EVE Search - If local was removed for 0.0 and maybe lowsec ...

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

If local was removed for 0.0 and maybe lowsec ...

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Christari Zuborov Ore Mongers R0ADKILL	Posted - 2007.08.13 20:25:00 - [31] Originally by: Jenna Shame Originally by: Trojanman190 Removing local would encourage blob warfare. Small gangs would have absolutely no chance to escape a slaughter. Small gangs have it rough as it is... Are we playing the same game? Seriously explain this one to me. If anything it gives small skilled gangs a chance. Hell you could even get a few ganks on scattered blobs before they came in as 3/4ths of the lemmings wouldn't be paying attention. You could shadow the blob picking off stragglers who fall behind. The possibilities are endless and wonderful. Only its a bit too hard core for the carebear nature eve has these days. QFJoygasm
Zimjin	Posted - 2007.08.13 20:29:00 - [32] What if you see no names in Local, ever, but you get warning about "Incoming warp detected". You only get this message once per 10 seconds, max, regardless of how many people are warping in, so you have to decide, "Do I wait and see who this is or do I start running right now?" That way an escorted mining ship could immediately turn to run while the escort hangs out to see who it is. Carebears have their wish -- they can ALWAYS run for it if someone is trying to warp on top of them, but pirates can still try to warp in further off and cloak their way in if they're patient, and pirate scouts could even detect incoming mining ships and attempt to coordinate warp-ins to catch them. And slightly more daring Carebears might even wait to see who it is, because it might just be another Carebear and they don't want to interrupt their own mining session every time there's a warp signature. And you might even get to catch people unawares. They're expecting their friend Bob to warp in, they hear "Incoming warp detected".... and that's not Bob!
Elmicker The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.08.13 20:31:00 - [33] Originally by: Jenna Shame The possibilities are endless and wonderful. Only its a bit too hard core for the carebear nature eve has these days. Productive carebears are a necessity to 0.0. No local means no productive carebears. No local, no one uses 0.0.
Jenna Shame	Posted - 2007.08.13 20:33:00 - [34] Originally by: Elmicker Originally by: Jenna Shame The possibilities are endless and wonderful. Only its a bit too hard core for the carebear nature eve has these days. Productive carebears are a necessity to 0.0. No local means no productive carebears. No local, no one uses 0.0. Maybe you wouldn't use 0.0, but I sure as heck would. Hell if it was that big a deal they could triple the value of the spawns to make it REALLY worth your while. Risk vrs Reward.
Elmicker The Phoenix Rising FreeFall Securities	Posted - 2007.08.13 20:34:00 - [35] Originally by: Jenna Shame Maybe you wouldn't use 0.0, but I sure as heck would. Hell if it was that big a deal they could triple the value of the spawns to make it REALLY worth your while. Risk vrs Reward. I think you should go look at what the response was when CCP suggested they might move level 4s to lowsec.
SiJira	Posted - 2007.08.13 23:20:00 - [36] Edited by: SiJira on 13/08/2007 23:20:21 CCP should move level 3 missions to lowsec and level 4 missions to 0.0 and prevent people from running level 2 missions in 0.8 or above ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Rhaegor Stormborn	Posted - 2007.08.13 23:24:00 - [37] Originally by: An Anarchyyt I speculate that remove local whines would be replaced with "bring back local" whines. Win.
Daimos Bellurdan Black Reign FATAL Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.13 23:45:00 - [38] Short term: - It would kill 0.0 carebearing. You could get attacked in dead end alliance protected systems without even the smallest warning and chance. - 0.0 would get a lot emptier once people lose lots of ships and are incapable of adapting. - Survivors will keep to man points of player concentration (outposts, main alliance systems). Lots of systems will be totally empty. - A lot less fights. Fighting will be limited to the scouts. Why would anyone ever attack a bait ship without intel? Even today you never know what will happen when you engage small gangs (cyno -> 5 carriers jump in, seen it happen several times). - Macroers will seize to exist in 0.0 Long term: - I do not think more blobbing than now will occur. We are already maxed out in that area as it is. - After a looong time of adjustment the amount of pvp will improve. - Lots of new tactics will surface, player skills starts to become an important factor. - Macroers will adapt and be even more protected than now Overall: Yes, please remove local in 0.0. In the longer run it will help the game. 0.0 will first shrink itself healthy and then grow again in the way it should have.
coldplasma Killson Corp Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.14 00:13:00 - [39] I can't believe this idea is still being tossed around. It is the most ridiculous piece of garbage idea that has ever got a fanboy following. _________________
JonnyWarhawk Renovatio Industries Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2007.08.14 01:59:00 - [40] I have only been to 0.0 once but I like how local works.
sableye principle of motion Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.14 02:01:00 - [41] I don'nt need to speculate as I lived through no local bugs in eve, granted that was for like a day max and so things never settled down but we learned 1) you can;nt do anything against the hunters if you npc/mine, your way to vulnerabe they will catch you 2) you can kill the hunters because they can'nt see you either. This means 0.0 becomes a very good and unexpected pvp ground but you can'nt do anything to earn isk without major drawbacks. this lasted a day if it went on longer people wopuld leave and make isk in empire level 4's and 0.0 would almost be unpopulated its not unrealistic to make better isk of level 4's now you make 0.0 any more dangerous without buffing the rewards it will be a bigger ghost land than low security. Join The Fight With Promo Today
sableye principle of motion Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.14 02:07:00 - [42] I'd also like to add that while I don't want 0.0 local togo away, perhaps some in game way of doing it would be good using channel jammers ect or perhaps random outages (no phone network works 100% of time) that may add some spice to 0.0 warfare but would not kill 0.0 completely. Join The Fight With Promo Today
Jaabaa Minmatar Dental Drilling Corporation	Posted - 2007.08.14 02:13:00 - [43] Edited by: Jaabaa on 14/08/2007 02:14:00 Removing local would simply kill the game. No random chat with people you don't know, no random chat with people you do know and manage to notice in local. So, no local = no chat, no chat = single player, and that means single player is not MMOPG. So it will never happen.
Cailais Amarr VITOC Fang Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.14 02:17:00 - [44] Now Im just speculating here, but I think they'd be less smack talk in local. C. - sig designer - eve mail
Nicholas Barker MASS Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service	Posted - 2007.08.14 03:30:00 - [45] bombageddons and warp bubbles EVERYWHERE ---
sartorii Genco Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.08.14 04:10:00 - [46] removing local would only work if there is some kind of semi-persistent (times out or needs to be refueled so they dont last forever) probe that could be dropped to monitor gate activity. Without some such Smart players/corps/alliances will simply have dedicated cloaked alts sitting on the choke points watching jump ins... which is boring tedious work that really shouldn't require a 'brain' to process.... We've had automated sensors that could report various forms of troop/tank/aircraft movement activity for 30 years... Eve should be WAAAAY beyond what we can currently accomplish *"disconnect and self destruct one mullet at at time" [sic]*
Krulla Minmatar True Centii	Posted - 2007.08.14 04:15:00 - [47] It'd be a bad thing in my humble opinion. They'd need to implement some other sort of early warning system. 0.0 ratters would be jittery and die more than they do now. Hunters could camp ratting systems and kill the ratters at will, meaning that all good ratting systems would be effectively useless. In the middle of nowhere, ratters would be more safe, as the hunters would have no way to detect them, without warping inside every system and scanning every belt. Lowsec pirates might profit a bit, since victims wouldn't see them coming. However, they're victims would be more safe if they were in low profile systems. At the end of the day, this would result in less people in lowsec and 0.0, I believe.
Le Cook Amarr Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2007.08.14 08:28:00 - [48] Edited by: Le Cook on 14/08/2007 08:31:48 1. The ammount bookmarks will increase, because we need scanspots for every gate. 2. Fast Roaming Gangs in 0.0 will be screwed, and have to invest much more time into scanning the whole system for potential targets, but we all know 90% are empty and so this is just a big waste of time -> slow roaming -> boring. 3. Cloaked Recon Ships like Pilgrim, Arazu will become the flavour of the month, because they are completly invisible then. -> your target doesnt see u at all, until u decloak 5k next to him.
Frug Zenithal Harvest	Posted - 2007.08.14 08:32:00 - [49] The issue should not be about removing local from everywhere. It should be about removing local from 0.0 space only. That's what I think most people suggest, and it's the only decision I support. It would make 0.0 feel more like deep space. It would feel darker and emptier. I don't know how it would change combat. People would use cloaked scouts more maybe? Scout all known grouping locations. It would be about spotting the enemy, not looking on a list. - - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles
Goonie Alt	Posted - 2007.08.14 09:36:00 - [50] I would stop mining and ratting and live off the enemy's carebears with my arazu.
Sandslinger Cornerstone Unlimited Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.14 10:45:00 - [51] I'm answering this with the understanduing that local is simply removed without any alternative being out in place I Think it will have a few effects and not the effects which most people have predicted in this thread like the end of macroing In fact the exact opposite will happen. To stay safe in a raven in a belt in 0.0 all you need to do is stay aligned to safe at all times chain one frig and then kill the battleships as they respawn one by one. this is the way I've seen most macro ravens operate - some even kill all spawns and donÆt chain. This means that all the macro needs to do is to include a scanner function in the macro which restarts scanner non stop. if a new player ship/probe appears on scan the macro jumps to safe and cloaks. With no local, gankers would most likely miss the fact that the macro which will react instataneously was even there. Ergo no local is a macroers haven as they could operate all over 0.0 without anybody even realising that they're there if the macro is setup right to pop its own cans or whatever. The exact opposite holds true for player ratting, most 99% of people ratting will rat alone in 0.0 as thatÆs the most efficient way to earn isk. If local is removed and nothing else is changed to balance it out the only safe way to rat will be to engage scanner non stop again and again for hours and hours. every time something appears you jump out. this means you'll end up going to safe when friends/macroers anything passes by so loads of disruption/wasted isk/per-H. I can't see any but the most hardcore of 0.0 residents being bothered to rat like that having to focus that much more non stop over the old way of having local open and visible in a spot you can't miss it and without having to focus on it too intently. As indicated by others I also think recon and small ship gank gangs in the intial phase after local removal would increase exponentially as everyone would want to get in on the easy kills from the ratters that takes longer then the rest to realise 0.0 ratting isnt worth it without local and/or intell channels keeping you safe vs empire carebearing. Some people indicated ratting in groups would keep you safe but the majority of older players will always look at earning isk/time and know that group ratting vs empire solo carebearing cant compare isk wise. So I think 0.0 would empty out a LOT. except Station systems which would be blobbed up to hell. I think eventually pvp would suffer except for gatecamps which would become much larger and be the predominant pvp form. Any non carrier Logistics would suffer greatly as scouting vs cloakers would simply not work, For mining ops even if you would have every gate in a system covered you would have to have a pvp force on standby with your barges just in case a hostile logs on inside the actual system close to the belts. Which brings me on to log on traps which I think would become much much more common as if you take a large hostile force inside your enemies system log them off at a offgrid point then you can log them on use one cov op to find hostile ratters/miners and drop on top of them with near impunity - the only chance the victim wold have of spotting incoming enemies would be the time it takes for attacker to travel the some 14 au thats inside scan range. And the victim would have to be scanning non stop to even have a chance then(macro anybody)
Ruu Caldari JASDIP	Posted - 2007.08.14 11:19:00 - [52] Just a side question, whats a 0.0 carebear then? after reading these forums it was my understanding of a carebear was 'an empire mission runner/miner who would never dream of leaving the relative safety of empire, nor pvp'
Aziz Hekato Minmatar Hekato-Matari Syndicate	Posted - 2007.08.14 11:32:00 - [53] Originally by: Kolwrath Originally by: SiJira 0.0 carebears would become emo Emo? could you explain? Self-destruct their Hulks crying while flying their pod into the nearest Veldspar asteroid. Squish
SiJira	Posted - 2007.08.14 11:37:00 - [54] Originally by: Aziz Hekato Originally by: Kolwrath Originally by: SiJira 0.0 carebears would become emo Emo? could you explain? Self-destruct their Hulks crying while flying their pod into the nearest Veldspar asteroid. Squish well said ____ __ ________ _sig below_ devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
Sandslinger Cornerstone Unlimited Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.14 13:19:00 - [55] Originally by: SiJira Originally by: Aziz Hekato Originally by: Kolwrath Originally by: SiJira 0.0 carebears would become emo Emo? could you explain? Self-destruct their Hulks crying while flying their pod into the nearest Veldspar asteroid. Squish well said Yes wholely relevant well thought out post worthy of the mature line that EVE likes to portray itself as
Kastar Viziam	Posted - 2007.08.14 13:29:00 - [56] I'd find it a pity should local disappear. I like to wave at people -----------------------------------------------
Laboratus Gallente BGG League of Abnormal Gentlemen	Posted - 2007.08.14 13:36:00 - [57] In short. It would become much more difficult to find intersting fights, since ppl would expect small gangs and single targets as simply bait. Blobbing would increase exponentially, since there is no point in being the lamb at the slaugter. Price of cloaks would go up. And everyone would fit cloaks. There is no way of determening wheter or not there are 300+ cloaked ships on any given gate... Ppl expect the worst, so travel would slow down. 0.0 gateway systems like EC- would become total slaughterhouses since the gatecamps would be virtually undetecteble. Price of mins would go up and T2 gear would become less and less available, since moon mining would become a very risky business, since you can't ice mine in peace anywhere and as such pos fuels would be extremely expensive. Since general availability of items and crash in income in game would put traders, miners and manufacturers out of business the market would crash. This would lead to the game losing lots of players and stagnation. In general things would become a lot less fun. ___ P.S. Post with your main. Mind control and tin hats
ghosttr Amarr ARK-CORP FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.14 13:36:00 - [58] The bobbits would deny our presence in thier space (oh, wait a second they are already doing that now) . Do not read this thread!!!
Fester Addams Minmatar	Posted - 2007.08.14 14:28:00 - [59] Originally by: Kolwrath Edited by: Kolwrath on 13/08/2007 18:21:11 Edited by: Kolwrath on 13/08/2007 18:03:08 -It would make pirating harder. Pirates would have to come into a system and scan. They would have to hunt. This would be good for Prey since they could mine or do what have you and just pay attention to the overview instead of the local window. On the other hand low-sec and no-sec would be much scarier since you would never know who is out there. You would never feel safe. That being the case I would be low-sec would become even emptier overall due to the shear ôscarinessö increase. I dissagree. There are two primary methods of pirating in EvE: Gate camping and roaming. Gate camping will get a huge bonus from this as you have to actually be at the gate to see that there are no campers there, removing local will thus give the campers additional advantages, especially out in 0.0 where a bubble can catch a warp to 0 ship at the gate. Yes, most people know the names of most local pirates and can fast spot the lot of them in a system and realize there is a camp going on, usually they will even know what type of camp. Roaming pirates have much more of my respect asthey seek out their targets rather than just sit at a gate and wait, however again removing local will not benefit the victim at all but will give the pirate a huge bonus. The pirate would now be able to sneak into a system undetected and spend quite some time scanning before making his move. While I am not principly against this it is wrong to claim that removing local will benefit the victims as that is false. Quote: -It would adversely affect blobbing since you would never be able to tell how big the target gang is. With local you can say ôoh they have 10 guys, we better get 12ö. Without local scouting to find a rough enemy count would be imperative. This would of course lead to safe spot traps where one guy is camping a gate, and 12 of his mates are 500km away waiting to reinforce. Again I dissagree. The reason for this in information, if you have good reliable information people will act accordingly, if you have shaky information at best and unknowns all over the place people will clump together for safety. I would predict we would see more and larger blobs rather than fewer and smaller as the unknown now meens you throw in a few more ships just for safety... and a few more as the other guys will throw in a few more for safety... and you throw in even more to counter that he knows that you know that he knows that you know that he knows you will bring in more ships. I am all for creating alternate info sources but untill there are working such removing local will have a negative effect on clumping (ie clumps grow not shrink), after all the human being is a heard animal and there is safety in numbers. Quote: So I guess I would say it would decrease the amount of PVP in all aspects quite abit. Gang leaders wont be able to say ôengage, there is no way we can looseö anymore. Battles will be a lot less ôcertainö. Engaging hostiles will become a large gambit since the ôknown unknownö factors such as gang size and reinforcement availability (yes I said it) would be much more substantial. Odd, I disagree with both your assessments but find myself in part agreeing to your conclutions. No more gang leader claims that we cant loose... well atleast none that can be believed, engagements will become more of a gamble as you will know very little about your foe however I think it would unpopulate lowsec even more as you would have to be constantly scanning for pirates, 0.0 unafiliated people would have a tough time too, true their posibility to hide may go upp a tad but having to keep upp a constant vigil in order not to miss a hunter will wear them down mentally, this will meen its more comfortable to simply play highsec and even more will move there.
Zim Zimmerson	Posted - 2007.08.14 14:38:00 - [60] What about this: Being within 150km of an asteroid hides your name on Local. (Asteroidial Interference...) That way you can see the names of gate campers and AFK cloakers, but not miners or pirates who are hiding out amongst the asteroid belts.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.