| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
   |
Posted - 2010.12.25 09:37:00 -
[1]
SO, we had two large camps, ones that want to remove local from null, and ones that don't. How about CCP rolls a dice a randomly TEMPORARILY (i.e. for a week only) removes local from a random constellation/system/region, preferably NPC or uninhabited. then we can see how it goes, and either lay rest to the topic forever, or go on with this. Justify it by pesky Sanhsas poking there noses somewhere again.
|
Marcus Henik
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 15:35:00 -
[2]
Supported, I love w-hole space because you can actually hunt someone without them knowing your there as soon as you enter system. I hate working outside of the holes because you cant even set up a deacent ambush due to local.
|
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 17:07:00 -
[3]
No compromise, the only people wanting local to stay as is are the people who don't grasp the kind of game Eve is supposed to be.
All experimenting in a small area will do is **** off thee people in the test zone.
Do a seven day test across the galaxy.
 Originally by: CCP Oveur
The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
Marlona Sky
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 18:04:00 -
[4]
As much as I would love a change to the local channel, you simply can't do anything to nerf it until a revamped directional scanner is in place. Even still, I would then prefer the local channel to display who is visible on grid with you and that is all.
|
Alias 6322A
|
Posted - 2010.12.26 04:13:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Alias 6322A on 26/12/2010 04:14:09
So on the actual OP's topic...which has nothing to do with whether or not you support 'no local'...
This actually sounds like a great idea. It'd need BIG player support, but why not? Also known as bipartisan, though if you're American, that word is foreign to you possibly... (I'm American, so calm down folks)
I'd like to see several constellations, or even regions, of nullsec go 'dark' (no local) for a week. Maybe just the whole thing to ensure everyone gets a taste. It needs to be done on SiSi though, NOT TQ.
Let's just test it: no local for a week. People who support it may go 'holy **** this sucks', and vice versa for opponents. Using SiSi doesn't hurt anyone and the players can see what it would be like. That's what a test server is for anyways...TESTING. For one thing, trying it could inspire CCP or the player-base to find a different, not yet discussed solution in the event no-local ends up being a flop.
On the aforementioned need for a new d-scan, yeah we need that too...but that needs development whereas this idea is more straight-forward (though I dunno how hard it'd be to implement? You lock players out of rookie help, so I imagine you can 'lock' local channels too?).
|
Asarus Atreyu
The Kairos Syndicate
Transmission Lost
|
Posted - 2010.12.26 17:42:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Marlona Sky
As much as I would love a change to the local channel, you simply can't do anything to nerf it until a revamped directional scanner is in place.
People living in w-space don't use local for intel at all..
========================================
Interested in a change? Come see what wormhole life offers in LOST-Pub! |
Goose99
|
Posted - 2010.12.26 22:31:00 -
[7]
Not supported. If you want no local, go to whs. Eve is about freedom and choice. Some place have local, some do not. You have the choice of where to roam. It would be the same as bringing concord to null, majority of playerbase are carebears, and would love it, doesn't mean it should be done.
|
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 04:06:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Goose99
Not supported. If you want no local, go to whs. Eve is about freedom and choice. Some place have local, some do not. You have the choice of where to roam. It would be the same as bringing concord to null, majority of playerbase are carebears, and would love it, doesn't mean it should be done.
The majority of nullsec inhabitants are botbears/carebears that depend on Local channel to let them know when to blob or dock up.
Local takes away freedom, because it adds an absolute to the game. The only other thing that is absolute is that CONCORD will kill you in hi sec for doing something they don't like.
A sandbox with absolutes is not a sand box.
Originally by: CCP Oveur
The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
Niklas
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 08:24:00 -
[9]
No local in Wspace semi works because the NPCs are omnitanked, and do omni damaged, and switch targets, and there are no cynos. Pirates coming in do indeed have a better chance at surprise, no doubt about it, but they do not have prior knowledge of their enemies most likely damage type, most likely gaping resist hole, and do not have many npc 'drones' providing additional dps for them, and can't drop a fleet of bored SC pilots on you.
You want to ditch local, you'll have to do that to rats in kspace so that pvpers can't exploit the gaping resists pve demands alongside having much greater surprise.
Cloakers will have to be detectable with dscan/probes as well(though not able to be warped too). They would be far too powerful if they could pop a cyno with no possible method of their presence being detectable before the thing is already active. Stealth bombers uncloaking, locking, and jamming you, all within 2s, going from zero indication(and zero possible indication) of anything being wrong to most assuredly will die within seconds would get old pretty fast.
Oh,and the chief reason to avoid WH space, the incessant spam of the dscan button, would have to be fixed. Autorepeat function or similar.
And asking in local whos in what ships is still a ******ed concept. Computers could easily automate that task if CCP would let us.
Originally by: Anubis Xian
Local takes away freedom, because it adds an absolute to the game. The only other thing that is absolute is that CONCORD will kill you in hi sec for doing something they don't like.
Thats the only other absolute? Wow.. I've missed out on some changes apparently. Can you tell how I can fit a covert ops cloak onto my battleship? Also, I would like to invent a brand new Zealot BPO and go into production, process on that please? I'd really like to tear out the poor sensors on my Golem, and swap in the much better ones from my navy scorpion... Do I do that in the fitting screen? Actually, nevermind, since apparently, with all the absolutes removed, its impossible to make things absolutely unprobeable anymore by fitting excessive ECCM and raising sensor strength above sig radius. Btw, does this mean I can fly every ship and use every weapon/module now? Before I got a message stating I absolutely didn't have the skills to use a lot of things.
A sandbox offers freedom of choice bound within constraints. Eve has rules, just like a real sandbox has rules. Dry sand won't make a sandcastle no matter how hard you wish otherwise.
|
Diefurcht
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 11:07:00 -
[10]
I agree with this post.
The local chat takes away a very particular element of the game. It gets rid of the element of surprise and mystery.
When you first jump through a wormhole, you immediately look at your overview, and the local chat to see who's in the zone. That's not how it should be. There's no sportsmanship involved in this.
When you first jump through a wormhole, you should look at your overview, bust out your scanner and do readings.
Getting rid of local chat has benefits:
1. Forces new players to utilize the scanner for safety, and rely on tips.
2. Creates the element of surprise, and a shadow of safety unless an individual is scanning for you in your asteroid field or wherever you may be.
3. Allows fleets, small gangs, solos and industrial to move un-noticed.
(why is it fair for your fleet to enter a system and then just because your blips pop up in local your ambush fail?)
Do it. 
|
|
|
Ya Huei
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 11:32:00 -
[11]
This is impossible without introducing some alternative way of detecting ships. I live in W-space, and "no local" works there because you have alot more control of your environment out there.
We can close off our system by collapsing wh's when we want to do pve stuff, and a few probes checking for new sigs is enough to give us some measure of security.
K-space with all its open stargates without local will just make any type of pve activity in low/null suicidal.
So NO ;)
|
Serra Polaris
Viziam
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 11:50:00 -
[12]
Supporting. I'd also like to see a delayed local in low sec for similar reasons.
|
Black Dranzer
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 14:05:00 -
[13]
Hmm. I think it shouldn't just be one small area, but I think it would be a good idea to test, even if just for a week or two, globally. There's no substitute for sticking the damned thing in and seeing how it goes. Experimentation is a cornerstone of science.
Do it.
|Bounty Fix|Mining Makeover| |
Tres Farmer
Gallente Federation Intelligence Service
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 15:56:00 -
[14]
Needs better d-scan first.. something that works active/passive to get some balance into this. If you're passive you get anything scanning active told. Then tie in combat scans as active if very very close and balance from there.
As for being save from hot-drops of SCs.. get a proposal for a module on the line, that works as local cyno-jammer for the grid you're on.
support
Public Idea Tracker | 24hr PLEX |
Nosferatu Zodd
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 20:37:00 -
[15]
After reading a few of the local chat threads I conclude that most people want a little uncertainty what's going on. Miners and PVE-ers want to know who's going to gank them and want to hide as long as possible them, gankers on the other side don't want their victims to know they're going to gank them. As it stands local shows up every threat or every opportunity immediately and all the time. In fleet battles, gatecamps, etc both sides know what they're up against (except for capital warfare with cyno's/jump portals). There is no tactical opportunity for either sides. We should think about a solution that gives both sides a tactical opportunity. The one with better intel skills (I don't mean a skill book but you're very own skills) wins. Also, I have a problem with many of the new features and idea proposals that are not logical/coherent. Taking in all these requirement Ive been thinking and came to a few solutions :
1: Local chat still exists. You will show in local chat to everyone if you talk. Other pilots will show if they are within a certain range, the range should be a fixed value for everyone and is not modifiable by skills or whatever.
2: Local chat still exists like any other channel but you will only appear if you talk. Detection of other pilots is detached from local chat and can be done through a new (compact) window or in another panel in the scanner, also with a fixed range.
I leave the detection range open to debate. This has to be calculated depending on average system span and other conditions.
One problem that can make this solution unworkable is that it might overload the server but I'm not sure about this.
Since it could rely on the detection that is already done by the overview. The overview updates the distance between your and other ships in real time and even other values like velocity, radial velocity, transversal velocity and angular velocity. I don't know if the game manages solar systems differently from viewable distance spheres. Also, is it possible to detect a player who is in deadspace doing a mission and calculate if he is within range?
This solution could open a lot of strategic possibilities, both defensive and offensive. Examples :
- You could put a bait covetor to lure an attacking group away and give a big mining operation more time to evacuate.
- Place a few pilots as detectors to cover several gates, for mining operations, fleet battles, ...
- A ganker can enter a system without being noticed immediately, he has an advantage over his prey but he doesn't know what he's up against, how many people in space/station that could come to help, a trap ...
- It will be harder for an enemy to attack your homebase, but if they prepare the attack with enough intel the advantage can turn to the their side.
This would also reduce the lag created in trade hubs since there are far less people that show up in local chat.
|
Bobbeh
Navy of Xoc
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 21:37:00 -
[16]
I had this debate in corp ts the other day.
It came down to People who want Pvp and People who want to avoid Pvp.
It is nearly impossible to catch someone ratting if they are aligned and paying attention. before you come out of warp they are in warp off grid. with or without local the only difference is when they enter warp. With local they enter warp to a safe spot the minute you enter system 100% safe, theres almost no way in hell to catch them, minus Awoxing (using blue alts to tackle). Without local They see you entering grid or on directional and enter warp. Fair chance you'll catch them, and a fair chance they will get away. Problem alot of people have with getting rid of local is its free information, giving up something that was free is always hard. This is why they always compromise with a better directional scanner a passive one (still free intel.) I'd be all for a better d-scanner but i would never agree to a passive one.
The reasons i wish to eliminate local, If i wanna rat noone will know im ratting, if i wanna camp a cyno beacon with a cloaky noone knows im there. If i wanna go afk in a pos noone knows im there. If i want to camp a gate noone knows im there. Key words are noone knows im there.
Because how would they? Especially if you have a cloak, cant see you visually cant detect you so how do they know your sitting there in a rapier?
If im out of directional scan range of you why should you know im there? answer me that?
|
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 22:42:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Niklas
Originally by: Anubis Xian
Local takes away freedom, because it adds an absolute to the game. The only other thing that is absolute is that CONCORD will kill you in hi sec for doing something they don't like.
Thats the only other absolute? Wow.. I've missed out on some changes apparently. Can you tell how I can fit a covert ops cloak onto my battleship?
It is not absolutely impossible to fit a covert ops cloak on a BS. There just doesn't exist one that can bother, yet.
Quote:
Also, I would like to invent a brand new Zealot BPO and go into production, process on that please?
Actually, that is not an argument in your favor. The invention-BPC system removes the absolute associated with the T2-BPOs.
Quote:
I'd really like to tear out the poor sensors on my Golem, and swap in the much better ones from my navy scorpion... Do I do that in the fitting screen?
ECCM II
Quote:
Actually, nevermind, since apparently, with all the absolutes removed, its impossible to make things absolutely unprobeable anymore by fitting excessive ECCM and raising sensor strength above sig radius.
Stacking penalize ECCM and that problem will disappear immediately. Again, not an argument in your favor as exploits are not applicable.
Quote:
Btw, does this mean I can fly every ship and use every weapon/module now? Before I got a message stating I absolutely didn't have the skills to use a lot of things.
I didn't think you could get any more absurd. There is nothing that says you absolutely can't fit or fly anything you want... you just have to have the skills.
Quote:
A sandbox offers freedom of choice bound within constraints. Eve has rules, just like a real sandbox has rules. Dry sand won't make a sandcastle no matter how hard you wish otherwise.
Rules are not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about guaranteed consequences outside of the bounds of rules a true sandbox would have. IE CONCORD is not a sandbox rule. It is an arbitrary absolute designed to put sand down someone else's pants when they put sand down yours in the wrong part of the sandbox.
Basically, Security Status is a constraint, CONCORD is an arbitrary absolute.
Originally by: CCP Oveur
The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 22:43:00 -
[18]
well, i actuall think passive one would be good, because clicking the scan button for 3 hours straight while rattin does get a bit on my nerves.
How about a simple option to close local? Then you don't appear in local, but you cannot see other people there? just add a little cross!
|
Bobbeh
Minmatar
Navy of Xoc
Wildly Inappropriate.
|
Posted - 2010.12.28 23:06:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev
well, i actuall think passive one would be good, because clicking the scan button for 3 hours straight while rattin does get a bit on my nerves.
How about a simple option to close local? Then you don't appear in local, but you cannot see other people there? just add a little cross!
Free intel is free. Free is bad making you work for your intel means lazy people won't and they will suffer for it but active people will do it and will be rewarded for it
|
Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
|
Posted - 2010.12.29 10:49:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Bobbeh
Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev
well, i actuall think passive one would be good, because clicking the scan button for 3 hours straight while rattin does get a bit on my nerves.
How about a simple option to close local? Then you don't appear in local, but you cannot see other people there? just add a little cross!
Free intel is free. Free is bad making you work for your intel means lazy people won't and they will suffer for it but active people will do it and will be rewarded for it
BY thatlogic overview is free intel.
Let's make us click 8 buttons in a sequence to get overview to refresh so we have to work for it!
|
|
|
Anubis Xian
Word Bearers of Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.12.29 16:23:00 -
[21]
Or better yet, dump the overview and make us sort through stuff visually.
Originally by: CCP Oveur
The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
Professor Bunsen
Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2010.12.29 23:27:00 -
[22]
Client would need some re-writing to make it so no local means you can't tell when someone enters your node, only your grid, but it could be an interesting counter to botters if suspected / high activity systems lost local until activity returned to a normal threshold.
------------------------------
I'm a logi pilot for sale, and I have 1.4mil unallocated SP. |
Infinity Ziona
Cloakers
|
Posted - 2010.12.30 01:33:00 -
[23]
Edited by: Infinity Ziona on 30/12/2010 01:33:24
Originally by: Professor Bunsen
Client would need some re-writing to make it so no local means you can't tell when someone enters your node, only your grid, but it could be an interesting counter to botters if suspected / high activity systems lost local until activity returned to a normal threshold.
Why would the client be updated with someone entering your node if your not on grid / near a stargate except to add your details to local?
Supported.
---------------------------------------------
Hate Bots / RMT? Do something worthwhile and good for EvE and cause tears and anguish for others, while doing absolutely nothing yourself! Join up. |
rootimus maximus
Caldari
School of Applied Knowledge
|
Posted - 2010.12.30 07:12:00 -
[24]
Edited by: rootimus maximus on 30/12/2010 07:12:29
Originally by: Alias 6322A
I'd like to see several constellations, or even regions, of nullsec go 'dark' (no local) for a week. Maybe just the whole thing to ensure everyone gets a taste. It needs to be done on SiSi though, NOT TQ.
I'd be happy if they just removed local in Jita, permanently. It needs to be done on Tranquility though, NOT Singularity. 
|
mech res
|
Posted - 2010.12.31 04:57:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Bobbeh
Originally by: Maxsim Goratiev
well, i actuall think passive one would be good, because clicking the scan button for 3 hours straight while rattin does get a bit on my nerves.
How about a simple option to close local? Then you don't appear in local, but you cannot see other people there? just add a little cross!
Free intel is free. Free is bad making you work for your intel means lazy people won't and they will suffer for it but active people will do it and will be rewarded for it
Yes, lets make eve a game where you are rewarded for neurotically clicking the same button. And lets punish those who donĘt want to incessantly click a button.
|
Alias 6322A
|
Posted - 2010.12.31 05:03:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Alias 6322A on 31/12/2010 05:03:43
Again, as I said earlier, I think people are taking this thread as a full-on "no local" proposal.
THIS IS NOT A PROPOSAL FOR PERMANENT NO-LOCAL.
The OP's idea is to try the no-local concept in an isolated area, likely on SiSi as it IS a test server, to see what players think of it. This allows both sides to see the vailidity, if any, of the idea as well as CCP itself.
Once TESTED the concept will either drop dead from players realizing its an insanely stupid idea that serves no purpose...
...or they'll herald it as a much needed and finally achieved awesome solution to an age-old problem.
You can decide which you WANT...but why not see it first? We have a test server, let's use it!
EDIT: I will say that the title of the thread doesn't help...should have said "Test No-Local" or some such.
|
Flybiere
|
Posted - 2011.01.02 02:25:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Flybiere on 02/01/2011 02:32:54
Final edit.
Bleh, I like the range thing.
|
Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
|
Posted - 2011.01.02 06:59:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Rip Minner on 02/01/2011 07:00:23
Edited by: Rip Minner on 02/01/2011 06:59:19
The way I would like to see this is. Remove local but add in a pos mod that gives a local to the owning corp allance and remove local only in Null sec.
This would give a real home field advantage. And add to the metagameing in spys are even more worthy.
Is it a rock? Point a Lazer at it and profit. Is it a ship? Point a Lazer at it and profit. I dont realy see any differnces here. |
Blood Anarchist
|
Posted - 2011.01.02 17:11:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Blood Anarchist on 02/01/2011 17:13:56
the idea of completely removing local from lowsec/null is an idea that i have always supported
|
Selinate
Wardens of the Void
|
Posted - 2011.01.03 04:37:00 -
[30]
Edited by: Selinate on 03/01/2011 04:38:09
I support this, but only if CCP provides something a bit less clunky than the D-scanner to use to see if any hostiles/neutrals are entering the system. WH's are one thing, but to have all of space without something that allows for the detection of hostile or neutral players going about wouldn't be a great idea...
EDIT: The above is only for high sec and low sec. Didn't see the null sec part, null sec probably shouldn't have local or anything to make up for it....
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |