| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Joe Starbreaker
M. Corp
   |
Posted - 2010.10.12 17:50:00 -
[61]
 Originally by: Razor Blue
Changing LOCAL into Constellation would be good start.
QFT.
Do this in 0.0, and it's a good medium between the benefits of LOCAL in empire and the absence of any free intel in w-space.
...
|
Fleetfoot Falmnir
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 11:40:00 -
[62]
I support removing local. This should have been done a long time ago. I wonder why CCP can't see the benefits to immersion that comes with no instant local. Moving local to constellation is also a good alternative. CCP please bring back risk to 0.0 Where I live in nullsec it is actualy safer than highsec.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 12:08:00 -
[63]
Immersion wise local makes alot more sense in its current version than removed.
Also this is just screaming for easy kills, well guess what, people dont like to be the easy kill. So only thing that happens is people moving to high sec to run missions there, great idea...
Removing local (or worse, this idea, since it really only benefits roamers) should only be done AFTER the dir scanner receives a complete overhaul and all npcs get sleeper ai. Otherwise the only effect is that it changes 0.0 in even more an empty wasteland, no one in their right mind is going to play a game which consists of pressing a scanner button every 5 seconds.
btw lol @ getting more epic pvp clashes without local. Serious? You mean you get more blobbing and less even fights.
|
Fleetfoot Falmnir
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 12:38:00 -
[64]
Originally by: Furb Killer
Immersion wise local makes alot more sense in its current version than removed.
With local removed the imagination can go wild. How can that be less immersive than with all possibilities available at a glance?
Go smoke more of that good stuff.
Every response here against removing local has been a "eaaazy kills o noes" kneejerk post. Like OP said removing it will require more from both parties.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 13:12:00 -
[65]
Immersion wise it makes no sense the gates would not monitor which ships enter and leave a system.
And removing local only hurts PVE'ers, the roamers trying to get easy kms are not hurt at all. The roamers trying to have a good fight most likely get blobbed due to local removal. Hint: You always know where all pve'ers in all of 0.0 are if you are at least a little bit competent.
Oh and since i missed that in my previous post, comparisons with WH space are ridiculous. When you sharply increase profit in 0.0, add sleeper ai and remove all gates and all forms of jump drives you may compare them, until then, just dont.
|
Sakurako Kimino
OffBeat Creations
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 14:25:00 -
[66]
Originally by: Fleetfoot Falmnir
Every response here against removing local has been a "eaaazy kills o noes" kneejerk post. Like OP said removing it will require more from both parties.
bull**** removing local will require less from the pvper.
pvper - use dolan maps to find ratters
jump into system drop probes
target fond kill target
pveer - go ratting smash dscan for 8 hours look for probes is there probes yes no wait thats a ship not a combat probe
macro will not be effected by the removal of local. lets take the marcominers in this post the 30 macks every one of them scanning every second there dscan shows a ship all log off and remember the botton use overview settings for dscan.
all the pro remove local pvpers just go pvp in wh space you'll be happer
btw dyslexic sorry for the bd spelling and grammer
|
Infinity Ziona
Minmatar
Yonnoth Assassination Squad
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 14:32:00 -
[67]
Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 02/12/2010 14:35:57
Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 02/12/2010 14:33:12
Originally by: Furb Killer
Immersion wise it makes no sense the gates would not monitor which ships enter and leave a system.
By that logic, ships that jump into systems with a jump drive or who log into system after having logged out and obviously never used the gates should not show up in local right? The gates have nothing to do with local and trying to tie them in with some corny gate fairy protector is just nonsense.
Originally by: Furb Killer
And removing local only hurts PVE'ers, the roamers trying to get easy kms are not hurt at all.
In some cases it protects the PvE'rs too. Not everyone is gonna scan down every system they jump through. Its quite probable that if you chose an out of the way system that not many people would be jumping in to take the time to scan it whereas if you have local, a quick scout will provide all the intel and many more systems can be scouted out.
Originally by: Furb Killer
The roamers trying to have a good fight most likely get blobbed due to local removal. Hint: You always know where all pve'ers in all of 0.0 are if you are at least a little bit competent.
No the roamers will be able to find a fight and the response will begin as soon as that fight starts. Not minutes beforehand when the roamers are spotted x systems away from the target by some industrial guy at a POS who only know they're in system because of local. And yes you do know where all the pvp'rs are because of local at the moment. That would change very quickly if local was changed.
Edit: And constellation would be a nightmare. As soon as someone enters your constellation you'll know and dock up. Even before they enter system.
Also, cloaked macro hunters would easily catch a macro. No local, no warp-off on neutral entering system. Macro dead.
Sig
---
Quote:
Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 14:38:00 -
[68]
I am going to give this hint only once, since pretty much everyone knows it already.
You do not need local to know where PVE'ers are. Open up dotlan maps (or ingame), look at npc kills, profit.
Station systems will usually have at least one person running an anomaly, ... , profit
Check the sov indices, if it has military V, it usually will have at least one person running an anomaly, profit
Really it isnt that hard. Meanwhile the PVE'ers get killed a few times and then just move to high sec.
|
Infinity Ziona
Minmatar
Yonnoth Assassination Squad
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 14:43:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 02/12/2010 14:43:57
Originally by: Furb Killer
I am going to give this hint only once, since pretty much everyone knows it already.
You do not need local to know where PVE'ers are. Open up dotlan maps (or ingame), look at npc kills, profit.
Station systems will usually have at least one person running an anomaly, ... , profit
Check the sov indices, if it has military V, it usually will have at least one person running an anomaly, profit
Really it isnt that hard. Meanwhile the PVE'ers get killed a few times and then just move to high sec.
Thats not really a problem with removing local. That's a problem with CCP providing too much intel for free, once again.
Although I must say, protect your damn station systems, protect your Sov systems. The only people who should be afraid to be in those alliance systems are non-alliance. If that's not the case then your alliance is doing something wrong.
Sig
---
Quote:
Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 14:57:00 -
[70]
So we should perma camp every station system with a bubble camp with lets say at least 5 people on each camp (to have reasonable chance of catching a competent cloaker). So we can either do that, or we just go run missions in high sec. There is not a single alliance that is capable of doing that, so maybe that is not really reasonable.
Btw problem wont be solved by removing that information. It is not exactly hard with a scan to find out if a system has military V. It takes some time the first time to do that, but after that it will hardly ever change. So even if CCP would remove that information you only need to find it out once, since it is static anyway, contrary to roamers.
|
Nuts Nougat
SniggWaffe
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 15:06:00 -
[71]
Originally by: Infinity Ziona
In some cases it protects the PvE'rs too. Not everyone is gonna scan down every system they jump through. Its quite probable that if you chose an out of the way system that not many people would be jumping in to take the time to scan it whereas if you have local, a quick scout will provide all the intel and many more systems can be scouted out.
You know, the longer I think about this, the more I see that all removing local in 0.0 would do is boost suicide ganking.
Because you're chaining system when grinding sec status, you won't show as pilot in space in the last 30 minutes (you're never in a system for more than 5 minutes). And since there's no local, chances are noone will notice you at all when they come through there.
This means you can grind sec status like a madman and gank people in jita all day long.
I am against this change.
Disclamer: If someone didn't notice until now, this is me being sarcastic.
Also: Originally by: Furb Killer
So we should perma camp every station system with a bubble camp with lets say at least 5 people on each camp (to have reasonable chance of catching a competent cloaker). So we can either do that, or we just go run missions in high sec. There is not a single alliance that is capable of doing that, so maybe that is not really reasonable.
Sorry but if you entire alliance can't send a couple guys to the two or three choke points leading to your regions, you should probably rethink whether you're fit to hold space or not.
---
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 15:59:00 -
[72]
Very few regions have only so little chokes. But even if they do, what are a few people on those chokes gonna do? You need way more than a few to prevent people from coming in. And you need to do a permacamp. Pretty sure you guys still got the record of permacamping, but that was for a charitable reason (camping bob caps in station), are you really telling me that you guys are permacamping every entrance to deklein? With enough people to stop someone who is a little bit competent?
Lets be realistic, it wont be really a challenge to get into deklein. It isnt a challenge to get into any region, it is just flat out impossible to permacamp all entrances.
|
Cearain
Caldari
The IMPERIUM of LaZy NATION
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 16:05:00 -
[73]
Originally by: mollymaguire
Edited by: mollymaguire on 01/09/2010 00:45:53
1) All space .1 rating and above remain unchanged
I'm glad the op is not wanting to change low sec.
I do think this change would actually help low sec. Because it would become the best, if not the only, place to do solo and small gang pvp.
It would definitely widen the gap between low and null sec.
-Cearain
Make fw occupancy pvp instead of pve:
http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1329906 |
Lili Lu
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 16:30:00 -
[74]
This is really a rather good compromise.
In 0.0 you should really be fleeting up and relying on gate scouts anyway. And as far as the immersion concord fairy theory goes I have no problem seeing them keeping track of their gates and having some system monitoring devise that lets them know who has jumped in by cyno (again with a delay).
This would be blow to macros. It might move them to lowsec. Where they would make less isk to sell. I do not see a major downside to a change along this direction. |
Corina Jarr
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 16:47:00 -
[75]
Can an ECM pulse decloak a ship? Cause if so, then you already have you magic win button.
And what about a smartbomb? Can it by cycled? Or is it one time use (never used, thats why I asked)? If you could cycle a smart bomb, that would also work.
|
Kabaal S'sylistha
Caldari
Technomage Trilogy
Comrades-Of-Two
|
Posted - 2010.12.02 17:07:00 -
[76]
Sucks. If you're going to nix it in null, just do it all the way. The 45 second thing is silly, and the only reason I can imagine you went with it over wormhole style is so someone jumping in has the advantage.
The 45 second thing is the only thing different from most other threads about it, so -1 from me for the only thing new in the OP.
I'd link the dev post saying they were looking at making null local like wh local, but I've done it like 4 times now and it hasn't seemed to help. The pro-local people are going to hug their intel tool til it dies.
-More Pewpew, Less QQ- |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |