| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
ChironV
Caldari
   |
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:02:00 -
[1]
Majority of what I have seen is local in 0.0 being used primarily for smacktalk or epeen stroking. Is it necessary... You have your corp channels, gang channels, squad channels, Teamspeak or Vent....
It also seems unfair as an intelligence gathering tool. Hop in a system and instantly know who is skulking about. Seems that there should be more work involved in finding out who is invading or snooping around.
Perhaps IFF probes which can evemail you with results of ships passing by.
________________________________________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion,
|
Kaeten
Hybrid Syndicate
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:04:00 -
[2]
tbh i think local works abit more to the ppl who don't to fight advantage...
High-Sec Piracy Recruitment |
Tachy
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:06:00 -
[3]
How many scans do you do while mining for hours, or while you're in a complex, or in a mission?
and I think we got enough threads about this already. (And the devs stated they're thinking up something about BM and local ...)
--*=*=*--
Even with nougat, you can have a perfect moment. |
Jim McGregor
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:06:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Jim McGregor on 17/07/2006 14:10:04
Travelling in 0.0 would be very dangerous without any info on what people are currently in the system. Sure there is the map, but its not updated very often. And you would have to scan every gate even in systems that are really empty.
Also, if you enter a system and looking for people to fight... you would have to scan every belt etc. Traps would be very easy too. Just have 5 people at a safespot and one guy in a belt.
---
Eve Wiki | Eve Tribune | Eve Pirate |
PVP'er
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:08:00 -
[5]
You remove local and expect to see alot of people leave this game in my opinion, since u are likely to get killed alot more often. |
hired goon
Euphoria Released
Dusk and Dawn
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:10:00 -
[6]
It has already been said that local should be removed, but will not be, because of massive damage to subscriber numbers.
-omg-
|
Valan
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:12:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Valan on 17/07/2006 14:14:03
Without a usable alternative to scanning exactly what was in local, blobs would be the way to go.
You wouldn't be able to see them so everyone would blob in the hope they would out blob the other unseen blob that may suddenly appear.
I would like to see it, it would make infiltrating alliance space really easy. You wouldn't be able to hold territory without having a scout permanently on the gate.
WANTED: Gate Warden
No previous experience required, all you need is two eyes and a second screen to surf the net. Extreme patience required. Long hours with no reward with a serious risk of being ganked at any second.
|
Dark Shikari
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:22:00 -
[8]
This won't happen for the same reason chance-based scrambling won't happen: neither side likes it.
The small corps and soloers don't want it because it means they won't be able to see who's in local after them. The big alliances don't want it because it means they won't be able to see who's sneaking around their system.
--Proud member of the [23]--
-WTS Heavy Electron II, 100mn AB II, Medium Warp Bubbles- |
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:24:00 -
[9]
Need?
Not strictly.
But if you were to remove local, you would also need to change some other things to keep it equitable.
I assume removing local would be to make it more realistic.
Ok, what other things would be realistic then?
1. Destroying gates should be possible. If there is a gate there I don't want to have, I should be able to destroy it.
2. Ships shouldnt disappear when logged out. Also unrealistic.
Actually, these are even be more unrealistic than local for the most part.
I could imagine a system where the gates would keep track of anyone who entered and left the system through any of the gates, and give out this information to anyone in system. So local could have a logical explanation beyond gameplay reasons (except perhaps for capital pilots, maybe they shouldn't be visible. But why we can't destroy gates, or why ships disappear from space when logged out has no possible ingame explanation.
|
Kata Dakini
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:25:00 -
[10]
 Originally by: Dark Shikari
This won't happen for the same reason chance-based scrambling won't happen: neither side likes it.
The small corps and soloers don't want it because it means they won't be able to see who's in local after them. The big alliances don't want it because it means they won't be able to see who's sneaking around their system.
...and worst of all, the nano bots that build that windowbox for everyone to read won't like it because they'll be out of job.
___
"And I don't feel any more guilty about liking baseball more than soccer than I do about not using the metric system or speaking Italian or owning an ABBA album."
-Jim Caple |
Avon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:29:00 -
[11]
Local should show the amount of people in system, but only display info on people who actually 'talk' in it.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Nox Solaris
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:30:00 -
[12]
In a word:
Yes. Otherwise 0.0 would just be a great big huge empty void even with 60 in local.
To up that: Local should have all of the settings that your overview does.
|
fairimear
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:31:00 -
[13]
local should have a 120 second delay on it.
|
Quarantine
Federation of Synthetic Persons
YouWhat
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:35:00 -
[14]
After some RMR patch, don't recall which exactly, it was possible to close the local window and thus disappear from local. Some GM ruled for whatever reasons that it wasn't an exploit, and guess what happened? One week of hundreds of people getting killed because they didn't know that, and one week of people not undocking because they had no idea whatsoever how many gankers where waiting for them in local to kill them.
If local was to be removed, you'd have to replace it by some sort of radar (read, automatically refreshing scanner), otherwise it would be ridicolously hard to mine or hunt in 0.0.
|
Goberth Ludwig
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:35:00 -
[15]
Originally by: fairimear
local should have a 120 second delay on it.
word
- Gob
[IXC] Admiral Goberius |
Roue
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:37:00 -
[16]
Can't remember who came up with this idea. Was it Joshua?
Anywho BEST EVER FRICKING IDEA FOR THIS.
Get rid of local chat entirely.
Turn on Constellation. (already there since exodus)
TADA!!
Hunters:
Would know if there is absolutely no one of interest in an area. The wouldn't know if those that are there are docked or not someplace. They would also get the advantage of their prey not stopping what they are doing immediately because the prey would never get anything done if they hid the moment a pirates was in their entire constellation, but they would be on alert of course.
Prey: Would get nice advance warning of hostiles in the general area and could opt if they wanted to be very conservative to hide. Unless they chose to do stuff in a system bordering another constellation, which would be the new place to setup stuff. Making camping spots less frequent and more predictable.
Overall you would get more information that is less precise. Allowing more options but less tactical advantage.
Whoever's idea that was, it was great. It was one of the more popular E-Online posters.
|
Infinity Ziona
The First Noble Truth
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:38:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Nox Solaris
In a word:
Yes. Otherwise 0.0 would just be a great big huge empty void even with 60 in local.
To up that: Local should have all of the settings that your overview does.
Well we certainly cant have 'great huge empty voids' in a space game! 
|
Khajit Smitty
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:41:00 -
[18]
Originally by: fairimear
local should have a 120 second delay on it.
I support both arguments for nerfing local and keeping local...
1 side is it makes 0.0 more tactical, the other side is it makes 0.0 exceptionally harder....
Maybe a 180-300 second delay ?
are you mature,easy going,strong willed and community orientated ? |
Khajit Smitty
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:44:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Roue
Get rid of local chat entirely.
Turn on Constellation. (already there since exodus)
I liked this idea aswell, remember reading it sometime back.
are you mature,easy going,strong willed and community orientated ? |
Noriath
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:54:00 -
[20]
I like local, because it would just be way too easy for atackers to kill their targets if there wasn't local.
What i don't like about local is that it shows the people and their afiliation in the system, it would be a lot more interesting if instead there would be a little window that just showed numbers of ship types.
Like it would say:
2 battleships
1 interceptor
1 interdictor
3 exhumers
2 industrials
1 carrier
But it wouldn't tell you anything else, so you wouldn't know who they belong to or what race or ship they are, just the types. Local would still exist except it wouldn't show people untill they talk.
That way you'd still have the advantage of getting a rough idea of what is going on in the system, but you can't tell if they are hostile or who they are untill you have a visual on the ships or they identify themselves in local.
That shifts the idea of local from seeing hostiles but not knowing what they are in to seeing ships but not knowing if they are hostile.
|
Infinity Ziona
The First Noble Truth
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:57:00 -
[21]
Any change to local should be global. If I spend two hours hunting someone in Empire then I deserve to have a chance at them. All that effort shouldnt be wasted because a bright green glowing alarm pops up even before I load into the system.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 14:58:00 -
[22]
No, it becomes practically impossible to find anyone who is on the move if you can't even pinpoint the system he's in. Not a problem for a pirate looking for ganks, but a serious issue for people ratting or mining.
Defending an area is already a pain in the ass with all the safespots, poor performance of probes and all the covert ops that can sit in a system for hours.
Until defenders get some more ability to stop and/or find people, any change to the local channel is unwarranted.
|
LORD STEALTH
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:14:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Kaeten
Edited by: Kaeten on 17/07/2006 14:06:12
tbh i think local works abit more to the advantage of ppl who don't to fight...
/agree.
Use your minimize button if you don't want to look at it.
|
Sergeant Spot
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:20:00 -
[24]
THE purpose of Local is to know who is in system with you.
I'd be happy to replace it with a scanner screen that has the following features:
--Self refreshes every second (so once I open it, I don't have to constantly click it every second)
--Can be filtered item by item, to remove clutter (No, I am not talking about filtering out "shuttles", I'm talking about filtering out "individual" shuttles)
|
Valan
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:21:00 -
[25]
If there was a drastic improvement in the scanning capabilities of your ship then yes. So you can see people coming at you but you have activeley search for them.
I have a problem with people mentioning realistic in a space game as an arguement for anything. Its made up, EVE does not really exist! I would settle for 'it would improve emmersion'.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:21:00 -
[26]
Local benefits people
- Who are chasing a target
- Who are stationary in a system (ratting/mining)
If you keep moving in a fast ship, just making 1 or 2 warps in system while scanning, you're not needing local too much.
I.e. local is a defensive tool. Nerfing local will benefit fastmoving ganksquads since they can cover great distances unnoticed and without giving people warning as to their presence.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc.
Ascendant Frontier
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:23:00 -
[27]
It would also improve immersion if I could blow up stargates, after all, nothing is invincible. Don't see that happening anytime soon...
|
Avon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:25:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
I.e. local is a defensive tool. Nerfing local will benefit fastmoving ganksquads since they can cover great distances unnoticed and without giving people warning as to their presence.
Riiiiight.
And who are these gank-squads going to kill?
They are just going to magically guess which system has people in it, if they are hostile, and their exact numbers?
Removing local penalises both sides equally.
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
Sergeant Spot
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:38:00 -
[29]
Any replacement of local must be equal to, or better (must error towards better) for insuring enough warning for a person ratting or mining in a belt to warp out.
It must also be equal to, or better, for "practical" use (scanner don't cut it on this point in its current form)
Getting rid of Local does NOT penalize both sides equally, as its fairly easy to make a good guess of where to find players. I'm not impressed.
Local has already been SEVERELY nerfed for defensive purposes. The delay on how fast it refreshes does not help defensive operations at all, but massively helps roving gangs.
The only replacement I'd accept for local is one that would make the roving gangs cry even louder.
|
Avon
Caldari
|
Posted - 2006.07.17 15:39:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Sergeant Spot
Any replacement of local must be equal to, or better (must error towards better) for insuring enough warning for a person ratting or mining in a belt to warp out.
Why?
How would the roving gang know that they are there?
The Battleships is not and should not be a solo pwnmobile - Oveur |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |