| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Catherine Laartii
Dominion Fleet Group
Templis CALSF
445
   |
Posted - 2014.12.28 08:29:34 -
[1] - Quote
For non-local chat, I would like it if they could introduce an option to display your current status. This would be useful in corp or alliance chat for communication purposes in a variety of different ways, not the least of which is allowing for fleet form-ups of active members more quickly. The status options are as follows; please let me know if there are any more you would like to add.
-Away
-Active (default)
-Looking for fleet
-Busy
-Fighting
-Bored
-Available
-Docked
-Windowed out
-In distress (or alternately, 'requesting assistance') |
Quadima
From Our Cold Dead Hands
The Kadeshi
116
|
Posted - 2014.12.28 08:38:48 -
[2] - Quote
+0.5
But it should be completely under the player's control, and not automatic in any way.
And there should be a way to disable it so it doesn't show any status for yourself.
There's some potential for abuse, as a spy could quickly identify how many members from the opposing team are actually active... and plan ops accordingly. |
Catherine Laartii
Dominion Fleet Group
Templis CALSF
446
|
Posted - 2014.12.28 09:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
Quadima wrote:+0.5
But it should be completely under the player's control, and not automatic in any way.
And there should be a way to disable it so it doesn't show any status for yourself.
There's some potential for abuse, as a spy could quickly identify how many members from the opposing team are actually active... and plan ops accordingly.
I should probably clarify that status would not be visible in local; it would be visible in fleets and normal chats, but not in things like local or incursion windows. It would be on the player to set their status, though, so yes it will always be under player control. |
TheExtruder
Internet Spaceship Business
45
|
Posted - 2014.12.28 09:23:17 -
[4] - Quote
my status would be afk most of the time. i guess it would be good for my buddies to know when im not there
I liked the idea of docked/undocked since it gives you an idea of what your friends are up to and can be a conversation starter |
Catherine Laartii
Dominion Fleet Group
Templis CALSF
446
|
Posted - 2014.12.28 09:40:38 -
[5] - Quote
TheExtruder wrote:my status would be afk most of the time. i guess it would be good for my buddies to know when im not there
I liked the idea of docked/undocked since it gives you an idea of what your friends are up to and can be a conversation starter
exactly! |
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Farsaidh's Freeborn
875
|
Posted - 2014.12.28 10:09:28 -
[6] - Quote
Surely this would just be good intel if anyone has infiltrated a corp? |
Catherine Laartii
Dominion Fleet Group
Templis CALSF
446
|
Posted - 2014.12.28 19:11:27 -
[7] - Quote
Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote:Surely this would just be good intel if anyone has infiltrated a corp?
It would be even better intel for people legitimately in the corp who want to know what other people in it are doing so they know what they can do with anyone in there. This would be a VERY helpful tool in huge corps like Blue federation or whatever where you have several thousand members; the same goes for larger alliances.
The 'status' wouldn't necessarily ever indicate things like location or specific pilot details; it would just allow the pilots themselves (who have the option of NOT choosing it if they so desired) to indicate their status for the benefit of themselves and those around them. |
Catherine Laartii
Dominion Fleet Group
Templis CALSF
448
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 20:32:55 -
[8] - Quote
As a clarification, this is an opt-in feature. Players wouldn't automatically be forced to display their status for whatever they're doing; it'd just be a handy tool for communication and organization in chats. |
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
1026
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 20:44:19 -
[9] - Quote
I would support this so long as it's:
1. Opt-in only, with default set to "off". Nobody can be forced to set a status.
2. Only allowable in channels that have some sort of player administrator to control settings. Fleet bosses could handle it for fleets, CEOs/directors could handle it for corps, channel admins could handle it for chat channels, etc.
3. If a channel has no player administrator (local, incursion, etc.), this feature is permanently disabled.
CCP Falcon's thoughts on suicide ganking.
Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook.
I want to create content, not become content.
|
Catherine Laartii
Dominion Fleet Group
Templis CALSF
449
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 21:23:00 -
[10] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:I would support this so long as it's:
1. Opt-in only, with default set to "off". Nobody can be forced to set a status.
2. Only allowable in channels that have some sort of player administrator to control settings. Fleet bosses could handle it for fleets, CEOs/directors could handle it for corps, channel admins could handle it for chat channels, etc.
3. If a channel has no player administrator (local, incursion, etc.), this feature is permanently disabled.
That's exactly on-par with what I've been saying, and the 3rd item is something good that I think would be easy to integrate. |
Leah Agenon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 21:52:21 -
[11] - Quote
need a way to filter local by Standings. |
Aran Hotchkiss
Phoibe Enterprises
40
|
Posted - 2014.12.29 22:04:38 -
[12] - Quote
Leah Agenon wrote:need a way to filter local by Standings.
If you want to go talk about that topic.. It has its own thread, where I'll probably yell at you.
But not here, because this idea specifically doesn't affect local. |
Desvath Benepeth
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 12:12:25 -
[13] - Quote
yes, anything to add to role play in eve... although i am sure we have different definition of the word role play |
Catherine Laartii
Imperium Technologies
Evictus.
477
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 02:02:01 -
[14] - Quote
Desvath Benepeth wrote:yes, anything to add to role play in eve... although i am sure we have different definition of the word role play
Why would you think this has anything to do with RP? It's basically just setting options for player status so allies can tell who's available and who's not; it would benefit larger groups immensely with lower-form up times, as well as a host of other talk-related benefits. Not the least of which would be not being bothered when you don't want to be. |
Iain Cariaba
1089
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 18:18:27 -
[15] - Quote
Catherine Laartii wrote:As a clarification, this is an opt-in feature. Players wouldn't automatically be forced to display their status for whatever they're doing; it'd just be a handy tool for communication and organization in chats.
1: Adding the modifier of "opt in" to a bad idea does not make it a good idea.
2: This idea has been vomited into F&I many times. The search feature is your friend.
3: Reported for redundancy.
EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid.
"This reminds me - I must complain to my local butcher about him not catering to vegitarians." - admiral root responding to someone whining about too much PvP in Eve Online.
|
Catherine Laartii
Imperium Technologies
Evictus.
482
|
Posted - 2015.02.26 19:19:44 -
[16] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:Catherine Laartii wrote:As a clarification, this is an opt-in feature. Players wouldn't automatically be forced to display their status for whatever they're doing; it'd just be a handy tool for communication and organization in chats. 1: Adding the modifier of "opt in" to a bad idea does not make it a good idea. 2: This idea has been vomited into F&I many times. The search feature is your friend. 3: Reported for redundancy.
1. How exactly is this a "Bad Idea"? Is there something about it that you feel harms pilots or gameplay in some way, or are you just spouting an empty claim for trolling's sake?
2. This is a streamlined idea that I had, and while some form of parts of it have popped up in elsewhere, this IS a legitimate discussion topic. Saying it's been talked about before is a feeble attempt to derail the conversation.
3. Now that's just lazy. Making a threat rather than having a debate about an idea you disagree with just tells people you didn't have any interest in it to start out with, and had a preformed opinion regardless of whether you read it or not.
So giving you the benefit of the doubt here and assuming that you actually DO have an interest in talking about this, please explain to the class why this makes a bad idea. Certainly you feel strongly enough about it to report it, so telling us WHY shouldn't be too hard.  |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |