EVE Search - CCP Please remove local with Kali

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

CCP Please remove local with Kali

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
gh0zt	Posted - 2006.11.02 05:44:00 - [1] This post calls people to sign here as a petition for ccp to remove local... Local is an integral part of everybodies mode of operation in eve... it allows us to see what friends or enemies are in the system, it allows us to quickly count how many hostiles might be in an enemy fleet, and it allows us to banter and smack each other pre and post battle. Although this may sound like a good thing, I believe it really undermines the basic principles of this game... these principles are -travel through the vast emptiness of space -long drawn out battles over many many kilometers -intense exploration and the reluctance of journey into the unknown Local chat in a way tells you exactly who is in your local solarsystem giving you the feeling that you are not alone and that space is not that empty at all. This chat window is also used to count the number of enemies in the system. It completely removes any sort of supprise from spur of the moment pvp in this game since we know exactly how many people enter the system just by looking at how local jumps. I think by not having a local window people would be more encouraged to scan down their enemies and jump into battles without knowing who your enemy is by clicking his icon in local chat in order to see how old he his and what corp he is in. Personally it would make the game a lot more fun by having to constantly worry who is and isn't in the system with me while im camping/mining/npc'ing/complexing. It would add depth and increase the effect awareness has on each player. It would make fleet battle's a lot more intense as well as remove some of the calculations the servers must do each time a fleet jumps into a system. please ccp remove local and if a chat must be available for people to socialize then make a region chat.
Morfane Privateers	Posted - 2006.11.02 05:50:00 - [2] so /signed Local makes hunting prey too easy, and killing them too hard.
Ephemeron Pelennor Swarm	Posted - 2006.11.02 05:50:00 - [3] With new system scanning and map tools, it would be appropriate to change local! make it so people appear in local only if they speak, like in other channels.
Dannek Llama F5 and Associates	Posted - 2006.11.02 05:54:00 - [4] How about some sort of system whereby the local channel still exists, but only gets populated with player identities if you a) have them on your friends list or b) if they speak in local? Sort of a wideband broadcast thing? Good if people tend to be chatty *****es in a system, but also allows people to go unnoticed if they want to. -------------------------------------------------------- Working towards my own personal Dreadnought, one ISK at a time.
Risien Drogonne	Posted - 2006.11.02 05:58:00 - [5] Originally by: Ephemeron With new system scanning and map tools, it would be appropriate to change local! make it so people appear in local only if they speak, like in other channels. Oh yah, except for the pesky problem that scanning doesn't tell you the name of the pilot or what corp/alliance he's in. Don't bother you with details, right? Or how bout the fact that scanning in Kali is chance-based?
Ephemeron Pelennor Swarm	Posted - 2006.11.02 05:59:00 - [6] Originally by: Dannek a) have them on your friends list. That would be fine if there were "friends list". EVE only supports "enemy list". And it would defeat the purpose if you could see when all your enemies enter local without using legit in-game tools
Ephemeron Pelennor Swarm	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:01:00 - [7] Originally by: Risien Drogonne Originally by: Ephemeron With new system scanning and map tools, it would be appropriate to change local! make it so people appear in local only if they speak, like in other channels. Oh yah, except for the pesky problem that scanning doesn't tell you the name of the pilot or what corp/alliance he's in. Don't bother you with details, right? Or how bout the fact that scanning in Kali is chance-based? Yes, you lose some security. No matter how good the legit in-game scanning tools are, they will never be as fast and reliable as current local chat. But that's the core of the problem. We don't want a system so fast and reliable.
Lygos ISS Navy Task Force	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:02:00 - [8] I'd be willing to accept a few tradeoffs in exchange for local removal: -Cloaks use cap or charges and partially deactivate scanner when active. -Varied scanner range based on ship hull. (The stronger the ship, the weaker the intel.) -Removal of beacons from (some) asteroid belts and possibly moons. -Nerf bandwidth monitor. -Substitute channels for more focused player interaction and tucked away in more places. Make ingame irc more 'netlike' basically with hypertext+IRC. -"Beer tithe." -Whatever else it takes. --- Private Investment should preceed Public Investment
MECTO Xenobytes Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:02:00 - [9] Originally by: Ephemeron With new system scanning and map tools, it would be appropriate to change local! make it so people appear in local only if they speak, like in other channels. agreed, new system make scanning pretty easy. It's Great Being Carebear in Kali - aint it? Originally by: Tuxford In this picture you might think that Gallente totally pwn. Well they're alright
Risien Drogonne	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:07:00 - [10] Originally by: Ephemeron Yes, you lose some security. No matter how good the legit in-game scanning tools are, they will never be as fast and reliable as current local chat. But that's the core of the problem. We don't want a system so fast and reliable. Who's "we"? I like local like it is and so do most people. You guys asking for its removal are in the extreme minority.

Dannek Llama F5 and Associates	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:09:00 - [11] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Dannek a) have them on your friends list. That would be fine if there were "friends list". EVE only supports "enemy list". And it would defeat the purpose if you could see when all your enemies enter local without using legit in-game tools Uhhh... hmm.. forgive my nubness. I could have sworn that I had added a friend or two to a list that alerted me to when they logged on. -------------------------------------------------------- Working towards my own personal Dreadnought, one ISK at a time.
NovaScotia	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:09:00 - [12] I am a new player. I use local to see if there may be trouble in a low sec system. It has saved my ship and my pod I am sure. Now that said.... Having local changed or removed could only be a good thing IMO. It would make it more.. tense.. scary... exciting! So although I am sure it will result in this noob dying more, I would probably have a more immersive, more enjoyable time playing. /signed
Amaron Ghant Caldari	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:12:00 - [13] Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Dannek a) have them on your friends list. That would be fine if there were "friends list". EVE only supports "enemy list". And it would defeat the purpose if you could see when all your enemies enter local without using legit in-game tools It¦s called a "buddies list" for a reason mate. Eve supports "friends list", Players normally misuse it as an "enemies list"
Ephemeron Pelennor Swarm	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:13:00 - [14] Originally by: Dannek Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Dannek a) have them on your friends list. That would be fine if there were "friends list". EVE only supports "enemy list". And it would defeat the purpose if you could see when all your enemies enter local without using legit in-game tools Uhhh... hmm.. forgive my nubness. I could have sworn that I had added a friend or two to a list that alerted me to when they logged on. Yes, I'm aware that some of you strange people use the "enemy list" to see when your friends are online. But most people use the feature as intended - to keep track of the enemies.
Enotz Amarr Terminus Est Incorporated	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:16:00 - [15] Originally by: Dannek a) have them on your friends list Considering the flist is moreo f an 'enemy list' in it's current state, I think it should be if they have you on their flist. Could also do the same thing with log on/off warning. Flist with people who don't flist you back would be used for "contact" info, and give no info on their online status; mutual flist would tell you if they're online or not.
Maxtor X	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:24:00 - [16] Stupid idea.
Madeline Wickwor Amarr Asguard Security Service Alektorophobia	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:31:00 - [17] Not Signed I love the fact that Kali has taken local in fact the opposite direction you want, with standings shown in local. Not everyone plays eve the way you do or at least want to. I never seem to have problems finding people to kill, local or not. Remove local and you will lose soooo many people who simply dont want to get ganked 5 times a day. And contrary to popular belief it is not soley a pvp game or all the market/production.....etc stuff would not be in game. SO if you get your way you will be only finding other pvpers to kill, and if you are having troubles now chances are these other pvpers will pwn you. Go figure.
Lo3d3R Implant Liberation Front Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:38:00 - [18] removing basic features of life in EVE like Local, Bookmarks etc will eventually kill this game. ___________________ Eating Chopped Bear:
Dukath	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:48:00 - [19] removing risk yet again from the game will kill eve So yes, please remove local, as in only show up if you talk, or alternatively make it a 10 system wide radius (I don't really agree with constellation or regional cause it will be too easy to police the border, with a 10 system radius you will never be in the system next to someone else you cannot see)
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 06:58:00 - [20] I feel that the intel one can gather from local is way too overpowered. I agree with the original poster in that the element of insecurity that should be attached to going into 0.0 or low sec has been lost on me as well. I have found little use for the scanner now due to the fact that as soon as a hostile comes into system everyone knows about it and jumps to ss or simply log off. By eliminating this flaw in game design would force a lot of low sec mining back into empire I would think, therefore again creating alot of strain on already overburdoned systems. It may also jack up the prices of low sec minerals and by association, mods and ships. This I feel would be a great thing indeed. Now Pies would have to actually hunt down miners in low sec systems. It may lead to more camping of gates tho... For industry it would put a bigger strain on being able to provide enough minerals. Hopefully this would mean more relience on actually protected mining ops in low sec, more co-ordination from corps and a better more insecure gaming experience for everyone. For the bigger alliances in 0.0 it would mean a whole rethink of fleet tactics. "Securing" space would no longer mean simply being able to set up pos's and scrambling when a hostile enters system. Perhaps a lookout post could be incorperated into the game play to help in this matter (ie you could anchor a lookout post which could in some way alert you to local presence) It would also mean a huge rethink of fleet battles. Instead of the cat and mouse crap I have so far witnessed in 0.0 a better strategy of scouting and ambushing may develope... I would be all for a rethinking of local /signed

Foxy PurpleHaze	Posted - 2006.11.02 07:01:00 - [21] Originally by: Madeline Wickwor Remove local and you will lose soooo many people who simply dont want to get ganked 5 times a day. And contrary to popular belief it is not soley a pvp game or all the market/production.....etc stuff would not be in game. People that don't want to die should stay in high sec systems. there is plenty of space to stay safe in. But if you want better rewards you will have to take risks.
Aramova	Posted - 2006.11.02 07:02:00 - [22] Let's take a Sci-Fi look at Local... Battlestar Galactica... Commander Adama is about to jump the fleet to a new location, but wisely he sends out a Viper recon squad ahead. static "This is Viper 1 to Galactica -- We've extied FTL, I'm showing 6 Cylons in local...and they are smack talking sir!" static Just a thought -- Save a Penguin!
Mira deVorsha	Posted - 2006.11.02 07:04:00 - [23] Edited by: Mira deVorsha on 02/11/2006 07:04:32 NOT SIGNED. All local tells you is the people in the system. It absolutly tells you nothing else about thier location within the system. Of course you can guess that if your in .4 space and there are 1-2 low sec players they are most likely gate camping. I wouldn't like to see local removed. Maybe have it that while your in range of a Gate/Station/static mission gate that you show up on the local list, or if you talk while on local. Or they show up in local if they are within your scanning range (visual or probes). This would mean that noobs would still be aware of possible gate campers or people around stations. But straight out removing local. No.
MysticScout	Posted - 2006.11.02 07:05:00 - [24] Edited by: MysticScout on 02/11/2006 07:06:24 Edited by: MysticScout on 02/11/2006 07:05:51 Local Greetings P.S. And i am lucky that the local will NOT be removed
Dufas Amarr Catalyst Reaction Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.02 07:06:00 - [25] no..stop whinning..move along __________
Glumpumpkin House Elf Liberation Front	Posted - 2006.11.02 07:22:00 - [26] Hey CCP I want my playing experience to be EXTREMELY BORING as I warp from belt to belt in every system I enter looking for enemies to kill. Also I want travel to be an impossibility without comprehensive sets of gate-to-gate and scanning bookmarks for the region I'm traveling through, and I don't ever want to know if there's someone interesting in local that I can converse with. While you're at it could you go ahead and make it so that once an asteroid belt is exhausted it never respawns and that rats are a finite resource as well? That would really boost the REALISM in the game, enhancing mine and everyone else's playing experience. Oh, wait, don't do any of these because THEY ARE ALL STUPID IDEAS! Stop posting gh0zt. Thanks in advance.
Ogdru Jahad Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.02 07:29:00 - [27] why have local "nerfed" like on delay where you show up once you speak? local will still show how many ppl in local. -
Okkie2	Posted - 2006.11.02 07:43:00 - [28] As stated before by a DEV it will not be removed which is a good thing, because removing it will mainly benefit pirates. If you are PvE'ing you'll have to scan the area continuously to know if any hostile is near, while a pirate only has to scan the system he just entered once to know if any targets are near.
Goca Minmatar Steel Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.02 08:20:00 - [29] /not signed, only benefits pirates.. sorry. I is Goca
DOGNOSH Minmatar SKULLDOGS	Posted - 2006.11.02 08:34:00 - [30] / NOT signed As I love seeing pirates sceedaddle away from our multi battleship gang(when we mission run in low sec.) with their tail between their legs when they look in local and go "Hmmm,soft target" yeah,he who laughs last mmmm pink Eris will approve - Xorus Xorus has been webbified - DOGNOSH

