Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails

---

yes but then pirates would get the advantage and nobody really wants that tbh lol


x

---

Originally by: CCP Shadow

---

Have you ever wished you could have prevented a train wreck before it actually happened? I need to stop this one before the craziness begins.

---

Originally by: Alara IonStorm

---

I say we remove local, but not in 0.0, no we need a new type of space, one that emphazises scanning.

Then we add incredible wealth to that space to make it interesting, and stat changes to change the way we look at PVP.

It is so hard core, all the bada$$ local whiners will flock there!

---

Originally by: Captain Yifan

---

Originally by: Alara IonStorm

---

I say we remove local, but not in 0.0, no we need a new type of space, one that emphazises scanning.

Then we add incredible wealth to that space to make it interesting, and stat changes to change the way we look at PVP.

It is so hard core, all the bada$$ local whiners will flock there!

---

Erm, my sarcasm detector is slightly off, but dosent that make low-sec even more.....pointless to go to?

---

Quote:

---

Surely, you know that there're mission-runners in the low-sec because you see them in local?

---

Quote:

---

And, I dont think your example is appropriate? You see probes by using the directional scanner, not local.

---

Quote:

---

yes but then pirates would get the advantage and nobody really wants that tbh lol

---

Quote:

---

Don't like local? Move into a WH. Bye.

---

Quote:

---

however what will replace the chat?

---

Originally by: Zisi

---

Second Post

---

Originally by: CCP Shadow

---

Have you ever wished you could have prevented a train wreck before it actually happened? I need to stop this one before the craziness begins.

---

Originally by: Kehro Urgus

---

Edited by: Kehro Urgus on 03/09/2010 04:13:29
This is not that unlike the daily whine about ninja salvagers.

---

Quote:

---

This is not that unlike the daily whine about ninja salvagers. (Or Cloaks, Ganks, Hybrids, ROTFkets or Lag.)

---

Quote:

---

Local is all seeing, always immediately perfectly accurate, requires no skills, no action of any kind at all besides just watching the window.

---

Originally by: Cat o'Ninetails

---

yes but then pirates would get the advantage and nobody really wants that tbh lol


x

---

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

---

As for local. Sure remove it, but make sure to add features to allow for similar data-gathering when in friendly space .. sovereignty modules in null, slight delay in low-sec and as is in high-sec.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Are you just trying to agree with everyone?

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

The defender has all of the advantages in nullsec: intel chat + local means it's impossible to catch anyone in a bs or smaller ship that's paying attention and competent. 100% safety doesn't really go along with the nullsec theme.

---

Quote:

---

Proposing to change a game mechanics that will ruin other people's gaming experience to boost your own is selfish.

---

Quote:

---

How ever did you get from "they saw my probes" to "local must go"?
That little yarn actually says that local has no noticeable effect on activity as they happily went about their business even with a potential hostile around.

---

Quote:

---

This is one of those times where you wish you didn't get your wish because until you got your wish, you didn't realize what it was you really wished for.

---

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

---

Eve is not a gank-bear game even if many think it is, there are checks and balances to almost everything.

---

Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn

---

So lemme get this straight. You want to remove local EVERYWHERE so you can play the game how you want to play instead of going to the 2500 systems that dont have local as an intel tool?

---

Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn

---

Personally i dont want basic intel gathering to be an annoying task ( something like eating in some other silly games.) I must do all the time. I play Eve to relax and have fun i cant do that if i have to spam a intel button every 5 seconds while i play.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn

---

So lemme get this straight. You want to remove local EVERYWHERE so you can play the game how you want to play instead of going to the 2500 systems that dont have local as an intel tool?

---

Have you tried being the aggressor in those 2500 systems? It's not as easy as it sounds. I can be scanning systems for hours without coming across even a single wreck to mark another player's activity.

Originally by: Thorian Baalnorn

---

Personally i dont want basic intel gathering to be an annoying task ( something like eating in some other silly games.) I must do all the time. I play Eve to relax and have fun i cant do that if i have to spam a intel button every 5 seconds while i play.

---

If you're not willing to put as much effort into not being found as the attacker is putting into finding you then why should you have a free pass? There's something seriously wrong if you can relax in 0.0 because there's no danger of anything happening to you. I guess we could lower the rewards to match the risk instead ... but really, changing local would be the better option in the long run

---

Originally by: Bhattran

---

Why not go where people are then? That won't work right, you want to be 'hidden' so people can't see you popping up while you hunt them, unaware, but if that happens either people will then be on their toes, or not.

---

Quote:

---

What you want is the people too lazy/ignorant to be on their toes so you can have 'easy' kills of most likely non pvp fit ships or prepared players.

---

Quote:

---

How about getting involved in a play style that doesn't bring you complaining on the forums about how you can't have fun doing the un-fun crap you do? Too much to ask right, but pushing that 'un-fun' behavior, scanning for face it gankers like you, on other people is fine.

---

Quote:

---

I should get a free pass because I and many others aren't playing your game of cat and mouse, how hard is that for you to understand, being in an MMO doesn't mean we've all agreed to play the way you are or want us to.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Bhattran

---

Why not go where people are then? That won't work right, you want to be 'hidden' so people can't see you popping up while you hunt them, unaware, but if that happens either people will then be on their toes, or not.

---

Sounds like you haven't been on the attacker side at all. No, going to where people are won't work because of local. Jump in, everybody docks. Jump in, everybody's at a pos. Repeat ad nauseum until a blob chases you away. That's what reality is at the moment

---

Quote:

---

What you want is the people too lazy/ignorant to be on their toes so you can have 'easy' kills of most likely non pvp fit ships or prepared players.

---

Quote:

---

How about getting involved in a play style that doesn't bring you complaining on the forums about how you can't have fun doing the un-fun crap you do? Too much to ask right, but pushing that 'un-fun' behavior, scanning for face it gankers like you, on other people is fine.

---

Quote:

---

I should get a free pass because I and many others aren't playing your game of cat and mouse, how hard is that for you to understand, being in an MMO doesn't mean we've all agreed to play the way you are or want us to.

---

Quote:

---

Looks like you have trouble reading things.

---

Originally by: Bhattran

---

Why not go where people are then? That won't work right, you want to be 'hidden' so people can't see you popping up

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

No, going to where people are won't work because of local. Jump in, everybody docks. Jump in, everybody's at a pos

---

Originally by: Bhattran

---

Isn't part of the lowsec/00 I can't get no PVP complaining that never ends is there aren't enough people there?

---

Originally by: Bhattran

---

I'm also glad someone will admit they aren't interested in 'real' PVP but ganking as there is a difference that it seems fewer and fewer people acknowledge.

---

Quote:

---

Yet there was mention of "I spend hours and can't even find a wreck to track someone" making the point that WH are huge time sink=can't find people=not fun.

---

Quote:

---

Again, trouble reading and understanding, I and most people know and understand this is a PVP game but not everything that players do is mandated by game rules to force us to play how YOU or ANYONE else wants us to play period.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Quote:

---

Looks like you have trouble reading things.

---

Looks like you have a memory problem. I'll refresh it for you

Originally by: Bhattran

---

Why not go where people are then? That won't work right, you want to be 'hidden' so people can't see you popping up

---

And then I very reasonably pointed out why it doesn't work

---

Quote:

---

It's not about me forcing a play style on you. It's about the risk vs reward in 0.0 being unbalanced. Either it gets riskier, or it gets less rewarding. 0.0 is designed to be a non-consensual PvP zone, so it doesn't make any sense that you can avoid non-consensual PvP in a non-consensual PvP zone while making more isk than you would in the equivalent risk highsec zones

---

Originally by: Bhattran

---

where you see the play style as inescapably being non-consensual pvp thus no one should be able to get away and you want to force the inability for anyone to be able to avoid pvp in a non-consensual pvp zone as you put it, oh and pvp.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Sounds like you haven't been on the attacker side at all. No, going to where people are won't work because of local. Jump in, everybody docks. Jump in, everybody's at a pos. Repeat ad nauseum until a blob chases you away. That's what reality is at the moment

---

Originally by: Morcam

---

Sounds like you're just really bad at hunting ratters.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Bhattran

---

where you see the play style as inescapably being non-consensual pvp thus no one should be able to get away and you want to force the inability for anyone to be able to avoid pvp in a non-consensual pvp zone as you put it, oh and pvp.

---

This is a non-consensual PvP game. Either come to grips with that, or leave.

And if you can't ever get away without local, then either you're one of the biggest bears I've ever seen or you're just blowing things out of proportion trying to support your riskless PvE nullsec experience. People hunted in WHs get away all the time. How do you think they manage that? Premonition? Time travel? Magic? Or maybe they know how to use the tools they're given and don't rely on the instant risk-free 100% accurate up-to-the-second intel crutch known as local

---

Originally by: Hofbrau Dunkel

---

Also, as the proposed theory would greatly increase the risk of low/null without any increase to a slightly better than hisec reward, how could you expect any carebears that you hunt to actually stick around in such dangerous environments?

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

It'll balance itself out. The risk-averse people will head back to empire, increasing the profit for the people who are staying. Some of my friends run a few DED plexes a day for several billion on a good day.

---

Quote:

---

And settled space would naturally be safer than unsettled thanks to intel channels and friendly traffic.

---

Quote:

---

And finally, don't forget that it's a double-edged sword for the attacker too -- ambushing that roaming gang going through your space becomes much easier when you can hide most of your fleet from them

---

Quote:

---

Riskless PVE? Again try harder there is no riskless PVE in EVE, ... You're blinded by warped perceptions about the game, saying I'm blowing things out of proportion when you make ridiculous statements like 'riskless PVE' among other fallacies you've been spouting.

---

Quote:

---

Ah, so you want less people in 0.0 so you can have more plexes to yourself...???...Profit. Also note that the 'risk averse' people make up a good chunk of the population of easy targets, which sending them back to empire will seem to undermine the intended purpose of removing local chat from 0.0, which was to make it easier to sneak up on carebears.

---

Quote:

---

And how exactly are intel channels going to work, as intel channels are derived from seeing people in local, then checking the D-scan to see what ship they are in?

---

Quote:

---

No, I don't do plexes. Yes, I know risk averse people make up a good chunk of the people in space that's supposed to be risky. That kind of statement just underlines the fact that nullsec is too safe; you're worried that once there's risk, the people who don't like risk will leave. Of course they will, they shouldn't be there in the first place

---

Quote:

---

You're kidding, right? With no local ships become invisible or something? You're too used to having perfect intel. Intel should be imperfect. If you want better intel, you'll have to send a scout. This goes both ways of course

---

Originally by: Hofbrau Dunkel

---

I'm just pointing out that those who wish to remove local chat as a means to easier gankage will have the unintended consequence of most of their easy targets moving out of dangerous space, making the whole 'removing local' as pointless to that original intent.

---

Quote:

---

but unless you expect someone to sit on a gate 23/7 to check traffic, its impossible to tell with D-scan if a ship is an ally moving thru or a red moving thru, and even if you use some special symbol to distinguish your ships on D-scan, its still possible for the smart ones to copy that naming scheme.

---

Quote:

---

Also, having good intel channels makes too much sense, why would you believe intel channels should be subpar? Obviously removing local will make the intel channels bad, probably to the point of uselessness.

---

Originally by: Herzog Wolfhammer

---

(back to bots: these would be most affected).

---

Originally by: Makalu Zarya

---

tracers work both ways, so does local. I'm sorry all the people that support local going are the ones that are clearly upset that they keep on losing their ravens in belt/anoms. As I keep on saying if you can't handle 0.0 then go back to high sec and carebear there.

---

Originally by: Zisi

---

it promotes small gang pvp and scouting

---

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

Sections three and four from,

http://go-dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/AdunhSlavy/RSIV611.htm

---

Originally by: Vertisce Soritenshi

---

Ok...I am all for removing local as well but something has to be done to balance the removal. Everybody has to make ISK in game to support PvP. I rat in 0.0 for my PvP ISK. So...you remove local. I can no longer know if I am about to be jumped on and killed by gankers. Directional scanners don't go far enough and I cant constantly use scan probes while ratting. You can scan using probes while cloaked meaning your enemy could be in your system and cloaked scanning you down and you wouldnt have a clue. Then what if you know someone is in your system. Now you are cloaked...he is cloaked and you are both trying to scan someone you cant scan.

Too many problems there. Give me a "RED ALERT" flashing indicator on my screen somewhere for when Neuts or reds are in system and also an audible sound for when they enter my system or when I enter a system they are in and we have something. There has got to be SOMETHING to let us know there is an enemy in system. We don't necessarily need to know how many but need to know there are.

---

Originally by: Tradeahun

---

So, anyone who does want to contest this. Tell me, WHY you should be completely safe in nulsec space? WHY should you immediately know if reds jump into system?

---

Originally by: Scatim Helicon

---

How is it that, every single day, dozens, probably hundreds of these 'completely safe' 0.0 ratters are caught and killed by roaming hostiles in their space?

Your assertion does not match the facts.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: cpu939

---

to all those that want local removed go live in whspace for a month and try to pvp.

---

Originally by: Zisi

---

Quote:

---

Proposing to change a game mechanics that will ruin other people's gaming experience to boost your own is selfish.

---

One word: Balance, Personally I feel removing local would benefit everyone, more fun for the prey since they don't have a win button, more fun for pvp of all kinds, it promotes small gang pvp and scouting, and better makes use of the features of the game that are already present.

---

Originally by: Allestin Villimar

---

Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it.

Originally by: Torothanax

---

Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive.

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: cpu939

---

to all those that want local removed go live in whspace for a month and try to pvp.

---

I pvp almost exclusively in wspace. It's much, much better (especially for smaller gangs) than nullsec. If you really do have people who won't even undock unless they have perfect intel on the enemy and superior numbers then chances are those people aren't worth having in your gang in the first place

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: cpu939

---

to all those that want local removed go live in whspace for a month and try to pvp.

---

I pvp almost exclusively in wspace. It's much, much better (especially for smaller gangs) than nullsec.

---

Quote:

---

looking at your kills/losses on eve-kill lots of nice kills in wspace but no losses lots of losses in nul space. is this down to no local in fast kill out before people can get help? so this is safe mode pvp? :)

---

Quote:

---

In 0.0, the 'bigger fleet wins' complaint which people have would only be exacerbated by removing local, because the small roaming gang would have much less warning that they were about to get jumped by vastly superior numbers.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Scatim Helicon

---

How is it that, every single day, dozens, probably hundreds of these 'completely safe' 0.0 ratters are caught and killed by roaming hostiles in their space?

Your assertion does not match the facts.

---

What facts? The numbers you just pulled out of thin air are facts now?

---

Quote:

---

Some people are pants-on-head stupid and get caught.

---

Originally by: Veaon

---

Not necessarily, it would put a much greater emphasis on scouts (probably causing a huge proliferation of throwaway noob alt's if we are honest) and smaller faster gangs would likely find it easier to evade a larger slower fleet.

---

Quote:

---

I don't have space but in 0.0 they are all fat carebears and I hate all of them because they have no skill and CCP not letting me kill them all pls developers make them as bad as I am

---

Originally by: World Director

---

Quote:

---

I don't have space but in 0.0 they are all fat carebears and I hate all of them because they have no skill and CCP not letting me kill them all pls developers make them as bad as I am

---

Did I sum it up right

---

Originally by: Allestin Villimar

---

Also, if your bookmarks are too far out, they can and will ban you for it.

Originally by: Torothanax

---

Low population in w systems makes afk cloaking unattractive.

Originally by: Veaon

---

Look you obviously don't understand the mechanics you are talking about here. The reason for that is that wormholes are not static. They don't appear on your overview system wide and can appear at any time and from almost any other type of system. Nullsec would not be the same.

---

Originally by: Jaari Val'Dara

---

4. Ihub upgrade that detects all the jump gate activations. Maybe with some delay, or perhaps it can only be put in the system bordering hostile alliances territory.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Bhattran

---

Why not go where people are then? That won't work right, you want to be 'hidden' so people can't see you popping up while you hunt them, unaware, but if that happens either people will then be on their toes, or not.

---

Sounds like you haven't been on the attacker side at all. No, going to where people are won't work because of local. Jump in, everybody docks. Jump in, everybody's at a pos. Repeat ad nauseum until a blob chases you away. That's what reality is at the moment

Quote:

---

What you want is the people too lazy/ignorant to be on their toes so you can have 'easy' kills of most likely non pvp fit ships or prepared players.

---

Yes, if people are too stupid, lazy or ignorant to be on their toes in lawless space they should be relatively easy prey.

Quote:

---

How about getting involved in a play style that doesn't bring you complaining on the forums about how you can't have fun doing the un-fun crap you do? Too much to ask right, but pushing that 'un-fun' behavior, scanning for face it gankers like you, on other people is fine.

---

WH hunting is great fun, and a perfect example of where I think 0.0 should go next. Unless you like the let's-nap-everybody-or-form-huge-blob tactics it's been reduced to?

Quote:

---

I should get a free pass because I and many others aren't playing your game of cat and mouse, how hard is that for you to understand, being in an MMO doesn't mean we've all agreed to play the way you are or want us to.

---

Eve is a PvP game. Every time you undock, you've consented to PvP. You're playing a PvP game in a PvP zone. Why is it that there's no actual danger of (non-consentual) PvP in a PvP zone in a PvP game? Yes, local needs to get the boot

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

I'm pro-local removal. However there are a few issues that need to be dealt with first.

1. Its far too easy to d-scan an entire solar system.
2. Its far too easy to probe out a ship.
3. Clicking d-scan every 10 6 seconds is not really practical.

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

It's a full fledged game, not just PvP. The PvP is there because introducing artificial restrictions on the universe we play in sucks, is bad for those who want to jump in and be taken away by the game and makes the game exciting.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

It's a full fledged game, not just PvP. The PvP is there because introducing artificial restrictions on the universe we play in sucks, is bad for those who want to jump in and be taken away by the game and makes the game exciting.

---

No, PvP drives everything. Everything. The market is a big PvP zone, whether people realize it or not. Think about any activity in the game, and PvP will have an effect on it on a direct or indirect way. That's why it's a PvP game.

By contrast, WoW is not a PvP game. (To my knowledge), player PvP in that game has no effect on its PvE. That's why it's a PvE game

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

It's a full fledged game, not just PvP. The PvP is there because introducing artificial restrictions on the universe we play in sucks, is bad for those who want to jump in and be taken away by the game and makes the game exciting.

---

No, PvP drives everything. Everything. The market is a big PvP zone, whether people realize it or not. Think about any activity in the game, and PvP will have an effect on it on a direct or indirect way. That's why it's a PvP game.

By contrast, WoW is not a PvP game. (To my knowledge), player PvP in that game has no effect on its PvE. That's why it's a PvE game

---

There is lore. Exploration. PvE.

A game can be more than just pvp, or just pve. It tends to be truly great when it does both well.

---

Originally by: Tradeahun

---

The fact of the matter is EVE is not fair.

---

Quote:

---

Of course those who post in this topic who arent pro-change local all say the same thing. "pvpers who dont want risk" or "Its not fair"

---

Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2

---

Edited by: MatrixSkye Mk2 on 27/11/2010 21:17:47

Originally by: Tradeahun

---

The fact of the matter is EVE is not fair.

---

And by not fair you mean it shouldn't be fair to your prey, not to you .

If you believed the bull**** you spew then you woudn't even be here complaining that having local isn't "fair". Yet, here you are, spewing:

Quote:

---

Of course those who post in this topic who arent pro-change local all say the same thing. "pvpers who dont want risk" or "Its not fair"

---

When in fact, the ones complaining something isn't fair is YOU.

Edit: Read my sig. It's meant for people exactly like yourself.

---

Originally by: Zisi

---

I realize there have been plenty of posts about this already....

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

---

Eve is not a gank-bear game even if many think it is, there are checks and balances to almost everything.

---

What's the check and balance to an alert PvE player who tracks local, watches intel chat, and aligns when things smell fishy? There isn't one, they'll never be ganked.......

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Zisi

---

I realize there have been plenty of posts about this already....

---

Then why don't you read some of those posts and read why removing local would make eve suck?

Instead you just start a new post and don't address any of the reason this idea is horrible. In sum you want eve to:

Make blobbing even more effective
Make it take even longer to find a decent pvp fight
Make solo pvp completely impossible
Force everyone to spend the night spamming a lame system scanner.

No thanks.

Everyone has the option to go into a wormhole with no local. They can make a lot of isk and do all sorts of things there. 90% of eve players choose to play where you have local.

---

Originally by: Tradeahun

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Zisi

---

I realize there have been plenty of posts about this already....

---

Then why don't you read some of those posts and read why removing local would make eve suck?

Instead you just start a new post and don't address any of the reason this idea is horrible. In sum you want eve to:

Make blobbing even more effective
Make it take even longer to find a decent pvp fight
Make solo pvp completely impossible
Force everyone to spend the night spamming a lame system scanner.

No thanks.

Everyone has the option to go into a wormhole with no local. They can make a lot of isk and do all sorts of things there. 90% of eve players choose to play where you have local.

---

Ever thought he did and simply disagreed? Not everyone is a moron and thinks that removing local is a bad idea. Erm... no... for a blob to be effective it has to be within range of targets, One jump, maybe two at most without carriers. However, you would need to find a target first, which without local showing everyone in system would be harder.
It wouldn't make solo pvp impossible, just means there is more forethought required.
And spending the night spamming the system scanner is worse then floating around waiting for someone to undock?

The fact of the matter is that the community is divided into 2 groups.
Group A: Those who are not afraid of change, or of risk, or of challenge, and want local removed or made the same as other chats in which it doesnt autopoll the inhabitants of s system
and Group B: People who are too set in their ways, to stubborn to see any other point of view that is valid, too rigid and inflexible, and too much like the hisec care-bears who cry about losing their ships or hard earned isk

Group A's arguments, those who provide them, have been for realism, immersion, accuracy (you need to work for intel, shouldn't get it free from local by showing you who is in it), increase in difficulty, or any number of other reasons. No one, who genuinely wants the change to occur has said "we just want something different to what we have now. Change = fun" but even that would be valid.

Group B's arguments have ranged from "no. its a bad idea" or "your just a stupid ganker, go home" to "we dont see a need to change it. We want the game as it is" or "why should the game be unfair to us mission runners who are too lazy to take active measures to gather intel on possible hostile attacks". And of course my favourite, "If you want no local, go to wormhole sectors"... *rolls eyes*
All of which either haven't actually provided any positive reasons for local not being altered in any way, or shouldn't be in nulsec or lowsec because they are afraid of the danger.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Tradeahun

---

The fact of the matter is that the community is divided into 2 groups.
Group A: Those who are not afraid of change, or of risk, or of challenge, and want local removed or made the same as other chats in which it doesnt autopoll the inhabitants of s system
and Group B: People who are too set in their ways, to stubborn to see any other point of view that is valid, too rigid and inflexible, and too much like the hisec care-bears who cry about losing their ships or hard earned isk

---

Originally by: Tradeahun

---

The fact of the matter is that the community is divided into 2 groups.
Group A: Those who are not afraid of change, or of risk, or of challenge, and want local removed or made the same as other chats in which it doesnt autopoll the inhabitants of s system
and Group B: People who are too set in their ways, to stubborn to see any other point of view that is valid, too rigid and inflexible, and too much like the hisec care-bears who cry about losing their ships or hard earned isk

Group A's arguments, those who provide them, have been for realism, immersion, accuracy (you need to work for intel, shouldn't get it free from local by showing you who is in it), increase in difficulty, or any number of other reasons. No one, who genuinely wants the change to occur has said "we just want something different to what we have now. Change = fun" but even that would be valid.

Group B's arguments have ranged from "no. its a bad idea" or "your just a stupid ganker, go home" to "we dont see a need to change it. We want the game as it is" or "why should the game be unfair to us mission runners who are too lazy to take active measures to gather intel on possible hostile attacks". And of course my favourite, "If you want no local, go to wormhole sectors"... *rolls eyes*
All of which either haven't actually provided any positive reasons for local not being altered in any way, or shouldn't be in nulsec or lowsec because they are afraid of the danger.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Local needs to be removed in 0.0.
There is also a large deviation between effort which occurs as a direct result of local. The maximum align time sub-cap in eve is around 30 seconds with most ships being around 12 or less. The minimum time to load system, deploy probes and scan someone down is greater then the maximum align time. The end result is that anyone watching local is guaranteed complete immunity from PvP if they so wish.

---

Originally by: Tradeahun

---

The fact of the matter is that the community is divided into 2 groups.
Group A: Those who are not afraid of change, or of risk, or of challenge, and want local removed or made the same as other chats in which it doesnt autopoll the inhabitants of s system

---

Originally by: Jaari Val'Dara

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Local needs to be removed in 0.0.
There is also a large deviation between effort which occurs as a direct result of local. The maximum align time sub-cap in eve is around 30 seconds with most ships being around 12 or less. The minimum time to load system, deploy probes and scan someone down is greater then the maximum align time. The end result is that anyone watching local is guaranteed complete immunity from PvP if they so wish.

---

And what makes you assume that someone could pay attention to eve every second for several hours a day? Even with local, they cant get distracted for to long, or else they might get caught by some roaming hostile. You are assuming that all 0.0 ratters are macros and pay attention to local without fail, but mistakes happen all the time, you just need to catch them unprepared.
If local was removed without any new intel tool, the rewards in null sec would need to at least triple to make up for pressing dscan every couple seconds. Of course only macros could do that, so we'd get a lot of them in nullsec. Of course pressing dscan so much would flood the servers and lag would increase beyond measure.
On the other hand pvp'ers would only need to pay attention when they jump into system.

So from now on, new rule in this thread. Unless you have a reasonable replacement for local please don't argue for it's removal.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

A roaming hostile in your alliance systems should be the one whose afraid.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

It's a sad state of affairs.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 28/11/2010 15:40:28

Originally by: Jaari Val'Dara

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Local needs to be removed in 0.0.
There is also a large deviation between effort which occurs as a direct result of local. The maximum align time sub-cap in eve is around 30 seconds with most ships being around 12 or less. The minimum time to load system, deploy probes and scan someone down is greater then the maximum align time. The end result is that anyone watching local is guaranteed complete immunity from PvP if they so wish.

---

And what makes you assume that someone could pay attention to eve every second for several hours a day? Even with local, they cant get distracted for to long, or else they might get caught by some roaming hostile. You are assuming that all 0.0 ratters are macros and pay attention to local without fail, but mistakes happen all the time, you just need to catch them unprepared.
If local was removed without any new intel tool, the rewards in null sec would need to at least triple to make up for pressing dscan every couple seconds. Of course only macros could do that, so we'd get a lot of them in nullsec. Of course pressing dscan so much would flood the servers and lag would increase beyond measure.
On the other hand pvp'ers would only need to pay attention when they jump into system.

So from now on, new rule in this thread. Unless you have a reasonable replacement for local please don't argue for it's removal.

---

Why are you in 0.0 / low sec if your so afraid that you feel you need to click dscan every 6 seconds for hours on end to be 100% safe.

Your not supposed to be 100% safe.

Your post confirms exactly what I stated, that 0.0 has been taken over by carebears and carebearism. There now exists in null and low sec an expectation of a right to be 100% safe all the time.

You shouldn't be out there if you feel the need to press dscan every 6 seconds to completely avoid being caught "by some roaming hostile". Your in an alliance, use the power of your alliance to make your systems safe from "some roaming hostile". A roaming hostile in your alliance systems should be the one whose afraid.

The reason 0.0 players feel this way, is because local has made it possible to solo 0.0 space once you get behind your chokepoints. Your basically a high sec mission runner / ratter / miner whose found an even more lucrative way to carebear it up and the bonus is its even safer, no suiciders or war deccers, easier to scan local, more isk per hour.

Its a sad state of affairs.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Removing local would just facilitate more ganks and one sided fights, quickly followed by an exodus to high sec. Those complaining about carebears in 0.0 most likely use alts to make their isk in high sec themselves.

If you remove local, you need a way better directional scanner than there is now. Aditionally all npcs should be moved to sleeper ai. So attacking a pve'er would actually result in a fight instead of a completely one sided gank.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 28/11/2010 18:04:03

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Removing local would just facilitate more ganks and one sided fights, quickly followed by an exodus to high sec. Those complaining about carebears in 0.0 most likely use alts to make their isk in high sec themselves.

If you remove local, you need a way better directional scanner than there is now. Aditionally all npcs should be moved to sleeper ai. So attacking a pve'er would actually result in a fight instead of a completely one sided gank.

---

Pretty much proving the point there.

An exodus to high sec indeed. I pretty much stay in high sec now, war dec people there, the reason? Its easier to not get spotted in local.

Targets actually flee to 0.0 and low sec because its safer, the reason? Its easier to spot a war deccer in local in 0.0 and low sec because systems are less congested.

You don't need a better directional scanner. How about you claim less space, concentrate your alliance in that space. Surely even a PvE fit ship can survive long enough for a few buddies to come rescue you?

Or alternately, fit for both contingencies?

Or alternately, since your in an alliance or corporation, do stuff with your friends?

Of all the barriers to non-consensual pvp in EVE, local is the biggest, it makes pvp in EvE WoW type dueling. I would guess 80% of my time during war decs is figuring out ways to outsmart the local chat.

With an alt scout ahead of me and local with me all the time, I'm virtually uncatchable and so is anyone else whose not completely stupid or somehow distracted.

Since when was EvE designed with consensual pvp in mind?

---

Originally by: Jaari Val'Dara

---

You still did not answer how could I outrun black ops.
Black ops bridges in 50 disposable stealth bombers. They are throw away ships, so no one really cares if they die. Combined cost of black ops and sb could be ~2bill.

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

Local is neutral. Everyone is forced to be visible so the disadvantage and advantage is even.

---

Originally by: Tradeahun

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Zisi

---

I realize there have been plenty of posts about this already....

---

Then why don't you read some of those posts and read why removing local would make eve suck?

Instead you just start a new post and don't address any of the reason this idea is horrible. ....

---

Ever thought he did and simply disagreed? Not everyone is a moron and thinks that removing local is a bad idea.

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

It also makes literally no sense that a hardcore pirate would keep his communication signal beacon activated. Just rip it out of your ship. No pirate would ever willingly let himself be known to others the moment he enters the system.

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

I've long been a supporter of local removal, providing it went hand in hand with a re-working of cloak/ D-scan/ sov upgrades etc.
And most of the arguments either way have been done to death in this thread already.

As a "first step" perhaps I would be interested if Local could be changed to reduce the amount of intel it gave away?
Namely remove pilot names and standing from local, leaving just a +/- one (or whatever number just jumped in/ out), and giving the ability to discover name/ standing to the D-scan.

At least in this scenario those like me who enjoy scouting/ intel gathering would be able to do so effectively while remaining "in-corp".

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Anyone who doesnÆt see how this would kill solo pvp does not do solo pvp.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Of all the barriers to non-consensual pvp in EVE, local is the biggest, it makes pvp in EvE WoW type dueling.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 29/11/2010 03:34:31

Originally by: Cearain

---

Anyone who doesnÆt see how this would kill solo pvp does not do solo pvp.

---

Only thing I do in EvE is solo pvp. This change would really benefit both sides. It would make pvp exciting. It would make pvp non-consensual.

You sound like you expect to be safe while pvp'ng....

---

Originally by: Kabaal

---

....Will it make things harder? Sure. That's kind of the point. Saying it will 'kill' solo/roam pvp is silly.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

It also makes literally no sense that a hardcore pirate would keep his communication signal beacon activated. Just rip it out of your ship. No pirate would ever willingly let himself be known to others the moment he enters the system.

---

In eve the gates not only know you entered but also whether you have an aggression timer still ticking so you can jump. So local fits in fine with how eve works.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Kabaal

---

....Will it make things harder? Sure. That's kind of the point. Saying it will 'kill' solo/roam pvp is silly.

---

Ok If I am being silly then please tell me how you would go about solo roaming in low sec or null sec without local to help you. I explained how I do it now - and local is a key tool. You explain how it would work with no local.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 29/11/2010 03:34:31

Originally by: Cearain

---

Anyone who doesnÆt see how this would kill solo pvp does not do solo pvp.

---

Only thing I do in EvE is solo pvp. This change would really benefit both sides. It would make pvp exciting. It would make pvp non-consensual.

You sound like you expect to be safe while pvp'ng....

---

Your telling me *I* want safe pvp?? Looking over your battleclinic kills I had to get to the third page of your kills and back in time to may of 2009, before you ever killed anything with a point. If you donÆt have a killboard that shows you do anything beside ganking pve ships, donÆt try to tell me I expect to be ôsafe while pvpÆngö.

Try to imagine you wanted the thrill of fighting something that can actually prevent you from simply warping if you start to take damage. Then try to think how the lack of local would effect your ability to solo pvp.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 28/11/2010 18:04:03

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Removing local would just facilitate more ganks and one sided fights, quickly followed by an exodus to high sec. Those complaining about carebears in 0.0 most likely use alts to make their isk in high sec themselves.

If you remove local, you need a way better directional scanner than there is now. Aditionally all npcs should be moved to sleeper ai. So attacking a pve'er would actually result in a fight instead of a completely one sided gank.

---

Pretty much proving the point there.

An exodus to high sec indeed. I pretty much stay in high sec now, war dec people there, the reason? Its easier to not get spotted in local.

Targets actually flee to 0.0 and low sec because its safer, the reason? Its easier to spot a war deccer in local in 0.0 and low sec because systems are less congested.

You don't need a better directional scanner. How about you claim less space, concentrate your alliance in that space. Surely even a PvE fit ship can survive long enough for a few buddies to come rescue you?

Or alternately, fit for both contingencies?

Or alternately, since your in an alliance or corporation, do stuff with your friends?

Of all the barriers to non-consensual pvp in EVE, local is the biggest, it makes pvp in EvE WoW type dueling. I would guess 80% of my time during war decs is figuring out ways to outsmart the local chat.

With an alt scout ahead of me and local with me all the time, I'm virtually uncatchable and so is anyone else whose not completely stupid or somehow distracted.

Since when was EvE designed with consensual pvp in mind?

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

You obviously have never run a sanctum or a complex in 0.0, with correct damage type you are death long before anyone can help you.

Also people dont run to low sec / 0.0 from wardecs because they have less people in local there, then they could also just go to quiet high sec. They go to low sec / 0.0 because they are not interested in station games with neutral RR in high sec and they know 99% of the wardeccers are too scared to leave concord protection.

And great for you that you feel the need to use alt scouts to prevent any risk, but not everyone has a small army of alts. Non-consensual pvp is a big part of eve, but while i expect some people to not want anything besides completely risk free one-sided ganks, some people actually play eve for the good fights instead of fapping on killmails.


And if you compare it with WHs, first remove viewable sov indexes and ammount of npc kills, make gates randomly move and force people to scan them down everytime, they reconnect to completely random other systems and have limitted ammount of mass you can jump through. Then double the rewards and make npcs also shoot on new ships that warp in and you may compare it with each other.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Quote:

---

People do run to lowsec and 0.0 to avoid war. Many times when I have had a scout in alliances I have decced the reliable old email of get out of high sec and back to your home systems asap comes flopping its way through the mail delivery chute. Its the reason wars end up going stale in high sec, the more people die, the more people log off, leave or run to 0.0 / low sec. Rather then being too scared to leave high sec, its simply a matter of being pointless to follow, since alliance space and low sec is just too easy to get spotted and blobbed.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Quote:

---

People do run to lowsec and 0.0 to avoid war. Many times when I have had a scout in alliances I have decced the reliable old email of get out of high sec and back to your home systems asap comes flopping its way through the mail delivery chute. Its the reason wars end up going stale in high sec, the more people die, the more people log off, leave or run to 0.0 / low sec. Rather then being too scared to leave high sec, its simply a matter of being pointless to follow, since alliance space and low sec is just too easy to get spotted and blobbed.

---

In other words, you are too scared to leave concord protection. Where your alts arent completely risk free since of course you are all fine with wardec system, but your alts may not be at any risk, that would be scary.


And sure i can remove damage mods from a pve ship in 0.0 and replace them with buffer tank. Or i can just go to high sec and run missions there in safety on an alt and earn more. Brilliant idea.


Just get some skill to kill people instead of whining that even with several out of corp alts you still dont manage to kill people so you come here complaining eve needs to be easier for you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian

---

It's a tricky problem.

I think that in terms of gameplay it actually cancels out, because it's equally useful as intel to both "sides", but in terms of immersion it's a real immersion-breaker for me, extraordinarily "unrealistic".

But on the other hand, it's a social game, and you need chat.

So it's quite a conundrum.

---

Originally by: Tornan

---

Originally by: Barbelo Valentinian

---

It's a tricky problem.

I think that in terms of gameplay it actually cancels out, because it's equally useful as intel to both "sides", but in terms of immersion it's a real immersion-breaker for me, extraordinarily "unrealistic".

But on the other hand, it's a social game, and you need chat.

So it's quite a conundrum.

---

how is seeing everyone in local unrealisitc. its like if I am in a room with 2 doors, at each door is a butler who annoucnes who arrives and who leaves to everyone there.

unless your saying that these gates have no ability to track who eneters or leaves meaning that transporder codes that exist on aircraft today is a forgoting tech and that the gates also have no way to comuniacte to ships in the system.

I think the best solution would be a 30 second to 1 minute delay, but I think that might give the red the adnvantage too much in systems he knows are populated

---

Quote:

---

I think that in terms of gameplay it actually cancels out, because it's equally useful as intel to both "sides",

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

As a "first step" perhaps I would be interested if Local could be changed to reduce the amount of intel it gave away?
Namely remove pilot names and standing from local, leaving just a +/- one (or whatever number just jumped in/ out), and giving the ability to discover name/ standing to the D-scan.

At least in this scenario those like me who enjoy scouting/ intel gathering would be able to do so effectively while remaining "in-corp".

---

Well in the current system you can still scan and gather intel. Shiptypes etc. Personally I hate scouting and scanning and warping around all f-ing night. I like to actually have pvp fights.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Anti removal: ôoh great now I have to spam the dscan all the time even in the middle of a solo fight! And it still wonÆt tell me what corp some is in so I wonÆt know if I need to run or not. Does this make the game better or worse?ö

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

It also makes literally no sense that a hardcore pirate would keep his communication signal beacon activated. Just rip it out of your ship. No pirate would ever willingly let himself be known to others the moment he enters the system.

---

In eve the gates not only know you entered but also whether you have an aggression timer still ticking so you can jump. So local fits in fine with how eve works.

---

The gates scan and keep a record of the ship. There could be distinctive markers placed on each ship like a license plate, at the molecular level, however you want to justify it. It could be placed anywhere on the ship so there'd be no way to remove it. A communication array, however, can be removed or disabled. It makes sense that gates know everything about you. It doesn't make sense that you can't disconnect from local.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Cearain, I challenge you to get an alt or even use your main, I'll give you an alliance to war dec, if you get 1 kill per day, over a week period and not get killed, I'll give you a billion isk.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

No it isnt, it is waaaayyyyyyy more useful for the pve'ers as defense than for the pvp'ers as offense. The location of PVE'ers is given by the game in several ways, so the pvp'ers dont need to search in which system they are, they know where they are.

---

Originally by: Nut Nougat

---

To all you people in here arguing about. Removing local would not boost gankers, nor would it boost blobs. What it would do is boost pvp.

People would get more kills, and they would get killed more. You can't have one without the other, it just cannot happen. More kills = more deaths.

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

Edited by: Syllein on 29/11/2010 15:35:00
Edited by: Syllein on 29/11/2010 15:32:49
Edited by: Syllein on 29/11/2010 15:17:42

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

As a "first step" perhaps I would be interested if Local could be changed to reduce the amount of intel it gave away?
Namely remove pilot names and standing from local, leaving just a +/- one (or whatever number just jumped in/ out), and giving the ability to discover name/ standing to the D-scan.

At least in this scenario those like me who enjoy scouting/ intel gathering would be able to do so effectively while remaining "in-corp".

---

Well in the current system you can still scan and gather intel. Shiptypes etc. Personally I hate scouting and scanning and warping around all f-ing night. I like to actually have pvp fights.

---

Good for you, however I think you missed the point I was trying to make. Namely why should I be forced to use an out of corp alt to do something I'd like to be doing on my main? As it stands if my main jumps into a system with WT's in they get a lovely "heads up guys, +1 WT in local....mmm maybe it's a scout trying to get a warp in on us" and can prepare accordingly. This sucks, and is the reason I have to roll with alts..

---

Originally by: Lemmy Kravitz

---

Edited by: Lemmy Kravitz on 29/11/2010 07:49:57
Edited by: Lemmy Kravitz on 29/11/2010 07:47:10
Solo PvP will stay the same, just require alittle more time for you to determine if you are 100% safe to gank.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

If you see a ship on dscan you likely will not have much time to get out of scram/disruptor range before it lands. Theya re already warping to you.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

So during a fight I usually try to fly my ship as opposed to hitting the dscan and analyzing the results. Having to spam the dscan during a fight is pretty lame. Local makes it so you donÆt need to and this is good.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

As far as using your alt û well people start to recognize alts and which corps are working together. I know where I roam in low sec I have some idea who is friendly to others.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

In sum it seems clear that removing local will just boost blobbing and make small gang and solo pvp less viable û unless you are just ganking pve-ers. No one even seems to question that. The question is why do we want that?

I think we need mechanics that do the opposite. The mechanics need to make solo and small gang pvp more feasible and blobbing less of the answer to every issue. So removing local is going in the complete opposite direction of what ccp should do.

---

Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2

---

Stuff

---

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

Imagine no gates, no local, improved D-scan such that game play is more akin to subs and sonar, passive and active. Then we're getting close to Eve's potential.

---

Originally by: ninjaholic

---

That would be crap. You have this option if you move into W-space. OPTION being a key word there. This would make half the game avoid low and null sec, and only benefits macro-miners, pirates and blobs.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

It also makes literally no sense that a hardcore pirate would keep his communication signal beacon activated. Just rip it out of your ship. No pirate would ever willingly let himself be known to others the moment he enters the system.

---

In eve the gates not only know you entered but also whether you have an aggression timer still ticking so you can jump. So local fits in fine with how eve works.

---

The gates scan and keep a record of the ship. There could be distinctive markers placed on each ship like a license plate, at the molecular level, however you want to justify it. It could be placed anywhere on the ship so there'd be no way to remove it. A communication array, however, can be removed or disabled. It makes sense that gates know everything about you. It doesn't make sense that you can't disconnect from local.

---

Actually I think the aggression timer goes with the player not the ship. Gate keepers keep track of where you are and whether you can jump so it makes perfect sense that you canÆt disconnect from local. If you could disconnect from local you could jump right after attacking someone.

LOL I feel like a treky arguing this stuff. I care more about how the game plays than justifying mumbo jumbo of the mechaincs. But what the heck for those who care there is my argument.

---

Originally by: Adunh Slavy

---

blah

---

Originally by: Nuts Nougat

---

Originally by: MatrixSkye Mk2

---

Stuff

---

1) And why would suddenly there be more people around to blob you because there's no more local.

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Actually I think the aggression timer goes with the player not the ship. Gate keepers keep track of where you are and whether you can jump so it makes perfect sense that you canÆt disconnect from local. If you could disconnect from local you could jump right after attacking someone.

LOL I feel like a treky arguing this stuff. I care more about how the game plays than justifying mumbo jumbo of the mechaincs. But what the heck for those who care there is my argument.

---

Then the gate scans the Pod itself, which remains the same unless the player dies. In which case, the aggression timer is removed. So yes, it makes more sense that the gate simply scans and keeps track of the player's personal pod.

Has nothing to do with local, and how any pirate should be able to disconnect from it.

---

Originally by: ninjaholic

---

You're belh

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

If you see a ship on dscan you likely will not have much time to get out of scram/disruptor range before it lands. Theya re already warping to you.

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

In all honesty, we just won't know what would happen until we try it. Personally I'd love to give it a go and see what happens.I'm not convinced it will boost blobbing as much as you think, but again you never know 'till you try.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

If you see a ship on dscan you likely will not have much time to get out of scram/disruptor range before it lands. Theya re already warping to you.

---

Ummm what? I do this regularly, when solo I always attempt to be in "control" (for want of a better word) of the fight. Disengaging when something nasty pops up on scan is not always 100% possible, but that's what makes it interesting. Sometimes you can kill and run, sometimes you get caught and burn. Either way, it's a GF.

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

In all honesty, we just won't know what would happen until we try it. Personally I'd love to give it a go and see what happens.I'm not convinced it will boost blobbing as much as you think, but again you never know 'till you try.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Originally by: Drakarin

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

Actually I think the aggression timer goes with the player not the ship. Gate keepers keep track of where you are and whether you can jump so it makes perfect sense that you canÆt disconnect from local. If you could disconnect from local you could jump right after attacking someone.

LOL I feel like a treky arguing this stuff. I care more about how the game plays than justifying mumbo jumbo of the mechaincs. But what the heck for those who care there is my argument.

---

Then the gate scans the Pod itself, which remains the same unless the player dies. In which case, the aggression timer is removed. So yes, it makes more sense that the gate simply scans and keeps track of the player's personal pod.

Has nothing to do with local, and how any pirate should be able to disconnect from it.

---

Sure it does. This information is kept track of and is published in local. If a pirate could disconnect from it then it would be able to jump through gates without concern of aggression timers.

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Nuts Nougat

---

Blobs do not form to size x, because it is a required size, they form to that size because they have x people. Would you tell anyone "no, you can't come to my roam, we have too many people"? And why would suddenly there be more people around to blob you because there's no more local. There would probably be less, because the bears would leave as you said yourself. Win/win situation if you ask me.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

The argument that gates broadcast such and such is irrelevent. We had gates and local way before we had agression timers. Your argument would seem to support jump drive / cyno'ed ships not showing up in local since they didn't go through a gate. In reality gates have zero to do with people showing up in local, the aggression timers were put in to stop gate games and were not tied to local chat at all...

---

Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha

---

I'm still not seeing the issue, but I don't intend to solo pvp (and win). There have been dev posts about not liking the 100% info local provides for no effort. The dev opinion in question only wanted to modify 0.0, so it's possible your lowsec browsing won't be affected when the change comes. At the same time, you might want to start developing your own strategies just in case.

---

Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha

---

Your stance is that an inactive, null effort tool is necessary to....

---

Originally by: Kabaal S'sylistha

---

I say if you want solo PvP /tryhard or suck it up and get a gang with a dedicated scout. I honestly don't care if you can't solo without it. I'd rather have a need for scouts to give people solo work to do than hide under some crazy assumption that we need to all know each other is there so we can decide if we want to duel or not.

As for promoting blobs, lol. Somehow this will encourage people to go from bringing everyone they have to...bringing everyone they have?

---

Originally by: Nuts Nougat

---

Blobs do not form to size x, because it is a required size, they form to that size because they have x people. Would you tell anyone "no, you can't come to my roam, we have too many people"?

---

Quote:

---

The sun is making a futile effort to expose the cloaked hull of your falcon. Being an advanced scout for your Black Ops fleet, you have been in system for the past few hours with your Sister Probes redeployed every little while. For once you are a more valuable asset then an interceptor that jumps in and does a gate crash to get a local count/gate visual. While waiting in position, you can detect a fleet of hostiles conducting operations as they are passing through system.

You notice one of these signatures warps to a destination separate from the others, likely an ammo can or safespot, judging by his off-gravity location. Seeing this as an opportunity, you immediately communicate your situation and get the order to engage, you lock in and warp to the target. Immediately upon landing you bracket up the prey and ECM/Disrupt him blind. All he can do is call for help. You anxiously hover your finger over that keybind, counting down from 5 and activate the covert cyno beacon. Already too late for the victim to warn those accelerating into your trap. Your fleet emerges through the Black Ops cyno primed and ready for the fleet now landing out of warp and into a situation much more grim than they could understand from the frantic victim.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

The main tool the solo pvp has to reduce the risk of getting blobbed is local. So ôwhat will happen to solo pvp if we take away the main tool they have to mitigate getting blobbed?ö

I have asked this several times and not one person who wants to do away with local can give an answer. How would you suggest going about solo pvp if there is no local?

---

Quote:

---

Originally by Oveur: High security empire space is supposed to be quite safe. ... That's the whole point of high security.

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

I have asked this several times and not one person who wants to do away with local can give an answer. How would you suggest going about solo pvp if there is no local?

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

I have asked this several times and not one person who wants to do away with local can give an answer. How would you suggest going about solo pvp if there is no local?

---

Originally by: Nuts Nougat

---

Originally by: Cearain

---

I have asked this several times and not one person who wants to do away with local can give an answer. How would you suggest going about solo pvp if there is no local?

---

Let me try, though I am pretty bad at this game.

What happens currently when I jump into a system in my <ship>:
1) If there's a bubble camp, I add the system to avoid list while timer counts down, burn back to the gate and go on my way.
2) If there are people in local, never warp to outgates without scanning them for bubbles first. If there's small bubbles, warp to a belt or moon not inline with anything major, then to gate. If there's a large bubble, chances are you'll die if you warp there so again, add to avoidance list.
3) If there are people in local, drop a single probe and let it run a cycle at max range, while d-scanning the belts near the gate. If there's nothing on scan there, warp to the nearest sanctum. If nothing shows up, move on.
4) If I catch something miraculously, and there's more than one hostile in local, spam d-scan on 1au range while killing it and if something shows up, warp off.

Now, let's see what happens when there's no local:
1) If there's a bubble camp, I add the system to avoid list while timer counts down, burn back to the gate and go on my way.
2) Never warp to outgates without scanning them for bubbles first. If there's small bubbles, warp to a belt or moon not inline with anything major, then to gate. If there's a large bubble, chances are you'll die if you warp there so again, add to avoidance list.
3) Drop a single probe and let it run a cycle at max range, while d-scanning the belts near the gate. If there's nothing on scan there, warp to the nearest sanctum. If nothing shows up, move on.
4) If I catch something miraculously, spam d-scan on 1au range while killing it and if something shows up, warp off.

I honestly can not see what the big problem is. As long as you assume there's people in local, you're in the same situation as if you knew they were there.

I also never fight on gates when solo, unless it's well off the gate and a single enemy I can outrun, which gives me enough time to bugger off if it's bait for the gang nextdoor.

---

Originally by: Syllein

---

Edited by: Syllein on 30/11/2010 08:33:00

Originally by: Cearain

---

I have asked this several times and not one person who wants to do away with local can give an answer. How would you suggest going about solo pvp if there is no local?

---

Sorry to labour the point, but do you absolutely need the information as to standings/ corp/ player history made available to you before you fight? Or more to the point, do you honestly think this level of Intel should be handed to you on a plate? Would a simple "system count" be sufficient? With further intel made available if you had to spend a little time & effort to acquire it?

---