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) |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 12:59:00 -
[1]
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.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Ji Sama
Caldari Tash-Murkon Prime Industries manufacturing disaster
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:01:00 -
[2]
Troll detected 0/10
Also.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:01:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 13:02:38
And while you're at it, only show online/offline status of watchlist for people that have you in their contact//watch list. However, locator agents should also communicate online/offline status for anybody
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
sentinel22uk
Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:08:00 -
[4]
+1
|
Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:10:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Akita T
Radical and cruel ? Maybe. But very EVE-y. Waah waah AFK cloaker syndrome ? HTFU. But but but ? NO.
I think you pretty much summed up the potential future discussions of this issue right here. No point discussing about it now I guess.
|
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:13:00 -
[6]
No delayed mode, just a complete removal. It's far too depended upon by bad pirates and carebears.
Don't really see the sense in locator agents telling you if someone is online or not because you can just add them to friends, and monitor their logging in and out, but maybe after a high enough standing locator agents could tell you the last ship someone was spotted in.
My deepest sympathies. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
TheLordofAllandNothing
Caldari GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:14:00 -
[7]
Supportin 'dis
|
Arous Drephius
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:15:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 13:06:52
And while you're at it, only show online/offline status of watchlist for people that have you in their contact list with positive standings. However, locator agents should also communicate online/offline status for anybody (alongside location)
This, coupled with a new corp "Intel" tab that automatically gets results from any locator agent and displays them for the whole corp to see.
|
Atticus Fynch
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:15:00 -
[9]
/signed
I also like Prof T's idea.
|
Eternum Praetorian
True Creation
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:15:00 -
[10]
Yes. Do it.
CCP DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!
Make 0.0 interesting again.
|
|
sentinel22uk
Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:16:00 -
[11]
Its the only way to make eve fun IMO.
Maybe it will teach people how to use the directional scanner ?
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 13:21:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Destination SkillQueue
Originally by: Akita T Radical and cruel ? Maybe. But very EVE-y. Waah waah AFK cloaker syndrome ? HTFU. But but but ? NO.
I think you pretty much summed up the potential future discussions of this issue right here.
I _KNOW_, right ? Aren't I just oh-so-thoughtful ?
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 14:05:00 -
[13]
Really dumb idea(but not new idea.)
The scan mechanics(both on board and probes) are too powerful/fast to make this reasonable.
If there was to be a massive nerf to scanning then I would be all for it.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Aralieus
Amarr The Inf1dels En Garde
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 14:16:00 -
[14]
me likey
|
Kronik2k
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 14:21:00 -
[15]
Nerfing probes would kill wormholes.
|
Signe Tesk
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 14:23:00 -
[16]
Obvious troll in need of an obvious answer. CCP said...
No.
|
Le Skunk
Low Sec Liberators
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 14:35:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Le Skunk on 15/08/2010 14:38:22
Im fed up of people posting game ideas in general discusions.
CCP have gone to a lot of time and effort to set up a mechanism wherby the players wishes can be communicated to them in a democratic manner.
1) Spend time formulating your idea and post it in the Assembly Hall area of the forums 2) There people will spend a lot of time debating the pros and cons, and a consensus may be hammered out. Supports for the final idea will lead to: 3) The CSM - a selection of people who donate their time and are voted in by the playerbase (after thoughtful consideration of their policys) in a months long election campaign - will further debat the issues in a more ofrmal manner - and if supported the idea will be passed onto ccp when: 4) The CSM members will fly accross the world for three days negotiation - and your idea will be either proved impossible to code, or accepted by ccp as a measure they will implement
Then your idea will be speedily implemented by ccp, as the culmination of a lot of time and effort put in by the player base. CCP have gone to great lengths to publicise this process with many major news outlets (New York Times and the BBC to name a few) as a demonstration of how much they back this system.
Why you feel this process is lacking and need to post in general discusion - i will never know.
SKUNK (o)
|
Ressiv
Cooperative Freelance Navigators Association
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 14:36:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Ressiv on 15/08/2010 14:38:38
Originally by: Ghoest
The scan mechanics(both on board and probes) are too powerful/fast to make this reasonable.
I dont get this statement ? How does scanning impact no local being present ?
Other then that, I like the idea .. tho it would make EVE a lot harder for a lot of people. This COULD result in less subscriptions.
It would make being a scout a lot more interesting and create a need for proper functioning intel channels. That would, imho, create the need for proper tools to do the job as well.
If I would have to rely on notes, my own private channel or other workarounds to keep track of people in system and stuff like that I'd go nuts.
Edit: reply to 'Im fed up of people posting game ideas in general discusions.' >> Look at this as: 'How much use is it to work it out in AH' and/or just ignore it perhaps ? It's GD .. you can't possibly try to say that posts like these are degrading the content of this forum part ========================== Nothing is true, everything is permitted. ========================== |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 14:47:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 14:54:22
Originally by: Le Skunk Why you feel this process is lacking and need to post in general discussion - I will never know.
CSM Meeting 2 Nov 2009... GEE, I WONDER... WHY ?
In other words, it has passed all of the above steps of the so-called process, this is AT MOST just a "hurry up already" thing. Remember "18 months" (now 17) ?
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
FlameGlow
Rebellion Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 14:48:00 -
[20]
So how are you supposed to know if enemies are coming? It is ok for w-space only because it doesn't see much traffic |
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 15:04:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 15:05:51
Originally by: FlameGlow So how are you supposed to know if enemies are coming ?
Gee, I don't know, how would you know your house/block/city/country is under attack in RL ? Might I suggest that maybe in EVE it could be answered with "directional scanner and the cries for help in the intel channel" ? That, plus, oh, you know, MAYBE system scanners ?
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 15:30:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Razin on 15/08/2010 15:31:49
Originally by: Signe Tesk Obvious troll in need of an obvious answer. CCP said...
No.
Do quote CCP on this issue (with a link). ...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 15:42:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Razin on 15/08/2010 15:43:11
Originally by: Ressiv Edited by: Ressiv on 15/08/2010 14:38:38
Originally by: Ghoest
The scan mechanics(both on board and probes) are too powerful/fast to make this reasonable.
I dont get this statement ? How does scanning impact no local being present ?
I didn't get that either. Unless it was sarcasm.
Originally by: Ressiv Other then that, I like the idea .. tho it would make EVE a lot harder for a lot of people. This COULD result in less subscriptions.
It may result in some initial rage quits; however, as with gate camping, suicide ganking, speed nerf, WTZ, etc. people will get used to it and continue on.
Originally by: Ressiv It would make being a scout a lot more interesting and create a need for proper functioning intel channels. That would, imho, create the need for proper tools to do the job as well.
If I would have to rely on notes, my own private channel or other workarounds to keep track of people in system and stuff like that I'd go nuts.
I don't see a difference with what we have currently except that a dedicated scout would now be required, rather than just someone parked in a POS or ratting. You'd still have a record in the intel channel, what more could you ask for? Or did you mean blues? ...
|
Rakshasa Taisab
Caldari Sane Industries Inc. Initiative Mercenaries
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 15:46:00 -
[24]
I hear 10.000 players continuously running directional scan macros make good server performance.
C/D?
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:02:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab I hear 10.000 players continuously running directional scan macros make good server performance.
C/D?
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."
"Local: I'm hoping we'll have something done to local in 0.0 in q1 next year."
"Timeframe for local changes: I'd like to see it q1 next year but I can't really promise it. I'll do everything I can to make it happen though :)"
"Local changes: Yeah, I actually thought that was so obvious that I didn't need to mention it. But yes, any changes to local will of course have to be hand-in-hand with changes to scanning mechanics. You must be able to somehow get quick-ish intel on the basic status of the system you're in."
I bolded the relevant quote, in case you have difficulties finding it. ...
|
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:04:00 -
[26]
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.
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.
But O ya, use the scanner limited to 14au, and it tells you pretty much, yes, ships are in 14au of you. Worthless unless you are solo. So YAY let's now use blobs for everything as safty in numbers...
|
Ressiv
Cooperative Freelance Navigators Association
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:06:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Razin I don't see a difference with what we have currently except that a dedicated scout would now be required, rather than just someone parked in a POS or ratting. You'd still have a record in the intel channel, what more could you ask for? Or did you mean blues?
Currently, half the intel is being dragged from local onto chat. That wont work anymore if local is gone.
You'd have to have eyes-on to be able to see who is where and link the name in chat, for all others present in system, you would only have ship type.
Serious intel would mean that you would have blues report their ship & shipname in intel, so you know which ones are not important on the d-scan.
This could use some game mechanics to ease that if local where to be removed.
For instance give the d-scan an option to ignore ships based on security status or something like that. (I didnt think much about this last line, just a probably bad example) ========================== Nothing is true, everything is permitted. ========================== |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:16:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Ressiv
Originally by: Razin I don't see a difference with what we have currently except that a dedicated scout would now be required, rather than just someone parked in a POS or ratting. You'd still have a record in the intel channel, what more could you ask for? Or did you mean blues?
Currently, half the intel is being dragged from local onto chat. That wont work anymore if local is gone.
You'd have to have eyes-on to be able to see who is where and link the name in chat, for all others present in system, you would only have ship type.
Serious intel would mean that you would have blues report their ship & shipname in intel, so you know which ones are not important on the d-scan.
This could use some game mechanics to ease that if local where to be removed.
For instance give the d-scan an option to ignore ships based on security status or something like that. (I didnt think much about this last line, just a probably bad example)
I see what you're saying. I agree that whatever the new scanning tools/local, some standings-based discrimination would be required.
As for intel reporting, you'd pretty much have to have a scout on a gate. Maybe a new mechanic could be added to be able to drag from the overview to result in full info (ship/pilot/system). ...
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:18:00 -
[29]
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.
Originally by: Ressiv Currently, half the intel is being dragged from local onto chat. That wont work anymore if local is gone. You'd have to have eyes-on to be able to see who is where and link the name in chat, for all others present in system, you would only have ship type. Serious intel would mean that you would have blues report their ship & shipname in intel, so you know which ones are not important on the d-scan. This could use some game mechanics to ease that if local where to be removed.
Can be solved by not just showing pilot name on d-scan but also allowing to filter d-scan by standings to pilot. That, plus change max d-scan range to be different for each ship class Maybe make it depend on sensor resolution too ? Nice buff for certain ship classes.
Doesn't really matter HOW you do it, really, the possibilities are bound just by imagination primarily... and the damned codebase more harshly... but that should still leave quite a lot of options. What DOES matter is deciding that it is indeed "about damn time" to do it already. Apparently, it isn't.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
uNtOldPAIN
Minmatar Covert-Nexus
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:25:00 -
[30]
How about in low sec someone shows within max scan range in local. 0.0.. same as WH space.
|
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:26:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Ji Sama Fail troll Akita T detected -10/10
Also.
Fixed, nice aren't I?
Don't want local? Minimise it.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:28:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 16:28:51
Originally by: uNtOldPAIN How about in low sec someone shows within max scan range in local. 0.0.. same as WH space.
Or that too. Whenever somebody warps, an extra check is made, and he shows up in local for the pilots in a certain AU range from his destination.
Originally by: Super Whopper Don't want local? Minimise it.
Sure, give me a button that lets me minimize local for all other pilots in the system _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:48:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Super Whopper on 15/08/2010 16:50:16
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Super Whopper Don't want local? Minimise it.
Sure, give me a button that lets me minimize local for all other pilots in the system
The moment you give me all your stuffz is the moment you stop caring about local.
Alternative: Cry the river you're crying Build a bridge over the river Jump off said bridge ??? Profit for us.
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 16:58:00 -
[34]
It will be easier to catch macro ravens !!
Also w-space local is the best local ( lack of it actually ).
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 17:03:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Super Whopper The moment you give me all your stuffz is the moment you stop caring about local.
I only care academically anyway
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Urgg Boolean
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 17:04:00 -
[36]
It already is delayed. I look into local and clearly see a different occupancy than is really in the system at any given time (Low Sec), counting Gate Campers and Station dwellers repsectively. So maybe what you want is MORE delay...
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 17:05:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Urgg Boolean It already is delayed. I look into local and clearly see a different occupancy than is really in the system at any given time (Low Sec), counting Gate Campers and Station dwellers repsectively. So maybe what you want is MORE delay...
Har har. Yeah, sort of. In case you were not being sarcastic : "Delayed mode" means "only show up if you type something". _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Forsaken Wolf
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 17:26:00 -
[38]
I support this.
Finally, to be a cov-ops pilot and actually be covert!
|
Unity Love
Caldari Dissonance Corp The Spire Collective
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 17:38:00 -
[39]
Market pvp != real pvp akita.
|
Minchurra
Caldari Feudum Chalybis The Spire Collective
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 17:42:00 -
[40]
Eeh I'm a bit torn on this, intel channels are already notoriously inaccurate - Scalding ass used to conveniently miss 50+ fleets untill they were 3 jumps from KZF, I fear removing local altogether would only make them worse.
I'll just post what I always post in these threads which seems to be the most reasonable change:
The only change local needs (if any) is that ships that entered the system through a covert cyno shouldn't appear in local untill you enter the same grid as them. This would make black ops bridges much more useful.
Similarly if you are covops cloaked you shouldn't appear in local unless you choose to speak in it or deactivate your cloak.
|
|
Tribal Traditionalist
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 17:52:00 -
[41]
You can do this allready, just minimize the local window you fool
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:03:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Unity Love Market pvp != real pvp akita.
You are correct, market PvP can be stealthy any time you want it to be
Originally by: Tribal Traditionalist You can do this allready, just minimize the local window you fool
Har har, har, ANOTHER wiseguy wannabe. Can I do that to everybody ELSE'S window ? No.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Mike TheMiner
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:14:00 -
[43]
Damn, how long have all these people from wow been here ?
|
Apollo Gabriel
Domini Lex Talionis Etherium Cartel
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:16:00 -
[44]
A few weeks ago I suggested in Features and Ideas forum that Local be changed to be a list of who entered the system through a gate. So if you leave through a gate, you are deleted from the list. If you dock you haven't left, if you leave through a WH, then you are on the list, incorrectly, and you are not removed until you enter through another gate elsewhere. It allows BO ships to be sneaky, and I think makes WH to k-space more fun.
************************************************** * Don't let the Trolls keep you from your goals. * ************************************************** |
Herzog Wolfhammer
Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:18:00 -
[45]
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.
Forget it, Akita. The bot runners and 0.0 drone region hogs will play the poor carebear role to the max to make sure 0.0 never has delayed local. I have yet to see anyone defending local in 0.0 who was not exposed later on to be either someone who never goes into 0.0 or someone who spends a lot of time in 0.0, has a 5.0 security status, and is often found in systems that never have more than 5 ships in it in a 24 hour period yet hundreds of pirate and faction ships destroyed.
And when we get corralled into submitting that the directional scanning system needs to be improved if or when local is removed, it's the same people knowing they can adjust their bot programs easily to detect probes.
Guess we have to keep griefing them with cloaking devices. Nothing more fun than making bots auto-dock just by being there, and minutes later some babblers show up smack talking so bad that babelfish crashes trying to translate it, and they use 5 or six people with T2 and T3 trying to camp you into a station (lol - I never dock in 0.0).
After a few days of that, they are so skittish it actually becomes possible to hit radar sites, because every moment they spend trying to get rid of you is lost ISK.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:26:00 -
[46]
For the pin heads who dont understand why the current scanners + no local would be different than wormholes(like Accura).
Skilled players can find if anyone is in a system in a couple seconds and they can find and warp to them in under a minute.
It is not a viable nor fun play style to have to run the scanner every 10 seconds when you are plexing or ratting in 0.0 Its a mind numbingly repetitive action that would prety much define bad game design. Yet this is the only defense.
In Worm Holes its not so bad because players cant systematically go through them region by region.
If this were implemented it would completely destroy little draw is left to going 0.0 outside of a sovereign system.
What I said is obvious to everyone who actually thinks- including the devs. Thats why they have never removed local even though they would like too.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:29:00 -
[47]
Edited by: Ghoest on 15/08/2010 18:32:29 I personally would love to see delayed local.
IF they made it such that on board scanners could not read anyone - unless they were shown in local. And if scanning down players took maybe 3-4 times longer.
People asking for this are sort of like the stupid pirates who dont understand that they will get more kills on carebears is low sec was safer. You cant kill empty space.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:51:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer 0.0 drone region hogs
You seem to be angry about something here though I can't understand what. You're welcome to come and take the region away from us anytime you feel like it. What's the problem?
On the rest of your rant - I believe the problem is largely player apathy and fragmentation. I believe there are enough EVE players that want delayed local in 0.0 (at the least) to be able to create the same kind of pressure that forced CCP to start looking into other EVE problems. All it takes is to agree on some basic principles (like a requirement to scanning overhaul - something that's even been stated by CCP) and then present a united front in continuously pressing the point to CCP any time they decide to communicate. ...
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:55:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Unity Love Market pvp != real pvp akita.
You are correct, market PvP can be stealthy any time you want it to be
ànot to mention that market PvP can actually hurt people in a serious way. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Shawna Gray
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:57:00 -
[50]
Good idea. We need more bots and more empire alts for iskfarming.
|
|
flakeys
DRAMA Inc
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 18:59:00 -
[51]
Hell yeah get rid of it
|
Shigsy
Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:06:00 -
[52]
Just changing what it is currently to delayed would be dumb as hell.
Need to show unpiloted ships on scanner, or show local count still in local. Im fine with either.
If they just went and changed current system to delayed, would go make off grid safes at all belts and dump some ****ty tier 1 battleship/cruiser/whatever at each one and have fun as people try scan your ship down. _________________________________
|
Spurty
Caldari D00M. Northern Coalition.
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:08:00 -
[53]
6 months + 4 patches to correct the replacement first, then local can go the way of the 24km/s nano ships
Must also come with removal of jump bridges, titan jumps and cov ops cyno portals.
so, I approve this idea, only after we have a non-broken replacement in place.
I too have no sov and nothing to worry about losing to this, but I can at least appreciate the complete downfall and disaster this will be to space holding alliances.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:20:00 -
[54]
Fix on-board scanners. Fix probes. Add system scanners to all empire systems. Add system scanner blueprints for 0.0. Then remove local.
Until then removing local as is will just be tipping the balance in favor of opportunistic PVPers some more.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
sentinel22uk
Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:23:00 -
[55]
People are talking about how this would be negative for solo pvp ? Please how ?
Simply removing local would make it easier to kill and easier to *be* killed = a more fun eve.
+2
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:24:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 19:25:25
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Fix on-board scanners. Fix probes. Add system scanners to all empire systems. Add system scanner blueprints for 0.0. Then remove local. Until then removing local as is will just be tipping the balance in favor of opportunistic PVPers some more.
Originally by: Spurty 6 months + 4 patches to correct the replacement first, then local can go the way of the 24km/s nano ships Must also come with removal of jump bridges, titan jumps and cov ops cyno portals. so, I approve this idea, only after we have a non-broken replacement in place.
Yup, because fixing all of THAT (and making the rest of the improvements needed) will be an awesomely high priority unless CCP committed to making local "delayed mode" not SoonÖ but NowÖ... [/sarcasm]
Quote: I too have no sov and nothing to worry about losing to this, but I can at least appreciate the complete downfall and disaster this will be to space holding alliances.
Wasn't that sort of part of the idea ? [/rubs hands] Screwing up the stagnant 0.0 political landscape and a wild mad chase for land == FUN !
Originally by: sentinel22uk People are talking about how this would be negative for solo pvp ? Please how ? Simply removing local would make it easier to kill and easier to *be* killed = a more fun eve.
See ? He sort of gets it better than the rest of you waah-waah-ers !
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:31:00 -
[57]
Originally by: sentinel22uk People are talking about how this would be negative for solo pvp ? Please how ?
Simply removing local would make it easier to kill and easier to *be* killed = a more fun eve for me.
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. I could defnitely see how this would be more fun for you but not everyone.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:35:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 19:25:25
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Fix on-board scanners. Fix probes. Add system scanners to all empire systems. Add system scanner blueprints for 0.0. Then remove local. Until then removing local as is will just be tipping the balance in favor of opportunistic PVPers some more.
Yup, because fixing all of THAT (and making the rest of the improvements needed) will be an awesomely high priority unless CCP committed to making local "delayed mode" not SoonÖ but NowÖ... [/sarcasm]
No. Nowhere did I even come close in saying that. What I am saying is that *IF* local is to be removed CCP will need to ensure it is balanced and not tipping in a direction which only benefits a single playstyle. If changes will be made to local then changes will need to be made to the onboard scanner, probes, and others, whether you like it or not.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:37:00 -
[59]
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? ...
|
Shawna Gray
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:37:00 -
[60]
Originally by: sentinel22uk People are talking about how this would be negative for solo pvp ? Please how ? Simply removing local would make it easier to kill and easier to *be* killed = a more fun eve.
+2
It would make empire isk-generating alts even better than they already are. Especially for the ones that dont use bots.(In other words your targets go away). Your traveltime slows because of scanning.
|
|
ceaon
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:38:00 -
[61]
+1 to set local on delayed
Originally by: CCP Adida The male thread was locked because the discussion turned into transsexuals and man boobs.
|
Xiong Yoshi
Roving Guns Inc. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:40:00 -
[62]
It took me a long time to finally come out in support of delayed/removed Local.
No, I haven't decided to support it in reaction to any event, or sequence of events.... more because I believe that this change will add an entire layer of "mystery" to roaming or ratting.
I believe that it will make the experience slightly more intense - which is what EVE needs.
------------------------------------------------ There are only two types of ships: those which have blown up; and those which will.
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:42:00 -
[63]
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.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:42:00 -
[64]
high sec - local as we know it
low sec - delayed local
0.0 - local as system upgrade
fixed.
--- 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 |
Pesky LaRue
Minmatar The Magnificent Bastards
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:45:00 -
[65]
Edited by: Pesky LaRue on 15/08/2010 19:45:20
Originally by: ceaon +1 to set local on delayed
Agreed.
I'd be up for the stargates reporting transit (ie, either a number of people in local, or a notification that someone has entered/left, as this kind of fits within the RP scope of things), but I love the idea of not knowing WHO is in the system with you, unless they decide to say hi in local. .
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:48:00 -
[66]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Originally by: Razin 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.
IMO this is very pertinent to this issue.
Currently the 'defender' has an overwhelming advantage that allows certain escape. Delayed local would serve to balance this somewhat. ...
|
Cozmik R5
Minmatar Chaosstorm Corporation Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:49:00 -
[67]
+1mil for Local change.
Only problem: 18-24 months because of CCP's hard-headedness. ____________________
Try not. Do. Or do not. There is no try. |
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 19:52:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Originally by: Razin 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.
IMO this is very pertinent to this issue.
Currently the 'defender' has an overwhelming advantage that allows certain escape. Delayed local would serve to balance this somewhat.
See AFK cloakers. They pretty much already decide who, what, where, when, and how. If the cloaker says NO ENGAGEMENT then rest assured there will be no engagement. If cloaker says ENGAGEMENT, then ready or not here he comes. Period.
I wouldn't exactly call that a disadvantage. At all.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Ori Blake
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 20:07:00 -
[69]
1. Dscans don't show whether or not the target is a wartarget. Combine that with no local in hisec, and you'd make the defender unable to do things like mission or mine. The attacker would also have less abilty to just randomly find their wartargets: they'd have to spy and metagame just to get locations, or resort to camping pipes.
2.No local in lowsec would make ratting hard to impossible for smaller corps and soloists. Even larger corps simply wont have the presence for effective intel to cover all the gate to a non-dead end system.
3. Dscanning is annoying. It's useful short term, but to have to spam a button every 5 seconds to get informational data is a bad design mechanic.
4. This would also kill off small gang and solo PvP because without a local headcount, you'd have to assume that every solo ship is a bait ship. Even now they still might be, but with an accurate local count you can choose still to engage and risk it.
They'd have to deal with these issues and more before delayed local becomes viable in anywheres but 0.0.
|
Rowbin Hod
Cloak and Daggers Black Core Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 20:22:00 -
[70]
I think the main issue with a proposed change is that the people proposing/supporting this are imagining how the current landscape of lowsec/0.0 would be better with this change. They are probably imaging themselves launching a surprise attack on an unsuspecting lone traveller or miner. They are probably touching themselves while imaging this.
What they don't get is how this one change will fundamentally change the whole landscape of New Eden. People will flock back to Empire in their droves, logistics will be borked.
I'm not saying it would be a bad change, but I really don't think the people supporting this fully appreciate how much it will affect the game as a whole as oppsed to the little bit they're imagining.
|
|
Mire Stoude
The Undesirables
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 20:59:00 -
[71]
As long as we are talking about d-scan improvements, along with all the other obvious improvements, it needs to be made so that un-piloted ships CAN (as an option) be filtered out.
Also, if local is removed as an intel source, other free intel such as the information you can get from the star map (# of active ships, ships destroyed, NPC's destroyed, etc) should be removed as well.
|
Drykor
Minmatar Aperture Harmonics K162
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:02:00 -
[72]
Didn't read the rest of the thread. But yes, yes it is time. I would totally be around known space if we didn't have these carebear local dynamics.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:07:00 -
[73]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 15/08/2010 19:58:37
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 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.
IMO this is very pertinent to this issue.
Currently the 'defender' has an overwhelming advantage that allows certain escape. Delayed local would serve to balance this somewhat.
See AFK cloakers. They pretty much already decide who, what, where, when, and how. If the cloaker says NO ENGAGEMENT (ie, keeps his PVP flag "OFF") then rest assured there will be no engagement. If cloaker says ENGAGEMENT (ie, ticks his PVP flag "ON"), then ready or not here he comes. Period.
I wouldn't exactly call that a disadvantage. At all.
In all my time ratting in 0.0 I've never had this problem. If I did I expect I'd just move to a different system.
Cloakers are a special case, and probably would need some balancing if local wend delayed. Could be as little as limiting the d-scan range while cloaked, to as harsh as not able to scan or use probes and/or produce a scan signature while cloaked. ...
|
Jita Alt666
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:13:00 -
[74]
CCP Adida... ....come quick this is a duplicate thread.
Maybe you will notice in 18 months.
|
sentinel22uk
Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:14:00 -
[75]
But look what pvp has come to ?
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 ?
Pretty much 90% of every mod in eve is to aid defence and look at the lengths you have to go to get a simple fight.
Nobody engages anyone if the odds aren't stacked in their favour its simple common sense, this causes eve to be a very boring and long winded place.
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.
+3
|
Ben Derindar
Dirty Deeds Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:35:00 -
[76]
I love how the local argument always brings out the people who are so quick to tell others to HTFU when they whine for the game to be changed to suit themselves, but on the subject of local, dohohoho that's completely different.
Yeah, no. You don't like local, go live in a wormhole. Problem solved.
/Ben
|
Sergei Le'Poof
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:36:00 -
[77]
Right now with all the riff raff in local no one can really admire my magnificent hair. But with local in delayed, I will just "o/" and I will be the only one in local to admire.
Me likes. Delayed local now.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:40:00 -
[78]
Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 21:44:26
Originally by: Ben Derindar Yeah, no. You don't like local, go live in a wormhole. Problem solved.
You can have legitimate reasons to want 0.0 local put on delayed mode even if you never leave highsec yourself anymore. And while you're at it, you can also move L4 missions to lowsec.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:40:00 -
[79]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2
Originally by: sentinel22uk People are talking about how this would be negative for solo pvp ? Please how ?
Simply removing local would make it easier to kill and easier to *be* killed = a more fun eve for me.
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. I could defnitely see how this would be more fun for you but not everyone.
/thread
All people who want delayed local have no clue about how people will obviously react. They are too addicted to the "Adapt or die" expression, to realize that people will not play their game.
Local is fine, period. _______ 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 |
RippaSplitta
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:43:00 -
[80]
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 ?
delayed local:
You enter a system and nobody is there except moon mining POS or blob. You will put 0.0 at the same level of low sec.
|
|
sentinel22uk
Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:44:00 -
[81]
I do live in a wormhole :P
|
Opertone
Caldari Metalworks Majesta Empire
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:46:00 -
[82]
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.
Supporting in Akita T thread
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 21:49:00 -
[83]
Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 21:53:01
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.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Shawna Gray
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 22:01:00 -
[84]
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.
|
Gneeznow
Minmatar Ship spinners inc
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 22:06:00 -
[85]
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.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 22:07:00 -
[86]
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.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Shawna Gray
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 22:12:00 -
[87]
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.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 22:19:00 -
[88]
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]
Originally by: Akita T It's obvious nothing will change anyway.
Had to say it again. So yeah, you're kind of right with your second part though. _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Admiral Pelleon
White Shadow Imperium
|
Posted - 2010.08.15 22:19:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Akita T And while you're at it, only show online/offline status of watchlist for people that have you in their contact list with positive standingsHowever, locator agents should also communicate online/offline status for anybody (alongside location)
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. ________ 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 22:21:00 -
[90]
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 ?
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
|
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.
|
|
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 08:16:00 -
[121]
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. 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.
That all sounds pretty good to me. How soon can we get this done?
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 08:19:00 -
[122]
Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn 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.
No. There are plenty of industrialists to go around to replace them.
Quote: 2) Logistics 3) gang friendly
àso people will play smarter? And this is bad, is it?
Quote: Cloaky ships will be the new flavor of the day for general moving around unless your pew pewing.
So, same as usual.
Quote: 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.
Not really. Everything is as easy to produce as before, and done in the same places ù where carebears go and do their thing, nothing will change. Logistics changes are insignificant. Oh, and lower supply does not mean higher demand. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 08:24:00 -
[123]
Originally by: Ghoest
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.
1) Akita has a long history of posting some of the most thoughtful pieces on these boards. Calling him/her (statistically, him) a troll just belies your lack of effective argument.
2) Googling your username + "battleclinic," I do not think you know how to play this game very well, if at all, and consequently your ideas on what would make this game better or worse are hard to take seriously.
|
Mister Swift
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 08:37:00 -
[124]
+1.
Some ideas:
- Allow players to join/leave Local at will.
- Long range/Off grid: Ships, gates, stations etc. automatically and constantly passively scan for (pilotted) ships up to a max distance and at a specific interval dependant on sensor strength & signature radius.
Long range results only return approximate ship class (based on sig radius), unless both parties are set to positive standing, in which case it returns ship name, type and pilot name.
- Short range/On grid: Will return ship name, type and pilot name, regardless of standing.
- Ships, gates, stations share these results to anyone in system with positive standing.
This means:
- Blues in system will get full information of everyone entering through gates and on-grid with gates/stations/other blues. They will also get vague information of anyone in scanning range of above.
- Reds will only have full information of fleet/corp/friends, and vague information of anyone within scanning range of fleet/corp/friends.
- People who enter via wormholes or covert cyno won't appear on Local Intel unless picked up on scanner or seen on-grid by someone with positive standings to you.
- People who enter via cynos won't appear immediately on Local Intel unless some sort of scouting probe (upgrade) is sent to monitor the grid the cyno is on.
- Local Intel should be sortable by standings, corp, alliance, fleet and security status for pilots with known information. Unidentified ships should be able to be sorted by sig radius.
- Every time Local Intel refreshes and there is a difference in number of ships, show the current numbers as well as the difference in brackets.
- Perhaps have a disableable built-in transponder module that hides pilot name from gates and stations (but never players) when off. Disabling it while flying in high-sec could flag you as a criminal or some such.
|
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 08:43:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn ..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.
The mins come from highsec (missionrunning, beltmining) and w-space anyways.. your point is moot. Also, stuff has never been cheaper than now.
Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn 2) Logistics- the logistical nightmare of getting materials and finished products around is going to raise prices.
What has logistics to do with delayed local? If you move stuff you move it.. If I move stuff I don't care what's in the system. Make gatesafespots.. scan the gates before approaching and then MOVE. What do you need local for this?
Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn 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.
BRs are the FOTM for moving stuff around.. check numbers of sales if you don't believe me. Belt ratting in low is ****ty compared with lvl4 and the risk already there.. FUBAR is FUBAR.
Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn 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.
Carebears have no right in null/low sec.. Either you can take the heat or not.
Also the w-bears show that this works.. d-scan is a pain in the ass, but that's the case for BOTH sides.
Make it delayed, like w-space I say.
PS: Yes, I'm a BR-flyer with no real intentions for pvp (be it solo or in gang/blob..).
|
Mister Swift
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 08:45:00 -
[126]
Edited by: Mister Swift on 16/08/2010 08:46:11 Whoops, double post.
|
Vanakov Mek'lanavar
Phoenix Tribe Art of Defiance
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 08:54:00 -
[127]
yes plz. we need local delayed mode
|
Cailais
Amarr THE ORDAINED
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 09:27:00 -
[128]
I think if you removed local in null sec (or elsewhere) then pretty much every ship would use a cloak, and covert ops ships (recons, SBs, B Ops) would become the 'norm' - at least for Null Sec.
Null Sec is more densely populated than W Space - its probably not fair to compare the two in this instance, and traversing across Null Sec is a rather different experience to the slow plod of moving through the unpredictable nature of W Space.
On that basis I don't think removing local entirely would be a 'good thing'.
That said the use of 'covert' ships is hamstrung by the use of local as a immediate intel tool. Now you can look at this two ways. One, cloaks do just that "cloak" which is different to pure stealth and covert operations. On the other hand the naming conventions of ships like the 'Stealth' Bomber suggest that these ships aught to be able to operate in such a fashion.
My personal preference would be for localised areas (for example around asteroid belts) to act as "cover from view" - i.e whilst in proximity to say an asteroid belt you are removed from the local channel. This might allow cloaked ships and regular uncloaked ships to ambush or seek cover - only revealing the player when they warp to another location.
C.
the hydrostatic capsule blog
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 09:45:00 -
[129]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney 1) Akita has a long history of posting some of the most thoughtful pieces on these boards. Calling him/her (statistically, him) a troll just belies your lack of effective argument.
2) Googling your username + "battleclinic," I do not think you know how to play this game very well, if at all, and consequently your ideas on what would make this game better or worse are hard to take seriously.
While you're wasting your life away staring at killboards I have been reading the bitter tone of his posts.
|
Emperor Cheney
Celebrity Sex Tape
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 09:59:00 -
[130]
Yes, because I mentioned battleclinic, it stands to reason that I spend 16 hours a day, 7 days a week with my eyes glued to killboards. Good call, and an effective rebuttal.
Also, because you think someone is "bitter," therefore they are a "troll" and have no argument.
Here is how it is: Akita may or may not be bitter. I don't think he is, but whatever. Maybe Akita is bitter. And mad. And crying, right now. None of that detracts or adds to anyone's argument. He is putting forth an argument. All you are doing is going "TROLL TROLL I AIN'T LISTENING" (which, incidentally, does not lend credence to the idea that the other guy is the bitter one, for what it's worth).
|
|
Flibertygibbet
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 10:10:00 -
[131]
how about instead of local, just make everyones ship explode.
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 10:36:00 -
[132]
Edited by: Super Whopper on 16/08/2010 10:38:10
Originally by: Emperor Cheney Yes, because I mentioned battleclinic, it stands to reason that I spend 16 hours a day, 7 days a week with my eyes glued to killboards. Good call, and an effective rebuttal.
Also, because you think someone is "bitter," therefore they are a "troll" and have no argument.
Here is how it is: Akita may or may not be bitter. I don't think he is, but whatever. Maybe Akita is bitter. And mad. And crying, right now. None of that detracts or adds to anyone's argument. He is putting forth an argument. All you are doing is going "TROLL TROLL I AIN'T LISTENING" (which, incidentally, does not lend credence to the idea that the other guy is the bitter one, for what it's worth).
0/10 Raise your intelligence level before poasting whatever argument you're trying to put forth. And you want credence? Post something people care about, this horse was flogged to death years ago. It's obvious you haven't been playing long, or else you'd know this nonsensical argument has been discussed for years and years and you know what the conclusion is? That you fail and need to find something new to fight for because this proposal died long, long ago. But what hasn't died is Akita's trolling.
Originally by: Flibertygibbet how about instead of local, just make everyones ship explode.
Best proposal so far. Upon undock your ship goes boom.
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 11:28:00 -
[133]
Edited by: JitaPriceChecker2 on 16/08/2010 11:29:12
Originally by: Super Whopper
Originally by: Flibertygibbet how about instead of local, just make everyones ship explode.
Best proposal so far. Upon undock your ship goes boom.
Inteligent level of those repplies suggest ...
Upon undock YOUR characters should be automaticcly biomassed and your hard drives formatted.
0% of arguments , 100 % of trolling.
|
zaqq
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 11:46:00 -
[134]
just have all the players under a year old in one system, so this muppet can pod at will.
in a world so full of smart asses, why is the world goin to pot ? |
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 12:08:00 -
[135]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney 1) Akita has a long history of posting some of the most thoughtful pieces on these boards. Calling him/her (statistically, him) a troll just belies your lack of effective argument.
2) Googling your username + "battleclinic," I do not think you know how to play this game very well, if at all, and consequently your ideas on what would make this game better or worse are hard to take seriously.
Akita tends to predict doom and gloom scenarios that never come into frutition. He has been predicting the fall of Eve for a long time now. And yes, one day Eve will die (hopefully not any time soon). And Akita will take credit for it ("See? I told you so!"). He may have some good economic posts (I'd say they're rare), but he tends to stuff them with biased, inaccurate, useless and bitter comments, usually in the form of insults towards CCP, "CCP, U suck I can do this better than you!" attitude.
Akita is not the harmless econo-centric carebear he claims to be.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 12:19:00 -
[136]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Akita is not the harmless econo-centric carebear he claims to be.
Dun-duuun-duuuuuuuuuun !
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Frozean
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 12:30:00 -
[137]
How about remove 0.0 and low sec altogether.
If you want it any more emptier then what we have now, then we might as well remove everything, make pvp only coming from wardecs, and jita node upgraded to 2400.
|
Chr1st OnABike
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 12:38:00 -
[138]
No.
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 12:53:00 -
[139]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 16/08/2010 12:53:22
Originally by: Tres Farmer Carebears have no right in null/low sec.. Either you can take the heat or not.
Also the w-bears show that this works.. d-scan is a pain in the ass, but that's the case for BOTH sides.
Make it delayed, like w-space I say.
PS: Yes, I'm a BR-flyer with no real intentions for pvp (be it solo or in gang/blob..).
People who think that as some carebears can be found in W-Space, so delayed local can be applied to null-sec, only show how much they are stupid.
W-space != Null-sec, for obvious reasons. Well, not so obvious when you are an idiot who probably never go in null-sec nor w-space... I hate doing that, but no kills is recorded about you, so I doubt that you go at least one time in this sectors...
Also, think that carebears has no rights in null-sec is just funny to read. "Delayed Local" supporters want to get more kills, but in the same time, want do everything to make them leave all sectors where they can shoot them. It is a great contradiction.
Originally by: Tres Farmer What has logistics to do with delayed local? If you move stuff you move it.. If I move stuff I don't care what's in the system. Make gatesafespots.. scan the gates before approaching and then MOVE. What do you need local for this?
Maybe YOU don't care. Others probably will. To move our jumpfreigters, we take care of what we can find in Local. It is better to take care, than stupidly lose a ship who cost 4 Billions plus the Cargo. With Delayed Local, it will be difficult to move them efficiently.
So I can confirm, you are an idiot. _______ 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 |
heheheh
The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:10:00 -
[140]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
1) Akita has a long history of posting some of the most thoughtful pieces on these boards. Calling him/her (statistically, him) a troll just belies your lack of effective argument.
hahaha, obviously an alt to actually beleive that.
|
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:12:00 -
[141]
You know what's funny ?
That even after CCP themselves have stated they don't like the way the local channel is being used as an intel tool AND even after the motion for switching 0.0 local to "delayed mode" has passed CSM approval nearly a year ago, SOME people in here can still claim with a straight face that whoever wants 0.0 on delayed mode is "part of a small vocal minority" or that "CCP doesn't want that".
WRONG. CCP would like to put 0.0 on "delayed mode", and the majority of people want that too. It's just that "IT IS NOT A BIG PRIORITY" for the time being.
Of course, to make the transition, a lot of OTHER stuff would also be better if it was changed, to counter some of the (partially legitimate) concerns raised in here by some of the more logical-minded opponents of the idea of delayed local in 0.0, and that's why it needs to be a high-priority-thing first, before any of it can happen "safely". But it won't be a priority at all for the next year and a half, if not longer before it really becomes high-priority. And THAT is not allright with me, and that's why this thread exists.
The only part where you can even BEGIN to accuse me of "trolling" (it's actually a combination of hyperbole and sarcasm, but whatever) is the part where I half-jokingly suggest they should just do it without bothering to make any of the necessary adjustments and just let everything sort itself out however it might develop. You could say that is absurd, and that CCP would never ever do anything stupid like that... in that case, I can point a finger to several cases where CCP _has_ done something like that in spite of community warnings, and things ended up much closer to where the community predicted than where CCP said it hoped it would end up. So, you know, nothing new under the sun, people just adapt eventually no matter what situation. Some of you called me bitter - well, hells yeah, I am bitter... wouldn't YOU be ? Don't answer that, you'd either lie in general, or just lie to yourself, or maybe you don't have the necessary background to properly answer it.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Celestine Santora
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:15:00 -
[142]
I support this idea. A chat channel should NOT be the primary intel gathering tool in the game
|
Vexion Daran
Gallente Templars of Space AAA Citizens
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:17:00 -
[143]
Akita...you my favo whiner...you are...seeing you in most threads commenting against CCP...brings tears to my eyes.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:21:00 -
[144]
Originally by: Vexion Daran commenting against CCP
Another funny thing is that right now I am actually commenting IN FAVOUR of (at least part of) CCP, and only against those in CCP that decide "what's urgent now and what can wait".
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:21:00 -
[145]
Originally by: Akita T
You know what's funny ?
That even after CCP themselves have stated they don't like the way the local channel is being used as an intel tool AND even after the motion for switching 0.0 local to "delayed mode" has passed CSM approval nearly a year ago, SOME people in here can still claim with a straight face that whoever wants 0.0 on delayed mode is "part of a small vocal minority" or that "CCP doesn't want that".
WRONG. CCP would like to put 0.0 on "delayed mode", and the majority of people want that too. It's just that "IT IS NOT A BIG PRIORITY" for the time being.
Of course, to make the transition, a lot of OTHER stuff would also be better if it was changed, to counter some of the (partially legitimate) concerns raised in here by some of the more logical-minded opponents of the idea of delayed local in 0.0, and that's why it needs to be a high-priority-thing first, before any of it can happen "safely". But it won't be a priority at all for the next year and a half, if not longer before it really becomes high-priority. And THAT is not allright with me, and that's why this thread exists.
The only part where you can even BEGIN to accuse me of "trolling" (it's actually a combination of hyperbole and sarcasm, but whatever) is the part where I half-jokingly suggest they should just do it without bothering to make any of the necessary adjustments and just let everything sort itself out however it might develop. You could say that is absurd, and that CCP would never ever do anything stupid like that... in that case, I can point a finger to several cases where CCP _has_ done something like that in spite of community warnings, and things ended up much closer to where the community predicted than where CCP said it hoped it would end up. So, you know, nothing new under the sun, people just adapt eventually no matter what situation. Some of you called me bitter - well, hells yeah, I am bitter... wouldn't YOU be ? Don't answer that, you'd either lie in general, or just lie to yourself, or maybe you don't have the necessary background to properly answer it.
Again, the vocal minority is those of you stomping your feet crying that CCP should remove local without carefully analyzing how the change would affect Eve as a whole. A drastic change like this NEEDS balancing.
Local eventually will go. But it will be accompanied by changes necessary to keep the game somewhat balanced. Now, if you don't like the current direction of the game may I suggest you put your characters in an 18-month hiatus and return once things are more to your liking? Seriously, you're going to give yourself an aneurism.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Vexion Daran
Gallente Templars of Space AAA Citizens
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:22:00 -
[146]
Edited by: Vexion Daran on 16/08/2010 13:22:34 Akita -> What ever way you want it bud.
Matrix -> very good option.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:25:00 -
[147]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Local eventually will go.
Not soon enough.
Quote: the vocal minority is those of you stomping your feet crying that CCP should remove local without carefully analyzing how the change would affect Eve as a whole
In case you only skimmed the part about hyperbole and sarcasm, nobody was SERIOUSLY suggesting any of that. The only actual "suggestion" (if you can even call it that) is that they should hurry the hell up.
Quote: Seriously, you're going to give yourself an aneurysm.
The rage level is far below my usual average.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Vexion Daran
Gallente Templars of Space AAA Citizens
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:29:00 -
[148]
Taking meds against the rage?
next to that....why do people feel free to start telling CCP what to do even when not asked for an opinion. And next to that...you think CCP will take this whining seriously or you think that they will consider a serious post that is posted by someone that shows respect en next to telling what is wrong, also can give CCP a good option to work with....
hmmm.....hard choice i think.
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:33:00 -
[149]
Originally by: Vexion Daran why do people feel free to start telling CCP what to do even when not asked for an opinion.
It's a forum. Look it up. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Vexion Daran
Gallente Templars of Space AAA Citizens
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:34:00 -
[150]
Is that a wildcard for idiots to complain in or is it a way to communicate with the rest of the community and CCP?
|
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:36:00 -
[151]
Edited by: Tippia on 16/08/2010 13:36:34
Originally by: Vexion Daran Is that a wildcard for idiots to complain in or is it a way to communicate with the rest of the community and CCP?
"And", not "or".
And yes, it's a part of both, that's why people feel free to do it. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Vexion Daran
Gallente Templars of Space AAA Citizens
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 13:38:00 -
[152]
Guess that gives me a clue to what section you belong.
|
Misanth
Reaper Industries Asset Liberation Front.
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 14:30:00 -
[153]
The WH system is awsome. Wish it was all over EVE tbh, at the very least outside highsec. - I'd tell you why but then I'll have to kill you. And to kill you I'd have to log in. And to log in I'd have to stop browsing these forums. Both you and me knows that'll never happen. |
Yankunytjatjara
Amarr Blue Republic
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 14:34:00 -
[154]
Reading the thread I had an idea: a visual approach to the intel/scanning issue will make it harder on macros.
From reading the thread, some points come up: - nobody likes macros - most posters don't want to spam scan every second and it's bad for lag and carpal tunnel - most like having an intel tool most resent that it is local but for many it's better than nothing
I agree that local should go to delayed; I don't agree on forcing the change without a proper solution. An idea comes to mind that, imo, wouldn't be too hard to develop: integrating the ship scanner and the planetary map, like the probe interface.
- Get rid of the table scanner (a table, being software-friendly, is macro prone)
- Keep *all* the scanner info in the planetary map - visually!
- The server no more waits for scan requests
- Every second the server sends to clients the same info that you can now get through the scanner
- When you're looking on it, you'll see dots moving around the system in jumps of 1 sec (continuously if the client interpolates the data)
More options: - use the same filtering/coloring options that the overview (you don't want to clutter with your fleet) - even cooler would be to let go of the planetary mode map altogether and just make it the extreme level of zoom...
YES, this would make probing easier if you're probing something inside scan range, the prober would have a reference in planet mode around which to put the probes. HOWEVER, there is no actual new information available: from the ship scanner you can already get direction down to 5 degrees and distance. My idea of course does not provide a warpable spot! The accuracy of the spot position would be more or less the same you can get with the scanner's 5 degrees.
A visual approach makes it harder for bots. To balance the loss of immediate local, the 14AU limit can be tweaked. Personally, I would keep immediate local for ships moving through jumpgates (holder alliance only in 0.0; and not to FW enemies in highsec)
If this idea is liked I'll do a new proposal.
And don't forget the tactical overview option for solo/small gangs: Ship Velocity Vectors |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 14:45:00 -
[155]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Again, the vocal minority is those of you stomping your feet crying that CCP should remove local without carefully analyzing how the change would affect Eve as a whole. A drastic change like this NEEDS balancing.
Local eventually will go. But it will be accompanied by changes necessary to keep the game somewhat balanced.
Dude, do you even read what you are replying to?
Try and see how many of those presenting arguments for delayed local in this thread fit your description of a "vocal minority" above?
It's been stated time and again, by both CCP and most players who argue for delayed local, that it must be accompanied by several other required changes, such as changes to scanning mechanics (which would include the overhaul to d-scanner, cloaking re-balance, grid-view while docked, etc.) and whatever else that CCP deems necessary to keep things balanced. Yet you (who actually seem quite reasonable at times) and many others seem bent on completely overlooking this fact even after numerous responses to your posts.
It's just weird. ...
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 15:10:00 -
[156]
Edited by: Akita T on 16/08/2010 15:15:57
Originally by: Vexion Daran you think CCP will take this whining seriously or you think that they will consider a serious post that is posted by someone that shows respect
Which part of "it's already on CCP's to-do list, just not any time soon" do you have trouble comprehending ? CCP won't consider ANY kind of ANY INDIVIDUAL'S posts right now, they've already spoken about prioritizations, and this one is not anywhere near the top.
P.S. Also, you're a fool if you think total seriousness and showing the utmost respect for CCP (wtf?) is a must-have thing in posts that CCP should ever take seriously while auto-discarding all other. I'd say facts, numbers and logic are the only things that should ever matter. But you know, thing is, NEITHER matters much in the end, sadly.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Borun Tal
Minmatar Spacepods Inc
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 15:33:00 -
[157]
Originally by: Akita T
Isn't it about time local was changed to delayed mode already ?
No.
|
sentinel22uk
Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 15:48:00 -
[158]
If local was removed I can't see why people would be using cloaked ships for anything other than they are used now days for pvp....
Plus a cloaked ship has nothing on a 130k EHP typhoon...
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 16:05:00 -
[159]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 16/08/2010 16:05:45
Originally by: sentinel22uk If local was removed I can't see why people would be using cloaked ships for anything other than they are used now days for pvp....
Plus a cloaked ship has nothing on a 130k EHP typhoon...
All PVP ships today don't have a cloack. Why the point to get a cloack if you are showed in Local ? Apart if you are in a Covert to annoy residents, or in a Transport ships to travel with security.
But if Local is changed, you will be able to choice where you want stay, with any ship type you want, and never been displayed anywhere if you have a cloack. So a cloack will be mandatory to gank in every system any poor players who will rat there.
It is obvious, like many of the others consequences of a Local change if you add some compromises to avoid the situation I just wrote.
Indeed, whatever solutions would be found to compensate Local, it will have a bad counterpart. For exemple, the idea to have a POS module or anything who has to be anchored to get the old Local to blue players... It will have a cost like a Cyno Jammer or everything else, obviously, so only big alliances will be able to get it in the most part of his territory. This will add a big advantage to the defender against small gangs or solo predators who will not know easily if there is someone here. Also, depending of the implementation, for territory fight, the attacker can be blind... As the actual sovereignty system already didn't give advantage to the defender. In fact, if you want achieve a TOTAL immobility on 0.0 politic, you couldn't find a better idea than ask a delayed local.
Maybe the actual local system is not great, still it is the better one. _______ 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 |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 16:45:00 -
[160]
Edited by: Razin on 16/08/2010 16:46:06
Originally by: Sky Marshal
Indeed, whatever solutions would be found to compensate Local, it will have a bad counterpart. For exemple, the idea to have a POS module or anything who has to be anchored to get the old Local to blue players... It will have a cost like a Cyno Jammer or everything else, obviously, so only big alliances will be able to get it in the most part of his territory. This will add a big advantage to the defender against small gangs or solo predators who will not know easily if there is someone here. Also, depending of the implementation, for territory fight, the attacker can be blind... As the actual sovereignty system already didn't give advantage to the defender. In fact, if you want achieve a TOTAL immobility on 0.0 politic, you couldn't find a better idea than ask a delayed local.
Kind of a straw-man, no?
One of the major arguments in favor of delayed local is to decrease the overwhelming advantage this free intel gives to the defender. And here you come and propose that a POS module will provide this intel to the defenders exclusively. Where's the logic? The whole point is not to do it; and so no such situation will arise. ...
|
|
sentinel22uk
Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 16:54:00 -
[161]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 16/08/2010 16:05:45
Originally by: sentinel22uk If local was removed I can't see why people would be using cloaked ships for anything other than they are used now days for pvp....
Plus a cloaked ship has nothing on a 130k EHP typhoon...
All PVP ships today don't have a cloack. Why the point to get a cloack if you are showed in Local ? Apart if you are in a Covert to annoy residents, or in a Transport ships to travel with security.
But if Local is changed, you will be able to choice where you want stay, with any ship type you want, and never been displayed anywhere if you have a cloack. So a cloack will be mandatory to gank in every system any poor players who will rat there.
It is obvious, like many of the others consequences of a Local change if you add some compromises to avoid the situation I just wrote.
Indeed, whatever solutions would be found to compensate Local, it will have a bad counterpart. For exemple, the idea to have a POS module or anything who has to be anchored to get the old Local to blue players... It will have a cost like a Cyno Jammer or everything else, obviously, so only big alliances will be able to get it in the most part of his territory. This will add a big advantage to the defender against small gangs or solo predators who will not know easily if there is someone here. Also, depending of the implementation, for territory fight, the attacker can be blind... As the actual sovereignty system already didn't give advantage to the defender. In fact, if you want achieve a TOTAL immobility on 0.0 politic, you couldn't find a better idea than ask a delayed local.
Maybe the actual local system is not great, still it is the better one.
True, it would become almost impossible to rat.
But then maybe ccp could introduce much higher rewards for 0.0 rats, bountys, more faction, due to the higher risk.
IMO it would make 0.0 a much more funner place than it is at the moment.
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 17:00:00 -
[162]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 16/08/2010 17:02:11
Originally by: Razin Kind of a straw-man, no?
One of the major arguments in favor of delayed local is to decrease the overwhelming advantage this free intel gives to the defender. And here you come and propose that a POS module will provide this intel to the defenders exclusively. Where's the logic? The whole point is not to do it; and so no such situation will arise.
Did you read this topic ? One of the others arguments you can find in favor of delaying local, is that it should be done if CCP make a good compromise (new intel tool or better scanner or whatever).
If you don't want a compromise, I hope you don't seriously expect that players will accept a situation where the predator is the ONLY one who has an advantage ? Kind of a straw-man, no ?
But I explained that any compromise will get a bad counterpart who will probably give more problems than the actual system. This is why Local should remain like it is today. _______ 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 |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 17:00:00 -
[163]
Originally by: sentinel22uk
True, it would become almost impossible to rat.
But then maybe ccp could introduce much higher rewards for 0.0 rats, bountys, more faction, due to the higher risk.
Or, CCP could balance the cloaks for delayed local. Cloaks could be nefed without losing their role-specific qualities. ...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 17:05:00 -
[164]
Edited by: Razin on 16/08/2010 17:05:55
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 16/08/2010 17:00:26
Originally by: Razin Kind of a straw-man, no?
One of the major arguments in favor of delayed local is to decrease the overwhelming advantage this free intel gives to the defender. And here you come and propose that a POS module will provide this intel to the defenders exclusively. Where's the logic? The whole point is not to do it; and so no such situation will arise.
Did you read this topic ? One of the others arguments you can find in favor of delaying local, is that it should be done if CCP make a good compromise (new intel tool or better scanner or whatever).
If you don't want a compromise, I hope you don't seriously expect that players will accept a situation where the predator is the ONLY one who has an advantage ? Kind of a straw-man, no ?
But I explained that any compromise will get a bad counterpart who will probably give more problems than the actual system.
Yours was not a compromise. Yours was giving back the advantage to one side and denying it to the other, and then declaring it a bad idea. A classic straw-man.
A compromise is a replacement scanning mechanic that will be available to everyone. ...
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 17:31:00 -
[165]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 16/08/2010 17:34:14
Originally by: sentinel22uk True, it would become almost impossible to rat.
But then maybe ccp could introduce much higher rewards for 0.0 rats, bountys, more faction, due to the higher risk.
IMO it would make 0.0 a much more funner place than it is at the moment.
With the last change on the loot table, L4 missions get a nerf. For exemple, I remember that the best named 10MN microwardrive was sold 9M, and now it cost 300K... But a good player in null-sec can make more than 15M every 20 minutes without looting, this fact didn't change, and it can be more with complexes.
Still, null-sec didn't get an big increase of ratters.
The fact is : People hate lose. People hate risks. People hate been mocked as all KBs will report the loss. So making the risk to lose more important than today will only worsen the situation, because I seriously doubt that boost the ISK generation in null-sec will motivate new players and actual null-sec residents to accept a big increase of the risks if Local is delayed, as all recent changes and the actual Local don't really give it.
And depending of the solution that CCP will find, it can be fun only for a specific branch of players, not for everyone. Maybe this explain why some predators already use the "HTFU" argument ^^ even if it is not convincing.
Originally by: Razin Yours was not a compromise. Yours was giving back the advantage to one side and denying it to the other, and then declaring it a bad idea. A classic straw-man.
A compromise is a replacement scanning mechanic that will be available to everyone.
It is not me who gave this compromise (page 2). I only copy that to explain my point. Kind of a troll, no ?
Actually, Local give intel to everyone, even for the predator who know if there is someone to kill. If I follow your logic, it is the best system... _______ 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 |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 17:55:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Sky Marshal
Originally by: Razin Yours was not a compromise. Yours was giving back the advantage to one side and denying it to the other, and then declaring it a bad idea. A classic straw-man.
A compromise is a replacement scanning mechanic that will be available to everyone.
It is not me who gave this compromise (page 2). I only copy that to explain my point. Kind of a troll, no ?
I was merely pointing out that such an example was a very bad choice to demonstrate your point.
I'm not sure about the "troll" part.
Originally by: Sky Marshal Actually, Local give intel to everyone, even for the predator who know if there is someone to kill. If I follow your logic, it is the best system...
No, you don't follow the logic. My argument was about what is and what isn't a compromise. Not about what is the best system.
Local is bad because of it's magical qualities: it's free, instant, and works at infinite range. ...
|
Grath Telkin
Amarr Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 18:05:00 -
[167]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 16/08/2010 17:34:14
Originally by: sentinel22uk True, it would become almost impossible to rat.
But then maybe ccp could introduce much higher rewards for 0.0 rats, bountys, more faction, due to the higher risk.
IMO it would make 0.0 a much more funner place than it is at the moment.
With the last change on the loot table, L4 missions get a nerf. For exemple, I remember that the best named 10MN microwardrive was sold 9M, and now it cost 300K... But a good player in null-sec can make more than 15M every 20 minutes without looting, this fact didn't change, and it can be more with complexes.
Still, null-sec didn't get an big increase of ratters.
The fact is : People hate lose. People hate risks. People hate been mocked as all KBs will report the loss. So making the risk to lose more important than today will only worsen the situation, because I seriously doubt that boost the ISK generation in null-sec will motivate new players and actual null-sec residents to accept a big increase of the risks if Local is delayed, as all recent changes and the actual Local don't really give it.
And depending of the solution that CCP will find, it can be fun only for a specific branch of players, not for everyone. Maybe this explain why some predators already use the "HTFU" argument ^^ even if it is not convincing.
Originally by: Razin Yours was not a compromise. Yours was giving back the advantage to one side and denying it to the other, and then declaring it a bad idea. A classic straw-man.
A compromise is a replacement scanning mechanic that will be available to everyone.
It is not me who gave this compromise (page 2). I only copy that to explain my point. Kind of a troll, no ?
Actually, Local give intel to everyone, even for the predator who know if there is someone to kill. If I follow your logic, it is the best system...
I can't hear you over the sound of your bots running.
Seriously, your argument is totally flawed, Local gives ALL the advantage to you the botter, or any other legitimate ratter. You have full intel the MOMENT another body enters the system.
You say that gives the same benefit to the hunter, but that assumes the hunter NEEDS that. He doesn't. In fact, it is nothing but crippling to the hunter, as without using Monkeysphere techniques its virtually impossible to catch a ratter, due to local.
The hunters do NOT want local, as it HURTS us. The current mechanics are totally slanted towards the defender and the prey, with no form of give to the hunter side of the coin.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 18:24:00 -
[168]
Edited by: Akita T on 16/08/2010 18:26:28
To reinforce what Grath Telkin just said, local in its current form is akin to having all cats already wearing bells atomic-powered speaker-phones blaring out mewling noises.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Jovialmadness
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 19:10:00 -
[169]
Edited by: Jovialmadness on 16/08/2010 19:12:33 Edited by: Jovialmadness on 16/08/2010 19:10:40 1. I like this
2. Ratters wont
3. I could kill this aggravating solo drake ratter if this happened.
4. That would be sweet
5. Signed
Edit: ohhh and ship losses would rise...is that such a bad thing for us manufacturers? |
sentinel22uk
Black Talon Mercs Middle of Nowhere
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 19:15:00 -
[170]
Survival of the fittest.
end of transmission
|
|
Spurty
Caldari D00M. Northern Coalition.
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 19:23:00 -
[171]
Will certainly fix lag
Hoping anyone in less than a 50 man roaming gang leaves the game spitting
|
KhaniKirai
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 19:40:00 -
[172]
The people that want local to be delayed are just some "carebears" pvp whiners, that cant pvp and that want easier ways to slaughter people.
Sorry, but delayed local, just means gankers get it easier.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 19:41:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Grath Telkin
I can't hear you over the sound of your bots running.
Seriously, your argument is totally flawed, Local gives ALL the advantage to you the botter, or any other legitimate ratter. You have full intel the MOMENT another body enters the system.
You say that gives the same benefit to the hunter, but that assumes the hunter NEEDS that. He doesn't. In fact, it is nothing but crippling to the hunter, as without using Monkeysphere techniques its virtually impossible to catch a ratter, due to local.
The hunters do NOT want local, as it HURTS us. The current mechanics are totally slanted towards the defender and the prey, with no form of give to the hunter side of the coin.
Despite you being correct, the argument of who should have an advantage (hunter or prey) can be cast aside entirely to make the case for local to change.
Fact is with current game mechanics, there is no risk for the rewards of ratting unless your computer disconnects. Bots and live people alike simply stare at local, and when it changes, warp and cloak.
The game flaws introduced by local as-is are no secret and have been voiced for years now. People here suggesting no one has considered the other effects on the game are naive at best, willfully ignorant at worst, trolling.. well par for the course
People should not think because CCP has not changed it yet, that it somehow validates the current systems balance or that it somehow is 'healthier' for the game overall.
Also, repeating my post from pages ago:
local as-is in high sec. delayed local in low sec. no local in 0.0 / delayed local in 0.0 with appropriate system upgrades
--- 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 |
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 19:44:00 -
[174]
Originally by: KhaniKirai
Sorry, but delayed local, just means gankers get it easier.
ok
so answer me these questions three: how could it possibly be any easier for carebears? how could it possibly be any harder for gankers? are you suggesting risk vs reward is an obsolete or invalid concept?
(the third one is kind of important as the entire game is built upon it)
--- 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 |
KhaniKirai
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:02:00 -
[175]
Edited by: KhaniKirai on 16/08/2010 20:05:33
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
Originally by: KhaniKirai
Sorry, but delayed local, just means gankers get it easier.
ok
so answer me these questions three: how could it possibly be any easier for carebears? how could it possibly be any harder for gankers? are you suggesting risk vs reward is an obsolete or invalid concept?
(the third one is kind of important as the entire game is built upon it)
Roaming around finding a target with delayed local means you get a HUGE bonus compared to the defender. Simple reason: You ONLY scan once or twice to track someone down and you are fitted for pvp. The defender isnt and isnt in a pvp setup either most of the times. Beside if you fail at the supprise, you jump out through one of the many gates and you are already hidden for intel again. Totally no risk involved for the attacker anymore at all.
With the current local, they have to take risk as well, yet their ships are better fitted then the average pilot in 0.0. Its a better balance then the above.
Beside: you should ask better questions, because your questions are vague as well and dont mean anything in the current vague form, nobody can even really read, what you are trying to say? Pls, explain your own view better first.
Risk vs reward: pvp-ers barely take any risks in 0.0, its often the miners and industrials that take the most risks with their assets and ships. Why do you want it even more unbalanced for them with delayed local?
A ratting person does take risks: their ships are often not fast enough to get away from interceptors or hics on time. A pvp-er on the other hand, barely takes any risk, sure they lose a ship, if they are not playing it smart, but ratters dont have scramblers or webbers fitted 99 percent of the time. So, a good pvp-er will get out of bad fights most of the time anyway.
Sorry to say it, but people asking for delayed local, just want to gank easier, they dont want a fair fight, no they wanna slaughter more often and get easier away with it.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:09:00 -
[176]
Originally by: KhaniKirai
Beside: you should ask better questions, because your questions are vague as well and dont mean anything in the current vague form, nobody can even really read, what you are trying to say? Pls, explain your own view better first.
Risk vs reward: pvp-ers barely take any risks in 0.0, its often the miners and industrials that take the most risks with their assets and ships. Why do you want it even more unbalanced for them with delayed local?
First line (well, your entire post): I can't answer your questions so here is a bunch of derp.
Second line: I know nothing about the game of Eve, let me open my mouth and prove it.
Nice work. Do you fail professionally or is it just a hobby of yours?
--- 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 |
Barakkus
Caelestis Iudicium
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:12:00 -
[177]
Edited by: Barakkus on 16/08/2010 20:13:17
Originally by: Le Skunk Edited by: Le Skunk on 15/08/2010 14:38:22
Im fed up of people posting game ideas in general discusions.
CCP have gone to a lot of time and effort to set up a mechanism wherby the players wishes can be communicated to them in a democratic manner.
1) Spend time formulating your idea and post it in the Assembly Hall area of the forums 2) There people will spend a lot of time debating the pros and cons, and a consensus may be hammered out. Supports for the final idea will lead to: 3) The CSM - a selection of people who donate their time and are voted in by the playerbase (after thoughtful consideration of their policys) in a months long election campaign - will further debat the issues in a more ofrmal manner - and if supported the idea will be passed onto ccp when: 4) The CSM members will fly accross the world for three days negotiation - and your idea will be either proved impossible to code, or accepted by ccp as a measure they will implement
Then your idea will be speedily implemented by ccp, as the culmination of a lot of time and effort put in by the player base. CCP have gone to great lengths to publicise this process with many major news outlets (New York Times and the BBC to name a few) as a demonstration of how much they back this system.
Why you feel this process is lacking and need to post in general discusion - i will never know.
SKUNK
Then why is there a Features and Ideas Discussion where devs actually respond to suggestions if you're supposed to post in the useless CSM board? :P
The CSM is a joke and nothing more than a PR thing for CCP.
Originally by: CCP Dropbear
rofl
edit: ah crap, dev account. Oh well, official rofl at you sir.
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:23:00 -
[178]
Originally by: Grath Telkin I can't hear you over the sound of your bots running.
Seriously, your argument is totally flawed, Local gives ALL the advantage to you the botter, or any other legitimate ratter. You have full intel the MOMENT another body enters the system.
You say that gives the same benefit to the hunter, but that assumes the hunter NEEDS that. He doesn't. In fact, it is nothing but crippling to the hunter, as without using Monkeysphere techniques its virtually impossible to catch a ratter, due to local.
The hunters do NOT want local, as it HURTS us. The current mechanics are totally slanted towards the defender and the prey, with no form of give to the hunter side of the coin.
Boohoo... At least, my bots are working as expected
More seriously, do you fail to get kills today even with local ? I guess not. You have to fight against pvpers who roam in the vicinity and are willing to fight, or get some stupid players who make errors. Ratters/botters, you can't, smaller fleet than yours, you can't. So you, you want force this players to be killed.
Problem is : Fun. Is it fun to be ****d by a bigger ennemy fleet ? Is it fun to be ****d by a gang while you are ratting ?
Don't answer me the usual "Don't undock with a ship you can't afford to lose" or "HTFU" or any others expression like it. Take a minute to rest, use psychology, and try to go into the prey brain.
So yes, maybe the actual system hurts the hunter. Still, the delayed local system will only hurt the hunted. You know that Eve is one of the few where loss means something, and there is the problem. Because the hunted take a doble hit unlike others games where you keep your stuff. This is why it is healthier that it is the prey who has an advantage, than the hunter : Local permit to raise survival probability, but not at 100%. In the opposite, with time, there will be a leak of preys if local is delayed or if intel is more annoying.
So maybe you are right about the hunter's situation. Still, it don't mean that local has to change, regarding to obvious consequences, and regarding about what is EvE. After all, I doubt that CCP want see more whiners than today ^^ _______ 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 |
Nisanu
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:25:00 -
[179]
Edited by: Nisanu on 16/08/2010 20:25:30
I understand, and partly agree, with the arguments against local. However, unless it is replaced by a good alternative, simply removing local would make 0.0 a place with even less to do.
Local is one of the few tools that a solo (or small gang) pilot has to rat, roam, look for fights or haul goods without being suicidal. Removing it would give even greater importance to sheer numbers, which in turn makes nullsec worse for everyone (less targets to hunt for gangs, etc.).
In short, if CCP removes local they should replace it with a system that would still favour solo (small gang) flying in null.
|
Ori Blake
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:32:00 -
[180]
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
Originally by: KhaniKirai
Sorry, but delayed local, just means gankers get it easier.
ok
so answer me these questions three: how could it possibly be any easier for carebears? how could it possibly be any harder for gankers? are you suggesting risk vs reward is an obsolete or invalid concept?
(the third one is kind of important as the entire game is built upon it)
You can't increase the risk threshold without increasing the risk aversion threshold. The game already has too much risk aversion due to losing your ship completely when you die, and the ease of that in low and nullsec because of roaming gangs. Increasing it is just going to pack people into empire and wormholes even more.
If you want more targets you need to lower risk in a way that lets people be willing to fight instead of run. This is just going to make people run even more, because at the first hint of any ship on dscan, they are going to warp out.
|
|
KhaniKirai
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:36:00 -
[181]
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
Originally by: KhaniKirai
Beside: you should ask better questions, because your questions are vague as well and dont mean anything in the current vague form, nobody can even really read, what you are trying to say? Pls, explain your own view better first.
Risk vs reward: pvp-ers barely take any risks in 0.0, its often the miners and industrials that take the most risks with their assets and ships. Why do you want it even more unbalanced for them with delayed local?
First line (well, your entire post): I can't answer your questions so here is a bunch of derp.
Second line: I know nothing about the game of Eve, let me open my mouth and prove it.
Nice work. Do you fail professionally or is it just a hobby of yours?
Originally by: Pr1ncess Alia
Originally by: KhaniKirai
Sorry, but delayed local, just means gankers get it easier.
ok
so answer me these questions three: how could it possibly be any easier for carebears? how could it possibly be any harder for gankers? are you suggesting risk vs reward is an obsolete or invalid concept?
(the third one is kind of important as the entire game is built upon it)
Well lets look at these very vague questions.
Which carebears are you referring too?
I wrote "carebears" pvp whiners. Thats not the standard carebear definition most people use in eve. Since personally I most industrialist and miners, that want to make their own home in 0.0 are taking WAY more risks then the socalled pvp-er that often only has a few ships and some spare mods and ammo in 0.0 Yet your question is so vague, that nobody can read from it, if you are now replying to my "carebears" pvp whiners, or the traditional carebear. Sorry, its just too vague, not my fault.
Second question: how could it be possible any harder for gankers. Sorry, I have no idea why you are asking that question to me, I havent said anything that it would be harder for gankers. Again a silly vague question, that shouldnt belong in a discussion, its more the type question a troll will ask, who cant stand it, that people do not want their beloved "delayed local".
Third question : You are talking about a risk vs reward mechanisme in its total form, without placing it into a context of the game. On that moment, the question is totally vague and just not usefull in a discussion at all.
Sorry, but if you want to take part of a discussion, then define your questions better, then people can answer them.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:55:00 -
[182]
Q: Are you stupid?
A: well... define stupid. this is all too difficult and not my fault.
--- 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 |
Kyra Felann
Gallente Neh'bu Kau Beh'Hude Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 20:56:00 -
[183]
I support this. I think it's definitely a needed change. Effortless perfect intel for free does not improve the game. -----SIGNATURE-----
Originally by: CCP Ginger Ships have crews, most pod controlled frigates do not, above that they have crews of varying sizes. Hope that helps.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 22:21:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney
Originally by: Ghoest
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.
1) Akita has a long history of posting some of the most thoughtful pieces on these boards. Calling him/her (statistically, him) a troll just belies your lack of effective argument.
2) Googling your username + "battleclinic," I do not think you know how to play this game very well, if at all, and consequently your ideas on what would make this game better or worse are hard to take seriously.
I have a long history of reading posts on the forums.
Lately I think Acura is intentionally trying to cause issue over stuff she doesnt even belive herself. I say this because Acura has a history of being smart.
I suspect she is bored or annoyed with the game as I said.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Thorian Baalnorn
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 22:25:00 -
[185]
Originally by: Emperor Cheney Considering the majority of carebears are in highsec, and the thread is clearly about nullsec*, I stopped reading right there.
Really? All the "important" carebears are in 0.0. Think about it. The carebears that mass produce goods and moon mine and do reactions.... all low and null sec.
|
Thorian Baalnorn
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 22:32:00 -
[186]
Originally by: Razin Dude, do you even read what you are replying to?
Try and see how many of those presenting arguments for delayed local in this thread fit your description of a "vocal minority" above?
A minority of eve players post or even read the forums. Even less do it regularly.
|
Intigo
Amarr Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 22:39:00 -
[187]
Edited by: Intigo on 16/08/2010 22:39:14 Delayed local = everyone farming anomalies in 0.0 now would go back to hisec and farm missions. 0.0 is deserted in terms of carebear work.
Yay?
... ___________________
|
Shawna Gray
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 23:10:00 -
[188]
Originally by: Intigo Edited by: Intigo on 16/08/2010 22:39:14 Delayed local = everyone farming anomalies in 0.0 now would go back to hisec and farm missions. 0.0 is deserted in terms of carebear work.
Yay?
...
Yes then we can all sit in cloaked ships all day and scan for targets and complain about too few people in 0.0 while carebearing in empire on our alts.
|
THERisingPHOENIX
Caldari Kaleidascopic Military Association
|
Posted - 2010.08.16 23:52:00 -
[189]
Originally by: Intigo Edited by: Intigo on 16/08/2010 22:39:14 Delayed local = everyone farming anomalies in 0.0 now would go back to hisec and farm missions. 0.0 is deserted in terms of carebear work.
Yay?
...
Not really..
Everyone knows that Local is in the need to change and CCP might be considering this seriously later on.
This Delayed Local begin talked about would have some balance affect, it would make people get caught and killed easily but at the same time make it harder for the PvPer to know if anyone is at local.
Personally I think this would help covert ops ship more since its barely possible to get through camp bubble with can spams when u hop in ur Covert in local and they see u.
Pvp would be more challenging I guess with less, hop in for easy kill on ratters and vanish out again. Also Pvper would have the element of surprise and make 0.0 feel more like 0.0.
Carebear mining? I dunno how they would benefit from this, the roids at 0.0 are barely touched at 0.0 and maybe something to help their survivability longer is welcomed.
If this would be considered to be added then Onboard Scanner and Probes is needed to be adjusted to suit the change.
I think maybe other change not only to local is needed. Like belt formation etc. E.g. Belts would be like Ice belts spreading out over 200km long. < ---(Warp in 0 wont make all ratters/miners instant goners anymore)
And possibly other warpable celestial object.
|
Stitcher
Caldari Lai Dai Infinity Systems
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 00:34:00 -
[190]
Edited by: Stitcher on 17/08/2010 00:39:21
Originally by: THERisingPHOENIX Not really..
Everyone knows that Local is in the need to change and CCP might be considering this seriously later on.
I've seen some great big steaming piles of bull in my time, but that right there is one of the most average.
"everyone knows..."
No, what YOU "know" is one thing, what the majority WANT is quite another, and the reality of what would be best is wildly different again.
nullsec Local is not broken and it doesn't need fixing. The number of people who think it does are a tiny minority, and CCP have quite rightly said time and again that they have no plans to change it.
Old and pointless recurring topic is old and pointless.
HTFU. -
- Verin "Stitcher" Hakatain.
|
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 00:38:00 -
[191]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 17/08/2010 00:42:15
Originally by: THERisingPHOENIX Everyone knows that Local is in the need to change and CCP might be considering this seriously later on.
This Delayed Local begin talked about would have some balance affect, it would make people get caught and killed easily but at the same time make it harder for the PvPer to know if anyone is at local.
Not really harder. It would be harder only the first time : You go into the system, you check the system map, you create one or two bookmarks who will cover most of the belts of the system by the dscan... Then everytime you go in this system, you just have to warp and scan, and leave or begin the hunting depending of the result. Time to check it after the first time : 3 minutes ? 4 minutes ? Also, you have the "Average players in the last 30 minutes" of the map to help you finding a target.
In the opposite side, the ratter will have to scan all the time (if no good compromise of local is created, who can't exist imo)...
If it works in W-Space, this is because there is no gates, so less traffic, so even with delayed local, security remains correct. _______ 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 |
THERisingPHOENIX
Caldari Kaleidascopic Military Association
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 00:44:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Stitcher Edited by: Stitcher on 17/08/2010 00:39:21
Originally by: THERisingPHOENIX Not really..
Everyone knows that Local is in the need to change and CCP might be considering this seriously later on.
I've seen some great big steaming piles of bull in my time, but that right there is one of the most average.
"everyone knows..."
No, what YOU "know" is one thing, what the majority WANT is quite another, and the reality of what would be best is wildly different again.
nullsec Local is not broken and it doesn't need fixing. The number of people who think it does are a tiny minority, and CCP have quite rightly said time and again that they have no plans to change it.
Old and pointless recurring topic is old and pointless.
HTFU.
Your reply is pointless to us, it wont make them stop suggesting the idea anyway.
|
Pr1ncess Alia
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 00:54:00 -
[193]
Originally by: Sky Marshal
In the opposite side, the ratter will have to scan all the time (if no good compromise of local is created, who can't exist imo)...
geeez... you make it sound like it would be RISKY or something
can't have that
--- 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 |
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 01:15:00 -
[194]
You should try to scan each two seconds with the dscan to know if there is someone. Sure, you will find this process uber great, will you ? _______ 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 |
THERisingPHOENIX
Caldari Kaleidascopic Military Association
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 01:33:00 -
[195]
Edited by: THERisingPHOENIX on 17/08/2010 01:34:31
Originally by: Sky Marshal You should try to scan each two seconds with the dscan to know if there is someone. Sure, you will find this process uber great, will you ?
Thats why I mentioned onboard scanner to have some adjustment to it. May some auto radar system that auto cycle scan for some mins/secs? Would be like the system we have atm and for long range scan, you have to do manually. Surely Eve Ships is not that stupid :D?
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 01:46:00 -
[196]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 17/08/2010 01:45:59
It will affect the server, as check the dscan automatically or manually, even not all two seconds, is not the same computation work than just add a name in the local of each player of the system.
But I agree, at least, ships have emotions : When there are too much players in a system, they are afraid to activate guns even if we want too _______ 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 |
So Sensational
GREY COUNCIL Nulli Secunda
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 01:53:00 -
[197]
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.
I very much not at all interesting in pres butan for made system scan each 5 seconds.
|
Thorian Baalnorn
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 02:41:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 17/08/2010 00:42:15
Originally by: THERisingPHOENIX Everyone knows that Local is in the need to change and CCP might be considering this seriously later on.
This Delayed Local begin talked about would have some balance affect, it would make people get caught and killed easily but at the same time make it harder for the PvPer to know if anyone is at local.
Not really harder. It would be harder only the first time : You go into the system, you check the system map, you create one or two bookmarks who will cover most of the belts of the system by the dscan... Then everytime you go in this system, you just have to warp and scan, and leave or begin the hunting depending of the result. Time to check it after the first time : 3 minutes ? 4 minutes ? Also, you have the "Average players in the last 30 minutes" of the map to help you finding a target.
In the opposite side, the ratter will have to scan all the time (if no good compromise of local is created, who can't exist imo)...
If it works in W-Space, this is because there is no gates, so less traffic, so even with delayed local, security remains correct.
The other reason this works in W- space is because you just cant warp to objects and find people expect maybe to a moon in which you might find people + shields+ guns. all ratting and mining areas plus exits have to be scanned out. The carebears that live in WH space have POSes for SS. Also you have WH restictions. You cant just take a 200 man BS fleet through every WH. If you can get 50 in some cases you are doing really good. You cant just pop a cyno and rain caps down and titan bridge fleets in. W space is nothing like 0.0. The only thing they have in common is they are both null sec. But the similarities stop there.
BKs are saved to the server. No local is going to add a bunch more BKs the server will have to deal with. Everyone is going be BKing every system they travel through. having to scan constantly means adding loads to servers than cant handle the loads now. 25k people pressing scan even every 30 sec is going to cause unnecessary lag.
Their is no good reason to remove local from known space. Especially not please a few lazy PvPers that want it to be even easier to gank people and screw the rest of the game up in the process.
The only way this is even remotely feasible is if its replaced with something that is similar that doesnt require spamming scanners every 30 seconds. In which case their is no reason to remove it. Why fix something that isnt broke, when so many things are broke?
|
Grath Telkin
Amarr Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 03:08:00 -
[199]
Edited by: Grath Telkin on 17/08/2010 03:09:25
Originally by: Stitcher Edited by: Stitcher on 17/08/2010 00:39:21
Originally by: THERisingPHOENIX Not really..
Everyone knows that Local is in the need to change and CCP might be considering this seriously later on.
I've seen some great big steaming piles of bull in my time, but that right there is one of the most average.
"everyone knows..."
No, what YOU "know" is one thing, what the majority WANT is quite another, and the reality of what would be best is wildly different again.
nullsec Local is not broken and it doesn't need fixing. The number of people who think it does are a tiny minority, and CCP have quite rightly said time and again that they have no plans to change it.
Old and pointless recurring topic is old and pointless.
HTFU.
Your an idiot, and every part of your post is wrong.
In fact, in this VERY THREAD, the dev remarks concerning local being broken and in need of a fix are actually IN PRINT.
The devs know it, the guys in 0.0 know it, the ratters and botters know it.
I'm sorry your upset by the shocking revelation that someday, they will eventually fix it (they're only a year late, but w/e)), but he is RIGHT, in fact EVERYONE but YOU knows it needs to be fixed.
If you doubt me, you can read back, find the post (first 2 or 3 pages afaik) and then go search for it to know its true.
CCP have quite literally said that local is in need of a change, because its an overpowered intel tool.
EDIT: went and found it for you brah!
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Rakshasa Taisab I hear 10.000 players continuously running directional scan macros make good server performance.
C/D?
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."
"Local: I'm hoping we'll have something done to local in 0.0 in q1 next year."
"Timeframe for local changes: I'd like to see it q1 next year but I can't really promise it. I'll do everything I can to make it happen though :)"
"Local changes: Yeah, I actually thought that was so obvious that I didn't need to mention it. But yes, any changes to local will of course have to be hand-in-hand with changes to scanning mechanics. You must be able to somehow get quick-ish intel on the basic status of the system you're in."
I bolded the relevant quote, in case you have difficulties finding it.
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 03:59:00 -
[200]
Wouldnt simply removing the on board scanner(along with adding delayed local) be a good move?
Make the game more hard core for both sides?
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
|
T0KER
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 04:37:00 -
[201]
Supported
|
Stitcher
Caldari Lai Dai Infinity Systems
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 05:27:00 -
[202]
Originally by: Grath Telkin yakkety freakin' schmackety
I reject your reality and substitute my own. :D
in all seriousness though, whether or not I've got my factrs right the defining rule of EVE for me is right there in those four letters at the end of my post - HTFU. I think things are fine right now and the people busting their balls in favour of delayed local should just deal with the way things are because it works. I don't want to see it change, but if it does, then I'll adapt to the new system and get on with life. Just like everyone else who doesn't want it would have to (although I wish to god the sensible ones posted in EVE-General more often because it would REALLY improve the tone of this forum)
I mean, it's not like delayed local would be a BETTER system imo - just a different system, with its own advantages and disadvantages just like the present state of affairs has. the current system has a nice smooth transition where nullsec is still a little bit civilized before you get out into the wilds of W-space.
now, I could get behind a partial system where any ship with a cloaking device fitted causes the owner to behave as if the system is in delayed mode, and give covops, recons or black ops the option of deploying some kind of local jamming probe that hangs around in space for ten minutes during which time the system puts itself in delayed mode without announcing the fact, but lighting a cyno field would immediately counter the effects of said probe. The point is to put information warfare in the hands of the players after all, not to just turn it the hell off. -
- Verin "Stitcher" Hakatain.
|
cheet sheet
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 05:50:00 -
[203]
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.
Yer Akita is a player who knows nothing about eve where its come from and where its going its ALL ABOUT HIM
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 07:39:00 -
[204]
Edited by: Akita T on 17/08/2010 07:45:31
Originally by: Super Whopper Akita is a successful troll.
FYP
Originally by: So Sensational I very much not at all interesting in pres butan for made system scan each 5 seconds.
-> "the scanner could be changed to compensate - basically, bring back the ancient "Elite-looking" radar of early EVE clients, and in it, constantly display (visually) ALL things that would show up on a d-scan that is set on max-range and 360 degrees."
Originally by: Stitcher now, I could get behind a partial system where any ship with a cloaking device fitted causes the owner to behave as if the system is in delayed mode, and give covops, recons or black ops the option of deploying some kind of local jamming probe that hangs around in space for ten minutes during which time the system puts itself in delayed mode without announcing the fact, but lighting a cyno field would immediately counter the effects of said probe. The point is to put information warfare in the hands of the players after all, not to just turn it the hell off.
Well, if that's your yardstick, then you can't possibly be happy with the current situation, since there's no info warfare to speak of except AFK cloaking and logoffski.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 14:15:00 -
[205]
Originally by: Stitcher (although I wish to god the sensible ones posted in EVE-General more often because it would REALLY improve the tone of this forum)
I couldnÆt agree more. It is becoming excruciatingly boring to see pseudo-meme one-liners in response to an attempt to explain.
Originally by: Stitcher I mean, it's not like delayed local would be a BETTER system imo - just a different system, with its own advantages and disadvantages just like the present state of affairs has.
This is pretty easy to dispute. The current system is simplistic in providing extremely important information to everyone for free, instantly, and at infinite range. The proposed system will provide the same information, but only to those who take the risk and effort to obtain it. DonÆt tell me you donÆt see the difference.
The implications are many û from making ambushes finally possible without resorting to metagaming, to the actual immersion feeling of infinite space.
Originally by: Stitcher the current system has a nice smooth transition where nullsec is still a little bit civilized before you get out into the wilds of W-space.
IMO the presence of set travel routes via stargates, and outposts provide plenty of transition.
Originally by: Stitcher The point is to put information warfare in the hands of the players after all
Delayed local will do just that. For example it will require dedicated scouts to provide information for intel channels instead of anyone that happened to be in the system ratting or parked in a POS. Try and sneak around any alliance territory and see how it takes them to put a blob together to catch you. All because it takes no effort to track you; youÆre always visible in local.
...
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 14:39:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Razin Delayed local will do just that. For example it will require dedicated scouts to provide information for intel channels instead of anyone that happened to be in the system ratting or parked in a POS. Try and sneak around any alliance territory and see how it takes them to put a blob together to catch you. All because it takes no effort to track you; you’re always visible in local.
Ok... And you would accept to stay like a goon (not the ones we know) around a gate, so in front of your computer for hours, just to provide intel to others players who will... play ? Even for some Isk, it is just stunning.
It would be fun for you, isn't it ? _______ 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 |
Shepard Book
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 14:52:00 -
[207]
My vote is to remove local from 0.0 and everywhere but mostly 0.0. I never liked the idea of being able to see who is in local. It is a free warning for the hunters and the hunted alike. I expect removing local would ease the load on servers in 0.0 quite a bit. Certain alliances like to flood local as an exploit to lag people even more. I would take delayed if that was the only thing available though.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:04:00 -
[208]
Originally by: Sky Marshal
Originally by: Razin Delayed local will do just that. For example it will require dedicated scouts to provide information for intel channels instead of anyone that happened to be in the system ratting or parked in a POS. Try and sneak around any alliance territory and see how it takes them to put a blob together to catch you. All because it takes no effort to track you; youÆre always visible in local.
Ok... And you would accept to stay like a goon (not the ones we know) around a gate, so in front of your computer for hours, just to provide intel to others players who will... play ? Even for some Isk, it is just stunning.
It would be fun for you, isn't it ?
Well, some people like mining. And there is nothing wrong with that.
In addition, if intel is provided by a dedicated group, processes will get optimized, optimal locations will be found, etc. The thing will acquire a life of its own. It'll just be another aspect of the sanbox. ...
|
Straight Hustlin
Gallente The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:07:00 -
[209]
As much as I would love for local to be removed, I feel that simply removing it or replacing it with a delayed mode is kinda lame, especially if the scanner remains unchanged.
Rather I would prefer to see the whole thing rexamined and overhauled as a whole using new mechanics, for example something that would take into account mass, signature radius & distance to target.
Just imagine that, Are you scanning down a handful of BS, or is it a much larger group of HAC's?
But I think theres so much that needs to be changed for everything to work well together, for instance, have you ever considered how odd it is that you can find out everything you could want to know about any system by simply looking up its name? Shouldn't you have to atleast go there and do some scanning to know where all the moons and belts and every other fcking thing is? Could you imagine if you had to look for stargates instead of just knowing where every flippin one is? It could be incredible.
EVE could have alot more of that cold dark feeling where your venturing out into the unknown void; but it requires removing the instantanious & all encompassing information we have access to, and local is only a part of that.
|
So Sensational
GREY COUNCIL Nulli Secunda
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:16:00 -
[210]
Originally by: Akita T
-> "the scanner could be changed to compensate - basically, bring back the ancient "Elite-looking" radar of early EVE clients, and in it, constantly display (visually) ALL things that would show up on a d-scan that is set on max-range and 360 degrees."
Yeah, if it wasn't for the fact that the data shows that polished features don't sell as well as new content. In theory I like the idea.
|
|
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:19:00 -
[211]
Edited by: Vincent Gaines on 17/08/2010 15:19:14
Originally by: Sky Marshal You should try to scan each two seconds with the dscan to know if there is someone. Sure, you will find this process uber great, will you ?
If you replaced the D-scanner with something like the old "overview" like shown in the bottom right of this screenshot it would be a nice improvement.
|
Spurty
Caldari D00M. Northern Coalition.
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:26:00 -
[212]
The Elite scanner thing was awesome, but does not scale! Ok with 10~50 ships max, after that, its a cluster!
This has nothing to do with local surely though? That's an overview feature.
Local = People talk in it, it has names of people here, it has a number at the top that says how many people are logged in, in this system.
Break local down into its features:
- people talking - Intended feature
- names of people - Intended feature
- people linkable (via drag) - Poorly thought out feature
- Standings too obvious - game breaker for some, an issue
- numbers of people - fuzzy if this is an issue. Should be like the map, delayed and averaged over 30 mins
- Broadcast anonymously - probably an anti-griefing concept, but feature missing
Break down what you can do with the representation and quality of intel gathering from local and you see, its not 100% bad.
Just poorly implemented.
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:36:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Razin Well, some people like mining. And there is nothing wrong with that.
In addition, if intel is provided by a dedicated group, processes will get optimized, optimal locations will be found, etc. The thing will acquire a life of its own. It'll just be another aspect of the sanbox.
Compare mining and scouting is not really relevant, really, apart if you never mine with a team of funny goons ^^
There is a limit about the sandbox. I mean, effort = realism != fun and so != game. You can find some players who would appreciate scouting with coverts on few situations, like a fleet fight because they feel important as they can change the result of a battle, but there is some risks too who can make it entertaining, and it is a time-limited task.
Scouting for hours most of the week to permit others players to play, I have a serious doubt that you can find a correct number of dedicated scouts to provide a decent intel at any moment of the day (Multiply it by the number of alliances the game has actually). There is scouting and scouting.
This is why it is hard to find good logisticians, as even if it is an important task, it needs a constant effort all the time (we lost good players because of it). Here, it would be a good presence and constant attention, which is not really better. _______ 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 |
Dzil
Caldari Caldari Independent Navy Reserve OWN Alliance
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:40:00 -
[214]
I might like to take this conversation in a different direction, though I'm not sure how much success this will have on page 8 (most people read the OP and respond without reading a thread)
This entire discussion really comes down to intel mechanics. So here's my question:
What kind of intel should each of the following be able to capture, and within what range?
A true "scout" (t2 scouting vessel properly fitted and rigged for scouting) A military field vessel. A civilian sitting in station, spinning his ship, just reading intel reports or being fed automated data (such as local).
In comparison/constrast, what kind of intel can they capture today through game mechanics? Retired from corp sales. Time to spend some of this on pretty explosions :) |
Vincent Gaines
Macabre Votum Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 15:42:00 -
[215]
Originally by: Spurty The Elite scanner thing was awesome, but does not scale! Ok with 10~50 ships max, after that, its a cluster!
This has nothing to do with local surely though? That's an overview feature.
Local = People talk in it, it has names of people here, it has a number at the top that says how many people are logged in, in this system.
Break local down into its features:
- people talking - Intended feature
- names of people - Intended feature
- people linkable (via drag) - Poorly thought out feature
- Standings too obvious - game breaker for some, an issue
- numbers of people - fuzzy if this is an issue. Should be like the map, delayed and averaged over 30 mins
- Broadcast anonymously - probably an anti-griefing concept, but feature missing
Break down what you can do with the representation and quality of intel gathering from local and you see, its not 100% bad.
Just poorly implemented.
When local is at 100+ though, is it actually used in the same sense? If the "dots" are colored by standings, than 1 hostile in a sea of blue will stand out.
There is still "constellation" chat that can be used to communicate as local, but set that on delayed mode.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 16:48:00 -
[216]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 17/08/2010 15:50:19
Originally by: Razin Well, some people like mining. And there is nothing wrong with that.
In addition, if intel is provided by a dedicated group, processes will get optimized, optimal locations will be found, etc. The thing will acquire a life of its own. It'll just be another aspect of the sanbox.
Compare mining and scouting is not really relevant, really, apart if you never mine with a team of funny goons ^^
I wasnÆt comparing the activities, just stating the fact that people are different and what may seem to be a mind-killing grind to one person could be a relaxing and enjoyable side activity to another.
Originally by: Sky Marshal There is a limit about the sandbox. I mean, effort = realism != fun and so != game. A game has to find a good compromise. So you can find some players who would appreciate scouting with coverts on few situations, like a fleet fight because they feel important as they can change the result of a battle, but there is some risks too who can make it entertaining, and it is a time-limited task.
As I said above, much comes down to personal tastes. However I do agree with your thoughts here, though itÆs hard to make a specific judgment call before actually seeing the new scanning mechanics.
In the end youÆll always be faced with finding the right people for the right job, and the fate of your corp/alliance may depend on it. Delayed local will add another few variables into that equation, and that is good.
Originally by: Sky Marshal But scouting for hours most of the week to permit others players to play, I have a serious doubt that you can find a correct number of dedicated scouts to provide a decent intel at any moment of the day (Multiply it by the number of alliances the game has actually). There is scouting and scouting.
I disagree that safety and reliable intel are required for æother players to playÆ. If that were true youÆd be able to see whatÆs on the other side of the stargate before jumping. To do that you need a scout. Do you think the fact that you need a scout to see what youÆre jumping into prevents some people from playing?
...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 17:11:00 -
[217]
Originally by: Spurty The Elite scanner thing was awesome, but does not scale! Ok with 10~50 ships max, after that, its a cluster!
This has nothing to do with local surely though? That's an overview feature.
It could become a feature of the new d-scanner, which it pertinent to delayed local discussion.
Originally by: Spurty Break local down into its features:
- people talking - Intended feature
No argument, and, as proposed, delayed local would still perform that function.
Originally by: Spurty
- names of people - Intended feature
Names of people who are not using local to chat? This is whatÆs causing the local chat tool to suddenly become the number 1 intel tool. CCP devs have made it pretty clear this feature was not intended.
Originally by: Spurty
- people linkable (via drag) - Poorly thought out feature
Why is that? This just saves you some copy-pasting and button pushing.
Originally by: Spurty
- Standings too obvious - game breaker for some, an issue
Agreed. Though for the Local that is instant and persistent this feature does make sense.
Originally by: Spurty
- numbers of people - fuzzy if this is an issue. Should be like the map, delayed and averaged over 30 mins
Agreed. Though IÆd prefer this number to be shown within the new d-scanner. Local should be for chat only.
Originally by: Spurty
- Broadcast anonymously - probably an anti-griefing concept, but feature missing
Not sure what youÆre saying here.
Originally by: Spurty Break down what you can do with the representation and quality of intel gathering from local and you see, its not 100% bad.
Just poorly implemented.
Indeed. By no means precludes switching the whole thing into a delayed mode.
...
|
HappyBunnyHammer
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 18:10:00 -
[218]
Signed.
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 19:40:00 -
[219]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 17/08/2010 19:41:44
Originally by: Razin I wasn’t comparing the activities, just stating the fact that people are different and what may seem to be a mind-killing grind to one person could be a relaxing and enjoyable side activity to another.
Apart the fact that if you mine into null-sec, generally it is within a team, because of the security and the logistic obligation. So you can compensate the annoying factors by relaying to the mass, and you can kill the boredom by talking or even multi-tasking (missions by an alt, use your browser, etc), so it is enjoyable. In Empire, you don't have so much obligations, so it can be enjoyable too. This is why it is not abnormal that players can like mining. Only pure pvpers consider that it is mind-killing ^^
But even if we can find all tastes in this world, I can't believe that scouting all the time a gate because of the delayed local can be enjoyable. It is not like mining.
Originally by: Sky Marshal In the end you’ll always be faced with finding the right people for the right job, and the fate of your corp/alliance may depend on it. Delayed local will add another few variables into that equation, and that is good.
Good ? Do you want a theory about why CCP pretend that it is better to release new features than correct existing ones ?
As we know, EVE is a harsh and cold world. It makes EVE unique, but it is also why it is hard for CCP to keep a constant grow of the subscription rate. People like WoW because it is easy... So CCP can compensate by adding new features to not remove the specificity of the game, or we would have a WoW-like game.
And so, there is already a big amount of variables in this game, more or less appreciated. Most of them relay to Local to be done efficiency and fastly (especialy for the annoying logistic session).
Make some of them harder to complete because of a leak of security, will only breach the limit of pression that a bunch of players can tolerate. We speak about a game where the learning curve and the effort needed for any action are already important, and where the null-sec is not really loved by a majority of players. Raise the difficulty of the game, by adding the Delayed Local, will not make any good.
Originally by: Sky Marshal I disagree that safety and reliable intel are required for ‘other players to play’. If that were true you’d be able to see what’s on the other side of the stargate before jumping. To do that you need a scout. Do you think the fact that you need a scout to see what you’re jumping into prevents some people from playing?
Why is there some private intel channels in some alliances ? To compensate the fact that we can't see beyond the stargate in the territory of the alliance, as someone else is probably inside the system we want reach.
For the rest, yes, you need a scout. So, do it prevent some people from playing ? No, but not in all situations. Most of the time, a scout is needed for a very time-limited task, so everyone can do it and few will refuse, it is for few minutes. For fleet fight, it is the time of the operation. Here, we speak about something who will require a permanent attention and a good presence to restore a good security for everyone in the good part of the territory of the alliance. If there is no correct security, people will prefer Empire who provide it. A correct security is an imperative in a game where loss means something, but it will not be possible to relay to the mass to reduce this obligation in the era of delayed local.
_______ 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 |
Shawna Gray
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 21:08:00 -
[220]
Originally by: Razin [ I disagree that safety and reliable intel are required for æother players to playÆ. If that were true youÆd be able to see whatÆs on the other side of the stargate before jumping. To do that you need a scout. Do you think the fact that you need a scout to see what youÆre jumping into prevents some people from playing?
There is a massive difference between using a scout for a extremely limited time while traveling, and have more or less permanent scouts in a system.
My guess is that corps/alliances insted will rely on bots for their intel.
|
|
Swidgen
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 21:20:00 -
[221]
Originally by: Akita T Isn't it about time local was changed to delayed mode already?
There is no absolutely must-have good reason to change it. Removing T2 BPOs should be way ahead of that on any list of changes to improve the game. |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 21:36:00 -
[222]
Edited by: Akita T on 17/08/2010 21:40:02
Originally by: Swidgen There is no absolutely must-have good reason to change it.
You mean, OTHER than the already stated intention of CCP to do it eventually ? You know, because "local was never INTENDED to be THE intel tool" ? The only problem is "eventually" is not soon enough.
Quote: Removing T2 BPOs should be way ahead of that on any list of changes to improve the game.
There's nothing wrong with T2 BPOs, quite the opposite. If you want to complain about anything related to T2 stuff, complain about invention ME/PE levels.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 21:49:00 -
[223]
Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 17/08/2010 21:36:09
Originally by: Swidgen There is no absolutely must-have good reason to change it.
You mean, OTHER than the already stated intention of CCP to do it eventually ? You know, because "local was never INTENDED to be THE intel tool" ? The only problem is "eventually" is not soon enough.
Quote: Removing T2 BPOs should be way ahead of that on any list of changes to improve the game.
There's nothing wrong with T2 BPOs. If you want to complain about anything related to T2 stuff, complain about invention ME/PE levels.
You must be a women? Or a guy on hormone pills, we can all make a little rant thread like you did about t2 bpos (or something else) and just say nope you are wrongà this reason is no good, nope that aint a reasonà etc etcà just like this dumb ass threadà there are a TON of reasons listed T2 bpos are bull****à TBH a t2 bpo is JUST like the local you want to change SO badà why because it is a great intel toolà okayà t2 bpo, great easy money printing pressà O SNAP see what I just didà? Did ccp intend for a select few to get money presses (t2 bpos) imam say no, did CCP intend for local to be the main intel tool, you said, no. O SNAP see what I just did AGAIN!
guess what, no local = GL having small corps, I canÆt wait to be put on gate dutyà damn it will be SOOOOO fun to sit and watch a gate and see who comes in for hours on endà GOSH so funà CCP said they would do A LOT of stuff they *never* didà local is one GOOD thing they never did.
You are lol, your first thing in your t2 bpo thread is BS, I never knew the old players who got t2 bpos paid for themà I thought it was a random lottery where a ticket was not the ôvalueö of the bpoà yet you state SAME chancesà just buy one LOLà free lotteryà 100+billà hey can I have a free lottery from you in the forum of 100+bill? ROFL
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.17 22:01:00 -
[224]
Originally by: alittlebirdy there are a TON of reasons listed T2 bpos are bull****
The only ones that are even remotely accurate are purely emotional ones, NOT based on logic.
Quote: TBH a t2 bpo is JUST like the local you want to change SO bad
Let's see...
* a T2 BPO is nothing more than a limited-edition investment tool with VERY low RoI but minimal effort required, a tool that also allows certain markets to even exist in the first place, while at the same time NOT interfering with invention profitability in the markets that have any reasonable demand... there are alternatives that are more profitable and cost less as far as initial capital goes
* local is an extremely powerful metagaming tool available to everybody FOR FREE, a tool that allows near-total PvP avoidance (via logoff) in a PvP-centric game, a tool that also enables other metagaming strategies like AKF cloaking and logon traps... all of which are universally hated, but still used because "that's what you do for best results"
[sarcasm]Yes, how could I not see just how similar they are ![/sarcasm]
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
KA StarLifter
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 00:19:00 -
[225]
Originally by: Ressiv
For instance give the d-scan an option to ignore ships based on security status or something like that. (I didnt think much about this last line, just a probably bad example)
One of the best ideas I've heard, yet, if we do go to not having an active local. The encoded recognition technology would easily exist in the Eve world(s).
But so would auto-docking after auto-piloting to a system...
|
Speaker4 theDead
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 00:26:00 -
[226]
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......
Translation: "I want a huge advantage over noobs and carebears..."
|
Awesome Possum
Gallente Isk Relocation Services
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 00:33:00 -
[227]
Originally by: Speaker4 theDead
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......
Translation: "I want a huge advantage over noobs and carebears..."
how is it a huge advantage when they'd all be subject to the same mechanics? ♥
Wreck Disposal Services |
Brannor McThife
Caldari Brotherhood of the Ancients
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 00:41:00 -
[228]
I used to live in 0.0 once. And as a scout, I found local both incredibly annoying, and insanely easy... When you're trying to launch a sneak attack on an enemy system, and they can clearly see you in local...well... duh...
And for them, they can't hide their anti-dread battleship fleet anywhere, because I can just see there's 100 of them in local... no nice hiding the fleet on the dark side of a moon or something... you know... Sci-fi like...
I'm now a carebear, and I support this. Local was never meant to be a free intel tool... it was meant for people in the same system to chat.
People should be playing EvE to PvP... if you want to be safe, go buy Freelancer and play single player.
-G
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 02:33:00 -
[229]
Originally by: Speaker4 theDead
Originally by: Akita T Isn't it about time local was changed to delayed mode already ? You know, like in w-space.
Translation: "I want a huge advantage over noobs and carebears..."
Yup, I, one of the most carebearish ship-PvP-wise carebear that can be, want a huge advantage over carebears
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 02:46:00 -
[230]
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 18/08/2010 02:48:14
Originally by: Awesome Possum
Originally by: Speaker4 theDead
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......
Translation: "I want a huge advantage over noobs and carebears..."
how is it a huge advantage when they'd all be subject to the same mechanics?
No, they would not be subject to the same mechanics. With local gone and nothing to replace it defense and offense play different roles.
Originally by: Akita T Yup, I, one of the most carebearish ship-PvP-wise carebear that can be, want a huge advantage over carebears
You are as much a carebear as I am a pirate.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
|
jackaloped
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 03:26:00 -
[231]
Delayed local will just be a tool to help blobs jump in and kill whatever bit their bait.
Blobbing gets enough love from ccp as it is. For this reason I don't support this.
Another reason is local helps people who actually want to find a fight.
As for how it effects carebears versus those who live to gank pve ships - I don't really care. |
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 03:46:00 -
[232]
Acura is out doing herself. By only selectively answering the people who point out how faulty her position is she is able to totally avoid the real reasons its bad idea9as she presented it) and act like shes making a case.
This is almost as cool as last week when she used the word "invalid" to describe arguments she disagreed with based on subjective reasons.
Wherever you went - Here you are.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 04:16:00 -
[233]
Edited by: Akita T on 18/08/2010 04:15:55
Originally by: Ghoest last week when she used the word "invalid" to describe arguments she disagreed with based on subjective reasons.
If by that you mean totally objective reasons based purely on facts, math and logic, sure. Also, who is this "Acura" person you keep talking about ?
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
JitaPriceChecker2
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 10:11:00 -
[234]
Originally by: alittlebirdy
I canÆt wait to be put on gate dutyà damn it will be SOOOOO fun to sit and watch a gate and see who comes in .
Guess what some people like to blow stuff up as they come through gate.
|
Tira Mitzu
Sphere Industries
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 10:32:00 -
[235]
Edited by: Tira Mitzu on 18/08/2010 10:34:52 Akita T is considering it, afaik she's never been wrong. CCP do it.
*edit, thinking error*
|
MatrixSkye Mk2
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 12:57:00 -
[236]
Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 18/08/2010 13:05:57
Originally by: Tira Mitzu Edited by: Tira Mitzu on 18/08/2010 10:34:52 Akita T is considering it, afaik she's never been wrong. CCP do it.
*edit, thinking error*
You know when I stopped taking Akita sersiously? Back when T2 battelships were introduced. He huffed and puffed about how the market was not going to be able to support such expensive ships and how they would NEVER EVER settle below the 1 billion isk mark, how CCP sucked and how they don't listen to him, etc. You know what happened? They ended up settling way below that mark. You know what Akita's reply to that was? Players are selling their marauders below their cost. Mind you, T2 BS haven't risen above his predicted mark.
After that I noticed that his doom&gloom(TM) predictions are nothing but "ccp, you suck, do things my way or you will burn!1" bull. And even more obvious, his "concerns" usually deal with allowing broader grief play, all the while claiming he's just an innocent carebear that doesn't PVP and that his interest is purely economic. But he can't even get the economics right. So the real question is, what are his motives behind his rants? And even though he now claims he was joking, I think there's some truth to when he answered a couple of posts above that it's about creating chaos and him having some fun.
And now his rant of the month is for CCP to remove local NAO!!11 Akita, in my opinion, cashed in his credibility long ago. It's become quite trasnparent that he's become bored of Eve for quite some time now. Read some of his other threads. You'll notice that they're a mix of sarcasm, trolls, exageration, condescendence, and insults toward CCP.
Grief a PVP'er. Run a mission today! |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 14:22:00 -
[237]
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 You know when I finally stopped taking Akita sersiously? Back when T2 battelships were introduced. He huffed and puffed about how the market was not going to be able to support such expensive ships and how they would NEVER EVER settle below the 1 billion isk mark
What the hell have you been eating to get such a bad case of wrong recall ? Initial pre-introduction estimates: "Overall, a Tech2 tier2 battleship will probably cost about 500 mil TOPS to invent and manufacture. I expect it to sell for at most 550 mil (probably much less) several weeks after introduction. As for initial prices... hmmm... maybe 1.5 bil tops, if even that much." So, if anything, I was predicting a much lower price too soon (so the exact opposite of what you just said), as it took them a whole lot longer to get anywhere close to those numbers, and that was because of increased overall demand for components ramping up prices.
You are probably confusing things with T3 strategic cruisers, which needed TWO LATER SEPARATE CCP HEAVY-DUTY INTERVENTIONS (reverse-engineering yields and sleeper drops adjustments) to make them go below 1 bil ISK in full decent configurations.
Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2 Read some of his other threads. You'll notice that they're a mix of sarcasm, trolls, exaggerations, condescendence, and insults towards CCP.
Wow, it's ALMOST AS IF I have been playing for much longer than a couple of years
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 14:46:00 -
[238]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Apart the fact that if you mine into null-sec, generally it is within a team, because of the security and the logistic obligation. So you can compensate the annoying factors by relaying to the mass, and you can kill the boredom by talking or even multi-tasking (missions by an alt, use your browser, etc), so it is enjoyable. In Empire, you don't have so much obligations, so it can be enjoyable too.
You can be just as busy and entertained chatting, web-surfing, reading, drinking, whatever, while sitting on a gate cloaked watching the traffic. You can be on the same grid as the gate and listen for the activation sound to alert you. This is not an argument for or against delayed local.
Originally by: Sky Marshal But even if we can find all tastes in this world, I can't believe that scouting all the time a gate because of the delayed local can be enjoyable.
Well, I donÆt think 23/7 scouting of any alliance space happens now (due to many obvious reasons û time zones, RL, etc.), and I donÆt think it will happen if local goes delayed. Such is life and this is a game. However, delayed local *will* make scouting an *important* profession, where currently anyone can do it. ThatÆs the difference.
Originally by: Sky Marshal As we know, EVE is a harsh and cold world. It makes EVE unique, but it is also why it is hard for CCP to keep a constant grow of the subscription rate. People like WoW because it is easy... So CCP can compensate by adding new features to not remove the specificity of the game, or we would have a WoW-like game.
This is all theorizing. CCP got rid of ghost training and made PLEX destroyable. Those were pretty æharshÆ decisions, and I donÆt see the subscription numbers dropping too much. Soon weÆll have Incarna, the PI stuff will get better, enough furry stuff to compensate the æharshnessÆ of delayed local. After a few months people will get used to it (like they did to the nano-nerf and delayed local in w-space) and itÆll be business as usual.
Originally by: Sky Marshal And so, there is already a big amount of variables in this game, more or less appreciated. Most of them relay to Local to be done efficiency and fastly (especialy for the annoying logistic session). ...
These are opinions. I happen to disagree with most of what you wrote here.
I donÆt think the current local adds the correct kind of variables to the game. It makes things too safe for some and too easy for others. This crutch is mistakenly thought of as æefficiencyÆ. It makes space feel small û every system like a room, connected to others by gates.
The steep learning curve makes sure the people who canÆt handle things like delayed local donÆt stay in the game or, if they do, stay in empire, where, even if local is changed to delayed, not much would change.
Null-sec is loved by enough people. Not all of them live in the same time zone so you canÆt always rely on the map to see this.
The extra depth brought to the game by delayed local and useful and more complex scanning mechanics will definitely be good for it.
Originally by: Sky Marshal Here, we speak about something who will require a permanent attention and a good presence to restore a good security for everyone in the good part of the territory of the alliance. If there is no correct security, people will prefer Empire who provide it. A correct security is an imperative in a game where loss means something, but it will not be possible to relay to the mass to reduce this obligation in the era of delayed local.
You missed the point of my example. The point is that you are not entitled to full intel (in game or in RL). You always have to work for it. Delayed local definitely allows you to do that. ...
|
Shizo Lang
Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 15:34:00 -
[239]
/signed delayed local, and it would also really solve one big Problem, which are makro Ratters and Miners, especially the makro Ratter Plague in Russian 0.0 atm.
Makro Ratter Botnet Discovered Thread
|
Ori Blake
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 15:36:00 -
[240]
I think it needs to be said again that Akita's intent wasn't just for this to be for 0.0, but highsec and lowsec as well, and there are a lot of issues delayed local raises in those regions. Scouting may not be possible given the smaller sizes of corps, and systems cannot be secured in those regions.
Quote: The extra depth brought to the game by delayed local and useful and more complex scanning mechanics will definitely be good for it.
I don't really see extra depth from this. I see a LOT of spamming the dscan and evaccing anytime a neutral shows up on scan unless they somehow manage to make dscan show wartarget or sec status. Then, I still see a lot of station docking or safe spot using because the dscan mechanics don't show ships distance from you unless they are on top of you.
It's a gamble that it will increase PvP. It could easily make it rarer as the lack of intel makes people less likely to commit or engage in risky behavior.
|
|
Stick Cult
Unspoken Autonomy.
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 15:39:00 -
[241]
Originally by: Ori Blake
Quote: The extra depth brought to the game by delayed local and useful and more complex scanning mechanics will definitely be good for it.
I don't really see extra depth from this. I see a LOT of spamming the dscan and evaccing anytime a neutral shows up on scan unless they somehow manage to make dscan show wartarget or sec status. Then, I still see a lot of station docking or safe spot using because the dscan mechanics don't show ships distance from you unless they are on top of you.
It's a gamble that it will increase PvP. It could easily make it rarer as the lack of intel makes people less likely to commit or engage in risky behavior.
Depth = more covert fleets that are actually ~covert~, you know, not a fleet of stealth bombers given away in local the second they jump in...
Originally by: CCP Tuxford my bad. Rest assured I'm being ridiculed by my co-workers.
|
Shizo Lang
Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 15:46:00 -
[242]
What about we agree for: option 1: --Normal old local style in highsec, wartargets goin to be delayed ( wont fix neut alts scouting tho )
--5 seconds delayed local in lowsec
--10-15 seconds delayed local in 0.0
option 2: --Normal old local style in highsec, wartargets goin to be delayed ( wont fix neut alts scouting tho )
--10 seconds delayed local in lowsec
--20-30 seconds delayed local in 0.0 ( will actually give the scout a basic idea on how the systems status is)
D-Scanner range increase by 20% or so is also possible, tho shouldnt be more than 30%
|
Ori Blake
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:28:00 -
[243]
Originally by: Stick Cult Depth = more covert fleets that are actually ~covert~, you know, not a fleet of stealth bombers given away in local the second they jump in...
Which they can't do when warping into a system. So either we get a ton of scouts on every gate to prevent this, or cov ops SB fleet becomes a huge flavor of the month to gank solo ratters or small enemy gangs in lowsec. Unless you are going to make some form of point defense detection of cloaked ships, like a short-range dscan or alarm, cov ops will be too powerful without local.
|
Shizo Lang
Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:34:00 -
[244]
Originally by: Ori Blake
Originally by: Stick Cult Depth = more covert fleets that are actually ~covert~, you know, not a fleet of stealth bombers given away in local the second they jump in...
Which they can't do when warping into a system. So either we get a ton of scouts on every gate to prevent this, or cov ops SB fleet becomes a huge flavor of the month to gank solo ratters or small enemy gangs in lowsec. Unless you are going to make some form of point defense detection of cloaked ships, like a short-range dscan or alarm, cov ops will be too powerful without local.
dude, we are already further in this discussion, we are talking about DELAYED local here now
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 16:58:00 -
[245]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 18/08/2010 17:02:03
Originally by: Razin You can be just as busy and entertained chatting, web-surfing, reading, drinking, whatever, while sitting on a gate cloaked watching the traffic. You can be on the same grid as the gate and listen for the activation sound to alert you. This is not an argument for or against delayed local.
This is false and you know it. You can't do everything when you scout or you would be able to miss the moment when a neutral come in. And you know too that few players use the sound, as the sound in this game don't work as we want.
Originally by: Razin Well, I don’t think 23/7 scouting of any alliance space happens now (due to many obvious reasons – time zones, RL, etc.), and I don’t think it will happen if local goes delayed. Such is life and this is a game. However, delayed local *will* make scouting an *important* profession, where currently anyone can do it. That’s the difference.
Do you seriously think that players will take some risks if there is no intel ? You know that just one AFK cloacker can immobilize nearly all activities in one system. How can you seriously think that no intel will not do the same effect if Delayed local is applied ? 23/7 scouting is mandatory.
And yes, it is a game. So it needs to make the majority of players able to play. Delayed Local will remove this ability to a big part of players, unless they return to Empire.
Originally by: Razin This is all theorizing. CCP got rid of ghost training and made PLEX destroyable. Those were pretty ‘harsh’ decisions, and I don’t see the subscription numbers dropping too much. Soon we’ll have Incarna, the PI stuff will get better, enough furry stuff to compensate the ‘harshness’ of delayed local. After a few months people will get used to it (like they did to the nano-nerf and delayed local in w-space) and it’ll be business as usual.
I think you don't understand what I meant, or you woudn't make this comparison. Ghost Training/Plexes give external services, there is nothing relating to the difficulty of the game itself.
Also, you are studborn to use delayed local in w-space as an argument that people can adapt, while there was explained many times that null-secs and w-space are NOT similar. Unless you never go inside...
Originally by: Razin These are opinions. I happen to disagree with most of what you wrote here.
I don’t think the current local adds the correct kind of variables to the game. It makes things too safe for some and too easy for others. This crutch is mistakenly thought of as ‘efficiency’. It makes space feel small – every system like a room, connected to others by gates. [...]
Null-sec is loved by enough people. Not all of them live in the same time zone so you can’t always rely on the map to see this.
The extra depth brought to the game by delayed local and useful and more complex scanning mechanics will definitely be good for it. [...]
You missed the point of my example. The point is that you are not entitled to full intel (in game or in RL). You always have to work for it. Delayed local definitely allows you to do that.
It is your opinion.
Complexity != Effort, you know it. But this and realism can be mistaken as 'immersion'. Still, a game have to find a compromise to generate fun. Local permit it. Delayed won't.
You give the feeling that for you, EVE is more a WORK than a game, as you want increase the effort required for everything. Maybe you never do some of the tasks who needs Local to be done. Also, if it really made things too safe, we wouldn't see any loss of JFs or others expensive ships.
And it is funny to read that 0.0 have enough people. As at the same time, predators whines because there is no target (false, or why do we see roamings). This is the same case about low-sec, where you can find people who say the same thing : Enough, but not enough.
We have an expression for that : You want the butter, the money of the butter, and the [Oups] of the female worker who made it. _______ 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 |
Shizo Lang
Caldari Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:01:00 -
[246]
umh, regarding the post above me (dont wanna quote all that),
seriously, delete the delayed local thing idea u have from highsec.
There were a cloaky immobilises whole systems is something wrong with ur defence and corp attitude.
Delayed local for lowsec and nullsec only!!!
Btw, in Wh systems corps really grow together cuz of no local^^!!, time for a change really
|
Dasubervixen
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:08:00 -
[247]
I would very much like to see delayed local in low and null sector space.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 18:29:00 -
[248]
Originally by: Sky Marshal You can't do everything when you scout or you would be able to miss the moment when a neutral come in. And you know too that few players use the sound, as the sound in this game don't work as we want.
Aww, now youÆre just making excuses.)) Gate activation sound (and graphical effect) works just fine.
Some scouts will be better, some worse. Not every gate or route will be covered. All very good for some infiltration action. Ratters will have to rat in PVP setups. Who knows, maybe this will finally make 0.0 more dangerous than empire.
Originally by: Sky Marshal Do you seriously think that players will take some risks if there is no intel ? You know that just one AFK cloacker can immobilize nearly all activities in one system. How can you seriously think that no intel will not do the same effect if Delayed local is applied ? 23/7 scouting is mandatory.
We seem to have a fundamental disagreement here. Players regularly roam 0.0 or low-sec solo with no scout. That means they risk with incomplete (or zero) intel every time they jump (unless theyÆre in a dramiel, that is))). I personally think you just donÆt have an argument.
I also donÆt see the problem with AFK cloakers. WhatÆs wrong with moving to a different system?
Originally by: Sky Marshal Ghost Training/Plexes give external services, there is nothing relating to the difficulty of the game itself.
I was speaking about effects on subscribers û an issue that you brought up. Some predicted a great drop in subscription numbers as a result of these actions by CCP. This didnÆt happen. I suspect this will be the same for delayed local in 0.0, or even empire.
Originally by: Sky Marshal Also, you are studborn to use delayed local in w-space as an argument that people can adapt, while there was explained many times that null-secs and w-space are NOT similar.
They are similar, they are not the same. 0.0 is safer and much more convenient because it has persistent gates and instant local.
Originally by: Sky Marshal It is your opinion.
Indeed. Mine against yours.
Originally by: Sky Marshal Complexity != Effort, you know it. But this and realism can be mistaken as 'immersion'. Still, a game have to find a compromise to generate fun. Local permit it. Delayed won't.
Very often you present arguments that presume a binary outcome, when clearly there are numerous shades of grey. This greatly weakens your case.
Complexity could definitely involve more effort. How much of that is mental or physical has more to do with interface design and general complexity of the environment. Realism could very well be used to increase immersion, in compromise with playability and general software/hardware limitations. How complexity with realism could be ômistaken as 'immersion'ö I donÆt know. If youÆre immersed, thatÆs it.
Originally by: Sky Marshal Also, if it really made things too safe, we wouldn't see any loss of JFs or others expensive ships.
Game mechanics allow for JFs to be 100% safe. Most are lost to pilot error.
Expensive combat ships are lost because they are used in combat. Surprise!1
Originally by: Sky Marshal And it is funny to read that 0.0 have enough people. As at the same time, predators whines because there is no target (false, or why do we see roamings).
I donÆt see players in our alliance complain about the lack of targets. A few jb hops brings us right to their doorstep.
Originally by: Sky Marshal We have an expression for that : You want the butter, the money of the butter, and the [Oups] of the female worker who made it.
No u!)))
...
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.18 21:31:00 -
[249]
It is only now that I realize that I was trolled. Dammit
_______ 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 |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 00:52:00 -
[250]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 18/08/2010 22:05:27
It is only now that I realize that I was trolled, as the precedent post can't be serious. Dammit
You mean you were serious when you complained that the sound doesn't work the way you want and so you can't hear the gate activation ('cause you turned it off)? Or when you revealed that one afk cloaker "can immobilize nearly all activities in one system"?
Sounds like you're just out of arguments.
I guess I'll have to concede your defeat! ...
|
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 01:45:00 -
[251]
Delayed local is a bad idea. If you don't like local go in a wh.
I like to pvp solo. Delayed local will just put the last nail in solo pvp's coffin. I will be blobbed before I can even think to try to get away from the bait.
What is the advantage of delayed local? Forcing everyone to skrew their fits in order to fit a probe launcher - let alone having to mess with that tedius mechanic is just bad. Thats probably one of the main reasons many people don't go in wormholes. You want spread that disadvantage everywhere? -Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 01:59:00 -
[252]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 19/08/2010 02:06:37
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 18/08/2010 22:05:27
It is only now that I realize that I was trolled, as the precedent post can't be serious. Dammit
You mean you were serious when you complained that the sound doesn't work the way you want and so you can't hear the gate activation ('cause you turned it off)? Or when you revealed that one afk cloaker "can immobilize nearly all activities in one system"?
Sounds like you're just out of arguments.
I guess I'll have to concede your defeat!
As you don't know that the sound engine of EVE is buggy, and it can be worse depending of the hardware. Seriously...
Sure that, as your post show it clearly, if you consider that everything who work for you is the same everywhere, there is no reason to continue.
Honestly, I never speak about a leaving of players from EVE, but about an exodus from Null to Empire at least, as it is obvious that it will happen. Well, not for you even if I try to explain. Indeed, you confirmed that you see everything only it with the eyes of a predator, you don't try to see anything else. It will be fun where I will see you whining about no target and why not L4 Missions "too rewarding so no one leave Empire so no targets" in the future, if delayed local is applied of course.
Yes, today, predators don't need so much intel to roam, as they know that ratters can't do a 1vs1 and that there are chances that the corp/alliance will be too long to react. That is the reality of EVE. Making delayed local will only make things worse. And read that ratters just have to rat with a pvp setup, just make me laught. Seriously, you have no clue about what you speak. If it was so easy, I wonder why it is not done today. Caldari players will like it too.
It is not the first time that you respond by avoiding the situation of the prey and refuse to understand them. Sound self-explanatory as the objective of delayed local is to shoot them. That weakens your case.
Also, you are really studborn about W-Space. Ultimate try to reveal FACTS. So consider that 0.0 is safer... No, I have nothing to say, you say everything involuntarily.
And to proof that you see everything only from your situation, well yeh, maybe your alliance don't whine about a leak of targets. But we never speak about your alliance or you only as I know. Seems that others on this topic are desperate about finding easy targets and consider that local is responsible.
_______ 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 |
Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 02:51:00 -
[253]
OMFG, STFU & GTFO. Let it die!
The horse has been beaten to death! (I consider this in the category of Rockets and Revamp to POSs) It's never gong to happen!
This thread needs to be either locked or moved to "Features and Ideas Discussion" as it is not appropriate for GD IMNSHO!
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 07:36:00 -
[254]
Originally by: Zendoren It's never gong to happen!
Except that we KNOW it will eventually happen. Just not soon enough.
Quote: This thread needs to be either locked or moved to "Features and Ideas Discussion" as it is not appropriate for GD IMNSHO!
The issue has been brought up by the CSM to CCP nearly a year ago, and it has been spoken about by CCP devs even before that, so it's way past any of those things.
But I guess reading even a few of the posts on the first page is way too much trouble for you, I bet you only read the thread title, right ? _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 07:47:00 -
[255]
Originally by: Sky Marshal [...snip...]Also, you are really studborn about W-Space. Ultimate try to reveal FACTS. So consider that 0.0 is safer... No, I have nothing to say, you say everything involuntarily.[...snip...]
A huge part of your arguments seem to rely on one main thing : the ASSUMPTION that just because local might be placed in delayed mode, there will be absolutely no way in hell the current level of intel that local provides could ever be achieved again. THAT IS AN INCORRECT ASSUMPTION. Nobody is saying that the level of intel available is too high, just the fact it comes without the need for any serious form of player effort or any matTriel commitment is what's actually wrong.
Another noticeable part of your arguments is "server strain". Who says d-scan (as it stands now) and probes (in their current form) have to be the only options for intel gathering ? If anything, it's not just common knowledge but also COMMON SENSE that the current ways to gather intel need to be supplemented by new means and/or they need to be enhanced and/or streamlined.
And before you go fluffing your plumage up about how I might have said anything different, that was already covered more than once : it's called sarcasm and hyperbole, respectively. It's been made clear enough.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
thisisacynoalt
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 08:39:00 -
[256]
Removing local will just make high sec more populated tbh.
its not broken, dont fix it???
|
SketS47
Minmatar The Brutal Henchmen
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 08:46:00 -
[257]
agree with the OP
Delay local chat in 0.0 low and high sec. Will make gameplay much more intresting.
Only idiots quote themselves -SketS47- |
Ori Blake
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 09:42:00 -
[258]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Zendoren It's never gong to happen!
Except that we KNOW it will eventually happen. Just not soon enough.
Quote: This thread needs to be either locked or moved to "Features and Ideas Discussion" as it is not appropriate for GD IMNSHO!
The issue has been brought up by the CSM to CCP nearly a year ago, and it has been spoken about by CCP devs even before that, so it's way past any of those things.
But I guess reading even a few of the posts on the first page is way too much trouble for you, I bet you only read the thread title, right ?
Maybe the reason why its been brought up but nothing has been done is because CCP realizes that they can't change it without making things worse. I've yet to see you give a good reason why it should be changed at all, or anyone posting in this thread. I can think of many bad things that would come from this:
1. Big alliances get more powerful since only they have the manpower to maintain scouts on gates for intel. 2. Solo players and small groups will get more risk when ratting or plexing. 3. Wardecced players would find out that stations are deathtraps since they can't check local to see if a wt is camping outside. 4. Players would get more risk averse due to lack of intel. 5. Revamping dscan to show needing standing info would put a strain on server resources. 6. Dscan can't differentiate between piloted or non piloted ships, is clogged with wreck and pos info as well. Systems with many ships would make active scanning near impossible. 7. Hitting a button every 5 seconds isn't good gameplay. 8. It would give way too much power to cov ops ships since cloaks wont show up on d-scan at all. No other tool but local exists to deal with cloaked ships.
Some bad reasons off the top of my head. If you want to convince me you need to give more of a postitive case for local and why lessening intel will make the game better for many people.
|
Aera Aiana
Amarr
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 11:22:00 -
[259]
Originally by: Ori Blake Maybe the reason why its been brought up but nothing has been done is because CCP realizes that they can't change it without making things worse. I've yet to see you give a good reason why it should be changed at all, or anyone posting in this thread. I can think of many bad things that would come from this:
Maybe actual gameplay-based intel gathering tools would be more fun? Who would care about the stuff you mentioned one year from now? -
|
Nenikeka
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 11:29:00 -
[260]
Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 15/08/2010 15:05:51
Originally by: FlameGlow So how are you supposed to know if enemies are coming ?
Gee, I don't know, how would you know your house/block/city/country is under attack in RL ? Might I suggest that maybe in EVE it could be answered with "directional scanner and the cries for help in the intel channel" ? That, plus, oh, you know, MAYBE system scanners ?
You mean the idiot-button from w-space evry 3 secs? This is a design failure imho...
regards
|
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 12:21:00 -
[261]
Originally by: Ori Blake 1. Big alliances get more powerful since only they have the manpower to maintain scouts on gates for intel. 2. Solo players and small groups will get more risk when ratting or plexing. 3. Wardecced players would find out that stations are deathtraps since they can't check local to see if a wt is camping outside. 4. Players would get more risk averse due to lack of intel. 5. Revamping dscan to show needing standing info would put a strain on server resources. 6. Dscan can't differentiate between piloted or non piloted ships, is clogged with wreck and pos info as well. Systems with many ships would make active scanning near impossible. 7. Hitting a button every 5 seconds isn't good gameplay. 8. It would give way too much power to cov ops ships since cloaks wont show up on d-scan at all. No other tool but local exists to deal with cloaked ships.
Some bad reasons off the top of my head. If you want to convince me you need to give more of a postitive case for local and why lessening intel will make the game better for many people.
But it would fix the lag in 0.0 would it not? And then carebears running their lvl 4's will finally experience the lag we experience and they won't even have to be in a fleet fight for it
This thread is a stealth nerf 0.0 and low sec whine.
|
raukosen
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 12:37:00 -
[262]
Jump through gate, drop 1 probe, scan, cloak, warp to sanctum. Probe shows up on scanner for maybe 10 seconds if it's even in scan range which it very well might not be. That would be great gameplay
|
Eternum Praetorian
True Creation
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 12:46:00 -
[263]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 12:47:30 Let Me Fix This For You Mr. Short Sighted
1. Big alliances get more powerful since only they have the manpower to maintain scouts on gates for intel.
No. They have supercarrier on top of Titans on top of NAP fests now. They can't get more powerful.
2. Solo players and small groups will get more risk when ratting or plexing.
You seem to be forgetting that the ewil piwates can't see if your in local either.
3. Wardecced players would find out that stations are deathtraps since they can't check local to see if a wt is camping outside.
You are 100% safe at undock, but I am not going to tell you why.
4. Players would get more risk averse due to lack of intel.
They don't do proper intel now. The only change is that they would become invisible to the enemy.
5. Revamping dscan to show needing standing info would put a strain on server resources.
Dscan needs an overhaul anyway, this would be a good reason to make it happen.
6. Dscan can't differentiate between piloted or non piloted ships, is clogged with wreck and pos info as well. Systems with many ships would make active scanning near impossible.
See above.
7. Hitting a button every 5 seconds isn't good gameplay.
See above.
8. It would give way too much power to cov ops ships since cloaks wont show up on d-scan at all. No other tool but local exists to deal with cloaked ships.
It's a cloak, you shouldn't see them. And if you MUST see them, make them come up as an unknown contact on Dscan or something after it gets overhauled.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 12:52:00 -
[264]
Originally by: Ori Blake Maybe the reason why its been brought up but nothing has been done is because CCP realizes that they can't change it without making things worse. I've yet to see you give a good reason why it should be changed at all, or anyone posting in this thread.
You mean other than, say, the one in bold in the OP ? "Local is an extremely powerful metagaming tool available to everybody FOR FREE, a tool that allows near-total PvP avoidance (via logoff) in a PvP-centric game, a tool that also enables other metagaming strategies like AKF cloaking and logon traps... all of which are universally hated, but still used because "that's what you do for best results"."
The PvP avoidance is one of the worst things, especially when combined with macro-users that are NOT directly linked to RMT operations (so their detection chance is smaller). Logon traps are almost equally "evil", especially when all you have in there is a single mostly-AFK cloaky scout.
Quote: I can think of many bad things that would come from this: 1. Big alliances get more powerful since only they have the manpower to maintain scouts on gates for intel. 2. Solo players and small groups will get more risk when ratting or plexing. 3. Wardecced players would find out that stations are deathtraps since they can't check local to see if a wt is camping outside. 4. Players would get more risk averse due to lack of intel. 5. Revamping dscan to show needing standing info would put a strain on server resources. 6. Dscan can't differentiate between piloted or non piloted ships, is clogged with wreck and pos info as well. Systems with many ships would make active scanning near impossible. 7. Hitting a button every 5 seconds isn't good gameplay. 8. It would give way too much power to cov ops ships since cloaks wont show up on d-scan at all. No other tool but local exists to deal with cloaked ships.
1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 Who says you'd have to make it so you need scouts on every gate, or that you have to keep d-scan "as is", or even use JUST d-scan ? For all you know, you could make it so that a single astrometrics frigate with a maxed-skills pilot could cover an entire system in a satisfactory manner (but only when not cloaked itself). Or many cloakers while cloaked. Or any other number of combinations of ships. Or you could get back the same functionality (for you, your corp or even your alliance) by dropping deployable objects on each of the gates (which can be destroyed easily) - so, things more like the deployable bubbles, as opposed to POS stuff that would give a huge advantage to whoever is "defending". Different sized deployable intel objects could give different levels of intel and/or need less of them per system. So, yes, you risk more stuff (in the form of losing the deployed objects), but that could be the only real extra risk. Of course, AFTER you lost the deployed objects, you also lost access to the intel. It's fairly balanced that way - you get to keep similar levels of intel BUT at a cost, you can also lose that invested capital.
3. There were also talks of making people able to view "outside" from a station, while docked, so that's not necessarily a good counter-argument. Basically, it's just enabling the overview while docked with the station acting as the player's max-0-speed ship (for all people docked).
8. You could make it so that PRESENCE of a cloaked ship is detected by one of the changed or one of the new scanning methods, just not their location. You could make it even so presence of LOGGED OFF ships is detectable (of course, no location, since they don't even exist after a short while).
7 (part 2). The d-scan could be revamped to be much more similar to the overview, but graphically. See the multiple posts about the old-style overview ("elite-look" scanner) plus some filters could very well replace the d-scanner (but having it as extra instead of replacement is better). No clicky. _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Minchurra
Caldari Feudum Chalybis The Spire Collective
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:02:00 -
[265]
If you really must remove it, why not just make local chat (as it is now) a buyable system upgrade like cyno jam?
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 12:47:30 2. Solo players and small groups will get more risk when ratting or plexing.
You seem to be forgetting that the ewil piwates can't see if your in local either.
Thats not a particularly great retort, 30 seconds on DOTLAN (or the ingame map for that matter) will instantly show you your target's ratting systems, the "ewil piwates" know where you are, so you're still at a disadvantage.
|
Eternum Praetorian
True Creation
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:08:00 -
[266]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 13:09:00
Originally by: Minchurra If you really must remove it, why not just make local chat (as it is now) a buyable system upgrade like cyno jam?
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 12:47:30 2. Solo players and small groups will get more risk when ratting or plexing.
You seem to be forgetting that the ewil piwates can't see if your in local either.
Thats not a particularly great retort, 30 seconds on DOTLAN (or the ingame map for that matter) will instantly show you your target's ratting systems, the "ewil piwates" know where you are, so you're still at a disadvantage.
So you pick one out of eight points? And then ignore the part about overhauling the Dscan?
Scared Carebear?
|
Minchurra
Caldari Feudum Chalybis The Spire Collective
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:13:00 -
[267]
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian So you pick one out of eight points? And then ignore the part about overhauling the Dscan?
Scared Carebear?
I picked the point I disagreed with.
Your other points were all quite valid, directional needs renovation.
Yes I'm quaking in my boots, too many already get their carriers tackled and killed in plexes, I shudder to think what the outcome of this will be.
|
Eternum Praetorian
True Creation
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:15:00 -
[268]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 13:15:33 Akita T suggestions would actually make life better for 0.0 plexers. People look at Dotlan maps now anyway.
|
Minchurra
Caldari Feudum Chalybis The Spire Collective
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:30:00 -
[269]
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 13:15:33 Akita T suggestions would actually make life better for 0.0 plexers. People look at Dotlan maps now anyway.
Isn't that what we're trying to avoid?
If people are being killed in plexes now, with full backing of local and (multiple) intel channels, how could removing both help them?
I understand people use DOTLAN now, its a very valuable tool. I raised it as an issue, because it undermines the idea "hunters and targets both suffer equally from lack of local" -> if all I have to do is search for systems with the most NPC kills and/or best sov upgrades I have an immediate leg-up over my targets, because I know where they are.
If local is removed, then the "NPC kills in last x hours" statistic should go with it, or else it won't be balanced.
|
Eternum Praetorian
True Creation
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 13:59:00 -
[270]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 14:00:08 At this very moment, do to local, in theory no one should ever get caught off guard and tackled in 0.0 (or any pleace else for that matter) while plexing or running missions. Between the blue system and local, EVERYONE has a fool proof way to keep their ship intact 23/7.
And yet as you said, people are getting tackled in carriers all the time
People ultimately are fallible [not to mention exceedingly dumb] and so removing local and adding an upgraded version of the Dscan will not really change the odds of who who lives and who dies. You have a 100% fool proof method now, and yet that isn't good enough for these idiots plexing in carriers.
What it WILL change, is how people interact with the game in order to gather intel. The dumb, the lazy and the meh will die stupid, needless deaths like they do now. The difference between gathering intel from local VS Dscan would be something like:
1.) You are not sure if the other guy has 4 or 7 ships. 2.) You still know what kinds they are (the ones you do see) 3.) You are not sure who is piloting those ships or what corp/alliance they belong to without some EFFORT ON YOUR PART.
This makes life better for a PVP based game, and yet it does nothing in terms of making the game less safe for carebears. We can have our cake and eat it too \0/
|
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 14:36:00 -
[271]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Ori Blake Maybe the reason why its been brought up but nothing has been done is because CCP realizes that they can't change it without making things worse. I've yet to see you give a good reason why it should be changed at all, or anyone posting in this thread.
You mean other than, say, the one in bold in the OP ? "Local is an extremely powerful metagaming tool available to everybody FOR FREE, a tool that allows near-total PvP avoidance (via logoff) in a PvP-centric game, a tool that also enables other metagaming strategies like AKF cloaking and logon traps... all of which are universally hated, but still used because "that's what you do for best results"."
The PvP avoidance is one of the worst things, especially when combined with macro-users that are NOT directly linked to RMT operations (so their detection chance is smaller). Logon traps are almost equally "evil", especially when all you have in there is a single mostly-AFK cloaky scout.
Akita none of this makes sense. First, itÆs not clear that local is a ômetagameö. You jump into a system you are identified by others in that system. Why? Well it could be any number of things û how the gates work, ships have scanners that indicate that (sort of like your dscan revamp idea only without the needing the revamp etc. Second, AFK cloaking is made possible because local is not delayed? Log on traps are made possible because local is not delayed?
Sorry I donÆt see how either of these makes any sense. Log on traps will be much more effective if you donÆt even know the gang is logging on until they are on top of you. With instant local you see local spike and at least have some time to get away. The time it takes for them to end their initial warp and warp to you. With delayed local you will know they logged on when they are on top of you.
Third AFK cloaking isnÆt universally hated. It doesnÆt bother me in the least. When people whine about it on the forums it rarely gets much traction with players.
It allows pvp avoidance. I suppose it does. But your idea of improving the scanner does this as well. Moreover knowing who is in local is a major tool to help me find pvp! When I am roaming I am looking for war targets if I donÆt see anyone in local I know to move to the next system. If I see some war targets then I can scan around to find them. Local delay means it might take much longer to find fights.
The only thing delaying local seems to do is benefit people who like to 1) pvp against pve fits and 2) blob. Sorry but Blobbing does not need a boost.
Nor does eve need to require more people to fit and f around with probe launchers. Its just tedious.
You say this ôwill happenö but I didnÆt see the link. Right now eve is borderline worthless due to the amount of time it takes to find an enjoyable fight without getting blobbed by mouth breathers. I hope ccp recognizes delayed local will go a long way to killing the game for anyone who has a brain.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 14:46:00 -
[272]
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 13:09:00
Originally by: Minchurra If you really must remove it, why not just make local chat (as it is now) a buyable system upgrade like cyno jam?
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 19/08/2010 12:47:30 2. Solo players and small groups will get more risk when ratting or plexing.
You seem to be forgetting that the ewil piwates can't see if your in local either.
Thats not a particularly great retort, 30 seconds on DOTLAN (or the ingame map for that matter) will instantly show you your target's ratting systems, the "ewil piwates" know where you are, so you're still at a disadvantage.
So you pick one out of eight points? And then ignore the part about overhauling the Dscan? Scared Carebear?
Actually the one he picked was the only actual advantage of delayed local you offered. The rest of your answers basically amount to ôwell lets change the dscan so that we effectively eliminate any effects delayed local will have so long as you spam the dscan button.ö Nice way to make eve more tedious. And the obvious response is: why not just keep local the way it is so we 1) donÆt need to upgrade the dscan to do those things and 2) we donÆt need to keep spamming dscan like obsessive compulsive ninnies.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 15:21:00 -
[273]
Originally by: Cearain You say this ôwill happenö but I didnÆt see the link. Right now eve is borderline worthless due to the amount of time it takes to find an enjoyable fight without getting blobbed by mouth breathers. I hope ccp recognizes delayed local will go a long way to killing the game for anyone who has a brain.
The big dev Q&A thread...
Originally by: by CCP Zulu, Posted - 2008.10.24 15:24:00 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.
Plus several other such posts by devs on other occasions, both before and after. Then there's the fact it was brought forth as CSM issue too.
...and so on and so forth. EVENTUALLY, it WILL happen. The only question is WHEN.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
raukosen
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:00:00 -
[274]
They want to, that doesn't mean they will. Saying it's inevitable isn't a good argument for why it should happen anyway. Stop spamming it
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:19:00 -
[275]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Cearain You say this ôwill happenö but I didnÆt see the link. Right now eve is borderline worthless due to the amount of time it takes to find an enjoyable fight without getting blobbed by mouth breathers. I hope ccp recognizes delayed local will go a long way to killing the game for anyone who has a brain.
The big dev Q&A thread...
Originally by: by CCP Zulu, Posted - 2008.10.24 15:24:00 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.
Plus several other such posts by devs on other occasions, both before and after. Then there's the fact it was brought forth as CSM issue too.
...and so on and so forth. EVENTUALLY, it WILL happen. The only question is WHEN.
I thought your original post included high and low sec not just 0.0. Also perhaps you didnÆt read the part where in 2008 he says of this ôLocal: I'm hoping we'll have something done to local in 0.0 in q1 next year.ö
Plans have changed Akita.
IÆm not sure what you mean by csm. http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/August_2010_Prioritization_Crowdsourcing_%28CSM%29 This link is supposed to contain everything csm passed but ccp hasnÆt acted on yet. I may have missed the ôdelay local everywhereö proposal but I didnÆt see it. I didnÆt even see one passed that would delay null sec. What number is the proposal? But in the end, this thread offers not a single good reason to delay local. And plenty of good reasons not to change it.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:23:00 -
[276]
If local got removed everyone would switch to one of the many programs that report local count. There're many and I know a guy who has made two, of which one is excellent. I will not reveal his identity but if local were to be removed only the wise (those with programs running) will surive and these little ebil piwates thinking they're the only ones with them will still be left crying. The only difference will be that half of 0.0 will be even more empty.
I say CCP should do it, they're trolling us as it is with their "We'll probably consider thinking about thinking about EVE in 18 months." schedule. This will just kill 0.0 and we can all go play other games.
AmIdoingitright?
|
Eternum Praetorian
True Creation
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:36:00 -
[277]
Originally by: Cearain
Blows it out of his kazoo
Dscan needs to be fixed anyway. Local intel requires no effort.
Are you still confused?
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:36:00 -
[278]
Edited by: Akita T on 19/08/2010 16:42:08
Originally by: Cearain I thought your original post included high and low sec not just 0.0. Also perhaps you didnÆt read the part where in 2008 he says of this ôLocal: I'm hoping we'll have something done to local in 0.0 in q1 next year.ö Plans have changed Akita.
Yes, all of it would be best, but 0.0 alone is decent enough for a start. Also, yes, plans have changed, it has been delayed with NO due date. This is about why that's not a good thing.
Quote: IÆm not sure what you mean by csm.
See O.P.
Originally by: Super Whopper If local got removed everyone would switch to one of the many programs that report local count.
Not REMOVED. Put in "delayed mode" (for starters, anyway). You do get to keep the damn number-of-pilots-in-system count, so you don't need any extra programs, it should be displayed right there still. Just so you don't automatically know WHO came into the system.
I would go even further and not just display total numbers of online pilots (without identification of who it is), BUT ALSO total number of people that are logged off but in the system. However, ideally, you'd want pilots that are cloaked to show up as logged off instead of online.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:42:00 -
[279]
Ok I'll bite,
A good part of this game is that its a social game. Really people don't talk enough in local for my taste .. but at least when you see peoples names in system you feel like you're hanging out wiht them. If you see their name each night you start saying hi.
You might share a bit of info, ask them for help with some rats if mining..etc.. thats for allies
As for enemies, that too is more interesting as you get to Know your enemy . Local allows you to click on their chracter.. read their bio ,, see their employment history, click on their corp.. maybe look at their corp page..
You start to get a feel for different groups of people. Rivalries start to arrise (oh no! its the Mustard Franfurter Squad invading again ! RUN to sation!) ....
Its the story of the people involved thats a good part of the fun... that makes mmos diffeent thanonline consule fps games. The less you see information about the names of other people, the slower that you'll get any sense of knowing who they are.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:44:00 -
[280]
For the Nth time, this is not about removing the ability to get that data... just about the fact getting that data should "COST" something, be it time, gear, or a bit of both.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
|
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 16:59:00 -
[281]
As for the AFK cloaking, that really shouldn't be part of the consideration about the need for local change.
The bad parts about AFK cloaking could easily be removed by implimenting some cloak timer...even if it were 15 minutes people would need to check back in that often else find their ship scanned down and blown up while they were walking their dog or off to another class. That is another argument but really the delayed mode in local doesn't even solve it at all anyway ... it just removes the pych out of knowing that an enemy is logged on in system and replaces it with the possiblity that unknown people are logged on in system.
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 17:02:00 -
[282]
Originally by: Akita T For the Nth time, this is not about removing the ability to get that data... just about the fact getting that data should "COST" something, be it time, gear, or a bit of both.
No it shouldn't. As has been explained in this thread, the game is better when that info is free. -Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Diomedes Calypso
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 17:09:00 -
[283]
Edited by: Diomedes Calypso on 19/08/2010 17:12:17
Originally by: Akita T For the Nth time, this is not about removing the ability to get that data... just about the fact getting that data should "COST" something, be it time, gear, or a bit of both.
My point was the casual nature of seeing the people in system by being able to click on their names and being able to find out about them.... all people set neutral, blue and red. Running scanners all the time to see friendlies names wouldn't be great either. And the harder it is to find by constant scanning and more difficult work in clicking to find out about people the less you'll get to be aquainted with other players. I kid people about their names all the time. Its fun to see people named after ****-stars and make some crack about them.
If i'm chasing through a system, I'm not going to have time to scan down all the ships,
and are you saying if I see a ship type on scanner I'm suddenly going to get the new ability to see who's piloting it and their pilot info ?
That would be a major change sort of in the opposite direction, making it too easy for defenders to scan down a non cloaking enemy ship in a populated alliance ratting system.
Peosonaly the darkness of the wormhole's makes them less appealing but hey, to each their own.
But I'm not 100% with the status quo.. I could see having a 30 second delay between entry into system and having your name discolsed. A bit more time to make a tackle.. a bit more "cry wolf" from friendlies popping into system without their names appearing.
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 17:13:00 -
[284]
Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 19/08/2010 16:42:08
Originally by: Cearain
Quote: IÆm not sure what you mean by csm.
See O.P.
Thanks for the link. The name "wild 0.0" was deceiving. That only applies to null sec and then it can be overcome by a module. I don't fight in null sec because I'm nto intereted in blobs. People in null sec may want to boost "bait and blob" tactics. But so far I have not seen anything suggesting they will screw up high and low sec with this crap. -Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Analissa Fiora
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 20:26:00 -
[285]
I say do it. Remove local. Sure, the carebears will move back to high-sec but it'll be fun while we kill them off . It's about time bears were run out of null and low-sec.
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 21:09:00 -
[286]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 19/08/2010 21:10:16
Originally by: Akita T A huge part of your arguments seem to rely on one main thing : the ASSUMPTION that just because local might be placed in delayed mode, there will be absolutely no way in hell the current level of intel that local provides could ever be achieved again. THAT IS AN INCORRECT ASSUMPTION. Nobody is saying that the level of intel available is too high, just the fact it comes without the need for any serious form of player effort or any matTriel commitment is what's actually wrong.
And I am trying to make you realize that more effort will mean less players in null-sec. Principles like "0.0 should be like this" or "Not enough effort to get it" will not be accepted by everyone only because it sound logical. This, because it is a game, not a job.
A huge part of your arguments seem to rely on one main thing : that CCP stated that it will be happening. And you are absolutely right. But let's go back to the day that it was stated :
½ 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. + - CCP Zulu
Small zoom :
if we find nothing better this will be put in testing at least
in testing at least
testing
Sound like CCP is not sure that it will be a good move. "Testing" on TQ is not really one of their habits. They seem to be more rational than you Akita.
Indeed, you hope that dscan will be adapted before delayed local is applied. That would be a good point. But all compromises will have some counterparts. It can be server-side AND/OR ingame. For exemple, the idea of a deployable object means that in a fleet fight, no one will get fastly an idea of the opponent power, or maybe only few minutes. I doubt that it means they will both try to fight, as loss means something in EVE. A suicidal attitude is not really rewarding... This will only make blobs worse to be sure to win in all situations.
At last, if you seriously think that people will play your game as you wish, so you are the most optimistic player I have ever seen. Today, EVE is a big napfest and a majority of players stay in Empire... For obvious reasons. Still, some players like you want make things worse. And this, mostly because you don't want think about all consequences of this move and about the ones of the proposed counterparts.
So, let's test it. I am already prepared to laught from the tears of the predators, if the leak of targets will happen as expected. _______ 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 |
Professor Tarantula
Hedion University
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 21:13:00 -
[287]
Originally by: Analissa Fiora I say do it. Remove local. Sure, the carebears will move back to high-sec but it'll be fun while we kill them off . It's about time bears were run out of null and low-sec.
Pretty sure local is used for finding targets much more than it is for avoiding them, so you might be in for a surprise when you see who that effects more.
My deepest sympathies. Prof. Tarantula, Esq. |
Analissa Fiora
|
Posted - 2010.08.19 21:26:00 -
[288]
Originally by: Professor Tarantula
Originally by: Analissa Fiora I say do it. Remove local. Sure, the carebears will move back to high-sec but it'll be fun while we kill them off . It's about time bears were run out of null and low-sec.
Pretty sure local is used for finding targets much more than it is for avoiding them, so you might be in for a surprise when you see who that effects more.
Except that when we roam they dock/cloak up as soon as we appear in local. So what difference does it make if we see them? If local is gone then we have a better chance at catching belt ratters and miners.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 13:58:00 -
[289]
Originally by: Akita T
You do get to keep the damn number-of-pilots-in-system count, so you don't need any extra programs, it should be displayed right there still. Just so you don't automatically know WHO came into the system.
I'll have to disagree with this. The "number of pilots in system" number should be the number that is used in the star map, and should have the same delay (and be displayed somewhere in the new d-scanner interface).
An instant in-system count would be almost as bad as the current instant local. ...
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 14:06:00 -
[290]
Originally by: Cearain
Originally by: Akita T For the Nth time, this is not about removing the ability to get that data... just about the fact getting that data should "COST" something, be it time, gear, or a bit of both.
No it shouldn't. As has been explained in this thread, the game is better when that info is free.
The only conclusive explanation to come out of this thread is that instant local is great for macros (and exploiters). Is this what you're referring to? ...
|
|
Brian Ballsack
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 14:18:00 -
[291]
yaaal already had a bunch of those already.
|
Thorian Baalnorn
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 14:35:00 -
[292]
Originally by: Analissa Fiora I say do it. Remove local. Sure, the carebears will move back to high-sec but it'll be fun while we kill them off . It's about time bears were run out of null and low-sec.
You obviously understand nothing about this game if you think its a good idea that the carebears that are in 0.0 and low sec all move back to empire. Eve would collapse.
1) All the t2 materials are found in low/null 2) carebears build caps in low/null 3) Hi sec belts would be stripped dry in days. 4) there are minerals that are only obtainable in low/null unless you count junk loot which is not nearly enough to sustain the current production rate.
|
Yankunytjatjara
Amarr Blue Republic
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 15:33:00 -
[293]
Originally by: Akita T P.P.S. Yankunytjatjara sort of had the right idea on how the scanner could be changed to compensate - basically, bring back the ancient "Elite-looking" radar of early EVE clients, and in it, constantly display (visually) ALL things that would show up on a d-scan that is set on max-range and 360 degrees.
Thanks. I posted it as proposal: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1371694&page=1, can I haz support?
And don't forget the tactical overview option for solo/small gangs: Ship Velocity Vectors |
Malcanis
Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 17:04:00 -
[294]
Originally by: Yankunytjatjara
Originally by: Akita T P.P.S. Yankunytjatjara sort of had the right idea on how the scanner could be changed to compensate - basically, bring back the ancient "Elite-looking" radar of early EVE clients, and in it, constantly display (visually) ALL things that would show up on a d-scan that is set on max-range and 360 degrees.
Thanks. I posted it as proposal: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1371694&page=1, can I haz support?
I would love this. It would also really add to the atmosphere of the game I reckon. I mean what the hell, I'd probably lose more ships but who cares...
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 17:12:00 -
[295]
Edited by: Cearain on 20/08/2010 17:12:57
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Cearain
Originally by: Akita T For the Nth time, this is not about removing the ability to get that data... just about the fact getting that data should "COST" something, be it time, gear, or a bit of both.
No it shouldn't. As has been explained in this thread, the game is better when that info is free.
The only conclusive explanation to come out of this thread is that instant local is great for macros (and exploiters). Is this what you're referring to?
No my concern is that every time you try to fight solo or in a small gang and then a blob jumps into local you will not see that until itÆs too late. You see my eve experience does not entirely consist of looking to gank people who are mining or in pve ships. Now if that is your main interest in eve then yeah delayed local is wonderful. But for those of us who play eve looking for good fights this change would suck. Just to be clear:
Do you like to spend all your time baiting and blobbing people in eve? If yes delayed local would be wonderful! Do you like to spend your time fighting ships that have nothing but mining lasers? If yes then delayed local would be wonderful! Do you like to get good quality pvp fights? If yes then delayed local is a horrible idea. Do you like to see if you are wasting your time looking for war targets in a system quickly without having to fit a probe launcher or warp around like an idiot? If yes then delayed local is a horrible idea.
Macros will have a harder time? IÆm not so sure about that. The only thing delayed local will do is make eve even less enjoyable unless you are in some big alliance that can post scouts at every gate. Its not that no one will be able to get these minerals in low or null sec. Its just that it will take more organized ventures to do that. But if you do have that organization then you will make *more* isk. Supply and demand. Now I have not heard anything to suggest that the macros and ôexploitersö are so much less organized than your typical player. Until we know that then we can not determine if this will be a boon or a bust to macros or exploiters.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 17:52:00 -
[296]
Originally by: Cearain No my concern is that every time you try to fight solo or in a small gang and then a blob jumps into local you will not see that until itÆs too late.
You are right, you will not get an instant notification that you should run wherever you are in the system. Your d-scanner will show the æblobÆ if it is within its range, which should give you enough time to get out.
Originally by: Cearain Do you like to see if you are wasting your time looking for war targets in a system quickly without having to fit a probe launcher or warp around like an idiot? If yes then delayed local is a horrible idea.
You search may have to become a little more strategic, instead of jumping around the map like an idiot. YouÆd have to use data from places like dotlan and the star map to see trends in traffic and farming systems. Track political events to become aware of war zones. Etc.
Conversely youÆll always have a blob hunting for you whenever you enter any alliance territory (that means 99% of 0.0) because youÆve been spotted by anyone who happened to be in the system you went through.
...
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:07:00 -
[297]
Originally by: Razin Edited by: Razin on 20/08/2010 17:58:58
Originally by: Cearain No my concern is that every time you try to fight solo or in a small gang and then a blob jumps into local you will not see that until itÆs too late.
You are right, you will not get an instant notification that you should run wherever you are in the system. Your d-scanner will show the æblobÆ if it is within its range, which should give you enough time to get out.
edit: Showing you the 'jump-in signatures' before the ships uncloak (sort of like seeing the local fill in) may very well be a function of the new d-scanner provided you are on the same grid as the gate, for example.
Originally by: Cearain Do you like to see if you are wasting your time looking for war targets in a system quickly without having to fit a probe launcher or warp around like an idiot? If yes then delayed local is a horrible idea.
You search may have to become a little more strategic, instead of jumping around the map like an idiot. YouÆd have to use data from places like dotlan and the star map to see trends in traffic and farming systems. Track political events to become aware of war zones. Etc.
Conversely youÆll always have a blob hunting for you whenever you enter any alliance territory (that means 99% of 0.0) because youÆve been spotted by anyone who happened to be in the system you went through.
At least we can to some extent agree on what will happen even if we donÆt agree on whether itÆs good or bad. I see having to hit my dscan all the time during a pvp engagement when I am already trying to monitor my overloaded mods cap and range as a big negative.
If the new dscan would show what local will show anyway û why not just have local show it? Why force us to neurotically click a button?
I donÆt always run away every time I see a ship on dscan because I donÆt know if it is a war target. Local tells me this. Again if the dscan is going to give the same information as local then why not just have local do it automatically. How does being forced to spam a button improve gameplay?
If I am involved in a pvp fight it is currently hard enough to try to burn away after seeing local spike with other wartargets. Giving people even less time will make it almost impossible and surely kill off what is left of solo and small gang pvp.
As far as having to use out of game tools to find war targets like dotlan û well that is moving in the wrong direction for me. I think it takes long enough to find a decent target. I am against any change that makes finding a good fight in eve more of a chore than it already is. I am very much in favor of mechanics that make good fights easier to find.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 19:38:00 -
[298]
Originally by: Cearain ...
Just a couple of points, if I may.
One, no one likes to endlessly push buttons. I believe that most who are arguing for delayed local assume that one of the features of the new d-scanner will be the 'auto mode'. This is explicitly stated several times in this thread.
Two, this new d-scanner is assumed to will have taken over all of the intel gathering functionality of current local, EXCEPT for its infinite range and general effortlessness. What this may mean is that different types of information provided by the new d-scanner may be provided at some limited ranges.
How CCP would implement any of this is anyone's guess.
Hope this clears up at leas some misunderstandings. ...
|
Nisanu
|
Posted - 2010.08.20 20:25:00 -
[299]
Edited by: Nisanu on 20/08/2010 20:25:31
I personally hate the idea of giving even greater power to alliances, but that is subjective. I'm afraid it would make 0.0 a true wasteland without any activity that is unsanctioned by the dominant alliances.
Still, one can debate the desirability of local.
What I don't understand is how people can argue with the fact that it will benefit (large) alliances. Surely it's obvious that removing free (democratic) info will benefit those with resources and scouts, and will make it even more difficult to solo or small gang roam 0.0.
Knowing who is in the system is much more valuable to a solo pilot than to a large alliance that has safety in numbers. Just send some cloaked scouts into systems, and the moment they spot a solo ratter, they can call in reinforcements. It would make it a suicide mission for any solo or small corp player to do anything in nullsec. How can people doubt this?
|
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 02:59:00 -
[300]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Cearain ...
Just a couple of points, if I may.
One, no one likes to endlessly push buttons. I believe that most who are arguing for delayed local assume that one of the features of the new d-scanner will be the 'auto mode'. This is explicitly stated several times in this thread.
Two, this new d-scanner is assumed to will have taken over all of the intel gathering functionality of current local, EXCEPT for its infinite range and general effortlessness......
IÆm not sure everyone posting in this long thread are on board for this ill-defined, new, and as yet never even mentioned by anyone in ccp, scanner. But ok. This new d-scanner won't require so much as the push of a button yet it will still somehow require more effort than looking at local.
Why are we splitting hairs? Just keep local as it is. DonÆt make changes just for change sake.
The fact that it has less range is not good IMO. It means blobs get a boost.
Plus I agree with NisanuÆs views on this. Being forced to have scouts at every gate will be a kick in the pants for all the more casual eve players.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 03:12:00 -
[301]
Originally by: Nisanu Knowing who is in the system is much more valuable to a solo pilot than to a large alliance that has safety in numbers. Just send some cloaked scouts into systems, and the moment they spot a solo ratter, they can call in reinforcements. It would make it a suicide mission for any solo or small corp player to do anything in nullsec. How can people doubt this?
First off, to have "safety in numbers", alliances would have to actually attain the needed concentration by reducing their territory (or at least concentrating more forces around the borders), something the "revamped sov" hasn't managed to do due to the not-ramped-up-enough costs. Second, sending out scouting parties outside the controlled territory (be it outside a tightly-packed area, or away from the border in the other type of number-concentration) will either result in less safety in numbers in the controlled space, or in a wipeout of the expeditionary force by an ambush. Or better still, the ambush would be a bait to draw out hotdroppable ships, to make room for the REAL assault. You never know for sure which is which. And that's just stuff off the top of my head. Making intel NOT automatic and NOT free-of-charge opens up strategic options that are simply impossible right now.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 04:16:00 -
[302]
Originally by: Cearain
IÆm not sure everyone posting in this long thread are on board for this ill-defined, new, and as yet never even mentioned by anyone in ccp, scanner.
CCP Zulu has mentioned new scanning mechanic to replace instant local. The auto feature seems like an obvious requirement.
Originally by: Cearain Why are we splitting hairs? Just keep local as it is. DonÆt make changes just for change sake.
The fact that it has less range is not good IMO. It means blobs get a boost.
So you did notice the limited range. Why complain about splitting hairs then? Seems disingenuous.
Originally by: Cearain Plus I agree with NisanuÆs views on this. Being forced to have scouts at every gate will be a kick in the pants for all the more casual eve players.
See Akita T's answer to Nisanu. ...
|
Zey Nadar
Gallente Unknown Soldiers The Spire Collective
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 07:28:00 -
[303]
Originally by: Cearain
First, itÆs not clear that local is a ômetagameö. You jump into a system you are identified by others in that system. Why? Well it could be any number of things û how the gates work, ships have scanners that indicate that (sort of like your dscan revamp idea only without the needing the revamp etc. Second, AFK cloaking is made possible because local is not delayed? Log on traps are made possible because local is not delayed?
In ingame sense, I thought local was explained somewhere as a concord network in the solar system. Id imagine relay stations of this network would be based on the gates. Wormhole space doesnt have gates or such structures so it doesnt have same kind of local.
That said, I like delayed mode local. I wouldnt mind having it in 0.0. It would change the game a lot though.
|
Hemp Invader
EVERYTHING IS TERRIBLE Prime Orbital Systems
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 11:34:00 -
[304]
Edited by: Hemp Invader on 21/08/2010 11:34:41 Beeing a wh pvp-er i always wanted 0.0 local to be just as wh local and here are my arguments: If you guys ever take a look at the kills that have been made in wh space you would see that there are some kills with officer fitted vargurs and stuff like that on a daily basis.(try that in 0.0)
Monkey sphere proved that local is a really really effective way for macros to make tons of isk, thus ruining the game(love you monkey for the pure awesome and congratulations to the epic programmer who made the software :) ). I could not figure out a more efficient way for the macro problem than letting the players themselves kill them.
A new dimension to pvp: when you decide to go in combat you never know what to expect, a small gang or a massive blob. Counter intelligence will be used much more and this will produce more fun fights than ever before.
The lag monster will be nerfed, think about the first engagements, they don't happen todya because everyone is scared of eachother.
The FC will have to make tougher decisions about when going in on a fight or not, not having the local intelligence channel.
Sorry about the wall of text but that's the way i feel about local.
edit: indentation
|
Kolatha
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 13:17:00 -
[305]
I have watched these nerf local arguments for some time and have noticed a recurring theme from those who want local changed to delayed.
Local is a free intel tool.
So, knowing that features and idea is that way, and knowing I will get a thorough lambasting for my idea I will still put this forward as a rough outline that can be fleshed out.
What if you had to work for local as an intel tool?
First change local intel so it only gave character name and current corp/alliance (not employment history, make it like using a locator agent to gather that info). This still lets you have standings and war-targets shown but leaves you guessing whether that is some 3 day old scouting alt or a 4 year old veteran you have on your scanner.
Change local in 0.0, NPC faction space and low-sec to delayed (it's fun in WH space even though I am always on the receiving end). Hi-sec local remains immediate for all.
Now comes the part where you work for local as intel.
In NPC held space (pirate factions and low-sec) you buy immediate access to local via LP stores of the sovereign faction (but only in systems where that faction has a station, essentially the fluff becomes that local is a function of the stations rather than the gates) and require a minimum standing for purchase. If you don't have sufficient standings and don't fork over the LP for access then your local remains in delayed mode.
Gives some sense of safety to mission runners that may encourage more people into the no-mans-land that is currently low-sec and further into the pirate faction space (it would certainly tempt me). Sure these mission runners will have better intel than the pirates but there will be more of us for you to hunt. Adds a bit more flavour to the game for the RPers as well (perhaps even add LP store item that allows you to become a member of the pirate NPC factions, kinda like faction warfare corps, but a little better thought out).
In 0.0 space immediate local is available as sovereignty upgrade that works for alliance members only.
Throw on top of this the feature where your appearance in local is always delayed, you don't show in local to other system dwellers regardless of whether they have immediate or delayed access (in hi-sec as well), if you enter the system via a non-gate entry, eg, wormholes.
Something along those lines may satisfy both sides of the argument.
But overall, I do agree some changes to local are in order just not to the extremes of a blanket removal. At the very least you should not appear in local if you don't enter the system via a gate.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 14:58:00 -
[306]
Kolatha, it's _a_ step in the general right direction, but not quite what anybody had in mind. You have the "non free" part down, which is ok... but what about global availability and equal opportunity ? It's not exactly gameplay-conducive to only have one category of 0.0 have a similar maximum level of intel to what we have now, and only have one category of people be able to access that kind of data (based on standings to NPCs).
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 15:08:00 -
[307]
Originally by: Akita T
* a T2 BPO is nothing more than a limited-edition investment tool with VERY low RoI but minimal effort required, a tool that also allows certain markets to even exist in the first place, while at the same time NOT interfering with invention profitability in the markets that have any reasonable demand... there are alternatives that are more profitable and cost less as far as initial capital goes
* local is an extremely powerful metagaming tool available to everybody FOR FREE, a tool that allows near-total PvP avoidance (via logoff) in a PvP-centric game, a tool that also enables other metagaming strategies like AKF cloaking and logon traps... all of which are universally hated, but still used because "that's what you do for best results"
[sarcasm]Yes, how could I not see just how similar they are ![/sarcasm]
O ya free... REALLY bad ROI... sell for 30bill...
The only reasons even remotely accurate to change local are purely emotional ones, NOT based on logic.
Thread over, I'll be like you!
You just love to skip the parts that hurt your case, everyone hates blobs too and no local just means, bring as many as you can... so either the node crashes or you have safty in numbers... *ALL THE TIME* also means people will get the FUN job of watching gates... how do you live in a WH, you close the damn ways to get in...
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 16:12:00 -
[308]
Originally by: alittlebirdy O ya free... REALLY bad ROI... sell for 30bill...
I have a feeling you have no clue what RoI means, or are purposefully ignoring it. As for the rest of your post : phshaw !
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
SovietShield
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 17:18:00 -
[309]
i believe the devs would be all over some sort of walking feature to revamp local chat
|
HarrietMiers
Native Freshfood
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 20:17:00 -
[310]
I would love W-space local everywhere. There would be a rough period of adjustment for both hunters and the hunted, but it makes perfect sense and is an advantage/disadvantage to both. But it would increase the "surprise" element, allow for proper raiding parties, and, most importantly, fits in perfectly with the "it's cold, dark, and you're all alone" feel of Eve.
+1 vote.
|
|
Nisanu
|
Posted - 2010.08.21 21:50:00 -
[311]
Edited by: Nisanu on 21/08/2010 21:51:21
Originally by: Akita T
First off, to have "safety in numbers", alliances would have to actually attain the needed concentration by reducing their territory (or at least concentrating more forces around the borders), something the "revamped sov" hasn't managed to do due to the not-ramped-up-enough costs. Second, sending out scouting parties outside the controlled territory (be it outside a tightly-packed area, or away from the border in the other type of number-concentration) will either result in less safety in numbers in the controlled space, or in a wipeout of the expeditionary force by an ambush. Or better still, the ambush would be a bait to draw out hotdroppable ships, to make room for the REAL assault. You never know for sure which is which. And that's just stuff off the top of my head. Making intel NOT automatic and NOT free-of-charge opens up strategic options that are simply impossible right now.
Well, I think there is a valid argument that because local is free, it should be removed. I don't agree, but it's a valid argument.
However, it is exactly because it is free that removing it would change the balance against solo and small gang players. Large corps and alliances can afford to gather (expensive/difficult) intel, a solo player or small gang typically can't.
Your arguments are mostly focussed on making warfare between alliances more interesting. That is fair enough, and I think it might (perhaps) make 0.0 alliance warfare better.
But it would definitely make 0.0 almost an impossible place for small corps or solo players, and that would eventually harm everyone (less targets, less fun). Do we really want 0.0 to be exclusively the domain of those with hundreds of blues?
Because of that, local should only be removed if measures are put in place to keep some kind of balance between the two type of players (alliance warfare and small gangs/solo players). |
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 01:36:00 -
[312]
I don't understand the issue with it being free. Are you saying we have to "pay" the cost of pressing a button to get the information on dscan. Therefore we should have to ôpayö to get information that concord gives in local? Paying is fine with me. X isk per month to concord and it tells you what is in local. Does that solve that problem? I mean concord has to know who is in local right? It has to check to make sure everyone hasn't aggressed recently before they are allowed to use the gates right?
So if your big issue is that concord shares the intel on who is in system with everyone then just set a fee and that is solved.
I donÆt think this will make the anti local crowd happy though. Because the whole ôlocal is free no fairö is really beside the point and indeed ridiculous. They want to be able to blob more effectively and they want to be able to get easier kills on pve ships.
If you want no local the game gives you that option now. Go to worm holes. DonÆt eliminate eve as an option for those who like to do solo or small gang pvp. At least leave low sec an option for people who donÆt live for of blobbing and ganking miners. Delayed local forced everywhere will go a long way to completely ruining the game.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Cearain
Caldari The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 01:40:00 -
[313]
Originally by: HarrietMiers I would love W-space local everywhere. There would be a rough period of adjustment...
Well 90% of eve players prefer the game elsewhere. Isn't there enough wormhole space for you to roam through that you have to insist we all play with the mechanics you like? I really don't understand the view that says we need to give people fewer options in eve. -Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 01:54:00 -
[314]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: alittlebirdy O ya free... REALLY bad ROI... sell for 30bill...
I have a feeling you have no clue what RoI means, or are purposefully ignoring it. As for the rest of your post : phshaw !
What Does Return On Investment - ROI Mean? A performance measure used to evaluate the efficiency of an investment or to compare the efficiency of a number of different investments. To calculate ROI, the benefit (return) of an investment is divided by the cost of the investment; the result is expressed as a percentage or a ratio.
30 bill û 0 / 0 = BIG ROIà so big, it gives me an error! Haha. Now IÆm sure you want to ignore how t2 bpos came into existenceà yet still, a t2 bpo has *unlimited runs* so itÆs value is the profit of 100% production of the life of eveà seeing as we do not know the life of eveà you do not know the ROIà you also leave out effortà again you will ignore how they came to beà invention over a BPO, requires a lot more effort than sitting around printing off moneyà bottom line, bpos of any sort are money pressesà
Seeing as this is about local, I do love how you decided to skip over everything about changing local, what happened you know people will blob? I think someone just wants to be able to take over some 0.0 space and is trying to shrink alliances; I got this one for you.
0.0 space you pay shít to concord correct? Seems only fair that you can tell concord to shut off X-Y-Z gates and leave only one entrance into your spaceà after all local being free intel is unfair why is not being able to control gates you pay for not fair? Now alliances can in fact get larger, however no local, howÆs that sound to you I think it fixed a few cost issues!
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 03:17:00 -
[315]
Originally by: alittlebirdy bla
If you want to keep blabbering about T2 BPOs, go here. _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 04:15:00 -
[316]
Originally by: Nisanu
Because of that, local should only be removed if measures are put in place to keep some kind of balance between the two type of players (alliance warfare and small gangs/solo players).
The balance is maintained by everyone having access to the same scanning tools.
The challenge for CCP is to develop such tools (mainly the new d-scanner) that provide for complex gameplay mechanics without the drudgery of incessant button-pushing or god-like qualities of instant local. ...
|
Nisanu
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 07:56:00 -
[317]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Nisanu
Because of that, local should only be removed if measures are put in place to keep some kind of balance between the two type of players (alliance warfare and small gangs/solo players).
The balance is maintained by everyone having access to the same scanning tools.
The challenge for CCP is to develop such tools (mainly the new d-scanner) that provide for complex gameplay mechanics without the drudgery of incessant button-pushing or god-like qualities of instant local.
It would require a whole new set-up. Maybe that's exactly what CCP are going to do, and if so, then fine (I won't complain).
At the moment, however, simply removing local would mean that if you and your friend are ratting/exploring/etc. in hostile or NPC, there is absolutely nothing to warn you before being killed. All that others need to do is have a cloaked scout find you, and jump to the scout. It basically means that any neutral or hostile territory will be completely off-limits for an solo or small gang pilot.
I don't know about you, but that is not my idea of a sand-box space game (with space being big and all that).
|
Drunken Idiot
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 10:08:00 -
[318]
Not sure I'd like gameplay changes that make low/nullsec even MORE intimidating to players on the fence about it.
|
Mme Pinkerton
United Engineering Services
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 10:59:00 -
[319]
+1
nice discussion thread + I support this proposal
I had a look at Darkfall recently and was suprised that some parts of it feel more EVE-like than EVE itself (the remaining parts remind me too much of Runescape to enjoy that game, though^^). One of these points is the lack of an intelligence gathering tool akin to local.
Imagine EVE without the overview, without local, without dscan & probes, with plenty of hiding opportunities in the terrain and no high-sec - guess what? the result is still an enjoyable game with some additional depth of gameplay:
on the one hand the ability to hide (to some degree) poses a threat that encourages moving around, killing NPCs, ... in gangs, thus promoting the MMO aspect of the game - if you want to get serious business done, you better bring along some buddies.
on the other hand the ability to hide gives the lone-wolf-type of player additional options as it enables him (with some luck and patience) to sneak past groups of enemies without being noticed.
Of course these experiences do not translate 1:1 to EVE but especially the second aspect is sth I find a bit lacking in EVE (outside of w-space) at the moment (if you want to scout someone without him knowing that he is being scouted you either have to resort to infiltrators or use 23/7 afk cloakers in all possibly relevant solar systems - both of which is somewhat lame imho).
|
Bomberlocks
Minmatar CTRL-Q
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 11:09:00 -
[320]
Removing local will probably end up emptying losec even more, as the rewards for being in losec will still be less than wormholes, but just as dangerous.
|
|
Reachok
Amarr Tres Hombres Severed Hand.
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 11:26:00 -
[321]
Akita,
Thought you were a trader, didn't realize you PvP'd. Anyway, if you want delayed local, go find a wormhole. Local in systems with gates is just fine. ________________________________________________
|
lylaal
Onbekend.
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 11:50:00 -
[322]
would be about time they implemented this.
|
Artemis Rose
Clandestine Vector
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 12:27:00 -
[323]
Making EVE harder? Seriously, do you really think that is ever going to happen?
*** Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine, Self Banstick +2 WTB: +666 E-peen killboard stats |
Eternum Praetorian
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 12:32:00 -
[324]
BUMP!
Because people need important topics beaten to death!
|
james1122
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 14:58:00 -
[325]
Hmm i like this idea alot. Would defo need an upgrade or something that you can put up in sov systems.
But the tactical gameplay this would open up is just limitless when you really really think about it.
Just as an idea what about an anchor-able device like warp disruption bubbles that provide local intel to all whilst deployed and the appear on everyones overview. Deployed say in a minute can be used to gain full local intel of a system. duno just an idea.
But you defo need to have something for sov systems or ratting basically becomes impossible due to stealth ships. Overall love the idea :D
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 17:07:00 -
[326]
Originally by: james1122
But you defo need to have something for sov systems or ratting basically becomes impossible due to stealth ships. Overall love the idea :D
Giving the sov holders a way to keep local for themselves would severely unbalance the game toward the sov defender (shifting such balance the other way is one of the benefits of delayed local).
As discussed in this thread, a better solution to this problem is to slightly nerf the cov op cloakers (as in give them some scan signaure that can't be warped to). ...
|
Camios
Minmatar Insurgent New Eden Tribe
|
Posted - 2010.08.22 17:48:00 -
[327]
Edited by: Camios on 22/08/2010 17:55:59 Edited by: Camios on 22/08/2010 17:55:22 Edited by: Camios on 22/08/2010 17:49:48 I strongly agree with local chat switching to delayed mode.
But obviously there should some improvements on the d-scanner, so that:
- It shows the relative standing of the scanned ships and results can be filtered like in the overview.
- The d-scaner range should be dipendent on skills and ship, so that a whole solarsystem can be covered.
- The dipendence on the ship of the d-scanner range should be balanced so that weak ships like recons, covops black ops have more range, while strong ships like assault, hac, command, even t1 hulls will have less range. It should be even race dependent.
Some consequences I see:
- Cloaked ships will become really invisible. This would make the recon-bomber-black ops gang invaluable. Good thing, but this may need some careful balancement, because otherwise a blackops+covert cyno attack would become completely undetectable and individual farming in 0.0 will become even more difficult. Someone will say HTFU, in the end this will make 0.0 farming more difficult, and thus more valuable. But it may make 0.0 too harsh in the end.
- For the last reason, macroratters in 0.0 will have their entire plans screwed. Good thing.
- It would make more easy for solo players and small gang to travel across semi afk-empires, so this would be an efficient boost to smuggling. The lack of intelligence on both sides advantages the weakest side.
- Of course, when big alliances wake up and organize proper intelligence channels, there is no "lack of intelligence on both sides" and the advantage for the solo and small gang players vanish, and the situation returns like the current one.
So, I don't see big advantages for powerblocks against the small groups, quite che contrary, unless you give the sov holders some special tools.
|
T0KER
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 01:50:00 -
[328]
Edited by: T0KER on 23/08/2010 01:50:23 The only ones who want to keep local chat the way it is are cowards that want to avoid pvp and hide in a POS when someone enters chat
There is a place for you to avoid pvp all you want, it's called Empire. Go there and enjoy.
|
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 05:03:00 -
[329]
Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 22/08/2010 03:56:36 If you want to keep blabbering about T2 BPOs, go here.
P.S. BTW, you could apply the same screwed-up logic to the cheapest of T1 BPOs to claim it's infinitely valuable.
Well stop ONLY replying to the crap about t2 and hit on the local parts of my post, that you seem to have no answers for... how you like that?
Cheap t1 bpos are *cheap* still aint the same you fail all over. I can buy every damn person in eve 1 cheap bpo off the *market* I can't do that for t2.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 14:17:00 -
[330]
Originally by: alittlebirdy Seeing as this is about local, I do love how you decided to skip over everything about changing local, what happened you know people will blob?
The blobbing dynamic will not change at all if delayed local is implemented.
Currently people blob not because they see some large number in local (itÆs usually too late by that time). People blob for two reasons: one û the op requires fleet DPS/coverage (for example, itÆs an alliance CTA to kill some structure), and two û there is safety in numbers. For both of these cases the number in fleet is limited by the number of members willing and online, *not* by some varying level of risk. Both cases can also be dependant on the scoutsÆ intel, however that is acquired. Since the scout canÆt be in every possible system that may contain the source of the threat, the gang always accepts a risk of engaging an overwhelming force. None of this changes with delayed local.
When not required to participate in a CTA there are a number players who prefer to stay within a smaller gang or solo format(there are, in fact, a lot of these type of players; granted though, not as many as those who like to blob). These independent players are usually much better at adapting and will stay within their chosen playstyle regardless of delayed local.
What delayed local will change is the solo to small gang incursion effectiveness into hostile alliance space. Since it is never possible to monitor every gate 23/7 there will always be a chance to ambush some carebearing players deep in hostile space without alerting a hoard of bored pvpers chillinÆ in the outpost/parked at the POS watchinÆ the intel channel.
Originally by: alittlebirdy 0.0 space you pay shít to concord correct? Seems only fair that you can tell concord to shut off X-Y-Z gates and leave only one entrance into your spaceà after all local being free intel is unfair why is not being able to control gates you pay for not fair? Now alliances can in fact get larger, however no local, howÆs that sound to you I think it fixed a few cost issues!
It is not a good idea to use ærealityÆ or RP to justify game mechanics. In fact, CCPÆs own prime fiction is inconsistent at best with regards to local, and a ærealityÆ argument can always be countered by sci-fi magic.
...
|
|
zz01shagsme
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 14:43:00 -
[331]
local or no local - not bothered is my verdict but for a solo pvper local does spoil it. You know what else does, not being able to warp to a ship that appears on d-scan. Gives us that ability and that might fix the "warping to belts to find untouched rats log off wait a few a log back in" syndrome. Which in all honesty is the only way i have been able to get any sort of pew pew.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 18:01:00 -
[332]
Well, technically, you can eventually get to a ship just with the d-scan, but it's horribly convoluted to explain _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
whiteshark12
The Black Rabbits Academy The Gurlstas Associates
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 18:48:00 -
[333]
i will wholehartedly endorse this as soon as i have the skills to effectivly take on most things in a 1v1. untill then it sucks as there could be a dominix sitting outside station and there would be no way to tell its there
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 18:55:00 -
[334]
Edited by: Akita T on 23/08/2010 18:57:05
Originally by: whiteshark12 until then it sucks as there could be a dominix sitting outside station and there would be no way to tell its there
If nothing else changes except putting local in "delayed mode", you'd have a point. Most of the people arguing for this change however also assume the change would be accompanied by a host of other changes (among which one could also be the ability to see something akin to the in-space overview while docked in a station, without undocking first).
Besides, you do have a high chance of surviving such encounters - keep pounding ctrl-space as soon as "space is loading", then keep pounding "dock requests" as soon as 30s have passed since you pressed undock. _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Ori Blake
|
Posted - 2010.08.23 23:30:00 -
[335]
I'm still not convinced, but hey, formalize it in a proposal and lobby your CSM on it. I don't care myself if they do it or not, because I really don't lose out if it makes the game unplayable PvP wise. I can just keep playing like usual, and just move some of my activities to empire.
You are gambling on how this change will make people react. I don't think it's really going to accomplish the stated goals in any sustainable way. But hey Akita, you aren't doing this to change the game for the better, but to make a killing speculating on short-term disruption so I don't think you really care either.
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.24 02:55:00 -
[336]
Originally by: Ori Blake I'm still not convinced, but hey, formalize it in a proposal and lobby your CSM on it.
As it has been already said several times in this thread (including in the early edits of the OP), it's already been proposed to the CSM, and the CSM brought it to CCP. They said "we wanted to do something like that already anyway, but we don't have the manpower available for it any time soon". Well, not exactly that, but roughly the gist of it. _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.25 17:32:00 -
[337]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 25/08/2010 17:31:59 Beep
Yea, this is a very good idea.
|
Nisanu
|
Posted - 2010.08.25 18:31:00 -
[338]
Edited by: Nisanu on 25/08/2010 18:32:06
Originally by: zz01shagsme local or no local - not bothered is my verdict but for a solo pvper local does spoil it.
I don't understand why people think this.
1) removing local will also remove vulnerable targets (ratters, mission runners, etc.), because it would simply become unprofitable (too risky) to continue doing that without back-up.
2) As a solo pvp-er, not having local means not knowing anything about your target's back-up (corp mates in the (neighbouring)system), making solo PvP pretty suicidal. You will have no clue as to whether that ratter or that small gate camp is truly vulnerable or not.
Removing local might make alliance warfare more tactical/interesting, but it would also make 0.0 more of a wasteland where neutrals have no place.
|
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.25 20:08:00 -
[339]
Originally by: Nisanu Edited by: Nisanu on 25/08/2010 18:32:06
Originally by: zz01shagsme local or no local - not bothered is my verdict but for a solo pvper local does spoil it.
I don't understand why people think this.
1) removing local will also remove vulnerable targets (ratters, mission runners, etc.), because it would simply become unprofitable (too risky) to continue doing that without back-up.
2) As a solo pvp-er, not having local means not knowing anything about your target's back-up (corp mates in the (neighbouring)system), making solo PvP pretty suicidal. You will have no clue as to whether that ratter or that small gate camp is truly vulnerable or not.
Removing local might make alliance warfare more tactical/interesting, but it would also make 0.0 more of a wasteland where neutrals have no place.
I disagree, and you have totally missed ALL of the Dscan upgrade suggestions.
Also, you seem to be crying about how you will have to do more work to hunt as well
|
Nisanu
|
Posted - 2010.08.25 22:34:00 -
[340]
Edited by: Nisanu on 25/08/2010 22:35:20
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian
Originally by: Nisanu Edited by: Nisanu on 25/08/2010 18:32:06
Originally by: zz01shagsme local or no local - not bothered is my verdict but for a solo pvper local does spoil it.
I don't understand why people think this.
1) removing local will also remove vulnerable targets (ratters, mission runners, etc.), because it would simply become unprofitable (too risky) to continue doing that without back-up.
2) As a solo pvp-er, not having local means not knowing anything about your target's back-up (corp mates in the (neighbouring)system), making solo PvP pretty suicidal. You will have no clue as to whether that ratter or that small gate camp is truly vulnerable or not.
Removing local might make alliance warfare more tactical/interesting, but it would also make 0.0 more of a wasteland where neutrals have no place.
I disagree, and you have totally missed ALL of the Dscan upgrade suggestions.
Also, you seem to be crying about how you will have to do more work to hunt as well
OK, so you disagree. It's common courtesy to explain, rather than just "disagree". I'm genuinely interested in this debate by the way; there are valid arguments on both sides.
About the other two (wrong) assumptions (why do people find it so difficult to not assume the worst about every poster they disagree with? Sigh...),
- I have read (closely followed) the whole thread, and in another post I welcome replacing local with other mechanics as long as they keep solo/small gang flying viable in 0.0. However, to many posters in this thread that seems secondary to simply getting rid of (instant) local, and that worries me. It's going to be very hard (but not necessarily impossible)to find a right balance so as to keep 0.0 from becoming even emptier.
- I am not crying about anything (I honestly don't get why you need to write that). In fact, even though I live in 0.0, I hardly ever engage in PvP, but would certainly not mind "working" to be able to hunt targets. My concern comes from my experience on the other side, i.e. as someone who rats and explores in hostile territory. Local is what keeps the risk reasonable (i.e. not being killed too often). I worry that players like me would disappear from 0.0, and thereby reducing targets for "hunters" even further.
No crying. No not reading of other posts. Simply concerned, and interested in the debate.
|
|
Thor Brawn
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 03:13:00 -
[341]
I vote for this. Heck if the entire game went this way it would be for the better...
Except for one thing. Put windows on stations, even if it is only displaying names and ship types. Undocking to the unknown would kill this game.
|
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 12:12:00 -
[342]
Originally by: Thor Brawn I vote for this. Heck if the entire game went this way it would be for the better...
Except for one thing. Put windows on stations, even if it is only displaying names and ship types. Undocking to the unknown would kill this game.
Is that because all stations are kickout stations?
|
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 12:21:00 -
[343]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 26/08/2010 12:22:24
Originally by: Nisanu Edited by: Nisanu on 25/08/2010 22:35:20 Stuff
This Is What The Old Hud Looked Like
Would it be so terrible to see little red dots in that circle thing when there was danger in system, when something was warping towards you, or something similar along those lines?
I will say again, SOOOO many people die NOW because they are to dumb to keep an eye on local. I don't see why, or how, removing it and adding in space "Radar" would hurt anyone. It would just make the game all around better and realistic.
|
Analissa Fiora
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 12:22:00 -
[344]
local needs to go. carebears have been having it too easy for too long.
and it would make for some very delicious bear-tears
|
Zarflax Zeeblebrox
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 12:24:00 -
[345]
Why don't we have a poll that pops up on the EvE screen when you login asking what the people would want. It would be a better representation of EVE than people from the forums. Not everyone goes here y'know. |
Analissa Fiora
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 12:29:00 -
[346]
Originally by: Zarflax Zeeblebrox Why don't we have a poll that pops up on the EvE screen when you login asking what the people would want. It would be a better representation of EVE than people from the forums. Not everyone goes here y'know.
lets let the carebears decide whats good for the game
|
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 12:30:00 -
[347]
Atlas cam had like 1,700 viewers. Allot of the EVE population just reads the forums and doesn't post because they consider the trolls here the dredges of society.
Also you can't expect most people to know what is good for them, or the game. Most people don't have a clue. Like these folks continually stating stations need windows, they don't understand the in game mechanics.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 14:25:00 -
[348]
Originally by: Thor Brawn I vote for this. Heck if the entire game went this way it would be for the better...
Except for one thing. Put windows on stations, even if it is only displaying names and ship types. Undocking to the unknown would kill this game.
CCP told the previous CSM that they are thinking of an overview-type display for looking at what's in the station's vicinity while docked. This conversation is described in one of the CSM report threads in the Jita Park forum section.
Looks to me like there is no issue implementing this in terms of CCP/player opinions. ...
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp Grenouilles Volantes
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 15:18:00 -
[349]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 26/08/2010 15:23:59
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian I will say again, SOOOO many people die NOW because they are to dumb to keep an eye on local. I don't see why, or how, removing it and adding in space "Radar" would hurt anyone. It would just make the game all around better and realistic.
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Also you can't expect most people to know what is good for them, or the game. Most people don't have a clue. Like these folks continually stating stations need windows, they don't understand the in game mechanics.
Yes, the old Hud existed. But it is not the same players than before, so it will not be easily accepted only because it existed few years ago. Or why not ask for a 0.0 empire as it was in the first day of EVE, etc... ?
Also, I agree, you don't understand ingame mechanics.
How a radar would hurt the actual bunch of players ? Maybe because an actual combat probe has a better range than the radar (if it only replace dscan without any upgrade) to see if there is someone ? So that the ratter will get informed of the hunter presence only when the hunter is warping to him, and so isn't it going to hurt more players than only the dumb ones who don't keep an eye on local ?
Or will you accept to raise the range of the radar, or make probes scannable in all customized overviews (unlike now) ? That will mean less targets.
Also, you have Dotlan, galaxy map, etc... sometimes with a better delay (like the Average in 30 mn), to know if there is someone in a system. Ratters has only the Killed in last hour. Great to know if there is an immediate danger around. This plus radar, great mix. Actual ingame mechanics is not really prey-compliant if there is no local anymore, and this is a problem in a game like EVE.
So if you want get less targets because people will leave 0.0, or a massive increase of unprobable T3 ships in 0.0, so yes, let's go. Signature removed for not being EVE related. Zymurgist |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 17:02:00 -
[350]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 26/08/2010 15:23:59 Yes, the old Hud existed. But it is not the same players than before, so it will not be easily accepted only because it existed few years ago. Or why not ask for a 0.0 empire as it was in the first day of EVE, etc... ?
Also, I agree, you don't understand ingame mechanics.
How a radar would hurt the actual bunch of players ? Maybe because an actual combat probe has a better range than the radar (if it only replace dscan without any upgrade) to see if there is someone ? So that the ratter will get informed of the hunter presence only when the hunter is warping to him, and so isn't it going to hurt more players than only the dumb ones who don't keep an eye on local ?
Or will you accept to raise the range of the radar, or make probes scannable in all customized overviews (unlike now) ? That will mean less targets.
Also, you have Dotlan, galaxy map, etc... sometimes with a better delay (like the Average in 30 mn), to know if there is someone in a system. Ratters has only the Killed in last hour. Great to know if there is an immediate danger around. This plus radar, great mix. Actual ingame mechanics is not really prey-compliant if there is no local anymore, and this is a problem in a game like EVE.
It sounds like you will not accept anything that does not give you 100% safety (as you currently have). Do you think that's a reasonable attitude within the framework of EVE-Online as a game, and 0.0 as a specific region within EVE-Online? ...
|
|
Rick Rothsar
Ghosts of Ragnarok Test Alliance Please Ignore
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 17:33:00 -
[351]
Active local chat should be a sov upgrade and should cost a fortune to maintain. It should also replace cynojammers as a 'one or the other' strategic option. If you're in NPC space or unclaimed sov, you're on your own.
The amount of metagaming required to nail down a ratter/anom runner/missioner/plexer is completely imbalanced these days- all they have to do is log or warp. The risk in 0.0 has plummeted since 2007.
Also, 15-minute flat log-off timer. No more 60s despawn crap.
|
Urgg Boolean
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:00:00 -
[352]
Valid debate or hidden agenda? Changes like the ones mentioned in this thread only serve to stack the deck in the favor of gankers and pirates, when the deck is already adequately stacked in their favor. I will remind the readers here, "If you're in a fair fight, you're doing it wrong."
Yeah, let's make it even easier for pirates. Why not create a "Covert Cloak of Gankage" that allows pirates to remain cloaked while firing upon their prey? Why not give pirates a "Gank Any" skill similar to the doomsday device but deployed from a frigate? Why not give pirates the "Alpine Autopsy" skill so they can surgically remove implants from the frozen corpses they create, thus increasing profits ?
All this talk about "delayed local" and "AFK cloakers" is really a hidden agenda to reduce the risk of pirating while simultaneously increasing the rewards. Low/null sec space is already adequately dangerous even for those who choose to properly prepare and engage in activities away from Empire space.
Furthermore, why do all the work of coding these changes when they must necessarily be accompanied by counter measures, as proposed, to maintain balance? Sure seems like things are acceptably balanced without all that work.
Such changes do not improve the game and should not be implemented.
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp Grenouilles Volantes
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:04:00 -
[353]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 26/08/2010 18:04:50
Originally by: Razin It sounds like you will not accept anything that does not give you 100% safety (as you currently have). Do you think that's a reasonable attitude within the framework of EVE-Online as a game, and 0.0 as a specific region within EVE-Online?
It sounds like you still refuse to see obvious things, as you don't care about the psychologic aspect of this move and so if players will play your game or not.
For your question if it is reasonable or not, I already responded it, in the post #178.
Signature removed for not being EVE related. Zymurgist |
Spurty
Caldari D00M. Northern Coalition.
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:09:00 -
[354]
Why don't stations have, like a back door? You know, servants entrance that Minmatar pilots use?
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:21:00 -
[355]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 26/08/2010 18:04:50
Originally by: Razin It sounds like you will not accept anything that does not give you 100% safety (as you currently have). Do you think that's a reasonable attitude within the framework of EVE-Online as a game, and 0.0 as a specific region within EVE-Online?
It sounds like you still refuse to see obvious things, as you don't care about the psychologic aspect of this move and so if players will play your game or not.
For your question if it is reasonable or not, I already responded it, in the post #178.
I see and understand your point on theoretical psychological implications of delayed local on the playerbase. I just don't believe it to be a significant factor. I also believe that this insignificant factor will be significantly mitigated by the new scanning mechanics.
My question to you was about safety, and how much of a reduction from the 100% that you have now you'd accept.
For example, how much warning of an impending contact would you need (in terms of time) to be able to warp to safety? and does that really require instant local? ...
|
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:23:00 -
[356]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 26/08/2010 18:24:40
Originally by: Sky Marshal Toot...
Is it just me or did you just let one rip? Responding will only validate your post, you need better reading comprehension. Or maybe you just missed a few posts back there somewhere, try reading it again.
Eagerly awaiting your "No I didn't response."
|
Riaqu
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:33:00 -
[357]
It seems to me that many posters are really underestimating the effect that the proposed changes will have on the 0.0 population. Unless a really clever alternative is found (the proposed changes to dscan or radar wouldn't cut it), removing local would take away any incentive to be active in 0.0 beyond friendly territory. This would make PvP even more limited to alliance warfare.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:43:00 -
[358]
Originally by: Riaqu It seems to me that many posters are really underestimating the effect that the proposed changes will have on the 0.0 population. Unless a really clever alternative is found (the proposed changes to dscan or radar wouldn't cut it), removing local would take away any incentive to be active in 0.0 beyond friendly territory. This would make PvP even more limited to alliance warfare.
You've presented no argument in support of your declarations. What is the required quality for this "really clever alternative" to give you the necessary incentive to be active? and why couldn't it be a feature of the new d-scan? ...
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp Grenouilles Volantes
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:48:00 -
[359]
Originally by: Razin I see and understand your point on theoretical psychological implications of delayed local on the playerbase. I just don't believe it to be a significant factor. I also believe that this insignificant factor will be significantly mitigated by the new scanning mechanics.
My question to you was about safety, and how much of a reduction from the 100% that you have now you'd accept.
For example, how much warning of an impending contact would you need (in terms of time) to be able to warp to safety? and does that really require instant local?
If there was no choice, I hope about this : Warnings ? Maybe, but before that... Hunters want that preys don't get free intel ? So hunters must not get it too.
- CCP has to remove the "Pirate and police ships destroyed in the last 24 hours". It will not be so obvious if there are some ratters in a particular system, or if a system is really popular or not, when used with the "Average pilots in 30 mn". To know it, the hunter will have to check it by himself. - CCP has to make the "Average pilots in 30 mn" at "1 hour", or the "Ships destroyed in the last hour" go down to 30 mn. Whatever the choice, it has to be the same delay for this two options, to get a status quo about the intel accurancy, for preys and hunters. - Also, the actual dscan don't show probes if you have a customized overview. The radar or whatever, should be raised to 16 AU and show probes when I use my ratting overview.
But still personaly, I prefer that local remains like today. Delayed local even with a better dscan is more like a short term option to increase kills, but a disaster in the long term for the game. This, because I don't trust CCP to create a good solution. Remember, CCP want add a delayed local like W-Space, not the one that Akita T want see (delayed for X seconds). Signature removed for not being EVE related. Zymurgist |
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp Grenouilles Volantes
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 18:55:00 -
[360]
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Is it just me or did you just let one rip? Responding will only validate your post, you need better reading comprehension. Or maybe you just missed a few posts back there somewhere, try reading it again.
Eagerly awaiting your "No I didn't response."
Is it just me, or your post is incomprehensible ? Signature removed for not being EVE related. Zymurgist |
|
Riaqu
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 19:12:00 -
[361]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Riaqu It seems to me that many posters are really underestimating the effect that the proposed changes will have on the 0.0 population. Unless a really clever alternative is found (the proposed changes to dscan or radar wouldn't cut it), removing local would take away any incentive to be active in 0.0 beyond friendly territory. This would make PvP even more limited to alliance warfare.
You've presented no argument in support of your declarations. What is the required quality for this "really clever alternative" to give you the necessary incentive to be active? and why couldn't it be a feature of the new d-scan?
Perhaps it could be a new feature of dscan, I just haven't read any proposals that compensate sufficiently for the added insecurity. I'm not clever enough to think of a "really clever alternative", by the way.
At the moment, "carebearing" (apparently anything other than PvP falls in this category) in neutral or even hostile 0.0 is possible because local allows you to estimate the risks. You can be completely safe if no one is in your system, and if there are others, you have some general clue as to who they are and what kind of threat they pose. You can adjust your actions accordingly. You will still get killed every once in a while (anyone with some intelligence who really wants to get you will, they just have to work for it).
The point is that you still have some control over the situation, and you don't have to be in state of paranoid frenzy every single second that you are undocked. This is important because, as in any game, you want to feel that you have at least some control over your success or failure. Seeing that people are warping towards you is nowhere near enough to feel that you are in control (as you will mostly be too late to escape anyway, especially if the scout uncloaks and tackles you).
People choose their activities based on variables such as enjoyment, risk/reward, and necessity. Going to 0.0 is not a necessity to play EVE, it's optional. Making it harder to feel (a little) safe in 0.0, and to (partly) control your success rate, would lower both enjoyment as well as the risk v reward ratio. Hence, less people would choose to fly in neutral or hostile 0.0.
I don't think that local is perfect, and would love to see an improved system. I just wish that people in this debate acknowledge the inherent risk of removing local if its replacement doesn't allow for sufficient carebearing and solo flying. I suspect that many of the proponents are members of strong 0.0 alliances, and have forgotten what it is like to not have powerful allies to back you up.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 19:27:00 -
[362]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Edited by: Sky Marshal on 26/08/2010 18:58:27 Still, to respond to your question, if there was no choice, I hope about this : Warnings ? Maybe, but before that... Hunters want that preys don't get free intel ? So hunters must not get it too.
- CCP has to remove the "Pirate and police ships destroyed in the last 24 hours". It will not be so obvious if there are some ratters in a particular system, or if a system is really popular or not, when used with the "Average pilots in 30 mn". To know it, the hunter will have to check it by himself. - CCP has to make the "Average pilots in 30 mn" at "1 hour", or the "Ships destroyed in the last hour" go down to 30 mn. Whatever the choice, it has to be the same delay for this two options, to get a status quo about the intel accurancy, for preys and hunters. - Also, the actual dscan don't show probes if you have a customized overview. The radar or whatever, should be raised to at least 16 AU and show probes when I use my ratting overview.
These seem pretty reasonable to me (unless IÆm missing something)!
On your second item, IÆd prefer both to be at 30 min refresh.
Item three: I donÆt remember where I read this, but I think CCP already plans to add this functionality. It seems the current d-scan has had this capability all along and all that is needed is the fix to the interface to be able to select this option.
...
|
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 19:43:00 -
[363]
Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 26/08/2010 19:43:50
Originally by: Riaqu The point is that you still have some control over the situation, and you don't have to be in state of paranoid frenzy every single second that you are undocked. This is important because, as in any game, you want to feel that you have at least some control over your success or failure. Seeing that people are warping towards you is nowhere near enough to feel that you are in control (as you will mostly be too late to escape anyway, especially if the scout uncloaks and tackles you).
Why do you assume in space "Radar" would make it so the enemy can warp to you so quickly that you would have no time to get away? That is an assumption, and it is NOT what the rest of us are suggesting.
Quote: I just wish that people in this debate acknowledge the inherent risk of removing local if its replacement doesn't allow for sufficient carebearing and solo flying. I suspect that many of the proponents are members of strong 0.0 alliances, and have forgotten what it is like to not have powerful allies to back you up
I wish people would acknowledge the fact that if local was gone, YOU would become invisible to the blobs that are trying to hunt you. This would increase the freedom of movement of solo players and people who prefer small gang pvp. With an improved Dscan, you would be very secure about your immediate environment.
1.) If you are ratting alone, no one knows you are there.
2.) If you are ratting in one of your home systems, (assuming there is not some kind of sov intel thing) there would be so many Dscans up you would have the entire system covered anyway.
3.) You people arguing on the side of keeping local are being phenomenally short sighted about it.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 20:26:00 -
[364]
Originally by: Riaqu Perhaps it could be a new feature of dscan, I just haven't read any proposals that compensate sufficiently for the added insecurity. I'm not clever enough to think of a "really clever alternative", by the way.
All we can do is guess at how CCP chooses to implement a local replacement. However, we can be relatively certain with respect to what would be required of this new d-scan, and what would be nice to have. For example, the new d-scan would be required to provide the same quantitative intel as the current instant local. The qualitative difference would be the limited range that such intel becomes available at, vs. infinite range for current local.
With this the new d-scan would still allow you ôsome control over the situationö, but at a shorter range, with all the associated drawbacks. The one drawback that seems to draw the most number of objections is the much shorter time you get after being warned by the new d-scan of an incoming (potential) threat. So, the question becomes: how much lead time do you need to feel reasonably safe, and how much range does that translate to? I think once you answer this youÆll become much more receptive to this whole idea of delayed local/new d-scan.
Note: cov ops cloak is a special case, and there seems to be a general agreement that some kind of cloak-warning functionality needs to be a part of the new d-scan.
...
|
Riaqu
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 20:52:00 -
[365]
Edited by: Riaqu on 26/08/2010 20:54:02
Originally by: Razin All we can do is guess at how CCP chooses to implement a local replacement. However, we can be relatively certain with respect to what would be required of this new d-scan, and what would be nice to have. For example, the new d-scan would be required to provide the same quantitative intel as the current instant local. The qualitative difference would be the limited range that such intel becomes available at, vs. infinite range for current local.
With this the new d-scan would still allow you ôsome control over the situationö, but at a shorter range, with all the associated drawbacks. The one drawback that seems to draw the most number of objections is the much shorter time you get after being warned by the new d-scan of an incoming (potential) threat. So, the question becomes: how much lead time do you need to feel reasonably safe, and how much range does that translate to? I think once you answer this youÆll become much more receptive to this whole idea of delayed local/new d-scan.
Note: cov ops cloak is a special case, and there seems to be a general agreement that some kind of cloak-warning functionality needs to be a part of the new d-scan.
I agree with your main points. I just think that in practice, implementing such a system is not going to be easy for CCP. I'm all for having a new system (local does seem a bit... primitive), but it's note easy with the current game mechanics.
I don't think covops cloak is such a special case, by the way. If local is removed, using a covops will be a very efficient way of getting to target. As you write, it would therefore indeed require a cloak warning, but that still leaves the "warp speed problem". In eve (for obvious gameplay reasons), warp is ridiculously fast. It is one thing to ask players to be careful and pay attention to enemies, it's whole different thing to be continuously, without respite, preparing to warp out. It would take any fun out of ratting, mining, exploration, etc. (which aren't that much fun to begin with).
I could also see the potential of "griefing" in rather annoying ways. For example just following ratters around with covops without any intention to decloak or calling in friends.
Again, I would love it if CCP found a clever way to avoid such problems. I just am not convinced that it is possible. But that's also why I think that a thread like this can be useful, to encourage creative ideas from the community. I just don't understand why some posters are so hostile... but that's the internet for you, I guess.
|
Lost Greybeard
|
Posted - 2010.08.26 21:44:00 -
[366]
As someone who does more hunting than fleeing:
how would forcing PvPers to waste half an hour scanning a full system plus manually checking common areas and stations to even see if anyone's in the system at all be beneficial to pvp in any way? Seems like a huge waste of time that's rendered unnecessary by "hey, there's someone in local. Engage engines!"
Plus, then how the hell do you catch stealthers? Even a double gate-camp on a pipe system won't do anything to trap them if you can't even tell whether they're still hanging around or have escaped/logged off.
And, finally, local's current setup makes sense in terms of the game, it's not a metagame technique at all. By using the gates, we (as pilots) have to route the QE signals for our clones through them. The data sorters keep our signals in a single "folder", which allows us to chat with other pod-pilots (but not normal pilots) using the same subspace router. Note that WH space requires us to connect manually: there aren't any of the brain-in-a-jar types out there that normally handle our body to clone data transfer and we have to drop our own independent relay into the WH.
|
Analissa Fiora
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 00:23:00 -
[367]
Originally by: Riaqu I could also see the potential of "griefing" in rather annoying ways. For example just following ratters around with covops without any intention to decloak or calling in friends.
theres no such thing as griefing in eve
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 01:15:00 -
[368]
This troll thread by Akita is still going and people are still biting
Akita simply wants CCP to self destruct and delayed mode/no local in 0.0 is the perfect way to force everyone back to high sec so his missions are boosted.
Well done Akita, this, for once, is a 'successful' thread, not that you won't be anything more than a troll.
|
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 01:26:00 -
[369]
Originally by: Super Whopper This troll thread by Akita is still going and people are still biting
Akita simply wants CCP to self destruct and delayed mode/no local in 0.0 is the perfect way to force everyone back to high sec so his missions are boosted.
Well done Akita, this, for once, is a 'successful' thread, not that you won't be anything more than a troll.
Legitimate issue (TM)
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 01:28:00 -
[370]
Originally by: Super Whopper so his missions are boosted
You mean the things I haven't touched for ISK purposes in almost two years ?
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
|
alittlebirdy
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 01:49:00 -
[371]
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Super Whopper so his missions are boosted
You mean the things I haven't touched for ISK purposes in almost two years ?
You mean the things that had loot drops changed like a few months ago, and you can't say that is not a "isk purposes"
You are funny, everything that whacks your idea you ignore... still waiting for, well let me just quote it
Originally by: alittlebirdy 0.0 space you pay shít to concord correct? Seems only fair that you can tell concord to shut off X-Y-Z gates and leave only one entrance into your spaceà after all local being free intel is unfair why is not being able to control gates you pay for not fair? Now alliances can in fact get larger, however no local, howÆs that sound to you I think it fixed a few cost issues!
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 01:57:00 -
[372]
Edited by: Akita T on 27/08/2010 02:07:56
Originally by: alittlebirdy 0.0 space you pay shít to concord correct? Seems only fair that you can tell concord to shut off X-Y-Z gates and leave only one entrance into your spaceà after all local being free intel is unfair why is not being able to control gates you pay for not fair? Now alliances can in fact get larger, however no local, howÆs that sound to you I think it fixed a few cost issues!
If you want, I don't see why not have a few EXPENSIVE consumable deployables (that need to be protected for quite a while in space you do control) that allow you to turn on or off the gate pair from each of the ends. So... get sov level X1-> deploy xyz1 mil gate deactivator -> wait abc1 days while protecting it -> gate shuts down at DT. On the other side (or on the same side, but later) get/hold sov level X2 -> deploy xyz2 mil gate activator -> wait abc2 days while protecting it -> gate goes online after DT. Ideally, X1>X2, xyz1>xyz2 and so on.
Hell, even allow people to BUILD NEW GATES for all I care at insanely expensive prices. These new ones could be made destroyable (but only when inactive plus yet another timer)... in fact, just make them destroyable (but with insane total HP and fast-recharging shields). Also, allow current owner to charge fees on usage based on transiting ship size. And set restrictions on who can use it.
You can even make it so that it's not just pairs of gates, but larger groups of gates that can be connected to eachother (withing certain rulesets depending on gate size and proximity on starmap). Then whenever you place an activator, you have to select which gate you want to link to (that other gate needs to also be inactive - and if it goes active with another gate before, well, tough luck, try again some other time after you shut the other gate down).
...
Still, I don't see what that has to do with local intel issues, but hey, it was your idea, and it wasn't THAT bad even if you probably meant it sarcastically.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Anhenka
Minmatar Jotunheimr Productions Ltd. Talos Coalition
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 03:37:00 -
[373]
Honestly, I can't support this mainly due to several factors.
1. 0.0 alliance corps, especially ones without a lot of R64's and good 32's, are at least semi-dependant on ratting in dominion upgraded systems.
2. Remove local and methods to find afk cloakers with cyno's and you have effectively crippled any dominion upgraded system with hostiles within carrier jump range.
3. The current system of local and 0.0 makes it so it's the slow and stupid that are caught, as well as the smart caught by the smarter, I dont wish to change this.
4. If you removed everyone who cannot make money from null because of constant hotdrops and undetectable roams, theres only a small fraction of the moneyed elite left, which sort of reduces CCP's inititive to get players to low/null with the whole dominion system.
5. No intel..no local..How do two enemy gangs find each other? It's no fun to roam if your blundering around in the dark, and gatecamps of any flavor soon lose thier appeal.
I'm sure your going to go all wah wah carebear at me, im not, I just know that removal of local in nullsec will reduce nullsec population like dominion lag did to the frequency of 1000 man fleet fights..
|
Allestin Villimar
Zebra Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 05:11:00 -
[374]
Oh boy, when I go into 0.0 I want to constantly click the scan button all the time. That sure sounds like fun and wouldn't contribute to lag in any way!
Local is not a metagame tool as it makes sense if you read the various stories they put out from time to time. You have to use the jump gates to get to systems, the jump gates record your travel and place you appropriately. There'd need to be some serious long-term testing before this could be done without utterly destroying the 0.0 population. If it were currently changed to a delayed channel, you'd soon have nothing but recons and stealth bombers in 0.0 within 2-3 months. ...in bed. |
Eternum Praetorian
PWNED Factor Elite
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 12:53:00 -
[375]
Originally by: Allestin Villimar Oh boy, when I go into 0.0 I want to constantly click the scan button all the time. That sure sounds like fun and wouldn't contribute to lag in any way!
You have LITERALLY not read a word of this thread. And please never stop posting....
|
Allestin Villimar
Zebra Corp
|
Posted - 2010.08.28 02:48:00 -
[376]
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 27/08/2010 13:04:42
Originally by: Allestin Villimar Oh boy, when I go into 0.0 I want to constantly click the scan button all the time. That sure sounds like fun and wouldn't contribute to lag in any way!
You have LITERALLY not read a word of this thread. But please never stop posting....
I have. I see a lot of back and forth bickering with little actual argument being presented on either side. I also haven't seen any recommendations that would actually work without being a massive drain on bandwidth and wouldn't utterly destroy the low sec / 0.0 population.
...in bed. |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.28 03:08:00 -
[377]
Originally by: Allestin Villimar I also haven't seen any recommendations that would actually work without being a massive drain on bandwidth and wouldn't utterly destroy the low sec / 0.0 population.
The possible radar-like permanent scanner would eat up almost exactly as much bandwidth as the same blips being on-grid with you. In fact, you probably use MUCH more bandwidth in a regular L4 mission with cluttered scenery than a typical 0.0 scanner would use.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp Grenouilles Volantes
|
Posted - 2010.08.28 03:26:00 -
[378]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 28/08/2010 03:25:55
Same bandwidth maybe, computation requirement, not. A 14 AU "grid-like" permanent instrument will not the same than a 500 Km overview especialy on a charged node.
A troll plays with words. Signature removed for not being EVE related. Zymurgist |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.28 04:19:00 -
[379]
Originally by: Sky Marshal Same bandwidth maybe, computation requirement, not. A 14 AU "grid-like" permanent instrument will not the same than a 500 Km overview especialy on a charged node.
Yes, you are absolutely correct about that, but you are completely wrong as far as implied direction. Computationally speaking, server-side, a perma-radar for objects off-grid is far less intensive than computing the same objects within the local grid. On a grid, you have collision detection going on. In the radar-like overview, no such thing is needed, just a raw dump to the client. And to make it even less CPU-intensive, hell, you can even make it a cube instead of a sphere. _
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Super Whopper
I can Has Cheeseburger
|
Posted - 2010.08.28 04:44:00 -
[380]
Originally by: Allestin Villimar I have. I see a lot of back and forth bickering with little actual argument being presented on either side. I also haven't seen any recommendations that would actually work without being a massive drain on bandwidth and wouldn't utterly destroy the low sec / 0.0 population.
But those proposals won't do because they don't totally destroy 0.0.
Imagine the following scenario. CCP destroy 0.0 by making it as populated as WH's by removing local/making it delayed. Clever emo girls like Akita will buy officer/faction drops and wait for them to become almost extinct and then will sell them, making tens of billions of profit. Thus achieving three things: 0.0 dies, people leave EVE and transparent people like Akita make more than they'll ever need. Unfortunately for them CCP aren't entirely ******ed (despite them having said they will probably consider thinking about looking at EVE in 18 months time) and will never implement this.
Thus, all that's left to little tragic wannabe piwates is to whine, whine some more and whine ever mooaar about 0.0 and local. Because, you see, the only people who will survive in 0.0 then are those who suffer from some disorder and feel compelled to click scan in their DScan every 5 seconds or those with little nifty programs that will tell them where everything is at all times.
But don't let your obvious failure at EVE prevent you from ing more because that's all you can do, Akita, alts, noob followers of his and wannabe failed pvpers.
|
|
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.08.28 04:47:00 -
[381]
Whoa, Super Whopper, bitter and spiteful much ? Besides, I already have made much more ISK than I could possibly spend in a reasonable manner any time soon (after buying enough PLEX to last a lifetime).
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
Atanatarii
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 15:22:00 -
[382]
I don't think removing local would work for 0.0. It works in wormholes because wormholes are difficult to find and deal with so don't see much through traffic. Therefore you can go out to a site and have a reasonable chance of getting something done before a hostile shows up on scan. In the part of 0.0 where I live, this would never happen. There is too much hostile traffic so basically all exploration and mining activities would be impossible. One of the basic problems is that ships and fittings for pve and pvp are mutually exclusive. Therefore the hunter will always have a massive advantage over the hunted. If the game was designed so that pve and pvp ships and fittings were more similar (as in most other mmo's), then I would be more in favor of this. After all, I have played games where it is entirely possible for a pve group to repel and kill a pvp group that jumps them. That would never happen in EVE, if for not other reason than the pve ships aren't going to have warp disruption fitted.
Even if we did fit our ratting ships for pvp, it would never be possible for any of our noobs to do anything solo, because the pvp hunters would have far superior skills and equipment.
Also I don't see how constantly spamming the directional scanner is fun.
|
Cearain
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.09.01 20:54:00 -
[383]
Edited by: Cearain on 01/09/2010 20:54:20 Edited by: Cearain on 01/09/2010 20:53:58
Originally by: Eternum Praetorian Edited by: Eternum Praetorian on 26/08/2010 19:43:50
... I wish people would acknowledge the fact that if local was gone, YOU would become invisible to the blobs that are trying to hunt you. This would increase the freedom of movement of solo players and people who prefer small gang pvp. With an improved Dscan, you would be very secure about your immediate environment.
1.) If you are ratting alone, no one knows you are there.
2.) If you are ratting in one of your home systems, (assuming there is not some kind of sov intel thing) there would be so many Dscans up you would have the entire system covered anyway.
3.) You people arguing on the side of keeping local are being phenomenally short sighted about it.
Solo/Small gangs would be ôvery secureö due to dscan? LetÆs think this through. Your in the middle of pvp combat and you now also have to constantly hit your dscan button and look at those results. (this in itself is annoying beyond words) But even if you do by the time you see them on dscan they are already mid warp onto you and then you have to *start* to try to disengage from the enemy. Yeah good luck! Even with local constantly updating your lucky to get away. ThatÆs before they even start to warp.
Blobs wonÆt see you? It doesnÆt matter if blobs see you *in local*. Its only when they can get a warp in on you that they are a problem. This wonÆt change that at all. The blob will send out a scout. You will not see anyone on dscan and engage the scout. The blob that was just sitting there in your system will just warp in and kill you as soon as you are pointed.
Sorry this would be an *insane* boost to blobbing. When you do small gang or solo work you look at the local if you see a big blob come in your donÆt engage anyone. If you donÆt have local to tell you if a large blob comes in you are screwed and might as well leave eve if you donÆt like blobs.
If you are ratting alone no one knows your there? Sorry just because you donÆt see them in local doesnÆt mean they donÆt know your there. If people are looking for ratters they will have a means to probe you out.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Sky Marshal
IMpAct Corp Grenouilles Volantes
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 01:16:00 -
[384]
Edited by: Sky Marshal on 02/09/2010 01:21:13
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Sky Marshal Same bandwidth maybe, computation requirement, not. A 14 AU "grid-like" permanent instrument will not the same than a 500 Km overview especialy on a charged node.
Yes, you are absolutely correct about that, but you are completely wrong as far as implied direction. Computationally speaking, server-side, a perma-radar for objects off-grid is far less intensive than computing the same objects within the local grid. On a grid, you have collision detection going on. In the radar-like overview, no such thing is needed, just a raw dump to the client. And to make it even less CPU-intensive, hell, you can even make it a cube instead of a sphere.
It is not important to know if it will be less or more intensive than others computations (I think it will be the same than collision detection as it requires XYZ coordinates) or if it will be a sphere or a cube... It will be added to the already existing computation that the server has to do today, this everywhere and anytime even in a charged local grid. This is not a good thing.
Local is like that : Player C just entered in the system. Tell this to player A and B actually in the same system. Nothing more. If someone leave, tell it to the others.
Perma-Radar will be like that : Player C is at the location XYZ 1 of the system. Player A & B are in the same system in some others locations. Is Player C in the radar range of player B ? If yes, tell him. Is Player C in the radar range of player A ? If yes, tell him. If Player B in the radar range of player C ? If yes, tell him. Is Player B in the radar range of player A ? If yes, tell him. Is Player A is in the radar range of player C ? If yes, tell him. Is Player A in the radar range of player B ? If yes, tell him.
Repeat this each second for a good radar.
For each new player, it will be something like (1 + x) * x at least. 2 + 1 players = 6 computations/seconds, 4 + 1 = 20, 1000 = 1001000, etc... To be added to the existing ones.
Poor hamsters. Signature removed for not being EVE related. Zymurgist |
Akita T
Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2010.09.02 03:31:00 -
[385]
Edited by: Akita T on 02/09/2010 03:36:23
Originally by: Sky Marshal stuff
Close, at least theoretically, but not quite. Or at least, it doesn't have to, practically. Depends how inventive CCP manages to be.
First off, you can limit it only to player ships (because that's what you really care about), which should be a relatively short list of "blips". To make that even simpler, create a separate data table where you only store GRID coordinates of ships in a system, and then you only work with small-ish integers from now on in a table that's easily accessed/searched. Also, if you make it a cube, you just "fetch" any signals between +/- (range) on x,y and z, it's just a RELATIVELY simple condition/query ("if xt>x-range and xt<x+range and yt>y-range and yt<y+range and zt>z-range and zt<z+range, then work with it"), the kind you probably have thousands of in just one mission/deadspace/dungeon instance whenever a player ship just sits inside.
The calculations needed for an entire system full of people, if they think it through properly and compromise on accuracy (it's not like you could tell if the dot was 0.42% off on the scanner vs reality), the entire combined scanner code for all people in a busy system could be no more computationally intensive than one guy running a L4 mission alone in a system.
_
Beginner's ISK making guide | Manufacturer's helper | All about reacting _
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: [one page] |