine like a baby's used diaper. Here's a "compromise" : ships with cloaks automatically cloak whenever they enter a system (as opposed to gate-cloak) AND they never show up in local even if they speak. Oh, you don't like that ? Then how about this other "compromise" : show EVERYBODY in local, INCLUDING logged-off people. Have cloaked and logged-off people display in an identical manner. And all predators will use cloacked ships if it is added ? Same effect than delayed local. The second "compromise" is just a way to pollute local and so reduce his usefulness, but this will still give the same effect than delayed local. For exemple, an alliance can just delegate to 20/30 alts, the obligation to log off in every system of the ennemy terrority to immobilize all his activities. Yeh, they can today but it need to keep the alt online, so it will be easier if your "compromise" is added. Remember one thing : People hate lose, but worse, people hate been mocked/humiliated (killboard). This is why it is hard to attract new players from High-Sec. The only thing that CCP can add, even if I don't really care so that why I consider Local is still fine, is that all ships coming from a COVERT Cynosural Field, should remain out of Local. This can permit some interesting tactics. Not more. But if you want some weird "compromises", I can give you one : Delayed Local is OK. Few Pos modules to compensate it, why not. But CCP has to create an option, unchecked by default, to permit killed players to hide their name on the killmail that the predator will get (only their name, not the Corp/Alliance). This option will not work if you are in a fleet battle. This way, even if people hate lose, the fact that they will be covered from killboard on few situations, will reduce the unattractiveness of a Delayed Local in null-secs, as dying frequently will not be too much a problem (so still good preys at any moment for the predator, instead of an exodus). After all, ISK can be managed, not killboards. _______ With the NGE, I'm sorry about the mistake we made. We screwed up and didn't listen to the fans when we should have. - John Smedley, CEO of Sony Online Entertainment
Pr1ncess Alia	Posted - 2010.08.15 23:16:00 - [103] Originally by: Shawna Gray Edited by: Shawna Gray on 15/08/2010 22:27:19 Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 22:19:43 Originally by: Shawna Gray Originally by: Gneeznow I'm sure it'll happen CCP always listen to their playerbase oh wait no they dont and it takes them years to fix even the smallest things. Its not like removing local in 0.0 has huge support. Akita is probably just trying to get some reactions. [sarcasm]Oh yeah, it doesn't have any support whatsoever indeed. That's why it's NOT on the list of issues raised by any of the CSMs to CCP, ever.[/sarcasm] U mad? Yes a few forum *****s does not mean a lot of support. Even on those proposals there are usually exceptions like keeping local if you got sov. looks like your sister Sasha got the looks AND the brains --- Players are losing faith and loyalty in CCP due previous expansions not living up to player expectations. The CSM and CCP agreed that expectation management can be improved
Admiral Pelleon White Shadow Imperium	Posted - 2010.08.15 23:23:00 - [104] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Admiral Pelleon Don't like this. Sucks for those of us in nullsec. We have to run a locator agent on an alt just to see if someone is online? More meta-gaming is not the way I want to see eve go. Add ability to remote-contact locator agents for an extra fee based on jumps to agent ? Now this isn't so bad... ________ Chicago players channel: 'Windy City' Originally by: CCP Navigator Confirming that I am the best poster.
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2010.08.15 23:44:00 - [105] Originally by: Schani Kratnorr If CCP were to change things it would, as you say, be a radical change. Such a change would likely change the ISK/hour generation of EVE, and as such would require a re-balance of the economy. In my view such a change would be very detrimental to the game. No, it would not "require a rebalance of the economy", it will rebalance itself eventually, it always does, it's only natural. The only difference will be in where the new equilibrium point settles. Also, you assume the new equilibrium point "the economy" will reach will somehow be worse than the one it's in now... I can only laugh at that. Lowsec mining barely better (and in some cases worse) than highsec mining ? 0.0 mining only a couple of times better than highsec mining ? "Mining with guns" more convenient than actual mining ? Really ? CAN something be worse than that ? Quite the contrary, if anything, it will be a slight trend back to the "golden days" of years ago, when 0.0 mining was actually far more valuable than highsec mining, because people willing to mine those ores needed for highend minerals there were few. I doubt it will go back QUITE to the profitability ratios of 4 years ago, though. Higher risk -> less people doing it -> better income for those that still choose to do it. Of course, if the same items (minerals) can be obtained in large enough quantities in risk-free ways (even if they are quite "grindy"), that defeats the purpose and breaks the just-described causal chain. _ Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper \| All about reacting _
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2010.08.15 23:51:00 - [106] Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 23:51:01 Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: Akita T It's obvious nothing will change anyway. I honestly don't know if you're purposely acting this way (trolling and baiting) or you really believe this. NOT EVERY IDEA BEING SPOUTED OUT THERE IS GOOD FOR THE GAME. Just because there's a loud minority rallying behind some idea that happens to benefit their playstyle (surprise surprise ) doesn't mean that CCP should automatically pass it. This isn't a game where ideas are passed through a democratic process (and thank God for this, really). Yes, CCP is kind enough to listen to its playerbase. That doesn't mean they have to ACCEPT all the stupid ideas being thrown out there. Right, because OVERWHELMING advantage for the defender is good for the game, right ? Because monolithic power blocs with huge financial strength and great manpower (held under control by the promise of financial security) is also oh-so-good for the game, right ? Because CCP never, ever stated that they want to make PvP and warfare in general more fluid and more attractive for smaller gangs ? And because CCP POSITIVELY LOVES huge blobs and node crashes so much they would NEVER EVER do anything to break'em down ? Quote: Let them think up a BALANCED solution into replacing local. Because in the end, you know what? I can almost guarantee you this won't be the free shooting-fish-in-the-barrel-change you think it's going to be. It really won't. CCP isn't stupid enough to shoot itself on the foot because of a loud obnoxious minority hell-bent in unbalancing the game to their benefit. I think they have proven this over and over again. So LET them think of a balanced solution then. Meanwhile, screw the balanced solution that will come two minutes after the end of the universe as we know it, and just throw the old junky situation into utter chaos by making local delayed NOW. Then whenever those "balances" are finally implemented, they'll be implemented. Meanwhile, we had some chaos and fun going on. Quote: The day CCP surrenders the game to the demands of a small loud vocal minority will be the day our game ceases to exist. What makes you think the people that want to KEEP local "as is" aren't the small vocal minority ? _ Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper \| All about reacting _
MatrixSkye Mk2 Minmatar	Posted - 2010.08.16 00:12:00 - [107] Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 16/08/2010 00:12:18 Originally by: Akita T So LET them think of a balanced solution then. Meanwhile, screw the balanced solution that will come two minutes after the end of the universe as we know it, and just throw the old junky situation into utter chaos by making local delayed NOW. Then whenever those "balances" are finally implemented, they'll be implemented. Meanwhile, we had some chaos and fun going on. Correction, YOU had some fun at the expense of everybody else's. But then again it's pretty clear this is about doing what YOU want, screw everyone else, amirite? And if you don't like powerblocs then come up with a solution to reduce the size of powerblocs. Changing local as is and without any consideration on how it will affect other aspects of the game WILL NOT BE THAT VIABLE SOLUTION. That is, if you're trully looking for a solution which I doubt . You've made it quite clear what you're looking for is to make the game more "fun" for you. Quote: What makes you think the people that want to KEEP local "as is" aren't the small vocal minority? The small vocal minority is the people wanting to have local changed without modifying and taking a look on how it will affect the rest of the game. The small vocal minority is the people yelling and screaming "CHANGE LOCAL NAO PLOX!1!" so they can have their fun at the expense of ruining the game because to them it isn't about balance. It's about what THEY want. You seem to fall in this category. Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today!
Ghoest	Posted - 2010.08.16 01:36:00 - [108] Looking over Acuras recent threads I think she is annoyed/bored with the game in general and trying to see if she can get the the general populace ranting for bad ideas just to see what happens. Wherever you went - Here you are.
Herzog Wolfhammer Gallente Aliastra	Posted - 2010.08.16 01:52:00 - [109] Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Originally by: Razin Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 And actually, it wouldn't make the predator easier to be killed. The stalker gets the advantage. The prey gets screwed. Yeah yeah, I know what you're going to say. The prey should always have predators defending it yadda yadda. In essence you demand the prey work twice/triple as hard as the predator. And even then, the predator has the advantage of making the decision on whether to engage or not to. To a point, isn't this how it should be in 0.0? Actually, if someone should be getting a slight advantage it should be the defender, not the attacker. But we're getting a bit off topic. Every time this topic is addressed, by the end of the thread, the conclusion that becomes obvious, reading all the pros and cons, is that both sides of the equation - offense and defense - are affected the same. Some will say it's impossible to offend, or defend, if local is delayed or removed, both are right and wrong at the same time. Right in that things will change, wrong in that it will be impossible. The impossible angle comes from a bit of laziness. They don't want to change. If the resistance to change is based on there being no benefit from it "so why bother changing", it's a valid argument. Chances are that as CCP appears to be supporting mechanics that favor small gang and small fleet engagements (their fix to lag perhaps?), this would be the source of the change.
Super Whopper I can Has Cheeseburger	Posted - 2010.08.16 02:15:00 - [110] I can't believe you guys are still responding to this thread. Let me explain Akita's motives. - Akita wants CCP to remove local in 0.0 so they kill whatever's keft of EVE, they're doing that anyway so why not help them a little? - Akita is a troll.

alittlebirdy	Posted - 2010.08.16 02:23:00 - [111] Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 16:25:22 Originally by: alittlebirdy Well seeing as wormholes do not use "delayed mode" but rather "recent speaker" you have no idea what you are talking about and should HTFU. Their is no delay last time I was in a WH, if you spoke, you showed up, if you were in their 23hours... and never spoke, you never showed. THAT is _called_ "delayed mode" by CCP. Try to create a channel and fiddle with the settings. Yep how could I forget that local = player made channel right, rofl. It is recent speaker. Delayed modes UPDATES the chan at most once every 5min, a WH never freaking updates.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2010.08.16 02:26:00 - [112] Originally by: alittlebirdy Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 16:25:22 Originally by: alittlebirdy Well seeing as wormholes do not use "delayed mode" but rather "recent speaker" you have no idea what you are talking about and should HTFU. Their is no delay last time I was in a WH, if you spoke, you showed up, if you were in their 23hours... and never spoke, you never showed. THAT is _called_ "delayed mode" by CCP. Try to create a channel and fiddle with the settings. Yep how could I forget that local = player made channel right, rofl. It is recent speaker. Delayed modes UPDATES the chan at most once every 5min, a WH never freaking updates. Perhaps we should take CCP's word for it over yours. CCP Zulu: Originally by: CCP Zulu "Local as an info tool: We want to put local in 0.0 as a delayed mode channel so only people who talk in the channel are shown. We are also looking at other alternatives but if we find nothing better this will be put in testing at least." ...
Ori Blake	Posted - 2010.08.16 02:43:00 - [113] Originally by: Super Whopper I can't believe you guys are still responding to this thread. Let me explain Akita's motives. - Akita wants CCP to remove local in 0.0 so they kill whatever's keft of EVE, they're doing that anyway so why not help them a little? - Akita is a troll. I think Akita wants delayed local as 0.0's version of Hulkageddon: as a device to get a lot of the miners and small corps out of the way to push up mineral prices. Because I can't see any real benefit to PvP from this change being pushed so abruptly, and I don't think it would destabilize the powerblocs as much as he thinks. It would though be win for traders as theoretically more people lose ships due to this, and less people in 0.0 mine the high-ends as barges there become harder to defend.
XIRUSPHERE Gallente THE DISC	Posted - 2010.08.16 02:48:00 - [114] +eleventy This kind of a change has a myriad of benefits and would make the game more challenging. CCP won't deal with bots and this would allow players to, currently there are a few ways to get at them but kill a few and they don't even come out to play when you're online . The AFK needs to be seriously removed from 0.0 as well, I have been privileged enough to see people invoke darwin by using supercaps for PVE and generally not paying attention but it's still not enough. If you are going to reap the rewards of null-sec and low-sec there needs to be more inherent risk. I can't understand peoples hostility towards the notion that you should pay attention if you are going to reap great benefits. IMHO it makes the game a hell of a lot more fun, I used to run lvl 5's in a carrier and you get used to clicking d-scan every few seconds or you get dead quick. It was always great fun and made an otherwise mundane activity into one that actually entertained me.
Pr1ncess Alia	Posted - 2010.08.16 03:10:00 - [115] Edited by: Pr1ncess Alia on 16/08/2010 03:11:13 Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 16/08/2010 00:12:18 Originally by: Akita T So LET them think of a balanced solution then. Meanwhile, screw the balanced solution that will come two minutes after the end of the universe as we know it, and just throw the old junky situation into utter chaos by making local delayed NOW. Then whenever those "balances" are finally implemented, they'll be implemented. Meanwhile, we had some chaos and fun going on. Correction, YOU had some fun at the expense of everybody else's. But then again it's pretty clear this is about doing what YOU want, screw everyone else, amirite? And if you don't like powerblocs then come up with a solution to reduce the size of powerblocs. Changing local as is and without any consideration on how it will affect other aspects of the game WILL NOT BE THAT VIABLE SOLUTION. That is, if you're trully looking for a solution which I doubt . You've made it quite clear what you're looking for is to make the game more "fun" for you. Quote: What makes you think the people that want to KEEP local "as is" aren't the small vocal minority? The small vocal minority is the people wanting to have local changed without modifying and taking a look on how it will affect the rest of the game. The small vocal minority is the people yelling and screaming "CHANGE LOCAL NAO PLOX!1!" so they can have their fun at the expense of ruining the game because to them it isn't about balance. It's about what THEY want. You seem to fall in this category. hmmm... MatrixSkyeMarkloser hates PL because some macros get killed MatrixSkymkderp hates local change because macros won't be able to poll local and autowarp/cloak why does MatrixSkyman hate eve? Why is he always trying to defend macros? You're everything that is wrong with eve. Stop trolling and slandering good people with ideas. --- Players are losing faith and loyalty in CCP due previous expansions not living up to player expectations. The CSM and CCP agreed that expectation management can be improved
Thorian Baalnorn	Posted - 2010.08.16 04:58:00 - [116] Edited by: Thorian Baalnorn on 16/08/2010 04:58:20 After reading most of the replies here i came to the realization that many dont get the full concept of what altering local in known space would do. The changes would have a butterfly effect on everything in eve. If this local thing happens enjoy paying 150%-$250 on all your pvp gear and losing it a lot more often. Here is why: 1) carebears - you know those guys that mine and build stuff so you can pew pew are going to get annoyed cause they cant carebear without a fleet anymore and quit. lets say 25% of carebears quit playing because they are getting screwed over in this deal. 2) Logistics- the logistical nightmare of getting materials and finished products around is going to raise prices. 3) gang friendly- People will solo even less than they do now. Even carebears, the ones that are left, will have escorts. BRs will be the new flavor of the day for hauling.... everywhere. Cloaky ships will be the new flavor of the day for general moving around unless your pew pewing. Good luck scanning those down. Belt ratting is already nearly non existent in low sec compared to 0.0. Sure bored pvpers will kill a few rats here and there for sec stat. But overall there isnt a lot of belt ratting going on in low sec nor mining. Not unless they are doing in pipes cause they sure dont do much of it out of pipes. 0.0 belt ratting might yield a bit better results but considering they have POSes, SSes, intel channel( though less useful now) and they know where all their mates are its not going to be as easy as you think it is. Removing local or delaying it is a bad idea. It will screw this game up.The prices of goods from POS fuel, to ore, to T2 mods and ships are going to go up. Carebears are going to emoquit. less carebears + more effort to move goods = lower supply = higher demand= higher prices for everything. Enjoy your 300 mil plus T2 fitted HACs if this goes into effect.
Shawna Gray Gallente	Posted - 2010.08.16 05:26:00 - [117] Edited by: Shawna Gray on 16/08/2010 05:29:21 Originally by: Akita T Because monolithic power blocs with huge financial strength and great manpower (held under control by the promise of financial security) is also oh-so-good for the game, right ? Lol like thats going to change by removing local. Quote: Because CCP never, ever stated that they want to make PvP and warfare in general more fluid and more attractive for smaller gangs ? And because CCP POSITIVELY LOVES huge blobs and node crashes so much they would NEVER EVER do anything to break'em down ? Lol like thats going to change by removing local. Good troll.
Emperor Cheney Celebrity Sex Tape	Posted - 2010.08.16 05:49:00 - [118] Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 16/08/2010 05:54:36 Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 16/08/2010 05:51:07 Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn Edited by: Thorian Baalnorn on 16/08/2010 04:58:20 After reading most of the replies here i came to the realization that many dont get the full concept of what altering local in known space would do. The changes would have a butterfly effect on everything in eve. If this local thing happens enjoy paying 150%-$250 on all your pvp gear and losing it a lot more often. Here is why: 1) carebears - you know those guys that mine and build stuff so you can pew pew are going to get annoyed cause they cant carebear without a fleet anymore and quit. lets say 25% of carebears quit playing because they are getting screwed over in this deal. Considering the majority of carebears are in highsec, and the thread is clearly about nullsec, I stopped reading right there. Even that aside, in a dynamic game economy, talk about prices going up or down across the board don't mean much. No one is going to go into space poverty and need space welfare. Even if prices went out of control, PVP would happen in BC's and cruisers instead of battleships and HACs, maybe. And that's probably not even going to happen (unfortunately). Not the end of the world. If you aren't decced, and in highsec, it doesn't matter if local is delayed or not. And any good carebear knows how to get out of a dec. edit to add: "the guys who mine" are largely bots. They should die in greater numbers. "they guys who. . .build stuff" will, if this change leads to more destruction, get to build even more stuff.
JitaPriceChecker2	Posted - 2010.08.16 07:45:00 - [119] Theres plenty of carebears in w-space and they didnt quit the game yet. Suprising ?
Ghoest	Posted - 2010.08.16 08:08:00 - [120] Originally by: Super Whopper I can't believe you guys are still responding to this thread. Let me explain Akita's motives. - Akita wants CCP to remove local in 0.0 so they kill whatever's keft of EVE, they're doing that anyway so why not help them a little? - Akita is a troll. Its not surprising that people respond to a troll. Its surprising that so many people enthusiastically agree with her suggestion which is obviously meant to wreck EVE some more. Wherever you went - Here you are.



Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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