EVE Search - Compromise on local chat?

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Compromise on local chat?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
mollymaguire	Posted - 2010.09.01 00:44:00 - [1] Edited by: mollymaguire on 01/09/2010 00:45:53 For the record, I browsed thru the list of local chat discussions on the common ideas list, all were older than 90 days and locked. So, here are my two cents. I am a 0.0 PVP'er, but I also do quite a bit of 0.0 PVE to fund my "habit". Right now, PVE in 0.0 is virtually risk-free. You see someone in local and you can immediately warp to a station or tower from your sanctum and be safe. Or, you can sit in your DED plex with scanner open until you see probes appear on them, and once again warp away. 0.0 should be difficult, it shouldn't be Easy to PVE. This, to me, is one of the must frustrating and yet un-discussed problems with nullsec. So, I propose the following changes to Local Chat: 1) All space .1 rating and above remain unchanged 2) WH space local chat remains unchanged 3) 0.0 Local Chats will have a delay of 45 seconds before your name appears in the local window regardless of any actions performed (unless you speak before this time is up, much like how you appear in WH space local if you chat) 4) The 45 Second timer can be decreased in increments based on Sov level of the system. For example, 5 seconds per level of Sov, so a Sov V system. would have a delay of only 20 seconds CONS: - Constant Scanner Ping - Paying attention to what you're doing in PVE, no more launching drones and checking the client every few minutes - Roaming gangs or Sieging gangs will not know if a large gang suddenly jumps into system without a few good scouts PROS: - Keeps attention to the isk making - Force some PVE'rs to go to lowsec to make their carebear isk in more safety (no bubble, a live local chat, more dockable stations) - Ratting in a plex off scan from a gate may buy you safety from a fast-moving gang - Rewards efforts to gain sov with a more secure ratting experience - More epic PVP clashes with less-accurate intel for certain situations The benefits from this are really self-explanatory. Right now there is almost no reason to continue roaming in 0.0 because of local chat, and too many people are in 0.0 because it's "easy". Let the people who want to play eve on Easy mode stay in empire space. However, honestly, I don't think CCP will ever change local chat as it stands, looking at the long history of inactive local chat issue discussions.
Goose99	Posted - 2010.09.01 02:12:00 - [2] Edited by: Goose99 on 01/09/2010 02:14:26 Basically all you want is to get a jump on people who don't want to fight you. I don't see the need of a game-changing/game-breaking alteration for the sole purpose of giving you more kms. All of those "pros" are only pros in your eyes, and cons for other people. It's like saying "buff lasers because I'm Amarr."
mollymaguire	Posted - 2010.09.01 02:27:00 - [3] Edited by: mollymaguire on 01/09/2010 02:29:07 Haha yes true, I do like killmails. But, why are people able to practically AFK rat in 0.0? It's a problem. People in WHs are way more aware of their surroundings, but in 0.0 you can fearlessly warp a titan into an anomaly to make easy isk without the fear of being caught. By suggesting that I post this just because I want killmails you are implying that I have less of a right to ask for game mechanic changes. So what if I want killmails; it's what makes the game fun for me. Making the game easier for PVE'rs makes the game less fun for PVP and right now that balance in 0.0 is off. My point in suggesting these changes was to try to find a middle ground between the two groups of 0.0 inhabitants.
Jack Coutu Gallente Canada Corps	Posted - 2010.09.01 02:34:00 - [4] Originally by: Goose99 Edited by: Goose99 on 01/09/2010 02:14:26 Basically all you want is to get a jump on people who don't want to fight you. I don't see the need of a game-changing/game-breaking alteration for the sole purpose of giving you more kms. All of those "pros" are only pros in your eyes, and cons for other people. It's like saying "buff lasers because I'm Amarr." All you want is to be lazy and not have any risk. Also I suspect you are actually a macro.
mollymaguire	Posted - 2010.09.01 02:41:00 - [5] Originally by: Jack Coutu All you want is to be lazy and not have any risk. Also I suspect you are actually a macro. PVE'rs deserve to have their isk - hence the sov upgrade delay reduction. Also keep in mind that the local delay works both ways - roaming gangs won't know that you're in system just from glancing at local. It forces both sides to be vigilant in their efforts.
Emperors Righthand Minmatar War Mongers	Posted - 2010.09.01 03:44:00 - [6] the game seems to be plenty ballanced and if it so hard to pve witch is the main sorce to make isk then no one can make isk cuz they alwayse have to hug stations!!! i say there are enough players out there that get plenty complacent or focused on survival it takes them plenty of time to overlook the neww visitors and when they show up hope they are far enough away to run. besides in null sec a wise pve pilot can still shut all ur complaints down with thier own bubbles and cloaked alts and so on just enjoy what u got if anything make wormholes more lucrative and u have ur wish!!! draw more players in wormholes with the wormholes having ice and ore and moon mining and more u have u much better odds of sneeking up on your opponates!!!
Kildan Caldari Zetatech	Posted - 2010.09.01 11:56:00 - [7] The main problem I find with local is that it is am immersion breaker. I used to have to try and explain that statement but now I can just point to wormhole space. When you jump through a wormhole you get the feeling of being stepping into the unknown with possible danger everywhere. The question is, "Is this suitable for 0.0 space?" and my initial response in no. 0.0 is more akin to a foreign country than an unexplored frontier for a roaming pvp'er. There should be some reward to cultivating space and that reward should be security. However, I agree with the OP in that the security should not be instant and all encompassing. The OP's delay idea is a pragmatic but perhaps too simple a solution. A possible alternative is to change local to its wormhole equivalent but to give members of the sovereignty holders alliance access to the system occupancy logs, which shows everyone who has entered via a gate, clone jump or traditional cyno. It subtracts anyone who has left by gate, cloned or jumped out. This bestows the same functionality that exists now on the people who pay to maintain the space but not to randoms who try to leech off the npc indexes or roaming gangs looking for easy kills. The flip side is that anyone who enters via a covert cyno is not listed in the log. It's just an idea and therefore maybe rubbish, but something needs to be done to make 0.0 feel bigger than it does right now.
Razor Blue VR Corp	Posted - 2010.09.01 13:24:00 - [8] Changing LOCAL into Constellation would be good start.
Aoa Lux Caldari b.b.k	Posted - 2010.09.01 14:11:00 - [9] The scanner is in dire need of a rework but I support the OP's idea regardless. 0.0 should not be as risk-free as it is presently, and this is coming from a 5.0 secstatus carebear. Local has been long abused as an intel tool and in the last year even the macros have started abusing it. +neut in local -> warp + cloak. Macrominers are bad enough, but macrogolems in 0.0 using local for literal risk-free isk is just absurd.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.09.01 15:41:00 - [10] yes, the instalocal has to go finally. Its just weird every raven and golem in 0.0 can instantly bash the warp button, 0.5 sec after you entered the system and havent even loaded the grid yet.
Koniss	Posted - 2010.09.01 15:46:00 - [11] changing local to delayed mode have 1 problem when the hunter enter in system he/she can see all the carebears (possible targets) immediately because they all are in system surely from than 45 secs but they cant see the hunter for X time. so the options are 2: leave it the way it is or make it like WH local, said this a WH local will be a total pain in the ass for people that like to solo roam because they will have to lose ALOT of time checking scanner/belts when with the actual scanner if you solo you watch the local and just skip the system.
Robert Caldera	Posted - 2010.09.01 16:03:00 - [12] Originally by: Koniss ps: oh and for the macro whiner if now macros use the local to warp away and cloak after a local nerf they will just adjust the macro to read the scanner unless it get a total rework to make it unusable by OCRs not really.. 1) the scanner is trashed with all crap currently, so its not easily readable by a bot 2) the scanner does not differ between friendly and hostile ships, so the bot would have to warp away on all ships entering the system 3) the scanner does not show cloakers
Koniss	Posted - 2010.09.01 16:14:00 - [13] Edited by: Koniss on 01/09/2010 16:15:09 Originally by: Robert Caldera 1) the scanner is trashed with all crap currently, so its not easily readable by a bot 2) the scanner does not differ between friendly and hostile ships, so the bot would have to warp away on all ships entering the system 3) the scanner does not show cloakers 1) yeah go figure if you had to hunt PVErs with no local what a pain it will be 2) putting a macro ratter where friendly players rat is not very wise, some guys in my corp did it and we ganked/kicked i dont think other corps will accept it happily, most of macroers are in a corp made for macros in low frequented systems. 3) thats ok if local get changed to WH style otherwise with a delayed local the hunter will just appear in local after a while. other than that cloakers are tha last thing in eve that need a buff
mollymaguire	Posted - 2010.09.01 16:51:00 - [14] Originally by: Koniss when the hunter enter in system he/she can see all the carebears (possible targets) immediately because they all are in system surely from than 45 secs but they cant see the hunter for X time. The local delay would apply to people jumping into system as well as those in system - person A currently in system would have a delay on seeing person B jump into local, and Person B Would have a delay seeing that person A was already in system. Additionally, there could also be a delay on showing when someone leaves local. It would be interesting to hear whether I'm beating the proverbial dead horse here and if CCP has any intention of re-visiting local chat after years of inaction.
Goose99	Posted - 2010.09.01 18:14:00 - [15] Edited by: Goose99 on 01/09/2010 18:15:33 Macro OCR does read scanner. They cycle directionals fast and tirelessly. Google one of the newer macros and look for "wh feature." Ratting macros stay aligned, and responds instantly, the moment you decloak next to it, it's gone. The problem is macros those days are better at running away than real humans. Macros are tireless, don't make mistakes, multitask, don't get distracted, and react instantly. Taking away local as source for intel, and macros will still have scanner, which they cycle constantly at a fast pace forever, without missing a thing, thus never get caught. Humans won't do as well at the same task. It's a gimp to humans, who won't fare as well as macros, and additional macros will take the place they vacated. The only real way is for CCP to look over logs of people who's logged on for too long with constant activity and income stream, then make human decisions.
Rhadia	Posted - 2010.09.01 20:03:00 - [16] If you're worried about macros, then go make a thread about it. From the sound of it, Macros will neither be made better or worse by this, really- and the betterment of gameplay gained by firstly making Cloaks actually become sneaky, and secondly making small ship combat and fast moving gangs more viable is well worth it, IMO. FYI, everything that is wrong with Eve regarding all these easy macros could be solved by making the HUD have more visual elements rather than easily botted lists, and by making ratting actually require a brain (Fitting for PVP to go ratting, because you have to scram your targets, and NPC ships prioritizing ships that are "easiest to kill"- EX: An frigate that has not closed range to orbit yet. Stuff like that.)
Zkeletonwitch	Posted - 2010.09.02 00:53:00 - [17] i like the op and kildan's suggestions. nullsec ratting is way too easy.
Daco Cutter NibbleTek	Posted - 2010.09.02 02:48:00 - [18] Tbh this is the first decent local chat idea I have heard. I do not agree with the whole not being able to see local chat WH idea most people have proposed for 0.0 just because it would make this a hell of alot more annoying to try and find fights then it already is, having a delay though is a very good idea imho, because it gives the pvpiers a chance to find lazy ratters/plexers or even the chance to jump a enemy gang without them knowing you're coming. Those people that say this idea is one sided and only favours the pvpiers are even more one sided then the people they accuse. To quote a article from CCPS first major expansion in 2005, where they answered this question. Quote: Q: "Is PvP combat the only combat in the EVE universe? Or is there safety for the lone player and NPC interaction?" A: "EVE is built as a giant sandbox for gamers, and no one is ever fully exempt from PvP. Solar systems in EVE are assigned different security levels, from 0.0 to 1.0. 5.0 and above are safe systems in which PvP can only occur with consent. 0.1 to 0.4 systems are "low security" systems in which players can fire on other players, but suffer penalties to their character. 0.0 is reserved for PvP. The best ships and highest rewards are all in 0.0 systems and we expect the players to fight each other fiercely for the right to call 0.0 systems home." So to say it is unfair on the people just wanting to PVE you are right but if they want a safe place to pve then empire is where you belong. 0.0 should be reserved for pvpiers and since it should be reserved for pvpiers then yes it is more lucrative then empire but you need to fund all the ships you are undoubtedly going to loose. If you want to PVE in 0.0 then hell it should be as dangerous as you can make it, so local is where that starts. Local is one of the most pivitol game mechanics in 0.0 warfare and so it should be. And yes I am a pvpier and yes it is all I do, but I have carebeared at one stage in this game like everyone else so I (as well as others) have a good idea of what it's like to be a carebear and to be a pvpier. It is the people that are owning carebears which object so passionatly to the local changes, and since CCP love their carebears they usually get their way. One sided indeed. ----------
Guy LeDuche	Posted - 2010.09.02 04:41:00 - [19] Originally by: Daco Cutter Tbh this is the first decent local chat idea I have heard. I do not agree with the whole not being able to see local chat WH idea most people have proposed for 0.0 just because it would make this a hell of alot more annoying to try and find fights then it already is, having a delay though is a very good idea imho, because it gives the pvpiers a chance to find lazy ratters/plexers or even the chance to jump a enemy gang without them knowing you're coming. Those people that say this idea is one sided and only favours the pvpiers are even more one sided then the people they accuse. To quote a article from CCPS first major expansion in 2005, where they answered this question. Quote: Q: "Is PvP combat the only combat in the EVE universe? Or is there safety for the lone player and NPC interaction?" A: "EVE is built as a giant sandbox for gamers, and no one is ever fully exempt from PvP. Solar systems in EVE are assigned different security levels, from 0.0 to 1.0. 5.0 and above are safe systems in which PvP can only occur with consent. 0.1 to 0.4 systems are "low security" systems in which players can fire on other players, but suffer penalties to their character. 0.0 is reserved for PvP. The best ships and highest rewards are all in 0.0 systems and we expect the players to fight each other fiercely for the right to call 0.0 systems home." So to say it is unfair on the people just wanting to PVE you are right but if they want a safe place to pve then empire is where you belong. 0.0 should be reserved for pvpiers and since it should be reserved for pvpiers then yes it is more lucrative then empire but you need to fund all the ships you are undoubtedly going to loose. If you want to PVE in 0.0 then hell it should be as dangerous as you can make it, so local is where that starts. Local is one of the most pivitol game mechanics in 0.0 warfare and so it should be. And yes I am a pvpier and yes it is all I do, but I have carebeared at one stage in this game like everyone else so I (as well as others) have a good idea of what it's like to be a carebear and to be a pvpier. It is the people that are owning carebears which object so passionatly to the local changes, and since CCP love their carebears they usually get their way. One sided indeed. The problem is this nerf to human null ratters is at the same time a buff to macro ratters, since they cycle scanners without fail, stay aligned, and flee in a way only machine can. It will be a major driving force for normal ratter to turn to macros, as it's the only sure way left to remain safe. This is unacceptable.
mollymaguire	Posted - 2010.09.02 07:39:00 - [20] Seeing as your character name is "guy ledouche" or something close to that i'm going to assume you're a troll. However, several people have brought up macros. Macros are illegal according to the EULA. That fact alone will keep the majority of players away from using them. CCP is hunting macros, actively. Basically, Macros aren't prolific enough and will never be prolific enough to affect the quality of roaming gangs.
mollymaguire	Posted - 2010.09.02 15:17:00 - [21] still looking for people's opinions/support/CCP response
Goose99	Posted - 2010.09.02 18:47:00 - [22] Originally by: mollymaguire Seeing as your character name is "guy ledouche" or something close to that i'm going to assume you're a troll. However, several people have brought up macros. Macros are illegal according to the EULA. That fact alone will keep the majority of players away from using them. CCP is hunting macros, actively. Basically, Macros aren't prolific enough and will never be prolific enough to affect the quality of roaming gangs. No offense, but you really need to go out there and get a clue.
Covert Kitty Amarr ISK Solutions SRS.	Posted - 2010.09.03 22:47:00 - [23] Edited by: Covert Kitty on 03/09/2010 22:49:00 Quote: It will be a major driving force for normal ratter to turn to macros Sweet, so your saying that nullsec carebares are so utterly full of fail that they would macro instead of learning the game? Sounds like a good way of getting rid of them via CCP's ban hammer. Theres a time and a place for risk free PvE, and its called highsec. I would prefer that local is removed entirely, but any step in that direction as your compromise describes would be a positive step.
Melankurion ANZAC ALLIANCE IT Alliance	Posted - 2010.09.05 07:59:00 - [24] I don't know if mollymaguire's suggestion is the right solution, but one thing is certain: this is a massive problem. Local in 0.0 _needs_ to be changed, somehow. At the moment, it is broken. Whether a simple delay is good enough, or whether CCP needs to add some electronic warfare module which must be activated and can only be fit on a certain class of ships (eafs or recons would be my choice), which detects the number of impulse drives in a system, or whether there is some other solution which CCP feels would be more balanced and work better, I do not know. But at the moment it is broken.
Gibbo3771	Posted - 2010.09.07 23:33:00 - [25] Originally by: mollymaguire Seeing as your character name is "guy ledouche" or something close to that i'm going to assume you're a troll. However, several people have brought up macros. Macros are illegal according to the EULA. That fact alone will keep the majority of players away from using them. CCP is hunting macros, actively. Basically, Macros aren't prolific enough and will never be prolific enough to affect the quality of roaming gangs. Dont matter if macros are illegal, you seriously havent been to deep 0.0 space in areas like Impass. The amount of macro ratters is ****ing terrible. I remember jumpin into a system with 30+ people and hit d-scan to see like 30 mackinaws/orcas on scan. local instantly became me and as i landed in belt the last of the stuff was just warping off. Logoffski bastards, macro ratters do the damn same if not they cloak. Local is never going to change, it effects pve too much and CCP see no benefit at all for carebears and therefore dont care.
cyndrogen	Posted - 2010.09.07 23:42:00 - [26] Originally by: Gibbo3771 Originally by: mollymaguire Seeing as your character name is "guy ledouche" or something close to that i'm going to assume you're a troll. However, several people have brought up macros. Macros are illegal according to the EULA. That fact alone will keep the majority of players away from using them. CCP is hunting macros, actively. Basically, Macros aren't prolific enough and will never be prolific enough to affect the quality of roaming gangs. Dont matter if macros are illegal, you seriously havent been to deep 0.0 space in areas like Impass. The amount of macro ratters is ****ing terrible. I remember jumpin into a system with 30+ people and hit d-scan to see like 30 mackinaws/orcas on scan. local instantly became me and as i landed in belt the last of the stuff was just warping off. Logoffski bastards, macro ratters do the damn same if not they cloak. Local is never going to change, it effects pve too much and CCP see no benefit at all for carebears and therefore dont care. well this is easy to defeat, all you have to do is just fit a hulk with smart bombs and you will kill all the macro bots because most likely they are configured to watch for all ships except other exumers.
Dmoney3788 THE DISC	Posted - 2010.09.08 00:04:00 - [27] How about...pilots of ships that cloak disappear from local chat until they uncloak?
mollymaguire	Posted - 2010.09.08 03:25:00 - [28] I like the cloak idea and as far as macros, I still maintain it's a small enough percentage of EVE players that it doesn't really make a difference. And also, a local delay will allow the roamer to d-scan a macro before he de-cloaks on gate and possibly/hopefully land on him before a d-scan macro comes into effect.
Dmoney3788 THE DISC	Posted - 2010.09.08 06:45:00 - [29] Originally by: mollymaguire I like the cloak idea and as far as macros, I still maintain it's a small enough percentage of EVE players that it doesn't really make a difference. And also, a local delay will allow the roamer to d-scan a macro before he de-cloaks on gate and possibly/hopefully land on him before a d-scan macro comes into effect. Sweet, I thought of it off the cuff, but it sort of makes sense in line with the whole stealth aspect of the cloak. Also, macro ratters are pretty easy to beat, all you need to do is warp to a belt and log off, wait for a bit and log back on, if the bot isn't in the belt you're in keep relogging until he is. This is under the assumption that the macro program picks a random belt to go to after hostiles leave, so as it starts warping to a new belt and you log in, BAM, dead macro.
Grarr Dexx Amarr GK inc. Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2010.09.09 11:40:00 - [30] Originally by: Goose99 Edited by: Goose99 on 01/09/2010 02:14:26 Basically all you want is to get a jump on people who don't want to fight you. I don't see the need of a game-changing/game-breaking alteration for the sole purpose of giving you more kms. All of those "pros" are only pros in your eyes, and cons for other people. It's like saying "buff lasers because I'm Amarr." Don't want to fight? Haha, you talk like you have a choice. Don't go to 0.0 if you 'don't want to fight'.

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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