Bloody Slave	Posted - 2006.11.02 08:43:00 - [31] Not signed. Some of the players already stated the reasons why local must stay, and I agree with them. Sorry OP, that was not a good idea, BTW, it's not even a new one.
Wild Rho Amarr Black Omega Security	Posted - 2006.11.02 08:45:00 - [32] Edited by: Wild Rho on 02/11/2006 08:45:04 Signed. Local in high sec = as it is now. Local in low sec = X minute delay until you show. Local in 0.0 = Don't appear unless you talk. Right now thanks to the local channel 0.0 is safer than low sec space (probably even than high sec space for corps involved in wars) apart from a couple of choke points. 0.0 is supposed to be the most dangerous region of space and the current situation is a bit of a **** take tbh. I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it.
Nikolai Nuvolari Caldari Gilead's Bullet Kimotoro Directive	Posted - 2006.11.02 08:52:00 - [33] No. --------------------- Originally by: Herko Kerghans Nik = win. Period. Mebrithiel Ju'wien > Nik's bio 4tw btw Graelyn > Nikolai for Dev 108!
Pabs Sco Caldari Ecosse	Posted - 2006.11.02 08:54:00 - [34] No!! How many times has this came up??? Its all the pirates and alliance alts that want this... ------
Palos Pax Gallente PERSONAS NON GRATAS	Posted - 2006.11.02 09:02:00 - [35] Originally by: Aramova Let's take a Sci-Fi look at Local... Battlestar Galactica... Commander Adama is about to jump the fleet to a new location, but wisely he sends out a Viper recon squad ahead. static "This is Viper 1 to Galactica -- We've extied FTL, I'm showing 6 Cylons in local...and they are smack talking sir!" static Just a thought Ya but in Galactica they're not exactly using gates to jump, presumably these gates are being maintained by someone, and local could be seen(Sci-Fi so to speak) as a registrar of who's come thru the gates of the system... Though field jumping wouldn't follow with this
Securion Wolfheart Caldari Semper Fidelis Industries	Posted - 2006.11.02 09:02:00 - [36] /SIGNED Local is so f***ing stupid. In space you should be able to hide AND be able to hunt someone without them knowing it. The fact that we are limited to a set number of positions to be in every system makes local even more idiotic. "Look everybody! Here comes Billy in his covert-ops!" -----====----- Whether we bring our enemies to justice or bring justice to our enemies, justice will be done.
Yuck Fou	Posted - 2006.11.02 09:11:00 - [37] /signed would be much more exciting without local.
Xordus Beasts of Burden Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.11.02 09:38:00 - [38] /signed http://show.imagehosting.us/show/1339817/0/nouser_1339/T0_-1_1339817.JPG your image host has seemed to have stopped hosting your sig, insurting a picture that is too big for the forums instead, i advise use of http://www.eve-files.com/ - Huitzilopochtli Tlaloc
Terminus adacai Caldari Mintaka Mining Inc	Posted - 2006.11.02 09:50:00 - [39] When do the pirates quit complaining? They got MWD's nerfed on haulers, they seek an end to gate instas, they want cloaks nerfed, etc. I have an idea for em. Mine, produce, haul, do something other than camp gates and expect CCP to hand you easier prey. I have an idea, remove local chat for anyone with a low security rating. That would be a good thing.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 09:51:00 - [40] Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 09:56:37 Im not a Pie. Im not even a pie's alt. I feel that having the ability to see everyone in system is just really bad game design. It totally nerfs the low sec areas. It particularly nerfs 0.0. Maybe the complete irradication of local chat is a bad idea. As was stated above, a pirate would only have to scan once for targets while a pve would have to continually scan for pies! Maybe that would be a good thing? I do a hellava lot of low sec mining and to be honest, its boring. Furthermore, due to the large numbers of corps doing it as well, its just not as profitable. I would hope that this would drive up costs of ships etc. The reason for this is because I just see so many people parading around in bs's its not funny. Most of the industrial strength of eve is based on doing mining trips out to low sec and than building off of loot for low end minerals. Conversly, by nerfing Local I think that this would drive more people into low and 0.0 because the profit margins of obtaining high end minerals would far outweigh the risks of pie attacks. Also it would definately increase pie activity , but the time spent would not be as effective. I cant see pies changing their gatecamping style of play that much. What it would mean tho is that it is entirely possible for a pie sit in a system for an extended period of time before they get kills- or at least have to work for it a bit more. It would also enhance communal channels that spring up in low sec to help keep an eye on pie activity. Once a pie is sighted in a system they will not be able to see the fact that 8 anti pie bs's have just jumped into system until its too late. Furthermore I think it would be cool if you could launch a "lookout" probe that sits at gates or sumf to let you know if someone is entering system... that way 0.0 space could be secured without the need for senties etc

ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2006.11.02 09:53:00 - [41] Originally by: NovaScotia I am a new player. I use local to see if there may be trouble in a low sec system. It has saved my ship and my pod I am sure. Now that said.... Having local changed or removed could only be a good thing IMO. It would make it more.. tense.. scary... exciting! So although I am sure it will result in this noob dying more, I would probably have a more immersive, more enjoyable time playing. /signed This doesnt sound like a "noob" to me. The noobs ive met have been frustrated to get jumped by someone. Normally they have jack for isk and need to try and find a way to sc***enough to get a new condor. This game is as lonely as a "mmo" could be. even when local is full of people, no one talks. Heres the thing about local and why its not likely to be removed or drastically altered. Does anyone know how the warpgates work? Have we been given the schematics of a WG? Do we really know its capabilities and uses? The WG is likely to need a massive amount of power to send a ship to another system so quickly. WGs probably have a "beacon" of sorts so that pilots can lock onto its location and cruise on over and use it. If you dont want to have friendly fire incidents you need a form of IFF especially when your friend could be in a gallente ship while your in a caldari design. Lets put this together and youll see why i dont think local is going away. First off we would get a signal from all WG in system,broadcasting their location. This means our ships computer(s) would know where to look for the WG. The WG's location is known and our ship is "listening"(scanning) for signals,for changes and for bursts of energy that matches that of a ship entering or leaving the system via WG. This means our ships are going to know that theres been activity at the gate thanks to our sensors watching all known entrances to the system we are in. When you and your corp mates go looking for a fight or to haul precious minerals to another system,you want to know who is who. This means you need a form of "IFF" or Identify Friend or Foe system. You are going to be broadcasting your info over a short range so if the ** hits the fan, your friends dont target your ship thinking its one of the hostiles you just encountered. Next, we dont know the specifics about WG, maybe its just me though. However we know that Concord is out to regulate empire systems. One thing that would help them respond is knowing who is coming and going through the WG. Knowing who is coming in allows them to react quickly to threats,think how this would help concord if eve was RL and outside gamemechanics. So if you have IFF, a WG and a police force out to regulate,what is the next step? Hopefully you guessed that they would have a scanner that would pick up your IFF "code"(info) and transmit it ahead of your ship. This would give concord a heads up while giving pilots quick service. The recieving WG would then broadcast the IFF that belongs to the inbound ship. This information is likely to be sent over the same system that broadcasts the location of the WG to pilots in system. A smart pilot no matter his intentions is going to use all of this information. Doing so in effect forms a "local" channel as you could broadcast over several frequencies in hopes that you hit the one the other ships are using. Of course corp,gang and other channels would be encrypted and use a particular frequency eliminating the chance of those messages reaching "local". Like local or not, it would be highly likely that within 10-20 years that the police force and goovernments as well as corps would fit all WG with a means of broadcasting the IFFs. Then again you could forge some but at the same time it could be assigned to the pilot much like a social security card. If you dont have one or it doesnt match a legitimate one, your stuck out in 0.0 becuase they denied you access to empire space. 0.0 to 0.0 may allow for no IFF.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 10:04:00 - [42] The idea of a tag is feasible... But so too should be a cloaking device to block that tag from transmitting... Hence being able to "hide" from local If this was a high end skill it would probably benefit pies more then noobs. If it was low end everyone would have it... I still dont know the answer but I think it needs to be addressed
Khaulu Tarn Minmatar Pator Tech School	Posted - 2006.11.02 10:15:00 - [43] Edited by: Khaulu Tarn on 02/11/2006 10:15:42 NOT SIGNED but conditionally, I suppose it would make sense for a ship to be able hide itself from detection in local. I mean, if your ship's radiating a constant transponder signal for communications purposes, that would be something you could lock onto, right? so how about this - whenever a ship is cloaked, that pilot is removed from local. They can't be seen, and they can't speak.... but neither can they see any details about local nor read anything written in it. This applies to cloaking device cloaks and gate cloaks as well. EDIT: apologies for the accidental alt-post. -Stitcher, JIT Enterprises.
Mangold Freelance Unincorporated Ushra'Khan	Posted - 2006.11.02 10:24:00 - [44] Not signed. It would make hunting for targets extremely boring. Both in empire and lowsec. bad idea imho.
Blighter	Posted - 2006.11.02 10:29:00 - [45] actually, they buffed local, by alowing you to see standings/wartargets. Bu I would not mind seeing local nerfed. I mean, they have system scanning, why not loet it be used a bit more.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:07:00 - [46] TBH, the only time i have seen scanning being used was in 0.0 when trying to flush out a single hostile in local. Because the hostile could see the amount of pvpers in system it created an impass. He could tell that we were there looking for him and his ability to do anything about us was negated by us knowing he was still in system! I still havnt seen a decent reply to my points beyond peeps are too lazy to go out and hunt for their kills, or they are too lazy to protect themselves in low sec. Its not like you have much better things to do when mining in low sec, especially when you are group mining and npcs are not a prob...
Kai DeathCutter	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:10:00 - [47] NOT signed
Godar Marak Amarr Return Of Red Dawn	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:20:00 - [48] Can all the people panicking over this suggestion please realize that removing local will affect pirates just as much as carebears? Jesus, if you are going to pirate you still have to spend time scanning for hostiles, and if you are mining or whatever you wont show up in local.....ERGO if you are in a system with a trillion asteroid belts its gonna be boring as hell to warp to every belt to see if anyones there or scan all of them. In otherwords, belt pirating is going to require more effort. Local is rubbish, it wont be removed but it should. -------------------- \0/\0/\0/\0/\0/ Cant we all just get along? Wheres EVE heading?
ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:20:00 - [49] Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik The idea of a tag is feasible... But so too should be a cloaking device to block that tag from transmitting... Hence being able to "hide" from local If this was a high end skill it would probably benefit pies more then noobs. If it was low end everyone would have it... I still dont know the answer but I think it needs to be addressed What if you were required to have a registered IFF in order to use the WGs? Concord installing such a system would help them emensely. No IFF,no use of the WG. If they installed such a system, which is feasible and logical, it would be unlikely for even a stealth ship to go through unnoticed. If there was a problem,which of course there would be,concord would adjust. Since everyone who enters or exits the system via WG, its easy to conclude that they would have an IFF broadcast prior to entrance and a IFF broadcast as you exit. If you entered system and your IFF was broadcasted, its easy to assume that your in system until your IFF is broadcasted again. Remember we arent dealing simply wth human memory but computers that could have a small program to "track" who is in "local" by adding and removing names according to WG transmissions. I dont see local going away, theres to much reason for its existence.Its to simple to form a "local" and it would become something considered basic to form this "local". hell microsquish would make a program to form a "local" from these different sources of information available to a pilot. If for some reason they did remove local,which would be stupid as it goes against logical thinking, they need to remove map options. If people want to play double blind EVE, remove the ability for them to see where people are at. This would allow them to go through every system without the slightest clue as to who is around. Either way, if removed it would truely increase gate camping as it would be the only way to know who is in system. hell even pirates sailing the ocean didnt get full surprise since they would be detected visually well outside the range of their guns. So in a time where people are cruising the darkmatter in personal ships bristling with weapons it makes even less sense to have no means to detect others outside of firing range and outside of visual range. the idea of removing local is based on nothing more then wanting an even easier target,not becuase there logical explanations as to why it should be removed.
ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:23:00 - [50] Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik I still havnt seen a decent reply to my points beyond peeps are too lazy to go out and hunt for their kills, or they are too lazy to protect themselves in low sec. Its not like you have much better things to do when mining in low sec, especially when you are group mining and npcs are not a prob... Rip apart my first post in this thread. Show me that it makes no sense. Give me a chance to counter and have at it again. If you can beat my reasoning as to why local would exist in one form or another,ill agree with you. Not only that but youll probably have several others turning and agreeing or at least admit that its personal want,not logic that dictates their position.

James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:23:00 - [51] Look, the fundamental problem here is you can't just remove local, because that will make the game unfun for anyone who's not out for a gank. A lot of us tend to spend a lot of time not ganking because we need ISK somehow. Here's a list of changes off the top of my head that would have to accompany the removal of local for it to be remotely fair: 1. System-wide asteroid belts. You can warp to a part of them, but chances are without scanning you won't find anyone because they would be huge. 2. Ship detects when you're being scanned. This is just common sense - if you're sending out waves to find me, then I can know you're doing it. 3. Allow people to warp anywhere so they can use their ship scanner to try and find people. You can't just remove local and yell "oh lol realism". The first point is the biggest - all the hunter has to do is warp from belt to belt until he finds a target. The prey has to sit there, doing something considered boring by most - mining or ratting, as well as hitting scan repeatedly just to see if someone is about to drop on top of them in the belt. This would suck. A lot. It would be unfun, and require a level of corp cohesion to counter that is simply not possible when people have a life outside of EVE. NOT SIGNED. --- Encrypted Client Side Bookmarks! Raise YOUR voice to CCP. Let's end slow copy times and bookmark lag for good!
Shilak Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:25:00 - [52] Signed. Local is far too powerful a tool for hunting/hiding at the moment. It makes it far too easy to spot hostiles when they enter the system. Its far too easy for ratters/miners to just watch local and then safespot the second a hostile appears. Its also far to easy for a hunter to spot prey when they enter the system. Keep the count so people can see how many others there are in system. Only list the people who have spoken in Local. Make people actually use the scanning systems supplied to detect and locate targets or threats. Maybe CCP could add a system where you can pay the local authorities to keep you updated on the pilots in the system, e.g. 100k for high sec, 500k for low sec, 1m for 0.0, only valid until you exit the system. This would also help remove some of the cash from the game.
Lelu Tarkenton	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:26:00 - [53] Originally by: Godar Marak Can all the people panicking over this suggestion please realize that removing local will affect pirates just as much as carebears? Jesus, if you are going to pirate you still have to spend time scanning for hostiles, and if you are mining or whatever you wont show up in local.....ERGO if you are in a system with a trillion asteroid belts its gonna be boring as hell to warp to every belt to see if anyones there or scan all of them. In otherwords, belt pirating is going to require more effort. Local is rubbish, it wont be removed but it should. Actually, it will help pirates immensely. With the scanning buff all a pirate has to do is check his map to see if there are folks in a system. He shows up, uses the improved scan, voila, he knows where his targets are. Someone competent in scanning now can scan belts in a matter of minutes. Meanwhile NPCers/miners will have to constantly be scanning on the off chance a pirate enters the system at that exact moment. All this while they are engaged in another activity. Removing local: Huge buff to pirates, huge nerf to NPCers/miners.
Blighter	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:35:00 - [54] meh, either remove local, or keep local, and add a warp to option on players portraits. Either way works for me.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:37:00 - [55] Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 11:42:42 Originally by: ShardowRhino snip. I really like your logic here mate. From a roleplaying perspective it would be easily explainable. But regardless I still feel a solution to the "intsa- intel" of local should be addressed. It prob wouldnt lead to more gate camps. Sure they would still exist as its the easy way out, but it would be alot more dangerous to camp a gate as you prob wouldnt see the gank squad forming up to pwn you :) Also, by your own logic mining in low sec would be relativly safer if local was removed because pies wouldnt bother scanning roid belts. I think that gameplay would evolve and pies would have to work harder for kills. I dont think that camping low sec gates would be as profitable. Furthermore 0.0 would be revolutionised, much to the dismay of many gankers. Also consider that warp to 0 might be introduced in the next patch so gate camping may become obsolete altogether. Perhaps a RP feasible compromise could be reached to introduce the ability to scram,cloak or watever, your sig on local. ie by activating the mod, your name would disappear from local. This would probably mean pies would have an extra advantage in low sec but for 0.0 it could lead to some very interesting results! Perhaps a version could be introduced for a gang mod. By having this scramer on one ship in a gang it could delete all the gang from local- So long as they were in the area (belt) as the scramer. The idea of a hauler sig blinking on for a minute or so and than off would be enough to spark the interest of some pies but they would have to scan or recon to find out what exactly they were dealing with. It would also mean that upon entering a system all of local would be able to see the numbers pop up for a short period before blinking off... How would I send this idea to the Devs? I really think that could solve a lot of gameplay exploits and enhance gaming. James Dours 2nd point would also be an excellent addition. An alert from the voice saying "**** scanning detected" or something like that... Great idea
Theronnos Citizens of E.A.R.T.H. E.A.R.T.H. Federation	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:37:00 - [56] /signed It needs some good thought but currently it is destroying the "space" feeling a lot. Atm I donÆt think EVE has that "space" feeling a lot, some places it does but itÆs very limitedàwe also need more black background btw :) ---------------
ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:39:00 - [57] Originally by: James Duar 2. Ship detects when you're being scanned. This is just common sense - if you're sending out waves to find me, then I can know you're doing it. You can't just remove local and yell "oh lol realism". The first point is the biggest - all the hunter has to do is warp from belt to belt until he finds a target. The prey has to sit there, doing something considered boring by most - mining or ratting, as well as hitting scan repeatedly just to see if someone is about to drop on top of them in the belt. I find the "oh lol realism" part halarious. Not becuase your wrong but becuase people think it would be realistic to have no idea whats going on around them. Modern militaries have the ability to tell if theres a ship/aircraft in their "local". Why? becuase of radar. Also they know when someone is using radar to find them. So both sides will have an idea of who is in their "local" becuase of the signatures that return after the target has been smacked by the radar. The idea of ships having no sensors,of the WGs having no way of alerting concord of who just warped in is without realism. The idea that there would be no way of detecting other ships in system is without realism. There is always a way to detect something at range. basically the idea of removing local is a buff to pirates without reason. They dont want a challenge,they dont want to have to think of how to find the targets before it can run. Theres no reason supporting the removal of local,at least no one has presented it. its just a case of "i want this!!!" ./pout .I seriously doubt the devs would make such a big move based purely on someone pouting becuase he was unable to find an easy target. oh and miners wouldnt be hitting a refresh button or actively scanning for other ships. Guess why? Their ships would have a program to run the sensors and alert the pilot when something is detected. Next thing someone will post that we should be shoveling coal into the boiler of a covetor to keep those mining picks swinging away at that astroid,becuase clearly using technology in an era where your cruising through space like you were driving the the mall is absurd,at least to them it is.
Shilak Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:44:00 - [58] Originally by: Lelu Tarkenton Actually, it will help pirates immensely. With the scanning buff all a pirate has to do is check his map to see if there are folks in a system. He shows up, uses the improved scan, voila, he knows where his targets are. Someone competent in scanning now can scan belts in a matter of minutes. Meanwhile NPCers/miners will have to constantly be scanning on the off chance a pirate enters the system at that exact moment. All this while they are engaged in another activity. Removing local: Huge buff to pirates, huge nerf to NPCers/miners. Wrong, its only a nerf to lazy NPCers/miners, decent NPCers/miners will already be monitoring the local to see when people enter and will safespot as soon as a potential hostile appears. By reducing the effectiveness of the current local system they will have to use the scanner system, which is admittedly a little harder to use than just watching local, but still not that difficult. Alternatively, NPC/mining gangs can appoint a lookout to monitor the gates for new arrivals and alert his fellow gang members if a threat is spotted. At the moment the only real risk in low sec is gate/station camps (easily avoidable with a forward scout) and login traps. Everything else is avoidable with a few safespot bookmarks or station instas and keeping an eye on local.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 11:52:00 - [59] Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 11:57:24 Originally by: ShardowRhino Originally by: James Duar 2. Ship detects when you're being scanned. This is just common sense - if you're sending out waves to find me, then I can know you're doing it. You can't just remove local and yell "oh lol realism". The first point is the biggest - all the hunter has to do is warp from belt to belt until he finds a target. The prey has to sit there, doing something considered boring by most - mining or ratting, as well as hitting scan repeatedly just to see if someone is about to drop on top of them in the belt. I find the "oh lol realism" part halarious. Not becuase your wrong but becuase people think it would be realistic to have no idea whats going on around them. Modern militaries have the ability to tell if theres a ship/aircraft in their "local". Why? becuase of radar. Also they know when someone is using radar to find them. So both sides will have an idea of who is in their "local" becuase of the signatures that return after the target has been smacked by the radar. The idea of ships having no sensors,of the WGs having no way of alerting concord of who just warped in is without realism. The idea that there would be no way of detecting other ships in system is without realism. There is always a way to detect something at range. basically the idea of removing local is a buff to pirates without reason. They dont want a challenge,they dont want to have to think of how to find the targets before it can run. Theres no reason supporting the removal of local,at least no one has presented it. its just a case of "i want this!!!" ./pout .I seriously doubt the devs would make such a big move based purely on someone pouting becuase he was unable to find an easy target. oh and miners wouldnt be hitting a refresh button or actively scanning for other ships. Guess why? Their ships would have a program to run the sensors and alert the pilot when something is detected. Next thing someone will post that we should be shoveling coal into the boiler of a covetor to keep those mining picks swinging away at that astroid,becuase clearly using technology in an era where your cruising through space like you were driving the the mall is absurd,at least to them it is. Im not specifically saying "i want realism"/pout. I dont think anyone is saying that but you. What I am saying though is that local in its current state creates an impass for the majority of pvp opportunities ( I again state that I am not a pie- im actually focussing more on mining/industrial. If I wanted flashy flashy pew pew I would go play a fps) and should therefore be addressed. I do agree with some of your points but surely you must see that by knowing exactly who is in local at any time without the ability to cloak that intel is damaging for gameplay. Im not only speaking of low sec but also of 0.0. Its just simply too nerfed to be honest. Anyone with more than 2 weeks of low sec flying under their belt who is a miner will be aligned for a ss or a instadock to a station and immediately jumps in before pies have a chance to retaliate. THIS is why they camp gates. Its their only real chance of a kill. If anything I kinda feel that the Nerf bat is definately against pies, not for them. It would also have an effect on the economy of eve. Pricing is simply stupid in most systems atm. Way too cheap. Remember, pies would be alot more likely to be cautious of loosing ships if they cost more but the beniefts of mining low sec mins would drive many miners out of empire into lower sec, which I can only see as a benefit I am interested in what peeps think of my idea of a cloaking mod which would remove you/or your gang from local. That way both miners/npcers could remove their presence as well as Pies. I think this should be an active mod. Any thoughts?
Redbad Minmatar Vengeance of the Fallen Imperium Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:03:00 - [60] Oke, I've read this thread and see a lot of good ideas that combined might be something worth while to consider. Luckily for you I come from the Netherlands where we have perfected our Poldermodel Consensus politics into a true art Consider it like this: 1. Safe empire space. 1.0 - 0.5 Local shows all people and standings as Concord is trying to keep everyone safe and informed, through system sweeps and thorough scanning. Local can be used by new players for info and ofcourse standard socializing conversation by anyone. 2. Unsafe empire space 0.4 - 0.1 Concord tries its best to keep everyone safe, but their reach is less in this space and their scanning possibilites are limited. To reflect this people only show up in local when they make them known, all standings will be shown, cause Concord's database will add this information to the Local channel once they pick up on someone in Local. You will disappear from local if you leave the system. 3. Unclaimed space 0.0 People only will be shown if they make them known in Local, but no standings will be shown as Concord hasn't got any influence here. You are on your own here. You will disappear from local when you leave the system, or after lets say 15 minutes of not contacting local channel anymore. 4. Claimed space 0.0 with sovereignty One of the options above as seemed appropriate by the Sovereign. Man I like being Dutch! Hope you like the idea, if not, no hard feelings. Greetz,

Glumpumpkin House Elf Liberation Front	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:05:00 - [61] Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik Im not specifically saying "i want realism"/pout. I dont think anyone is saying that but you. What I am saying though is that local in its current state creates an impass for the majority of pvp opportunities ( I again state that I am not a pie- im actually focussing more on mining/industrial. If I wanted flashy flashy pew pew I would go play a fps) and should therefore be addressed. I do agree with some of your points but surely you must see that by knowing exactly who is in local at any time without the ability to cloak that intel is damaging for gameplay. Im not only speaking of low sec but also of 0.0. Its just simply too nerfed to be honest. Anyone with more than 2 weeks of low sec flying under their belt who is a miner will be aligned for a ss or a instadock to a station and immediately jumps in before pies have a chance to retaliate. THIS is why they camp gates. Its their only real chance of a kill. If anything I kinda feel that the Nerf bat is definately against pies, not for them. It would also have an effect on the economy of eve. Pricing is simply stupid in most systems atm. Way too cheap. Remember, pies would be alot more likely to be cautious of loosing ships if they cost more but the beniefts of mining low sec mins would drive many miners out of empire into lower sec, which I can only see as a benefit Pirates gatecamp because they're lazy and don't want to risk their ships, but they enjoy watching their k/d ratio climb. It's a pathetic way to play the game, and it isn't fun for anyone- it's only amusing for the pirates. That rant belongs in another thread, though. If you think that local is a detriment to the majority of PvP you're doing it wrong. Yes, some attentive people will flee from their rats and roids the moment an unknown appears in local, but after wasting 10 minutes in a safespot 3 times in an hour as people pass in an out of a system they will let their guard down and you can attempt to engage them. Alternatively, you can safespot yourself and walk away from the computer while you wait for them to become accustomed to your presence in local. Tactics are local's nerf, not any heavy-handed game breaking changes by CCP.
ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:05:00 - [62] Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 11:42:42 Originally by: ShardowRhino snip. The funny thing is it seems like people think "local" is unrealistic.However they havent given a reason why its unrelistic. It ends up turning into them talking about hwo they think things should be. Local ,if it was RL,wouldnt exactly look like it does. At least not until someone makes a program to sift through all the available information and then displays it in an easy to digest format. This would actually end up as the "local" we see in eve. Ive played planetside for a few years and i see a lot "becuase we say so" going on. "we" meaning devs who didnt think things through but just pulled stuff out of their rear and made it so. Now in Eve i see more reasoning,logic and thought in things. Hell go through the intro guides on how to hit a target. That shows theres a lot more then "becuase we say so" going on in eve. Removing "local" would be a step towards being soe as opposed to being a company who makes a game that uses logic. Thats one thing that i really like about this game is that it makes sense to me and i know the devs had to make it make sense to them as well. "Local" as i mentioned is not some crazy left field idea with a dose of Soe-ism. Its all feasible and took me just a few minutes to come up with a rough idea on how to form a "local" that would be possible. Local isnt a crutch. Local just hasnt been explained. Hasnt been "fleshed out" so that everyone could read it and have it make sense to them as to why it would be unavoidable. As for 0.0, an area where concord has no say is a different story. It would be easy for someone to get into the WG and remove the IFF system. They could make it so anyone could warp through it by waving at it,if they added the right sensors. Then again its logical that they could reprogram it for it to work only for their corp. That would become a bit of a problem since that could effectively cut off entire segements of the "world" by reprogramming just a handful of WGs. They dont need to control both ends and since each end has to activate to complete the warp, you r going to lose lots of ships. Think SG1 iris from the StarGate show. As for the idea of setting up decoys, that would be cool. I dont know how the new scanner system will work though. The idea of setting up a ship as bait would shake things up a bit. Then again a group could do that already in a sense. A smart group would keep at least 1 ship posted at each gate to see who comes in. They could stay out of attack range for most ships and warp if they are in danger. Of course gate camping would be encouraged more then it is now becuase you wont have the ability to know someone has jumped in otherwise. They can then gather at a rally point and hit you when you dont expect it. I dont know of any exploits associated with local. I know people log off but thats hard to justify as an exploit since i know ive logged off in a safe spot becuase i simply had to get to sleep and didnt want to make several jumps back at that time,not becuase of hostiles in system. They could always force a ship to sit there for X minutes if you log outside a station or POS shield. Make the ship detectable while its "logging off". hell add in a timer much like some mmorpgs do when you log in an unsafe enviroment.
Shilak Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:10:00 - [63] Originally by: ShardowRhino Modern militaries have the ability to tell if theres a ship/aircraft in their "local". Why? becuase of radar. Also they know when someone is using radar to find them. So both sides will have an idea of who is in their "local" becuase of the signatures that return after the target has been smacked by the radar. In EvE that 'radar' is called your scanner. In real life there are ships/planes/etc that can avoid radar using so called stealth technologies. Why wouldn't EvE contain similar technologies for hiding a ship from scanning systems? The ships could contain some sort of transponder that broadcasts their details I suppose, but why couldn't they be turned off or set to transmit false details? Originally by: ShardowRhino The idea of ships having no sensors,of the WGs having no way of alerting concord of who just warped in is without realism. The idea that there would be no way of detecting other ships in system is without realism. There is always a way to detect something at range. CONCORD only operate in high sec, the gate owners could catalog entries/exits from the system but why would they give such valuable data away for free, especially in 0.0 which is uncontrolled by the gate owners. Originally by: ShardowRhino basically the idea of removing local is a buff to pirates without reason. They dont want a challenge,they dont want to have to think of how to find the targets before it can run. Theres no reason supporting the removal of local,at least no one has presented it. its just a case of "i want this!!!" ./pout .I seriously doubt the devs would make such a big move based purely on someone pouting becuase he was unable to find an easy target. oh and miners wouldnt be hitting a refresh button or actively scanning for other ships. Guess why? Their ships would have a program to run the sensors and alert the pilot when something is detected. Next thing someone will post that we should be shoveling coal into the boiler of a covetor to keep those mining picks swinging away at that astroid,becuase clearly using technology in an era where your cruising through space like you were driving the the mall is absurd,at least to them it is. Actually the people for and against it seem pretty mixed, some pirates actually like local because it makes checking for targets easy. Some NPCers/miners would like to loose it because it makes it too easy for them to be detected in a system. As for the constantly scanning thing, how come these scanners know the name/corp/alliance details of a pilot yet cant give the type of ship they are flying? If anything the scanners should just give the type of ship ... no name ... no pilot info ... that would be consistent with the justification you are putting forward. Some people on this thread seem to be getting confused about what the local channel actually is, its a communication channel, not the result of using your ships scanners. The info the scanners give is acquired by opening the scanner screen and hitting that scan button.
Dukath	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:18:00 - [64] Originally by: ShardowRhino Originally by: James Duar 2. Ship detects when you're being scanned. This is just common sense - if you're sending out waves to find me, then I can know you're doing it. You can't just remove local and yell "oh lol realism". The first point is the biggest - all the hunter has to do is warp from belt to belt until he finds a target. The prey has to sit there, doing something considered boring by most - mining or ratting, as well as hitting scan repeatedly just to see if someone is about to drop on top of them in the belt. I find the "oh lol realism" part halarious. Not becuase your wrong but becuase people think it would be realistic to have no idea whats going on around them. Modern militaries have the ability to tell if theres a ship/aircraft in their "local". Why? becuase of radar. Also they know when someone is using radar to find them. So both sides will have an idea of who is in their "local" becuase of the signatures that return after the target has been smacked by the radar. The idea of ships having no sensors,of the WGs having no way of alerting concord of who just warped in is without realism. The idea that there would be no way of detecting other ships in system is without realism. There is always a way to detect something at range. basically the idea of removing local is a buff to pirates without reason. They dont want a challenge,they dont want to have to think of how to find the targets before it can run. Theres no reason supporting the removal of local,at least no one has presented it. its just a case of "i want this!!!" ./pout .I seriously doubt the devs would make such a big move based purely on someone pouting becuase he was unable to find an easy target. oh and miners wouldnt be hitting a refresh button or actively scanning for other ships. Guess why? Their ships would have a program to run the sensors and alert the pilot when something is detected. Next thing someone will post that we should be shoveling coal into the boiler of a covetor to keep those mining picks swinging away at that astroid,becuase clearly using technology in an era where your cruising through space like you were driving the the mall is absurd,at least to them it is. May I point out that in modern warfare radar is often deactivated? Same with sonar and similar detection systems. Why? because then signal is used by hostiles/weapons to zoom in on you. Do you really think that the russian subs sneaking along the american costline are constantly pulsing their sonars so that everyone can easily notice them? Passive scanning, while less powerfull is probably used more often than active scanning in such situations. Same with eve. Why the hell would I want to broadcast my location to everyone by activating my radar? I'd rather hide between the asteroids and let a friend scan so the hostiles only detect one ship.
Kamikazi BOB	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:20:00 - [65] Local is good, leave it as it is. Seems to be a trend to whine about stuff thats been working fine for 3 years, now all of a sudden some people like to change it (mostly for their own pleasure and not considering the general populous) and all of a sudden it turns into the next rage. So leave local and WCS alone and adapt allready, someone using more stabbies? fit more scramblers.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:25:00 - [66] Originally by: Glumpumpkin Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik Snip Tactics are local's nerf, not any heavy-handed game breaking changes by CCP. True, true. But you do admit than that it does negitively affect gameplay due to the ability to draw up your bio etc. Lets get away from semantics and look at examples. 1) Low sec system- Few miners/ratters doing what they do etc. Than a pie jumps into system. Most immediately align to ss or watever and continue. Some panic completely and insta dock (I know I do if I have a precious cargo on). Now lets say that instead of constantly being on local you were able to cloak your sig with a mod. New entries into local wouldnt know you were there. Effectively you would be shutting down your systems or cloaking them. Cloak would wear off from any hostile action or bumping object- like cloaking now. This would provide for the possibility of targets AWAY from gates. 2)Low sec- same scenario except this time the lone miner has the cloak on. He can see you enter and activates cloak (or has it run constantly). Pie passes on because he thinks system empty. 3)Low sec- Again Pie enters. This time the gang lead or whoever has cloak on which cloaks all of the gang from local. Pie is about to pass on when suddenly someone blips on. The hauler has warped into dock... comes back out and blips off local. Pie now has the option of scanning system or thinking it was a passer by. 4)0.0- Hostile fleet enters and prepares gate camp. Lead engages cloak. Another fleet/haulers enter system from another gate. If they were smart they have a scout and spot the ambush before hand anyway. Camp would still get a kill from scout flying into bubble. Whatever. 2nd Fleet now has the option to withdraw or perhaps cloak themselves. The campers now have the possibility of being ambushed themselves. 5) 0.0- Hostile gank squad enters system and sees 2 in local. Get trigger happy and warp into a large fleet that is mostly cloaked. Hurrah! 6) 0.0- large fleets just prior to engaging need intel before commiting forces. Local is no longer a valid form of intel because although 5 show up in local, the count could be much higher. I really cant see why this would only enhance gameplay. Not everyone would have the technology to cloak so it would merely add another layer into the game- not remove it. Comments welcome (really hope Devs are following this thread)
NightmareX Caldari MAFIA Pirate Coalition	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:27:00 - [67] No wai in hell. NOT SIGNED Local is fine as it is now, and it's even getting better in Kali
Bob Smackalof Caldari The Xenodus Initiative.	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:29:00 - [68] Originally by: NightmareX No wai in hell. NOT SIGNED Local is fine as it is now, and it's even getting better in Kali He speaks ye truth! ------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------
ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:30:00 - [69] To be honest when i say people are saying "i want realism"./pout. what i mean is that they dont really want realism,they simply want something that buffs their playstyle without a reason. The only thing i see backing the vast majority of these posts are "becuase i say so" and "this is what i want". I also say it becuase i can see past the post of "nerf it, its to powerful" so i poke fun at it. I'm primarily a miner but ive been trying to get more combat against other players in. Now if i came in here and posted "OMFG make my barge invisible becuase seeing me is to powerful" everyone here would be jumping all over me for it calling me a carebear in spite of facts. Would i like to be an unseen,undetectable miner? Sure,why not? it buffs that playstyle without reasoning other then ./pout"i dont want to be seen so bad pirates cant shoot me". Theres really no logic behind it. id rip it apart myself,first off being the mining beams giving things away visually then the thermal readings from the roid,the beam and my ship. Then the drones and ship's computer talking to each other,giving and recieving orders. Then i could say that the cloak and ship takes power which im sure a few sensor types will be able to detect. If this was an soe game, i could see them listening to "omg its to powerful" as if it finds the targets,locks onto them and fires or autowarps people to safety when a "pirate" jumps in. IF we are going for realism, then i want to deploy sensor bouys near the gate tht tell me when someone jumps in, what ship they have and their current heading. If we are just going off of "its too powerful" then id like to put in a request for a BS style mining barge and deployable turrets that i can put in a field to defend me. The idea that removing local is a nerf to pirates is insane. So you want to remove a logical way of alerting people in system that someone new has come in, for what? For a way pirates can jump out of nowhere unannounced,blow stuff up, lol, ask for ransom then fly off? mean while a mining barge is going to be sitting there minding its own bussiness. sitting there,mining away at ore pirates dont want. sitting there with no real way to defend itself.sitting there.....then blown up by a pirate thats "equally" nerfed? honestly im not pulling for one or the other. Im just trying to make sense out of posts that have none other then saying what they want, in order to make things more fun for them. When your idea of fun is predetory in nature, it makes it at least equally unfun for the reciveing player. So lets make the least fun thing to do in game suck even more becuase...its to powerful to have any form of sensors to detect hostile ships??? explain? someone?
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:42:00 - [70] Originally by: ShardowRhino explain? someone? You misunderstand me. Local would stay. The ability to remove yourself from local would be introduced. All that stuff you have said about thermal monitoring, radio comms etc should only be picked up by some sort of scanning device. Now if only there was a scanner in the user interface Local as a "chat" channel shouldnt be compulsory. But whatever, Im looking at a game balance issue rather than a RL/Eve debate. By installing a mod that would cloak you from local both miners and pies would have an equal opportunity to "hide" as it were. Still anyone entering the system would first have to ACTIVATE the mod, so for a short time, they would be on local. Enough time for someone to start counter measures if ness. But what it would eliminate is the screaming signal of "Hey- Look for me. Im in SYSTEM!!!" from both miners AND Pies. If Pies could mask themselves from local I think we would see a decrease in gate camping because other targets would become availiable. But it would require work for any decent mining op would have a cloak on. So too would a Pie hunting from belt to belt. The amjor benefit would be from a 0.0 perspective. It would be harder to judge enemy fleet sizes and would introduce a bigger element of surprise. By applying this in the form of a mod, choice in using the advancement falls back to a player choice. It wouldnt provide more of an incentive to gate camp. It would provide less.

Hector Ruiz Greedy and Co Enterprises	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:47:00 - [71] Edited by: Hector Ruiz on 02/11/2006 12:48:08 Not signed. Local is fine as it is. And btw, there is a dev post in this thread that cleary states that local is staying. Edit: spelling
ShardowRhino Legion 0f The Damned	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:48:00 - [72] Hey, im not saying that i wouldnt like to know what ships just jumped into system. Thats not the point though but i would ./sign that. LIke i said before though, they could issue IFFs like social security numbers. Updated info could be spread "world" wide when people activate the gate, the info could be sent,hell it could be a little pod that goes back and forth if need be. If they issued IFFs like social security cards, it would make sense that they would force users to flash their IFF to the gate in order to activate it. If that was to be done,which makes sense for them to do, then it makes sense that they would want concord in system Z to have the same info that concord in system Y has. This means they would send the IFF ahead of the ship so concord in Z can monitor certain individuals. Of course you could , or at least should be able to remove the IFF,basically destroying it, and go about 0.0 space. Then again the gate operator would likely want isk for their services. Its possible since if they get IFFs from players, the gate operators could go back to their respective governments to ask for the "toll" that their citizens racked up. The governments could then pay for the toll through taxes. Also whos to say that the governments wouldnt pay for security,pay for the WG operators to send them the IFFs as people jump in. As for turning off radar, thats true, you could. Thing is if the IFFs are in place and the transmission of IFFs between gates is working and you go back to my first post and look at how it works, youll realize it would be pointless to turn off your radar while your in system. If you havent jumped out but you jumped in, whats the obvious conclusion? as it is ,local does not say your in field 3, it merely shows that you jumped in and have yet to jump out. it has nothing to do with you having radar on or off while in system. essentially 1 way in and 1 way out unless you fly between systems without the use of the WG but thats different. Im still not seeing any posts that make sense when it comes to removing local other then they want it. Unless you Jump into the system or you fly from system to system instead of using the WG, it makes no sense that you wouldnt show up. Stealth would only hide your current location, not the fact that you havent jumped out. people apparently have difficulty seeing that its 2 different things.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:49:00 - [73] Originally by: ShardowRhino Originally by: James Duar 2. Ship detects when you're being scanned. This is just common sense - if you're sending out waves to find me, then I can know you're doing it. You can't just remove local and yell "oh lol realism". The first point is the biggest - all the hunter has to do is warp from belt to belt until he finds a target. The prey has to sit there, doing something considered boring by most - mining or ratting, as well as hitting scan repeatedly just to see if someone is about to drop on top of them in the belt. I find the "oh lol realism" part halarious. Not becuase your wrong but becuase people think it would be realistic to have no idea whats going on around them. Modern militaries have the ability to tell if theres a ship/aircraft in their "local". Why? becuase of radar. Also they know when someone is using radar to find them. So both sides will have an idea of who is in their "local" becuase of the signatures that return after the target has been smacked by the radar. The idea of ships having no sensors,of the WGs having no way of alerting concord of who just warped in is without realism. The idea that there would be no way of detecting other ships in system is without realism. There is always a way to detect something at range. basically the idea of removing local is a buff to pirates without reason. They dont want a challenge,they dont want to have to think of how to find the targets before it can run. Theres no reason supporting the removal of local,at least no one has presented it. its just a case of "i want this!!!" ./pout .I seriously doubt the devs would make such a big move based purely on someone pouting becuase he was unable to find an easy target. oh and miners wouldnt be hitting a refresh button or actively scanning for other ships. Guess why? Their ships would have a program to run the sensors and alert the pilot when something is detected. Next thing someone will post that we should be shoveling coal into the boiler of a covetor to keep those mining picks swinging away at that astroid,becuase clearly using technology in an era where your cruising through space like you were driving the the mall is absurd,at least to them it is. Bingo! Exactly the point I was driving at. I would be totally ok with removing local if we got it replaced with a full sensor suite simulation and system-wide belts, but people calling for local removal would generally hate it if that happened since the random gank would be nigh on impossible. I however would love it if that happened, since then it'd be like submarine warfare. --- Encrypted Client Side Bookmarks! Raise YOUR voice to CCP. Let's end slow copy times and bookmark lag for good!
Anatolius Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:50:00 - [74] Signed, by God, signed. I'll even settle for just letting cloaked people not appear in local unless they talk. Local stands in the way of the romantic notion of frigate captains cruising about, plundering fat merchantmen. Err, industrials. "If God be for us, whom can be against us?"
Ephemeron Pelennor Swarm	Posted - 2006.11.02 12:53:00 - [75] I would like to compromise. Lets have most systems with local as it ease, to appease the carebears. But give us SOME systems/regions where local does not automatically show people! Make those systems/regions a bit more profitable to be in, because of increased risk. Don't force the carebear style upon all the players. Even tho hardcore PvPers are a minority, we want some hardcore space to play in too! Give us something.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:01:00 - [76] Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 13:03:38 Originally by: ShardowRhino Im still not seeing any posts that make sense when it comes to removing local other then they want it. Unless you Jump into the system or you fly from system to system instead of using the WG, it makes no sense that you wouldnt show up. Stealth would only hide your current location, not the fact that you havent jumped out. people apparently have difficulty seeing that its 2 different things. Blatently you are not reading posts, or are ingnoring anything that goes against your view. You cannot just dismiss ideas cose you dont like them. The idea of IFF makes no sense at all. Why would that info be broadcast to pods in system? Air Traffic Control would be the closest RL example and that info is a oneway system and really thats only used for negotiating flight paths and airspace. Therefore your idea of gatemasters just willy nilly giving out the info is stupid. Especially why would they broadcast it to a Pie? The idea that it is like a social security system is ridiculous. If that was the case anyone with a low sec just wouldnt be allowed to jump. Or really low sec would be shot off into the depths of space. We can apply RL examples to something set in a game. You need to get off that line of thinking otherwise the entire system of eve just doesnt make sense. I am looking at this from a gameplay angle. I dont have time to repeat myself. GO BACK AND RE READ PREVIOUS POSTS. They do make sense from a gameplay perspective. It is balanced, doesnt favor either carebears or Pies and would probably eliminate a big problem with gameplay at the moment- the totally unrealistic amount of intel you can get for no effort watsoever. The information of jumps could be availiable from the map still, so you could deviate away from camps etc but it would free up the ability of both pies and miners AND 0.0 fleets to avoid unwanted intel against them
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:06:00 - [77] Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik Originally by: ShardowRhino Im still not seeing any posts that make sense when it comes to removing local other then they want it. Unless you Jump into the system or you fly from system to system instead of using the WG, it makes no sense that you wouldnt show up. Stealth would only hide your current location, not the fact that you havent jumped out. people apparently have difficulty seeing that its 2 different things. Blatently you are not reading posts, or are ingnoring anything that goes against your view. You cannot just dismiss ideas cose you dont like them. The idea of IFF makes no sense at all. Why would that info be broadcast to pods in system. Air Traffic Control info is a oneway system and really thats only used for negotiating flight paths and airspace. The idea that it is like a social security system is ridiculous. If that was the case anyone with a low sec just wouldnt be allowed to jump. Or really low sec would be shot off into the depths of space. We can apply RL examples to something set in a game. You need to get off that line of thinking otherwise the entire system of eve just doesnt make sense. I am looking at this from a gameplay angle. I dont have time to repeat myself. GO BACK AND RE READ PREVIOUS POSTS. They do make sense from a gameplay perspective. It is balanced, doesnt favor either carebears or Pies and would probably eliminate a big problem with gameplay at the moment- the totally unrealistic amount of intel you can get for no effort watsoever. The information of jumps could be availiable from the map still, so you could deviate away from camps etc but it would free up the ability of both pies and miners AND 0.0 fleets to avoid unwanted intel against them I'd like to see you respond to my points regarding this. You haven't addressed the fundamental issue that the miners and NPC'ers are in one well defined place, the pirates can be anywhere and the scanner certainly isn't long range enough to tell you when they've entered system. You need to balance all these concepts. Hence removing local by itself makes no sense and is hugely unbalanced against miners and NPC'ers. The argument that no one would bother going belt to belt is a false one, especially if a gank squad sets out. It would only take a few warps to cover a system and once they find a target they just tackle, warp in and destroy. The target is almost never going to see them on scanner before it's too late, and probably not going to be looking all that often because hitting the **** button repeatedly is certainly not my idea of anything remotely 'fun'. --- Encrypted Client Side Bookmarks! Raise YOUR voice to CCP. Let's end slow copy times and bookmark lag for good!
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:15:00 - [78] I thought I did respond. I actually liked some of your ideas. Let me just recap my position LOCAL WOULD STILL EXIST!!!!!! THE ABILITY TO REMOVE YOURSELF COULD BE INTRODUCED!!! This would not disadvantage miners because they would still see an influx in local for a short time (maybe a couple of seconds) and with Kali I think the scanner is getting a massive boost anyway. What it would mean is that pies would have to come and find you, not just sit at gates endlessly. A mining party could clock themselves as well so really a gank squad would have to physically scan/check all belts instead of warping from g2g looking at local. Seriously I know that just about the entire population of eve misuse local to spot baddies/targets. The introduction of a mod that removes peeps from local would eliminate that. Even if there were noone in system using the cloak you couldnt be certain. I think the idea is great. What about 0.0!!!! The benefits would be huge.
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:20:00 - [79] Sorry I think I misread you as being someone else. I'm still not sure I'm onboard with that idea, though this might just be personal bias - I've never had any trouble with local, either as a victim of it when I was in an alliance hunting pirates/raiders or as a miner. --- Encrypted Client Side Bookmarks! Raise YOUR voice to CCP. Let's end slow copy times and bookmark lag for good!
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:24:00 - [80] Originally by: James Duar Sorry I think I misread you as being someone else. I'm still not sure I'm onboard with that idea, though this might just be personal bias - I've never had any trouble with local, either as a victim of it when I was in an alliance hunting pirates/raiders or as a miner. But you do use it to monitor for hostiles right? And generally warp to a ss if you are in a weak ship? OR if you yourself are ganking could very well use it to search for miners etc. On that note im surprised how many peeps state that they are "non hostile" or a miner in their bio. The same for pies- such a giveaway! I think pies do it to try to instill fear in nubs and the cautious

Shilak Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:28:00 - [81] Originally by: ShardowRhino snip Nice, you drop the realism argument as soon as it starts going against you, i.e. the concept of running silent. Fact of the matter is, the cold war submarine scenario is the most appropriate to the way EvE works in low-sec. The ideal for all sides is to remain unseen by their enemies for as long as possible. So maybe a more real-world system (with a few EvE relevant tweaks) is the solution ... 1) have an open communication system (call it 'Local') where anyone can talk but their presence is unknown until they make their first communcation, at which point they will appear on the list. 2) have all ships fitted with a passive scanner, so that when someone else initiates a scan the ship will pick up the scan signal and alert the pilot. i.e. add an unknown ship to the overview with a direction, an approximate distance and the class of the ship (based on scan strength and racial scan type). 3) have all ships fitted with an active scanner, with a strength and type based on the ship (use the existing attributes that are used in EW). Maybe use strength to determine the maximum range of the ship scanners, so frigates cant scan entire systems in one go but capital ships can. Have the accuracy of the information returned based on the distance from the scanning ship and the strength of the scanners. 4) automatically show pilots/ships in the same gang, corp or alliance on the overview. 5) maybe add a right-click option to gates to allow pilots to pay the local authorities for details of the other pilots and their ships in the system. Maybe also limit this option to pilots with high standing in empire space (0.1 or higher).
Gorebane Gallente Venom.	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:29:00 - [82] Originally by: Terminus adacai I have an idea, remove local chat for anyone with a low security rating. That would be a good thing. /signed
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:41:00 - [83] Originally by: Shilak Originally by: ShardowRhino snip Nice, you drop the realism argument as soon as it starts going against you, i.e. the concept of running silent. Fact of the matter is, the cold war submarine scenario is the most appropriate to the way EvE works in low-sec. The ideal for all sides is to remain unseen by their enemies for as long as possible. So maybe a more real-world system (with a few EvE relevant tweaks) is the solution ... 1) have an open communication system (call it 'Local') where anyone can talk but their presence is unknown until they make their first communcation, at which point they will appear on the list. 2) have all ships fitted with a passive scanner, so that when someone else initiates a scan the ship will pick up the scan signal and alert the pilot. i.e. add an unknown ship to the overview with a direction, an approximate distance and the class of the ship (based on scan strength and racial scan type). 3) have all ships fitted with an active scanner, with a strength and type based on the ship (use the existing attributes that are used in EW). Maybe use strength to determine the maximum range of the ship scanners, so frigates cant scan entire systems in one go but capital ships can. Have the accuracy of the information returned based on the distance from the scanning ship and the strength of the scanners. 4) automatically show pilots/ships in the same gang, corp or alliance on the overview. 5) maybe add a right-click option to gates to allow pilots to pay the local authorities for details of the other pilots and their ships in the system. Maybe also limit this option to pilots with high standing in empire space (0.1 or higher). This still doesn't address the fundamental problem which is that there is a limited number of small fixed locations that targets can be in - the asteroid belts. If the asteroid belts were system wide though (i.e. like a real asteroid belt..somewhat) then this would work. Then this would be awesome. I keep saying it - if we had totally relativistic sensors, and could do passive sweeps, triangulate people who are pinging etc. etc. then it would be awesome. However you need to make space itself BIG for this to be fair to everyone. --- Encrypted Client Side Bookmarks! Raise YOUR voice to CCP. Let's end slow copy times and bookmark lag for good!
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:41:00 - [84] Originally by: Shilak Originally by: ShardowRhino snip Nice, you drop the realism argument as soon as it starts going against you, i.e. the concept of running silent. Fact of the matter is, the cold war submarine scenario is the most appropriate to the way EvE works in low-sec. The ideal for all sides is to remain unseen by their enemies for as long as possible. So maybe a more real-world system (with a few EvE relevant tweaks) is the solution ... 1) have an open communication system (call it 'Local') where anyone can talk but their presence is unknown until they make their first communcation, at which point they will appear on the list. 2) have all ships fitted with a passive scanner, so that when someone else initiates a scan the ship will pick up the scan signal and alert the pilot. i.e. add an unknown ship to the overview with a direction, an approximate distance and the class of the ship (based on scan strength and racial scan type). 3) have all ships fitted with an active scanner, with a strength and type based on the ship (use the existing attributes that are used in EW). Maybe use strength to determine the maximum range of the ship scanners, so frigates cant scan entire systems in one go but capital ships can. Have the accuracy of the information returned based on the distance from the scanning ship and the strength of the scanners. 4) automatically show pilots/ships in the same gang, corp or alliance on the overview. 5) maybe add a right-click option to gates to allow pilots to pay the local authorities for details of the other pilots and their ships in the system. Maybe also limit this option to pilots with high standing in empire space (0.1 or higher). Sounds good, but probably a little to overpowered towards +sec players. Also how long would a name stay in local for? Also although a passive sensor would seem like a decent comprimise, the time it takes to scan, warp and engage would probably be too long for a pie to have any chance of making a successful engagement. Perhaps this could be included as another mod? The idea of gate bribes seems a lil too overpowered for me. I would just always pay, hence the situation would be the same for pies. The idea of mods that could cloak peeps would be to draw pvp away from gate bottlenecks. The best solution so far seems to be the introduction of some more mods. One that cloaks you from local, one that cloaks gang from local, a passive sensor (scanning detector) and finally, perhaps, a deployable becon/scanner that could be deployed in 0.0 that would broadcast info as long as you were within range (mostly to give alliances better response times to fleet engagements)
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 13:49:00 - [85] Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 13:51:02 Originally by: James Duar Originally by: Shilak Originally by: ShardowRhino snip Nice, you drop the realism argument as soon as it starts going against you, i.e. the concept of running silent. Fact of the matter is, the cold war submarine scenario is the most appropriate to the way EvE works in low-sec. The ideal for all sides is to remain unseen by their enemies for as long as possible. So maybe a more real-world system (with a few EvE relevant tweaks) is the solution ... 1) have an open communication system (call it 'Local') where anyone can talk but their presence is unknown until they make their first communcation, at which point they will appear on the list. 2) have all ships fitted with a passive scanner, so that when someone else initiates a scan the ship will pick up the scan signal and alert the pilot. i.e. add an unknown ship to the overview with a direction, an approximate distance and the class of the ship (based on scan strength and racial scan type). 3) have all ships fitted with an active scanner, with a strength and type based on the ship (use the existing attributes that are used in EW). Maybe use strength to determine the maximum range of the ship scanners, so frigates cant scan entire systems in one go but capital ships can. Have the accuracy of the information returned based on the distance from the scanning ship and the strength of the scanners. 4) automatically show pilots/ships in the same gang, corp or alliance on the overview. 5) maybe add a right-click option to gates to allow pilots to pay the local authorities for details of the other pilots and their ships in the system. Maybe also limit this option to pilots with high standing in empire space (0.1 or higher). This still doesn't address the fundamental problem which is that there is a limited number of small fixed locations that targets can be in - the asteroid belts. If the asteroid belts were system wide though (i.e. like a real asteroid belt..somewhat) then this would work. Then this would be awesome. I keep saying it - if we had totally relativistic sensors, and could do passive sweeps, triangulate people who are pinging etc. etc. then it would be awesome. However you need to make space itself BIG for this to be fair to everyone. That would probably cast too much time and effort in changing the game mechanics. Surely the introduction of mods that pretty much do the same thing would be easier to impliment. Miners can still travel 50-100 km from some warp-to-points in some fields and mine. Its not like you would always jump on top of em. A mod with a passive detector could give you enough time to warp to a safe but if not fitted would allow a pie to sneak up on you. Sounds fair for all. Also for 0.0 (again) it would increase the need for a purely EW/Logistics ship in fleets As for a small amount of places targets could be, we yeah but those targets do have the option of asking local if there are pies present or alturnatively scanning, watching local for a few seconds of activity before cloaks are activated etc etc.
Kassidus Gallente Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering	Posted - 2006.11.02 14:22:00 - [86] Bull **** we need local, it helps avoiding asshat pirates simple. it should stay
DukDodgerz Amarr Imperial Academy	Posted - 2006.11.02 14:24:00 - [87] look mom, I'm in a dead horse thread ! ! ! ! local is fine unless you want to grief others... so put down your sticks, stop beating the dead horse, and go pull the wings off flies like a good little griefer...
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 14:28:00 - [88] Originally by: DukDodgerz look mom, I'm in a dead horse thread ! ! ! ! local is fine unless you want to grief others... so put down your sticks, stop beating the dead horse, and go pull the wings off flies like a good little griefer... WOW super intelligent post there man! How exactly would giving the ability to cloak ones self be only applicable to griefing? What about miners doing it to "hide"? Or for Fleet ops in 0.0
Twilight Moon Minmatar Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2006.11.02 14:39:00 - [89] Originally by: DukDodgerz look mom, I'm in a dead horse thread ! ! ! ! local is fine unless you want to grief others... so put down your sticks, stop beating the dead horse, and go pull the wings off flies like a good little griefer... Wanting to gank people is an acceptable form of play. There is other tools you can use to keep your ass safe... Ship Scanner - If you see a ship called "Murderer" approach, warp off. Map - "Average persons in Space", "Average persons docked and active", "Average Jumps in last Hour", "Average ship Kills in last hour", all very useful in avoiding getting ganked. As it stands with the changes coming in Kali, every carebear on these forums with half an ounce of sense will set -10 standings to all pirate corps, so they can avoid all their members when they jump into local. ....it's great hi-jacking a meme isn't it?

Oveur	Posted - 2006.11.02 14:42:00 - [90] Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Senior Producer EVE Online


Borrus	Posted - 2006.11.02 14:43:00 - [91] /signed or just make local constellation wide
Virida Mindstar Technology United Confederation of Corporations	Posted - 2006.11.02 14:51:00 - [92] Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Good, as it is, local is the most primary toolkit in game for detecting others, and i keep feeling im playing a zoneing gank game sometime, not a epic space battle game.
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 14:59:00 - [93] Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 14:59:29 Oh so sweet that the devs of this game actually listen to players input Much kudos to you. I hope this thread has led you to take some of the ideas onboard. Personally I think the easiest way of nerfing local would be countering modules. These too could be countered etc etc. But at least you could free up the dependence EVERYONE PUTS ON LOCAL
Nyphur Pillowsoft Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:02:00 - [94] Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. The changes to local in Kali increase its use as a tactical combat tool. That is in direct contradiction with what you just said. Eve-Tanking.com - For tanking spreadsheet and resources.
Taralesk Inshani Infinite Improbability Inc Dusk and Dawn	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:02:00 - [95] I love you Oveur. . Quote: Oh, yeah, what are you gonna do? Release the dogs? Or the bees? Or the dogs with bees in their mouth and when they bark, they shoot bees at you?
sesanti Minmatar Universal Exports Namtz'aar k'in	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:14:00 - [96] Originally by: Nyphur Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. The changes to local in Kali increase its use as a tactical combat tool. That is in direct contradiction with what you just said. Yes, but look at the bigger picture. Like Oveur said, this changes might be necessary to implement later what they have in mind. ANd now it seems just adding more functionality. Personally, i would love to see local nerfed in some way so people doesn't show up at all! _______________________________________________ The ShadowMaster - <I am a guy... don't mind the portrait>
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:15:00 - [97] Originally by: Nyphur Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. The changes to local in Kali increase its use as a tactical combat tool. That is in direct contradiction with what you just said. Agreed. Possibly see how much more combat becomes local-centric, than nerf it with introduced mods in kali2 or a patch kali v1.1 2 days into it. Cheers
Nyphur Pillowsoft Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:20:00 - [98] Originally by: sesanti Originally by: Nyphur Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. The changes to local in Kali increase its use as a tactical combat tool. That is in direct contradiction with what you just said. Yes, but look at the bigger picture. Like Oveur said, this changes might be necessary to implement later what they have in mind. ANd now it seems just adding more functionality. Personally, i would love to see local nerfed in some way so people doesn't show up at all! Actually, these changes are just an in-game implementation of an exploit that some players had using. The one where they changed portraits so they could see their enemies and friends more quickly in local. It also replaces the laggy buddy list system, where players would add enemies to their buddy list to see them in local. It's a good change and doesn't alter balance at all, but it's not an obvious step toward making local less of a tactical tool. Eve-Tanking.com - For tanking spreadsheet and resources.
Razin	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:26:00 - [99] Signed. The only change to Local everywhere: you do not appear until you talk. ...
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:31:00 - [100] Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Keep local as it is for high sec empire For low sec and 0.0 move current local to constallation Also you could leave it so that when someone jumps in system the gate reports in local, with about a 15-30sec delay that someone has jumped in system. It does not tell you when someone leaves. Alternately you could still have local show totals for the system, but display who. That then tells people to either safe, or get on their scanner. To compensate for this, the map should be changed to no longer show number of pilots in system in last 30 mins in low sec or 0.0 at least. Numbers in station should stay, and jumps should stay.

Nyphur Pillowsoft Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:36:00 - [101] Edited by: Nyphur on 02/11/2006 15:35:59 wtfomg. I just had an idea for local. It's complicated and I am not the kind of person to suggest ideas but it just popped into my head. What if you needed clearance to see people in local? For example, you might need 6.0 standing with the Gallente Federation to see who's in local in Gallente space unless they speak. For 0.0, that would mean you could only see who was in local if you were on friendly terms with the alliance claiming soverignty, giving a defensive bonus in the case of attack. Too radical? Eve-Tanking.com - For tanking spreadsheet and resources.
Razin	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:37:00 - [102] Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Keep local as it is for high sec empire For low sec and 0.0 move current local to constallation So Local is replaced with a nice constellation recon tool? What's the point? ...
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:42:00 - [103] Originally by: Nyphur Edited by: Nyphur on 02/11/2006 15:35:59 wtfomg. I just had an idea for local. It's complicated and I am not the kind of person to suggest ideas but it just popped into my head. What if you needed clearance to see people in local? For example, you might need 6.0 standing with the Gallente Federation to see who's in local in Gallente space unless they speak. For 0.0, that would mean you could only see who was in local if you were on friendly terms with the alliance claiming soverignty, giving a defensive bonus in the case of attack. Too radical? Not bad but heavily bias to mission runners etc Whats wrong with a mod that cloaks you from local and a passive scanner warning mod? Miners could use the mods as well as pies to "hide" from local
Serendipity007 Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:43:00 - [104] /agree If system scanning is coming in Kali, make the Local channel not list the people in local, unless they type in local, like other channels work. Not a lot of coding, maximum effect. Gankers could no longer scan local for targets, and carebears could no longer avoid PvP by scanning local for enemies. Covops could truly do their job, as they could jump in and out without being known they were there. Fleets of frigs could move deep into enemy territory and conduct hit-and-fade strikes on targets, then jump out. Local should not be a system-wide super scanner that tells you the ID of everyone in system. Except maybe in empire space. /sign ___________________________________________________ "I'm an engineer, not a miracle worker!" - Scotty, Star Trek: The Original Series
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:52:00 - [105] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Keep local as it is for high sec empire For low sec and 0.0 move current local to constallation So Local is replaced with a nice constellation recon tool? What's the point? The point is it maintains the social aspect of the game. A constellation recon tool is not nearly as effective as the local recon tool. And basically, you cant just get everything you want. Sometimes you have to compromise. This is the compromise.
Trance Gemmini	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:57:00 - [106] /signed
PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik	Posted - 2006.11.02 15:57:00 - [107] Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 15:57:22 Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Razin Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Keep local as it is for high sec empire For low sec and 0.0 move current local to constallation So Local is replaced with a nice constellation recon tool? What's the point? The point is it maintains the social aspect of the game. A constellation recon tool is not nearly as effective as the local recon tool. And basically, you cant just get everything you want. Sometimes you have to compromise. This is the compromise. That is a **** compromise
Wild Rho Amarr Black Omega Security	Posted - 2006.11.02 16:00:00 - [108] Region wide wouldn't be so bad though. Personally I'd like to see an option whereby you can choose to show on local or not. If you choose not to you pay the price in that you cannot see local either and vice versa. I have the body of a supermodel. I just can't remember where I left it.
Serapis Aote TBC	Posted - 2006.11.02 16:05:00 - [109] Originally by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik Edited by: PaddyPaddy Nihildarnik on 02/11/2006 15:57:22 Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Razin Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Keep local as it is for high sec empire For low sec and 0.0 move current local to constallation So Local is replaced with a nice constellation recon tool? What's the point? The point is it maintains the social aspect of the game. A constellation recon tool is not nearly as effective as the local recon tool. And basically, you cant just get everything you want. Sometimes you have to compromise. This is the compromise. That is a **** compromise Maybe, maybe not. It is as much help to the hunters as the hunted. Problem is that there needs to be something to let people interact with eachother a bit... and in low sec region is just to much. Actually it is a bit ridiculous. It only futher makes low sec more dangerous then 0.0 for a whole lot less reward
Razin	Posted - 2006.11.02 16:07:00 - [110] Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Razin Originally by: Serapis Aote Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Keep local as it is for high sec empire For low sec and 0.0 move current local to constallation So Local is replaced with a nice constellation recon tool? What's the point? The point is it maintains the social aspect of the game. A constellation recon tool is not nearly as effective as the local recon tool. And basically, you cant just get everything you want. Sometimes you have to compromise. This is the compromise. The social aspect of the game is maintained by the myriad of predefined in-game chat and soon to be voice channels (plus channels you get to create yourself). Local would still be available for talking, you'd just have to deal with the consequences. ThatÆs the compromise. ...

Aphroditi	Posted - 2006.11.02 16:21:00 - [111] I believe that some of the ideas above are very good. a) I sign to remove local and only people who speak may be there as in every other channel. b) buddies list is used for tactical purposes atm. I believe they can change it so you should see if someone is online (buddie) ONLY IF he has you too in his buddy list. c) Allow invisible mode. If it's on when you are online, none can open you a convo.
coldplasma	Posted - 2006.11.02 16:31:00 - [112] I concur, this is a stupid idea. ____________________________ See you in 0.0 kids...
Lt Hole Caldari Tyrell Corp Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.11.02 16:39:00 - [113] Edited by: Lt Hole on 02/11/2006 16:39:06 Sometimes I like local. Sometimes I hate it. It would be interesting to see what kind of server load 20k plus users would induce if they were all doing scans every few seconds. If you're nervous, smacktalk in local.
Anatolius Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.11.02 16:55:00 - [114] Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Please let me know what address I can send Kladdkaka to, in honor of future glorious changes to local. "If God be for us, whom can be against us?"
Ogdru Jahad Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:28:00 - [115] Edited by: Ogdru Jahad on 02/11/2006 17:28:30 those who want local nerf are pretty much forgetting... whats good for the goose is also good for the gander. just coz they cant see you dont mean you cant or can see them. yeah fine you jump into a system. how the **** are you goign to know what to find? scan every belt? warp to a gate? OMFGWTFBBQSAUCESTABBERBONDS! yeah just remember be careful what you wish for. its a two edged sword! -
Peter Armstrong Caldari 5punkorp Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:30:00 - [116] Edited by: Peter Armstrong on 02/11/2006 17:34:55 Originally by: Amaron Ghant Originally by: Ephemeron Originally by: Dannek a) have them on your friends list. That would be fine if there were "friends list". EVE only supports "enemy list". And it would defeat the purpose if you could see when all your enemies enter local without using legit in-game tools It¦s called a "buddies list" for a reason mate. Eve supports "friends list", Players normally misuse it as an "enemies list" Yer and i think if someone wants to add u as a friend they have to agree to it as well. Like Yahoo and man messager! So they cant use it as a friends list u know? EDIT LOCAL CHAT:In short Local stay and u show up when u talk! and if u dont then we dont see u BUDDIE LIST:two player got to agree to be on friends list like RL Messagers. If hostile wants to use it as that then no. Or u can have that but two types of list as well. One for friends and other for Hostiles. Because if ur m8 hostile in game but friend in RL then change them to Hostile list that they can see u on or not! and so one.
Nanobotter Mk2	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:34:00 - [117] "Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet." You got a long way to go before you can limit local to simply chat, because you built a game where people are defenseless thanks to your choice of IWIN stealth, steroid using intercepters and the uncounterable warp disrupters and webbers. Quality pvp has counters for outs and traps, EVE has nothing besides logging out or not playing. Eve needs to stop catering to carebear pvp players who take the risk out of pvp by flying fast cheap ships and using numbers to play literally risk free. Just to easy and risk free to rip around in an inty looking for victims npcing and then when you know it is safe having your heavy expense firepower warp over safely.
Xelios Minmatar Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:41:00 - [118] Remove local and replace it with something that does practically the same thing, but that requires you to put some effort in. Be it a module, a deployable or what have you. Removing local without adding any new tools would be a disaster, CCP knows that which is why they're waiting until they have alternatives in place. You can't expect people to press "scan" 10 times a minute for hours on end just to avoid being killed by some random dude who only had to open the map and fly to the nearest blip. Not to mention how incredibly overpowered force recons would be with this change (specifically the Pilgrim). There'd be no way to tell if a pilot cloaked, safe spotted or completely left the system. I would have an absolute field day if local was removed tomorrow without any new tools, but at the same time I know how horribly it'd affect all the other aspects of the game. Do it, but do it properly.
roadrage639 Caldari SHADOW FLEET iPOD Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:41:00 - [119] This is a great IDEA!!!! recommended! The Man Who Runs Will Fight Again
Xelios Minmatar Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:43:00 - [120] Quote: yeah fine you jump into a system. how the **** are you goign to know what to find? scan every belt? Are you kidding? Right now I can jump into most systems and be on top of an npcer in under 2 minutes. Most systems you warp to maybe 3 planets and bang you've scanned every belt, it's really not that hard.

Xasz G.H.O.S.T	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:45:00 - [121] Originally by: Lo3d3R removing basic features of life in EVE like Local, Bookmarks etc will eventually kill this game. QFT!!111o1neoneoneeno
Fredbob 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:50:00 - [122] I'm quite happy with local being a tactical tool o.0, it's there to be used by both parties.. People shooting roids know there's a ebil piwate around, and the piwate knows there is prey to be had.. all is good :) Remove local and that new scanner system better be **** (o0 "dam" then) good because you could end up with people flying past each other looking for targets instead of having fun. Or... people will simply bubblecamp chokepoints as thats the only place to find people :P. ___________ ~Fredbob~
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:56:00 - [123] Local is perfect and logical tactical tool. Remove it and I will terminate subscription.
Sean Dillon Caldari Privateers	Posted - 2006.11.02 17:58:00 - [124] I agree get rid of local
Gort Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:00:00 - [125] Frankly, I would like to see local gone as an automatic "show all". But I don't for the life of me see how non-high sec mining would survive. It's hard to see how the game will be improved if the mechanics almost completely eliminate the possibility of quiet individual activities in non-high sec space. It's a valid mode of play. I do think that if local space is "owned" by a player's organization, that player should have better real or near real time intell on who's in the system, and maybe even where they are, than non-owners should have. After all, if you own the system, you should be putting up deep space radar surveillance systems, right? Low-tech sig: "When in doubt, empty the magazine."
Khorian Gallente Omega Fleet Enterprises Xelas Alliance	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:01:00 - [126] Wow removing local would be awesome. It would make EvE a really huge and scary place to be. It would be realistic. Maybe they could add a passive sensor alert that rings if ships get close to you as a heads up warning (Star Trek like etc). You would actually maybe try to get in conversations with people you meet. It would tighten realtionships and make them more valuable. Wars and Battles would gain an even bigger strategic and tactical depth (Hide reinforcements in nebulas, lure enemy fleets into traps). Oh the possibilities. Won't happen tho. Eve is pretty hardcore, but it's not THAT hardcore either :-/
Xelios Minmatar Rampage Eternal Ka-Tet	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:09:00 - [127] Originally by: Khorian Wow removing local would be awesome. It would make EvE a really huge and scary place to be. It would be realistic. Maybe they could add a passive sensor alert that rings if ships get close to you as a heads up warning (Star Trek like etc). You would actually maybe try to get in conversations with people you meet. It would tighten realtionships and make them more valuable. Wars and Battles would gain an even bigger strategic and tactical depth (Hide reinforcements in nebulas, lure enemy fleets into traps). Oh the possibilities. Won't happen tho. Eve is pretty hardcore, but it's not THAT hardcore either :-/ Sure, it'd open a lot of doors, but at the same time it'd close a lot of doors too. Say goodbye to ratting or mining in 0.0 or low sec space, say goodbye to travelling without a noob corp scout, say goodbye to most forms of risky fleet engagements (read: anything that doesn't involve sniping from 200km), etc.
Terminus adacai Caldari Mintaka Mining Inc	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:10:00 - [128] For those of you whom feel that removing local would add romanticism and realism to the game, simply minimize it and never look at it again. CCP could even allow you to close the window entirely. I personally feel that local is fine as is. I rarely use it, but when I am hauling into low sec and have an advance scout, I like to see who is in local and how many are docked. It seems that every one of these type threads petitioning for change are to provide more prey to pirates and gankers. I see no use for either, and see it as feasting over other's work. Vultures if you will. CCP should not sway so easily everytime one of these ganker threads are started. There does remain some of us that mine, produce and haul goods for our isk. While it isn't necessarily all fun, it contributes to the markets and the economy. Gate campers are worthless scum. They do nothing but lurk and wait for prey. They need someone to pass through with their meal ticket. If they pop into a system, I'd like to know. I also want to point out that I have found and petitioned macro crews because of the local chat. It makes it easy to detect their presence. You can take local away, however you are going to have to give something back to the hard working players that invest time to make isk, rather than just steal it from others.
Razin	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:13:00 - [129] Edited by: Razin on 02/11/2006 18:16:39 Originally by: Khorian ... good stuff... Oh the possibilities. Won't happen tho. Eve is pretty hardcore, but it's not THAT hardcore either :-/ Yes it will: Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. ...
Jim Linger	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:29:00 - [130] lets not make this game more rigged for pirates... /sign aginst _____________________________________________

Sonho	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:32:00 - [131] Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. I lobe you ober.
Zixxa	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:39:00 - [132] Originally by: Khorian Wow removing local would be awesome. It would make EvE a really huge and scary place to be. Afaik, it is very scary place for your laughful alliance, isn'y it? Quote: Wars and Battles would gain an even bigger strategic and tactical depth (Hide reinforcements in nebulas, lure enemy fleets into traps). Dude! What battle are mumbling about? With local off you will not find enemy at all. You will be searching for enemy till subscription ends. Quote: Eve is pretty hardcore, but it's not THAT hardcore either :-/ Mot enough hardcore? Are you mean not enough random? Or not so randomly stupid as World of Warcraft?
Levin Milcaro	Posted - 2006.11.02 18:58:00 - [133] Originally by: Terminus adacai For those of you whom feel that removing local would add romanticism and realism to the game, simply minimize it and never look at it again. CCP could even allow you to close the window entirely. I personally feel that local is fine as is. I rarely use it, but when I am hauling into low sec and have an advance scout, I like to see who is in local and how many are docked. It seems that every one of these type threads petitioning for change are to provide more prey to pirates and gankers. I see no use for either, and see it as feasting over other's work. Vultures if you will. CCP should not sway so easily everytime one of these ganker threads are started. There does remain some of us that mine, produce and haul goods for our isk. While it isn't necessarily all fun, it contributes to the markets and the economy. Gate campers are worthless scum. They do nothing but lurk and wait for prey. They need someone to pass through with their meal ticket. If they pop into a system, I'd like to know. I also want to point out that I have found and petitioned macro crews because of the local chat. It makes it easy to detect their presence. You can take local away, however you are going to have to give something back to the hard working players that invest time to make isk, rather than just steal it from others. QFE and yeah, all the point about removing local is moot, since CCP want to improve it with kali (anyone seen the changes?...)
Razin	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:05:00 - [134] Originally by: Levin Milcaro and yeah, all the point about removing local is moot, since CCP want to improve it with kali (anyone seen the changes?...) Considering OveurÆs statement in this thread the Kali change to Local looks like a temporary solution alleviating the extra server/client lag caused by abused ôbuddiesö lists. ...
Tribunal FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:11:00 - [135] Edited by: Tribunal on 02/11/2006 19:11:29 Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Originally by: Mephysto Local will not be removed for the foreseeable future. BM changes are still under discussion afaik. Kinda contradictory. "We can't all be heroes, because somebody has to sit on the curb and applaud when they go by." - Will Rogers
coldplasma	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:16:00 - [136] This is a case of "The operation was a success! unfortunately, the patient died..." ____________________________ See you in 0.0 kids...
Sgt Napalm ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:22:00 - [137] Hi, No Your friend, The Sarge
hydraSlav Synergy Evolved Serenity Fallen	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:22:00 - [138] /SIGNED Local ruins life in 0.0 It takes away the danger that should be there in 0.0, it takes away the immersion of being in deep space, and it makes any ambush type of attack virtually impossible. All these login trap exploits are local's fault. If there was no local, there wouldn't be a need for these. And too all those whining that they can't see the pirates coming, or they can't see the carebears mining, read this Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat You got all types of tactical tools, such as a scanner. Have it running, and you will always know when someone is about to jump on you to attack you. Or use the map to hunt your prey. You can see places where people rat on the map. There is also a great filter called "jumps in the last hour". You can follow these jumps and build a picture of how many forces moved into what direction. You can see something like 20 jumps, then 18 jump into the next system, then 19 jumps into the next, then 16 jumps into the next, then 5 jumps, then 6 jumps. You can clearly build a picture that a force of approximately 10-15 stopped in that system. Mining op? Or maybe a gate camp? Definitely this isn't that easy or reliable. But this is the challenge. And besides, your prey won't easily know you are coming too, so this is balanced. And in case someone missed it, i will repeat this again Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat You know what.... i will even put that as my sig =================================== Above comments are my personal views Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat
Kruel Blunt Force Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:26:00 - [139] Local should be an optional channel. Those who join local can see others in local. Those not in local are invisible.
Tribunal FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:29:00 - [140] Quote: You got all types of tactical tools, such as a scanner. Have it running, and you will always know when someone is about to jump on you to attack you. Yes, because playing EvE should involve constantly clicking the scanner button over and over. "We can't all be heroes, because somebody has to sit on the curb and applaud when they go by." - Will Rogers

Nyphur Pillowsoft Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:31:00 - [141] Originally by: Kruel Local should be an optional channel. Those who join local can see others in local. Those not in local are invisible. That won't happen because it removes a social player interaction aspect from the game. Eve-Tanking.com - For tanking spreadsheet and resources.
Razin	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:34:00 - [142] Edited by: Razin on 02/11/2006 19:37:28 Edited by: Razin on 02/11/2006 19:34:53 Originally by: Tribunal Edited by: Tribunal on 02/11/2006 19:11:29 Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Originally by: Mephysto Local will not be removed for the foreseeable future. BM changes are still under discussion afaik. Kinda contradictory. AFAIK Oveur is higher up the management chain. edit: Additionally, Local doesn't have to be removed, only it's function changed by making it operate like the other public channels. ...
Karash Amerius Amarr O.E.C	Posted - 2006.11.02 19:48:00 - [143] If Local was nerfed, it would go good with having players warp to 0km to a gate. Sort of balance things out a bit. /signed since beta on this one Merc Blog
Alz Shado	Posted - 2006.11.02 20:13:00 - [144] If I wanted to play a single-player game, I'd go play X3. The lag is lower and the pirates don't insult your mom. /NOT SIGNED.
Lord BlackSter The Syndicate Inc Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.11.02 20:23:00 - [145] not signed ... local is important for chrissake
Tribunal FIRMA Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2006.11.02 20:31:00 - [146] Edited by: Tribunal on 02/11/2006 20:34:55 Edited! This is the happy version Originally by: hydraSlav Originally by: Tribunal Quote: You got all types of tactical tools, such as a scanner. Have it running, and you will always know when someone is about to jump on you to attack you. Yes, because playing EvE should involve constantly clicking the scanner button over and over. No, because you need to rely on tactical tools and/or your setup to survive an attack, not a chat window. And in case you missed it: Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat Yes, because pressing the scan button over and over it "tactical". Originally by: hydraSlav Fit accordingly, bring protection. What? It's gonna cut into your productivity? Well, then don't, and stay with your current setups. Risk vs Reward. Ever hear of it? The only "productivity" I do on a daily bases is remove loot from destroyed ship cans of outstanding individuals such as yourself. By all means though, come down to G-7 and show me how it's done! "We can't all be heroes, because somebody has to sit on the curb and applaud when they go by." - Will Rogers
Feng Schui Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2006.11.02 20:57:00 - [147] I like local... but yea, make it like other channels, where if you speak, your name appears. I would also like the ability to CLOSE it.. not just minimize it.
Zebler	Posted - 2006.11.02 21:34:00 - [148] Edited by: Zebler on 02/11/2006 21:36:23 Local is one of the most important tools in the game. Yes, when you are on the offensive you want it to be removed. But lets be honest, the majority of ppl are stuck in empire as it is. They feel unable to cope with the hostility in 0.0. A change like this will only make more ppl stay in empire, and those people are you targets. Cloaked ships that can warp cloaked, tackle, jam and call in support. Hell, ships like the pilgrim even kill solo. Against ships like that, this change would give people almost no chance at all, you cannot scan for these recons. Those who have those recons will love it, those who don't will die a lot, get annoyed, and disappear to empire. In the end this change will be bad for all. You will end up with no targets, its not as if its hard to kill ppl as it is, now is it
Shilak Amarr	Posted - 2006.11.02 22:04:00 - [149] Its a non-issue if the scanner system is improved sufficiently to allow people to be on the lookout for hostiles. Nothing stopping a miner scanning whilst mining, gives them something else to do. If they are too lazy (or AFK) they can always get their defense to do the scanning in between engaging NPC spawns. NPCers can appoint a lookout if they are hunting in gangs, might be a little harder for solo NPCers but then this is an MMO, promoting teamwork should be part of the game. For PvPers it just adds a little more effort to locating and avoiding the enemy, at the moment its way too easy anyway ... quick glance at local, if no obvious hostiles then check the unknowns, if there is no target move on, if there are too many hostiles then safespot/dock/insta out of the system.
Tranklukator	Posted - 2006.11.02 22:16:00 - [150] Signed. Local was made for chatting, not as a source of intel. And now this flaw in game mechanics makes local more reliable than a scanner. Scanner needs a boost though, so that it's possible to scan for cloaked recons. As for 0.0 hostility and the like, nooobs are cannon fodder, then they learn to check local and they are not noobs anymore =) Let them learn to use scanner instead, not this half-exploit. The change will add more to player coordination in 0.0 It will be significantly harder to live there alone, but for 0.0 corporations nothing will change.

Morfane Privateers	Posted - 2006.11.02 22:27:00 - [151] Edited by: Morfane on 02/11/2006 22:32:25 Local is a vital and important tool for those who wish to npc and mine in 0.4- with no risk by simply logging or going to their pos the second someone pops into local. Risk is no fun, I get it. But if risklessness is your thing, you belong in high sec. PS: I dont see whats wrong with an autoscan button on the scanner. The client lag involved would deter its abuse. Or even a checkbox which makes a sound when anything not friendly appears on scanner. I agree that mashing the scan button is lame. edit: added ps
qrac Caldari Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.11.02 22:48:00 - [152] Solution: Remove local in 0.0 and replace it with "constellation". Keep local in empire space. -------------------------------------------
Plutoinum German Cyberdome Corp Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.11.02 23:06:00 - [153] Originally by: Oveur Local shouldn't be a tactical tool, it's for chat. Local will change, it's just a question of how and when. Kali brings some pre-requisites which we feel are necessary steps towards a change, but we're not there yet. Yey !!! \o/ Ok thanks, trust in devs +1. The easy way would have been: "Yes, we know it's not as intended. But now we let it like it is and ignore it, since the solution means work and the majority doesn't whine". Good to see that the devs try to stay on track.
Kaathar Rielspar Minmatar	Posted - 2006.11.02 23:30:00 - [154] so many people signing this shows there is a perceived need for local to change but simply removing it is NOT an option. Something has to added to provide tactical awareness, whatever that may be. Oveur is spot on with his post. ____________________ Originally by: Jerick Ludhowe Originally by: Eximius Josari If BS Sized HACs would be overpowered, what are HACs? Overpriced Nos victims.
Dagda Dia	Posted - 2006.11.02 23:38:00 - [155] NOT SIGNED at least no until you do away with gate camps. Make the pirates work for. It is funny that I hear pirates *****ing about other pirates fleeing LOL. so why can't my mining brage flee when I see a pirate in local? Move along nothing to see here, yes I am a ALT Just portecting my main.
Xorv	Posted - 2006.11.02 23:50:00 - [156] Yes, I believe Local needs to go, or rather the aspect of it that shows who is present in the system. And as others have suggested, it can go hand in hand with doing something about zone.. I mean Gate Camping. Which in turn can go hand in hand with doing something about log offs. I see all these things as related to making EVE's PvP worth playing.
BaronWaste Finis Lumen Muffins of Mayhem	Posted - 2006.11.02 23:50:00 - [157] Please keep local. 0.0 would be unihabitable without it. I mean, I like getting caught with my pants down as much as the next person, but you're just requiring me to scan every 2 seconds while I rat, which is a bit too much work IMO for NPCing.
Maldas Harant	Posted - 2006.11.03 00:26:00 - [158] Idea: leave current 0.0 as it is but then have no local channel in the new regions being opened up in Kali. This could be "uncharted" 0.0 (or something) and would match the way the rest of the Eve universe is split into zones of varying risk. Uncharted(TM) 0.0 would be the ultimate PvP environment: I have a vision of systems filled with dozens of gankers warping around for hours on end in their cloaked recons all the while completely unaware that there's anyone else there. Poetic somehow.
Razin	Posted - 2006.11.03 01:04:00 - [159] Originally by: Dagda Dia NOT SIGNED at least no until you do away with gate camps. Make the pirates work for. I generally agree with the gate camp sentiment, though itÆs a symptom of a larger problem caused by the gated travel system. Local is a separate issue. Local wonÆt save you from a gate camp, scanning the gate will. ...
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2006.11.03 04:40:00 - [160] Having local on "delayed" mode would make sense. BUT you need a better notification mode that SOMEBODY has entered/left the system than having to look at the total number of players in Local. Personally, I would say a separate botton on the navbar that brings up a "System statistics" window would be nice. You know, with number of pilots in system, number of pilots in space, number of (player) ships in space, jumps in last 15 minutes, 1 hour and 24h, deaths in last 15 min, 1h and 24h, podkills in last 15 min/1h/24h and so on. _____ -sig- This is my only char. These are my skills Always question everything, including yourself

James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.03 05:01:00 - [161] I keep saying it, you can't just remove local, it is unfair and unfun to just about everyone but miners and NPCers in particular. The scanner is not long enough ranged to allow me to know if someone's entered the system, and I certainly don't want to spend hours hitting the same ** button lest I not and it undo those hours of work in one go. If local was removed, we got system-wide asteroid belts and planets which had proper orbital levels, if we got ship sensors which detected when we were being scanned and could back triangulate to the location it was coming from (or work with a gang to do it more accurately), if we could use passive scanning to quietly locate a bigger group making a bunch of EM noise etc. etc. etc. then I would be all for this. But no one calling for local's removal is ever all for this, because it would not blindly favor whatever mechanic they have in mind. Instead it would make pirating a really elite skill, it would make running through alliance space looking for ganks positively suicidal if you weren't careful, it would mean we could play shadow games for hours in a system as two fleets try to outflank each other. It would lead to a pretty ** awesome type of game, that would favor the patient and the smart and it would pretty much eliminate ganking. --- Encrypted Client Side Bookmarks! Raise YOUR voice to CCP. Let's end slow copy times and bookmark lag for good!
Liru Okami	Posted - 2006.11.03 07:10:00 - [162] Good riddance. Originally by: Zixxa Local is perfect and logical tactical tool. Remove it and I will terminate subscription.
Tristan J'ior	Posted - 2006.11.03 13:51:00 - [163] /signed Remove local as an intel tool. In the reference of insta's, it's a tool CCP gave us that has been used in ways they didn't intend, thus technically a small exploit. Do I use it? Yes. Do I feel that EvE would be better, harder, more realistic without it? Yes. Btw, every time you say the word 'most,' you're assuming. No matter which side of the argument you are on, you ruin your own credability by using an assumption in your argument.
Harry Bucannon	Posted - 2006.11.03 15:49:00 - [164] Edited by: Harry Bucannon on 03/11/2006 15:50:26 Edited by: Harry Bucannon on 03/11/2006 15:50:10 /signed!... However, maybe another option is to have players pay/bribe concord to "switch off" or "keep on" local to a constelation - making is like the talk and you are seen chat channels. The one who pays the highest price gets there wish granted?.
Giamilton Gallente Synergy Evolved Serenity Fallen	Posted - 2006.11.03 16:08:00 - [165] IMHO just having a slight delay on Local 15-30 seconds could do the trick. There are good arguments for and against having local, this must be why CCP hasn't done anything yet, it's not a slam dunk kind of fix. Some other options could be if you have sovereignty you get a more funtional local, or perhaps a more nerfed local for everyone that shows how many in local but not who until you scan them. Just thought I'd throw those out there...
Novan Leon Goat Raiders	Posted - 2006.11.04 19:53:00 - [166] Make local voluntary rather than remove it. Makes more sense eh?
James Duar Merch Industrial	Posted - 2006.11.05 00:59:00 - [167] Originally by: Tristan J'ior /signed Remove local as an intel tool. In the reference of insta's, it's a tool CCP gave us that has been used in ways they didn't intend, thus technically a small exploit. Do I use it? Yes. Do I feel that EvE would be better, harder, more realistic without it? Yes. Btw, every time you say the word 'most,' you're assuming. No matter which side of the argument you are on, you ruin your own credability by using an assumption in your argument. Once again, if you want realism then I want system-wide asteroid belts and the ability to detect when I'm being scanned and back triangulate to the scanning source, improved by having several ships in my gang spread out a bit. --- Recently returned from vacation on a sunny planet in 0.0. Guess which one!
Ruze No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2006.11.05 03:14:00 - [168] /signed. Local is bust. Check my siggy for some cool ideas, specificially the 'intelligence' section for Local-specific changes. Genesis Project
Kyuzo	Posted - 2006.11.05 04:48:00 - [169] If you remove Local ... then please render Insta bookmarks useless as well... i mean u may as well if your removing local...
Ruze No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2006.11.05 13:11:00 - [170] Agreed. All warps to 5km, automatically. Make it so you can't warp closer, and 5km is for both autopilot AND regular. It's simple, it's direct, and it requires ONE change, instead of actually increasing server load with maps and skills and individual calculating. Genesis Project



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.