| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Drilla
   |
Posted - 2005.08.15 16:41:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Joe
Originally by: Kar Brogan
edit-Oh, look who posted just before me......
could have read my post before trying to be a smartass bastard,
map is poo. yes nurf it silly
ships have scanners that can simply spot you the moment you enter local anyway. local channel makes sense (unless your cloaked)
if you dont have a constructive post, and cant prove why my post pionts aren't valid, you just make yourelf look like an ass.
Checking if profanity filter works when I quote you.
EVE System Security - Killboard (still early alpha) |
Blind Fear
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 16:44:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Joe
wtf, is profanity filter ignoring me or something
None of those words have ever been in the profanity filter.
And trust me, if anyone would know, I would.
------------------------------------------------
Derailing threads with logic since 1992 |
Summersnow
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 16:47:00 -
[33]
I can see the benefits to destroyers, jump into a known mining system and hop to the belts till you find out which one has the op and blitz them with little or no warning.
What counter benefit does it offer builders? Sure, it removes blobs but to be fair an intelligent enemy should've already used the changes to scout your locations and know where you do your business and be ready to exploit this change to your detriment.
|
Blind Fear
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 16:48:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Summersnow
I can see the benefits to destroyers, jump into a known mining system and hop to the belts till you find out which one has the op and blitz them with little or no warning.
What counter benefit does it offer builders? Sure, it removes blobs but to be fair an intelligent enemy should've already used the changes to scout your locations and know where you do your business and be ready to exploit this change to your detriment.
Originally by: Blind Fear
The advantage to the hunted is that it will be much easier to hide in the less commonly used systems - a particular advantage to people who are not based in 0.0 but simply wish to go there to hunt or whatever.
If you are too stupid to spread out and take advantage of such a change, you are too stupid to survive in 0.0. Goodbye.
------------------------------------------------
Derailing threads with logic since 1992 |
Thor Darkwing
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 16:56:00 -
[35]
ya, great idea!
let's make 0.0 only availible to hardcore PVPers and pirates.
an we who want some PvE action and can't afford or don't have the sp to pvp should just stick to empire and overflod it with half fun gameplay.
|
Antoinette Civari
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 17:40:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Antoinette Civari on 15/08/2005 17:43:25
I strongly have to disagree, as a pvp`er that is. Let`s just take a standard wolfpack run for example ; 3-6 frigs group up in a random system, we check the map which region looks most profitable, plot a course and go for it. Average distance is about 30 jumps plus a couple of system which arent on the route but still have some blips in it, ofc you have to travel all the way back .. so in the end you`ll visiting ~70 systems. At the moment, if theres a target in local you`ll scan em out and kill them, or he'll run, safespot and log .. you need to be faster if the second one happens to frequently.
Now, without the local / with nerfed local you would have to scan each system manually to find out if there is even a target there ( since most of 0.0 space is empty anyways this will get really frustrating because .. well .. try spending a couple of hours scanning for nothing ) ! Everyone who hunts occasionally knows that this will take a) way to much time b) is really really boring / mindnumbing and c) will force people to gatecamp even more. And we all know that gatecamping is bad.
And for all the indutrialists who are whining .. no, removing local from .0 systems would actually make you safer as long as you dont use all the common and well known systems. Oh, you would have to face a gatecamp on every empire entry system tho.
|
Laurela Mangers
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 17:42:00 -
[37]
I'd just like to throw a hybrid Idea out there, that also mixes in with soveriengty(sp)
The list of names in 0.0 local goes away, however it always shows the number of people in a system.
In a system claimed by an alliance the alliance members are notified is anyone is neutral or - standing to the alliance.
|
J'inn
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 18:11:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Laurela Mangers
I'd just like to throw a hybrid Idea out there, that also mixes in with soveriengty(sp)
The list of names in 0.0 local goes away, however it always shows the number of people in a system.
In a system claimed by an alliance the alliance members are notified is anyone is neutral or - standing to the alliance.
This isn't bad.
With the current system I'm able to sneak my hauler through 0.0 systems with very little chance of getting ganked. (It's not easy and it requires a lot of checking and double checking the map and such). I can see when people are coming and going. I can see when those Nasty Stinky Pirates leave the system so I know when it's safe to come out of my hiding spot. And, I can see those hiding in the bases.
Personally I have a ball playing cat and mouse with the Pirates. (Lets face it, it's kinda too easy right now as they are usually drunk on rum and well . . . not so bright <snicker>. So having Local chat work against them is kinda like kicking a puppy)
Plus Local Chat in 0.0 is demeaning. I'm tired of people laughing at me when I have to type "PLEASE DON'T SHOOT ME!!! MOMMY HELP ME!!!"
It's causing me stress.
However, if it stays the same. Fine with me. If it changes, fine with me. If CCP finally responds to my requests to issue a NO SHOOTING J'INN RULE, fine with me. I mean the leaxst they could do is tell me how much such a rule change would cost. Sheesh.
|
Altai Saker
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 18:19:00 -
[39]
We definitely need this, with Safes and Instas 0.0 is way too safe, ohno, hostile in local, ss log off, tell my friends to blob.
|
Galk
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 18:47:00 -
[40]
The op's post seems to be more of a 'they must fight us' opinion.
They run and log simpley because they either don't have the means to fight, or simpley don't wish to.. thats their choice i belive.. in other words it's not a case of branding them cheap loggers......
I get the feeling here thats your agenda, your crying more about the fact that some well against the odds fight (or gank if you will, against npc'ers or miners) is denied you by the local channel lighting you up as soon as you come in.
Tbh all for getting rid of local in 0.0 personaly.. gave the opinion of that at the time...
Your agenda is your own though, naturaly..
--------
23
Arguing that namechanging would promote griefing is somewhat moot given the current FFA on that front.
'Danton Marcellus'
|
Thor Darkwing
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 18:55:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Altai Saker
We definitely need this, with Safes and Instas 0.0 is way too safe, ohno, hostile in local, ss log off, tell my friends to blob.
once again, ya super idÚa, that would meen that it would get IMPOSIBLE for non mega aliance people to even try and get out to 0.0
have you ever tried flying there in something bigger and slower then an interceptor or cov ops even with instas you can't get a bigger ship throgh a smaller blockade.
and i'm sorry, but i just don't have 200m(bs with t2) to spare as soon as i want to take a litle trip out in 0.0 and hunt.
why does it feel like the only people liking this idea is the ones in mega alliances or who've been hardcore PvPing since beta
|
Justice Starcatcher
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 19:37:00 -
[42]
This is a stupid idea. There are more then ****ers with nothing better to do than fly around and kill soft targets for fun. And, yeah it is fun. But I got better things to do than posting an army of scouts just so I can mine a little ark. There is enough tedium in the game already thank you. Removing local moves the advantage overwhelmingly in favor of the attacker.
Add to that, that there are no windows in the stupid station. The only source of info is local when docked.
What the... |
dalman
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 20:18:00 -
[43]
But OMFG.
Why don't ppl realize that "remove ppl in space on the map" = BLOB. More blobs than there already are.
And it also encourage all the lameness of alt-scouting etc.
Drink up, shoot in. Let the beating begin.
Distributor of pain. Your loss becomes my gain...
|
Danton Marcellus
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 20:23:00 -
[44]
More blobs are good, means you're confined to fewer systems.
[23] |
Sleazy Cabbie
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 20:34:00 -
[45]
Removing local gives too much advantage to aggressors.
If you are a pirate, you jump into the system, you have the initiative to start scanning and get the jump on whoever with no warning.
If you are already IN the system (presumably mining or NPCing), you would be hardpressed to constatly use a scanner to check for hostiles, you depend on local to know when ppl come in.
And yes, pvp has always been ALMOST consentual, that's what allows new alliances and challengers to come to 0.0, because nobody can really fight each other unless they both want to.
If it wasn't ALMOST consentual, a large alliance would build up momentum and just steamroll everybody.
There doesn't have to be ACTUAL piracy in Eve, it just has to FEEL like you're doing something naughty to make people want to pony up 15 bucks.
The same with PVP and alliances, it not actually brutal, otherwise nobody would play, it just has to be PERCEIVED as brutal to be meaningful.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 20:41:00 -
[46]
I love the generalizations of an ignorant few in this system who state all of the people in 0.0 local log/dock/safespot if an invading enemy enters local.
Telling lies to further your own goals is bad, mmmmkay?
It's my experience that the only docking done is so people can switch to PVP setups and grab some probes to find the safespotted enemy!
I'm with dalman on this one - the 30-minute delay to the map is more than enough for 0.0 stealth combined with the new ways into 0.0
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Sexy Plexy
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 20:46:00 -
[47]
give up on this one. ccp is trying to get more people to 0.0 not less.
|
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 20:47:00 -
[48]
And hence combat in 0.0 consists largely of sitting in an ss counting the number of friendlies and hostiles in local before deciding to either fight or log.
The fact that deep 0.0 space is actually safer than low sec space is a joke tbh.
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 20:50:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Wild Rho
And hence combat in 0.0 consists largely of sitting in an ss counting the number of friendlies and hostiles in local before deciding to either fight or log.
The fact that deep 0.0 space is actually safer than low sec space is a joke tbh.
Then don't sit in one system long enough to get pinned down, d'oh.
That's what the 30-minute delay is meant to help - pro-active wolf packs not safespotted indy gankers.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Wendat Huron
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 21:01:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Originally by: Wild Rho
And hence combat in 0.0 consists largely of sitting in an ss counting the number of friendlies and hostiles in local before deciding to either fight or log.
The fact that deep 0.0 space is actually safer than low sec space is a joke tbh.
Then don't sit in one system long enough to get pinned down, d'oh.
That's what the 30-minute delay is meant to help - pro-active wolf packs not safespotted indy gankers.
How much can you mine inside 30 minutes?
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 21:03:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Wendat Huron
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Originally by: Wild Rho
And hence combat in 0.0 consists largely of sitting in an ss counting the number of friendlies and hostiles in local before deciding to either fight or log.
The fact that deep 0.0 space is actually safer than low sec space is a joke tbh.
Then don't sit in one system long enough to get pinned down, d'oh.
That's what the 30-minute delay is meant to help - pro-active wolf packs not safespotted indy gankers.
How much can you mine inside 30 minutes?
Depends how many guns you were holding to my head.
heh.
I'm speaking from a purely invasive force point of view not from ninja-miners point of view.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.08.15 22:21:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Joshua Calvert
Originally by: Wild Rho
And hence combat in 0.0 consists largely of sitting in an ss counting the number of friendlies and hostiles in local before deciding to either fight or log.
The fact that deep 0.0 space is actually safer than low sec space is a joke tbh.
Then don't sit in one system long enough to get pinned down, d'oh.
That's what the 30-minute delay is meant to help - pro-active wolf packs not safespotted indy gankers.
Sadly when doing fleet actions in alliance space thats what happens. You attack an alliance system and you never get an engagement until the locals have finished counting how many of your people are in local and making sure they have twice that.
As for hunting, thats what I've done, it's not alot different, the only real kills come from the unfortunate buggers that were jumping through a gate we were approaching. That's not hunting, that's pure dumb luck.
Everyone else DOES hit the ss as soon as a pirate comes into local and there are more than a few times I've seen everyone in local vanish seconds after we've jumped in.
|
MegaJ
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 08:51:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Wild Rho
Everyone else DOES hit the ss as soon as a pirate comes into local and there are more than a few times I've seen everyone in local vanish seconds after we've jumped in.
Exactly. You all talk about removing local would shift favour to PVPers, this is bull. Atm it entirely favours the people who want to hide/logoff. Removing local would actually make it fair and make 0.0 what it is supposed to be: NOT SAFE. Since both parties will have to actively use the scanner to gather intel on enemy numbers instead of count heads on local chat.
[-SAS-] on Eve-Kills |
Antoinette Civari
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 10:51:00 -
[54]
Originally by: MegaJ
Originally by: Wild Rho
Everyone else DOES hit the ss as soon as a pirate comes into local and there are more than a few times I've seen everyone in local vanish seconds after we've jumped in.
Exactly. You all talk about removing local would shift favour to PVPers, this is bull. Atm it entirely favours the people who want to hide/logoff. Removing local would actually make it fair and make 0.0 what it is supposed to be: NOT SAFE. Since both parties will have to actively use the scanner to gather intel on enemy numbers instead of count heads on local chat.
So you really want to scan every system you are in if you want to find a target ? Thats just stupid and boring, you`d be spending 80% of your time scanning empty systems .. sounds like fun, doesnt it ?
|
Amataras
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 11:04:00 -
[55]
Local must go 
Perhaps if CCP only allowed those people in 0.0 alliances to take part in a vote...? 
--------------
The Eve Diplomacy Table
Visit the Hadean Drive Yards |
Rexthor Hammerfists
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 11:15:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Rexthor Hammerfists on 16/08/2005 11:15:33
I Like that idea,
it has advantages for ppl roaming around and ppl that mine etc.
When i come into a system with ppl hunting or mining in, they run immediately, my only hope is they are asleep or scrambled by rats.
thats annoying and id love to see that changing.
on the other side,
take Providence as example.
its a 0.0 Region without stations, its rarely used lots and lots of system which are unused - theres just one constellation with ppl.
without the average pilots in space, and the rats killed in the last hour,
it would be much easier for smaller corps to get a place in 0.0.
imo taking the average pilots and local away would result in:
more ppl in 0.0, better isk vs. reward balance.
more heartbeats per seconds and adrenalin.
established alliance will ahve it ahrder to defend themselvves against iroaming frigs.
but corps with poses somewhere outside hsve it easier, which also could lead to alliance corps moving with poses further outside in their region, so using more of it.
|
Sariyah
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 12:03:00 -
[57]
I got a better idea.
Whenever a player changes his/her location in 0.0 (system) I want to get an eve-mail. Plus I want to see the players in a system on the map, a list including alliance, corp, name, age, sex, phone number if female. Oh and, of course, rl location. ;)
----
"Empires do not suffer emptiness of purpose at the time of their creation. It is when they have become established that aims are lost and replaced by vague ritual."
|
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 12:09:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Antoinette Civari
Originally by: MegaJ
Originally by: Wild Rho
Everyone else DOES hit the ss as soon as a pirate comes into local and there are more than a few times I've seen everyone in local vanish seconds after we've jumped in.
Exactly. You all talk about removing local would shift favour to PVPers, this is bull. Atm it entirely favours the people who want to hide/logoff. Removing local would actually make it fair and make 0.0 what it is supposed to be: NOT SAFE. Since both parties will have to actively use the scanner to gather intel on enemy numbers instead of count heads on local chat.
So you really want to scan every system you are in if you want to find a target ? Thats just stupid and boring, you`d be spending 80% of your time scanning empty systems .. sounds like fun, doesnt it ?
Actually it means if you want to kill somone in 0.0 you've got to get off your backside and make the effort to find them. The good side is if you do find somone you have decent odds of being able to ambush them.
It also allows smaller corps to move into 0.0 without being forced to join an alliance since they could then pick a nice quiet system out of the way of the main routes with very low chances of anyone stumbling across them.
Other benfits is it can allow players in 0.0 to actually ambush gate camps along gates. Now you can get your force into position and near it without the campers seeing it and running away.
|
siim
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 12:10:00 -
[59]
It Will never happen.
PVP gets harder in every patch and PVE get gets easier in every patch
|
Face Lifter
|
Posted - 2005.08.16 12:14:00 -
[60]
I agree that local should show people only when they speak. EVE already has that feature for alliance chat and other channels. Why isn't it the same for local?
Seriously, why? what goes on in dev's mind when they think about local chat?
It seems so obvious that people shouldn't show up in local automatically.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |