Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 09:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
With the words from the CEO I hope you plan to listen to what the vast majority of people in nullsec want which is not what a small group of people wanting free ganks want.
One thing that has to be a priority in Winter 2011 gameplay wise is removing the immunity AFK Cloakers have to cause chaos in nullsec without actively being at a computer or taking any risk at all. The fact that many afk cloakers suggest removing local as a solution shows they are not serious about offering a solution to this serious issue and ought to be discarded as such. Realistic alternatives have been proposed and I hope you will read back through and consider them for Winter 2011.
Let me make it clear again tho. People suggesting removing local or changing it from anything from being able to glance and see a hostile in system want free ganks and that is it in my opinion. I have talked with more than a few people that will not only leave lowsec but leave the game in the event that the only chance to respond to a threat in local is once he has you locked down. You understand now that people will unsub this game and leave so I hope you will take proposals for fixing nullsec in the future seriously and not try to push things that will cause chaos and ghosttowns of nullsec to please solo pvpers. PVP ought to be in groups in EVE and things like TIme dilation will cause Group battles to be better instead of the lagfests they were in the past.
Edit: Any suggestions on changing local to "delayed mode" are also just those wanting free ganks in my opinion and ought to be discounted as the resulting chaos will result in many leaving the game and many leaving upon "discovering it" in nullsec. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 10:24:00 -
[2] - Quote
Illwill Jill wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:cloakers I live in 0.0, and I'd love a delayed-mode local like the one in WH space. It'd be a very easy nerf to AFK-cloakers, as they'd not even be able to scare people anymore. At the same time, it'd encourage teamwork amongst 0.0 residents, and would add some excitement to the constant sanctum and sov grinding that 0.0 is today.
No it will just cause many people (Including me and most of my corp) To give up. Stop living in a fantasy land where miners target paint themselves just for your lovely ammo to hit them. The risk in 00 is enough already and if you want to go have some excitement then go join a PVP group and oust the enemy from their systems. Now with time dilation the excuse of not going on large scare PVP due to lag will evaporate. There is no excuse to cause many to leave to please a few solo pvpers looking for free ganks.
WH space is the way it is for a reason. It is a CHOICE to go there. Making 00 like WH space will just cause the same thing as WH space. Small corps/alliances being ousted by big giant ones that are able to charge insane rents to people in select systems with caps while the rest of nullsec becomes a wasteland of crap that only pirates inhabit.
IE we quit. And even worse it will reinforce the idea that CCP is making doing things less valuable to drive up the will to use PLEX. There are already enough reasons to suspect this. There is no need for another.
Ya it will fix the AFK cloak issue alright. Because nobody will want to AFK cloak an empty 0.2 nullsec system for weeks.
Anything but a direct replacement for local or leaving it alone will ruin small corps and alliances. So this needs to be noted. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 10:48:00 -
[3] - Quote
Nice try. Yet botting is a separate issue involving the report bot function. That is completely different.
IWin? Not if you aren't paying attention. In a game where loss is permanent I am not seriously going to walk out of the POS where my first indication of an enemy is him locking me down because I dont have some kind of fantasy instawarp fit,
You want free ganks. Just admit it. Because like many others we are tired of the excuses and run arounds to claim you "NEED local to go away"
No we are not going to put up some fantasy CAP. No we arent going to pay some alliance an ungodly fee to do such cap. We arent going to spam some D-scan like thing. We arent going to play minigames to see local.
We are going to leave. And I HIGHLY suspect we wont be the only ones. Especially once the pirates flood into nullsec and pounce upon the many who don't keep up with the news.
So ya you may have your fantasy world of gank after free tear filled gank. But then you will notice empty systems. Then slowed down dev as CCP loses customer after customer.
CCP you have shown willingness to listen. People in nullsec are taking a risk. The afk cloakers have no risk when AFK and the ones asking for local to delay want to remove almost all risk from their ganks.
Fix nullsec. Don't kill it! |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 23:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
Ho'Taru wrote:On the issue of local chat, one compromise/solution I can think of is to make being cut off from local an effect of cloaking. With the exception of covert ops cloak users (for which getting the jump on enemies is the whole point), my understanding is that other cloak users would give up too much in the way of being able to move/resync times to be able to seriously exploit not appearing in local.
That would be just as effective at giving them free ganks. Please leave local the way it is or buff it or replace it with something that does the exact same thing.
Don't kill nullsec! |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.06 23:53:00 -
[5] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote: You want free ganks. Just admit it. Because like many others we are tired of the excuses and run arounds to claim you "NEED local to go away"
People in nullsec are taking a risk. The afk cloakers have no risk when AFK and the ones asking for local to delay want to remove almost all risk from their ganks.
Fix nullsec. Don't kill it!
Null sec is already dead. Strange however that i dont see many of your corp members trying to do anything significant in 0,0  And no, im not after ganks. I do however want to be able to try and find a fight without an entire region knowing about me as soon as ive enterd local somwere. What you want to do with your carebear needs is of no interest to me, and never will be either. Eve is a cold hard place, and local the way it is, ruins a lot of that feel. Out of pure curiosity, but how the hell does ppl in 0,0 really take any risks these days?? you have info channels, you have jump bridges, you have bubbles to slow gangs down and you have local. so no, you dont really have any risks, cause as soon as someone enters local you can warp away or log, wich is risk free. Also your char has 0 kills and 0 losses, so dont come talk to me about risks, when your either a) have never been to 0,0.. b)post with an alt to hide your mains identity, in wich case again you prove you cant take risks.
I am not going to risk my corpmates being attacked and supported wardeced by people who want to ruin the game to get free ganks.
Local does not remove that feel for anyone but the people who want free ganks. It is all about the free ganks and the faster you can admit that the faster we can get to solving the real issues like AFK cloakers and lagsploitz that make people want to stay away from big battles.
CCP has said they are ready to listen to the community. And not do stupid stuff that ruins the game to please a few. Time Dilation means you can now go into large scale PVP with half a chance. Asking to remove local in spite of that addition allowing balanced PVP in my opinion shows the agenda those that want it have. The want of free ganks. And the fantasy that people will stick around afterwards to be their targets.
CCP you know this. Removing local or changing it to delayed without making something of the equivalent or even better. Would not support small scale PVP in the long run. It would just make rich, big alliances bigger.
Again just so its clear.
Not going to accept delayed or removed. Not going to have to hit a button over and over to check system for contacts. Not going to use some kind of probe system.
If you want to remove local for backend reasons. Replace it with an intel window that does the same thing and is fully configurable. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 03:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
Becky Manson wrote:Uhm,
AFK cloakers & Delayed local
I'm not really sure why people worry so much about them, however, here is a suggestion.
Create a module for sov holding alliance(s) which gives them the ability to disable all cloaks in a system. These modules should at minimum have a timer as to avoid abuse of being turned on and off every five minutes. They also should be able to be destroyed as any other anchored structure.
Personally I like the idea of delayed local. It gives human players time to aquire bots and dispatch them to their new clone.
Just my two wooden nickels.
Because with anything that changes the intel system as it is. Most likely your first indication of an enemy system is him coming out of warp on top of you.
It's a free gank. Atleast free for the few months that people will accept it until mass amounts leave and then some alliances will be able to run permacap system that costs a fortune to do anything in. Making things far far worse.
There are several ideas on how to give AFK cloakers risk. I am not in favor if disabling the cloak completely. Just forcing them to remain at their keyboards like everyone who uses a nullsec system. A system of nerfed probes that can decloak them is one I support. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 04:45:00 -
[7] - Quote
Scrapyard Bob wrote:A better option for dealing with cloakies who just go AFK all day would be for the cloaking devices to wind down on some sort of timer where they just wear out after 60-120 minutes. Maybe have them slowly take heat damage and have to be repaired. Smaller ships might be able to stay cloaked for longer before overheating, or you could add modules/rigs that let you exchange utility/gank for a longer-lasting cloak (before you have to decloak and apply nanite paste to repair it before recloaking).
(Disclosure, I fly cloaked ships - a lot.)
Issue with that is that it could affect legit use of the cloak such as live intel gathering. Also such modules would be easy for a bot system to handle.
A type of probe that can decloak ships after giving such ships fair warning is in my idea the best solution. But I would support your idea and others over doing nothing on AFK cloaking at all. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 09:03:00 -
[8] - Quote
No No NO
ANYTHING that prevents people from knowing a hostile has entered system will be exploited to hell and back.
For instance making something autoscan or range based. They will just warp to far safespot out of range and be on top of you before you can warp (Instawarps are fantasy period) Or they will simply log there. Log back in make a scan and be on you again as if local was delayed in the first place.
The ONLY thing I MIGHT accept if it is easy to do. Is having people have to do something to reveal the name. With the window only showing dots or counts of Blues Neuts and reds. But to do so ought to be some kind of Dscan that can reveal it and not affect the basic knowlege that there is a hostile in system when they come in.
Local is fine. Improve it dont delay or remove it. Don't kill nullsec! |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 13:39:00 -
[9] - Quote
Shepard Book wrote:I am still looking forward to the removal of local and the improvement of scanner tools. Removal of free warnings is a good thing to me. I hope it has not been scraped. I am also anxious to hear about black ops improvements and establishments / contraband. Can you please let us know if this is still being actively worked on?
You hope for free ganks before nullsec turns into a wasteland. Where only the largest alliances run.
Do NOT remove or delay local.
As for going back to empire. Armyofme, I will do no such thing. I will unsub in the event that CCP somehow likes the idea of nullsec being a wasteland where only a few pirate groups still exist. I am not going to accept highsec because you will not accept that those who use nullsec already have enough risk. The only risk free people are AFK cloakers.
I don't play EVE just to pad your killboards and give you a free target. If you want to get come. Bring the rest of your alliance and battle for my territory or try to catch me not paying attention to local. I will NOT just accept you getting free ganks.
And neither will CCP hopefully considering the changes they made to counter the hisec no risk ganks. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.07 15:11:00 -
[10] - Quote
DarkTemplarCrimsonWolf wrote:Gotta love all the anger at no-local 0.0, I in fact thing it's a better idea to have no local in 0.0 as it makes you actually think, use d-scan a bit more often, plot your course through 0.0, be more paranoid, etc. If possible just add in destroyable subspace beacons as an upgrade for Sov holding alliances, they should not be built into the IHub and not linked to a POS but be placeable in open space, also said upgrade should cost money per system covered per month, you want local? you pay for it, this would add in more depth to the tactics you could employ and also make smaller raiding parties viable (send a small fleet ahead of the main one to wreak havoc on enemy communication lines).
Bull, it's about free ganks. Wanting to do anything to local except buff it is want of free ganks.
There is not going to be "new tactics" or other bullcrap. There will be a few clicks to unsub along with the sound of MANY other unclicks to unsub from others like me that will give up.
The faster you admit you want free ganks the faster we can move on to thinks that matter such as adding risk to AFK cloaking.
Don't like me making use of Nullsec? Bring your alliance and boot me from it. Of couse those wanting free ganks are likely not in big alliance or any that value loyalty that is.
And Jackk there isnt going to be any new "risk vs reward" There wil be people leaving. Maybe not all at once but once you show up and get your free gank that is when the "Frak it im out" happens.
Just admit you want free ganks. Join the club of those who wanted to keep the free hisec ganks. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.08 05:14:00 -
[11] - Quote
KFenn wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:You hope for free ganks before nullsec turns into a wasteland. Where only the largest alliances run.
Do NOT remove or delay local.
As for going back to empire. Armyofme, I will do no such thing. I will unsub in the event that CCP somehow likes the idea of nullsec being a wasteland where only a few pirate groups still exist. I am not going to accept highsec because you will not accept that those who use nullsec already have enough risk. The only risk free people are AFK cloakers.
I don't play EVE just to pad your killboards and give you a free target. If you want to get come. Bring the rest of your alliance and battle for my territory or try to catch me not paying attention to local. I will NOT just accept you getting free ganks.
And neither will CCP hopefully considering the changes they made to counter the hisec no risk ganks. Removing local would allow smaller entities to operate in nullsec. You have a D-Scan don't you? I mean, there would have to be an improvement so you could tell if a ship on scan was friendly or not but quite frankly, your logic is flawed. Local just gives everyone a chance to dock up and avoid fights - which isn't fun. Also, it means that people looking for fights have to also find you - they won't be alerted to your presence in-system. But nobody seems to realise that 
That is so funny it is almost hard to focus in on how wrong that is. Tho easy when you think of the consequences.
FEW people are going to spam the D-scan button. Not to mention it is easily exploited for free ganks. This will cause big alliances to get even bigger and be able to extort huge amounts of funds for the few players that remain. Have you even thought of the cost the MASSIVE MASSSSSSIVE amounts of Dscan spam will impact on the server? No because it is about Free ganks and nothing else.
The only people that arent having fun are the people looking for free ganks. If it isnt free they wont try it as evidenced by not trying to take down the POS the enemy is hiding in.
CCP is it not obvious what these people want? Its free ganks and nothing else. Othewise they would use the Tidi system and come take down my POS in a big fight. They don't want to fight unless it is free and want a change that will ruin nullsec because of it.
Do NOT delay local
Do NOT remove local
Improve it if you are going to change anything. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.09 03:45:00 -
[12] - Quote
Danny Centauri wrote:I've seen a lot of discussion on the removing local in 0.0 front, personally I feel the following should happen: - You do not appear in local for 30 seconds after you jump into system.
This will mean that a skilled pilot will be able to use directional scanner to find any enemies in system and tackle them, if they are intelligent they will be using directional scanner and run away. If this is too in favor of the pilot jumping into the system then I would also add that: - Local chat does not appear fot the first 30 seconds after you jump into system.
What this means is that everyone has to rely on the d-scanner for intel initially some other ideas are that the base time should actually be 1 minute but upgraded down towards 30 seconds with sov upgrades then a sov holding body will be paying for their intel effectively.
ANYTHING to change local is of want of free ganks. It is THAT simple. That change you suggest will allow them be on top of you with no warning unless you spam Dscan to hell and back. If I wanted to do that crap I would go into a wormhole.
There is not going to be some fantasy dreamworld for "skilled pilots" The pirates and solos are going to get free ganks then people are going to leave in droves then the big alliances will be able to name the terms even more.
DO NOT Delay local
DO NOT remove local
The bot argument doesn't work here. If you see a bot hit the report bot function. Killing nullsec to give people free ganks in the name of bot control is just silly. The Bots will just start going in highly defended system and the big alliances will get even more power and free isk.
You call us carebears yet you wont bring your fleet to destroy our POS and systems. Why is that? You want free ganks that is why. Please don't pretend otherwise. The pirates claimed to "need" to be able to get free ganks in hisec yet CCP responded by buffing concord.
Leave local alone or make it better. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.10 06:36:00 -
[13] - Quote
Actually local ought to be left alone or put in its own window if CCP needs to change the chat system.
Don't delay or remove local. Improve it or leave it alone. There is no need to wreck nullsec. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:29:00 -
[14] - Quote
Don't Remove or Delay local. How many times must it be said?
Black Ops Batships are used to hotdrop without use of a titan. The range ought to be buffed but local must remain unchanged for Nullsec to remain viable.
Do NOT remove or delay local. Improve it or leave it alone. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 05:30:00 -
[15] - Quote
Rawls Canardly wrote:more destroyers please Oh, and making them useful would be nice, too.
I have suggested an expensive probe launcher that can only fit on a destroyer hull that can probe out and decloak AFK cloakers after a time. This would give them use and remove the incentive to walk away from the keyboard while in a hostile system. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.12 06:14:00 -
[16] - Quote
ArmyOfMe wrote:Endeavour Starfleet wrote:Don't Remove or Delay local. How many times must it be said?
Black Ops Batships are used to hotdrop without use of a titan. The range ought to be buffed but local must remain unchanged for Nullsec to remain viable.
Do NOT remove or delay local. Improve it or leave it alone. oh for the love of god just shut up with that crap.
No thanks, When there is no need to remove local and the resulting effect removing or delaying it on the use of nullsec and a good chunk of the game. I will continue to be against it and be for real changes to improve nullsec and the big battles in the game. Such as TiDi and viable changes to capital ships. Also changes to allow probing down of AFK cloakers would be a viable change as well.
The want of free kills is the only issue at hand here. There is no use pretending that want to delay or remove local is for any other reason. Just admit it and lets move on to far better changes.
The same language you use was used when CCP implemented large changes to CONCORD in response to pirates getting virtually free kills left and right in hisec. We were called every name in the book but CCP did what was correct. And I believe they will do what is correct here which is to keep local the way it is and remove the incentive to walk away from the keyboard while cloaked for long periods of time. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 03:09:00 -
[17] - Quote
No don't remove local. There are many ways to deal with the issue of the incentive of walking away while cloaked but local needs to stay. No need for giving people free ganks for the few months that people would stay in EVE before giving up.
A nullsec where people line up in your crosshairs for you is a fantasy land. We will just leave. |

Endeavour Starfleet
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.13 22:20:00 -
[18] - Quote
Sorry, I will not. Removing local will destroy nullsec and as a result I and many others will just up and quit. Instead of that I will continue to push back against the "remove local" talk with the cold hard fact that its removal will mean loss of players to serve a few wanting some new shiny "SOLO KILL!" marks on their killboard.
I refer you to the Forum TOS BTW.
http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Forum_rules |
|
|