Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gorefacer
|
Posted - 2007.09.13 15:59:00 -
[61]
Originally by: Khan Soriano
Originally by: Elmicker
Originally by: Nicho Void Seems to me like both sides would still be on equal footing
The attacking force is, by its very nature, at an advantage when searching out a defender via any player-controlled method.
And..
erm..
Why do you want to work for your intel? Timesinks ftl.
It's not that big of advantage if any at all, defending force still has his scanner and attacking force still has to find his target. So if you jump randomly to a belt you only have a small chance that you will find him, but if you try to scan him then he is also able to scan you.
And speaking about advantages, you don't see any towards defending player the way its working right now??
Originally by: Elmicker Edited by: Elmicker on 13/09/2007 00:15:42
Originally by: Akita T Would you please kindly link to the part of the backstory that says every pilot in the system automatically broadcasts his presence to everybody else in the same system ?
Not quite exact... However, every pilot is connected to a universal internet. If you're clutching at straws for arguments against convenient intel, you may aswell allow the counter argument to similarly clutch at straws for arguments to explain it. S'only fair.
Though again, i'd like to ask why anyone would want to remove local. It doesn't benefit anyone at all. All it results in is more timesinks.
If you like to talk about arguments so much then please present at least one viable one in favor of keeping local the way its now? What we're really hearing now from ppl against removing local is:
- Don't
- Nobody will benefit from it (Yet nobody cared to explain how 'I won't benefit from them not being able to know I just jumped into the system')
- Please don't
In the first quote he meant that the hunter has the natural advantage because they are fit to destroy the hunted. The hunted are only trying escape (in most situations). This is a similar concept to Gank > Tank overall.
Hunter vs Hunted: Hunter catches Hunted = Hunted loses ship (ISK) Hunted escapes Hunter = Tie (both ships survive)
Tank vs Gank: Even = Tie + Gank = Tank ship dies (lost ISK) + Tank = Gank ship flies away / Tie
For your second part:
Elmicker's argument- Attaining your own "local" intel all the time everytime would be an annoying time sink.
Other arguments- Pilots looking for PVP will miss each other/take longer to travel so less PVP will happen.
Personally I think removing local could work if other game mechanics were introduced to facilitate the change. I liked the idea of hacker ships that could broadcast intel to their corp or alliance, maybe make it so enemies know they are being compromised. That way more PVP would happen at gates and hopefully more often.
Either way, so many variables are involved I think it's premature for anyone to claim to KNOW how the outcome would play out. I think a test on the test server would be interesting before implementing it to give people a taste.
Hopefully that clarifies other posters positions and helps you not to misconstrue their posts in the future. That way you can be more constructive to the discussion.
"You can't reason someone out of a belief they haven't reasoned themselves into" - Prometheus |
Deschenus Maximus
Amarr Digital Fury Corporation Digital Renegades
|
Posted - 2007.09.13 16:03:00 -
[62]
I'd be happy if Cov Ops pilots didn't appear in local, tbh.
|
Derovius Vaden
|
Posted - 2007.09.13 16:06:00 -
[63]
Sure, you could take out local; but I want to be able to right-click and warp to 0 when I see your ugly mug on my local character list.
|
Eemaavi
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.09.13 16:11:00 -
[64]
WOOHOO YET ANOTHER THREAD ABOUT LOCAL
I'm in the Remove it camp.....Let us know when there are gate activations and thats it.
Yeah I'm an Alt- Go cry elswhere |
Selena 001
|
Posted - 2007.09.13 16:25:00 -
[65]
EVE is all about the gank.
CCP promote the gank.
If theres a way to make the gank less consentual without 'unbalancing' any ship/mod statistics... guess whats gonna happen? ___________
NATIONAL SARCASM DAY!! |
Miss Mickey
|
Posted - 2007.09.13 16:30:00 -
[66]
To me this just seems like the gankers/pirates/whatevers want local removed so that it's easier to gank people. More often than not, the people they are ganking are ratters or miners. So basically, they want an easier way to farm PvE'rs.
However, if local is removed, then something will have to be put in place to allow those PvE'rs to have even the slightest chance to avoid being ganked. For a start, there'd need to be a way to detect cloaked ships, since recons and cov-ops can warp cloaked, scanner won't do. So now all cloaked ships can be detected. Fantastic! Next, scanner would need to be system wide (and not just 14AU) since 20AU probes could land you onto a ratting BS and you'll be in warp by the time he sees you on scanner leaving him no time to warp out.
So basically, if local IS removed, there will still be a replacement tool which instead of just looking at local list, will require pressing a button or two. However, it won't make ganking any easier. Only ppl not paying attention or afk will die, which already happens anyway.
However, since there's no local it will also require work on the part of the hunter and since the system is likely to be a "if i can see you you can see me" system, nothing will change really. Except there might be fewer miners and ratters around, which ultimately will drive prices up.
|
Donathan Slade
Kay Korporation Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.09.13 16:56:00 -
[67]
Local has been the way this game has been for years. To remove it would be to remove the very way people find roaming gangs and fights.
Think about it this way. Airplanes all broadcast an ID signature, ok, so we can scan using the scanner. But, if we don't display who is in local, how can we know who is friendly. I could warp into a area with 20 guys who could all be friendly and never know if they were 20 friendlies or 20 hostiles waiting to gank me.
It local is removed, a practical part of the games "intel" will be gone. Yes, 0.0 ratters and miners will be even harder because somebody could warp in and catch you and you didn't even know they were there. ESEPCIALLY if they warped over cloaked, locked you down, and then had their out of scan range gang warp in.
I like to think of Local as a long range radar, "something" is there, you just don't know what except for friendly, neutral, or hostile.
|
Khan Soriano
Beyond Divinity Inc Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 08:42:00 -
[68]
Originally by: Donathan Slade Local has been the way this game has been for years. To remove it would be to remove the very way people find roaming gangs and fights.
Don't want to burst your bubble but WTZ was also in this game forever and it defined the way people travel (believe me its much more used 'feature' than finding people/fights). Nothing is set in stone and everything can be changed, discussion is what gives us a chance to make those changes good for everyone.
Originally by: Donathan Slade Think about it this way. Airplanes all broadcast an ID signature, ok, so we can scan using the scanner. But, if we don't display who is in local, how can we know who is friendly. I could warp into a area with 20 guys who could all be friendly and never know if they were 20 friendlies or 20 hostiles waiting to gank me.
First of all a plane can choose if he broadcasts the signal or not, to put it bluntly remember all those 'unidentified planes' in movies? You know what could tell you if they are friendly or not? INTEL!!!! That whats scouts are for!!
Originally by: Donathan Slade It local is removed, a practical part of the games "intel" will be gone. Yes, 0.0 ratters and miners will be even harder because somebody could warp in and catch you and you didn't even know they were there. ESEPCIALLY if they warped over cloaked, locked you down, and then had their out of scan range gang warp in.
I really really don't know how your logic worked to figure out that more intel is less intel. As for poor poor ratters: they would know it if the change to local meant that only number of people was displayed and not their names. To work out who was it that jumped into system they would have to use a scout (more intel), ask alliance chat if anyone seen somebody pass (more intel) or risk getting ganked. ----- Arbitrator - Life & Death |
Andrahkon
UNITED STARS ORGANISATION
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 09:15:00 -
[69]
Edited by: Andrahkon on 14/09/2007 09:17:13
Originally by: Khan Soriano
As for poor poor ratters: they would know it if the change to local meant that only number of people was displayed and not their names. To work out who was it that jumped into system they would have to use a scout (more intel), ask alliance chat if anyone seen somebody pass (more intel) or risk getting ganked.
Thats not the point if ratters or not, if you only see number changing you never know if its a hostile or not. So say you have claimed space where the crowd is doing the business. I as hostile gang would send all some minutes 1 or 2 m8 to the target-system so noone is paying attention to that because theres always number-changes of the own m8s flying around. That means i easily can bring in 5-10 hostiles
Now you say every change has to be checked? Huu..so youre willing to sit the whole day there and check evere local-number change to protect the rest of the ally or m8s? Booooring like hell for the guy who has to do it...after some days for sure theres noone willing to do the job.
And if theres always some1 who do the job..the time to do it is too short, except you have a deadend where you can place the guy right @ the gate so he dont have to move.
So in the end its only an attacker/pirat advantage...
------------------------------------------------------------- Selling Carrier with fuel and Mods - preorders accepted |
Khes
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 10:06:00 -
[70]
Im pro local as it is now but it would not be impossible that I could change my mind if someone came up with a good alternative. Just removing local as it is with no replacement what so ever would just not work and those who think so should try and think just a little bit further then their own nose. So untill someone comes up with a working alternative that would benefit ALL playstyles (or at least not totaly nerf some playstyles), KEEP LOCAL!
|
|
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 10:20:00 -
[71]
Local changes are coming with the post revelations expansion: Buddha Q3 '08.
You heard it here first.
copy and paste this to ten ppl and you will get a kiss from your sweety ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ___ Support Killmail Overhaul
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 10:24:00 -
[72]
No one who just wants to straight remove local has any interest in actually improving the game, because they never suggest anything remotely approaching appropriate replacement tools.
I was going to write a post about a sensible way to do it, but I realized that my proposed solution's second point is still actually slightly better then local is:
Quote: Secondly, local would be replaced partially with a counter which would indicate the ratio of alliance/friendly and neutral/hostile ships in system. This would be "friendly sensor beacons" vs "no sensor/unidentified sensor beacons".
There is no way to do it - every complete removal is just "make ganks easy at the cost of everything else and eventually the game anyway". The only sensible cause is to try and create a situation where people don't immediately go safe when a hostile appears in local/on the counter/etc.
To an extent, I think adding an ability for ships to refit independently in space would be a decent option because people would actually stay and fight gankers. Let people flip to a web and a point on a ratting ship, and any potential ganker is committed to the fight.
|
Red Desire
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 10:47:00 -
[73]
REMOVE LOCAL !!!!! but replace it with something that will give the ratters,miners,etc a chance to see when a hostile is approaching without scanning every 3 seconds.
I have only one suggestion, special skill -> from scanning you will be able to identify the pilot flying the ship also.. new probes,new database which registers all ships modulating engine signals( which we all know they're like fingerprints) - so after a scan you know who is hostile and who not
But come one guys, it sux : - We have scripts who log you off the moment someone jumps in the system - It makes the game look dumb !!! - It's a tool to get information??? You need to put some work into it to get some info
Also increase the ISK per hour in 0.0 ( certain areas), but increase it a lot, it's absurd to make LOTS of ISK in 0.8-0.9 systems beside trading!
|
Khan Soriano
Beyond Divinity Inc Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 10:48:00 -
[74]
Originally by: Andrahkon
Thats not the point if ratters or not, if you only see number changing you never know if its a hostile or not. So say you have claimed space where the crowd is doing the business. I as hostile gang would send all some minutes 1 or 2 m8 to the target-system so noone is paying attention to that because theres always number-changes of the own m8s flying around. That means i easily can bring in 5-10 hostiles
I don't know why you should know, just like that, if somebody that came in is hostile or not.
Ok so you've managed to get your gang of 5-10 to 0.0 unnoticed, big deal. What now? The second somebody spots you on their scanner or meets you at the gate everything becomes the same as local was present. But now information about it was gathered in some way not given out just because your gang passed a system with lone ratter inside.
Originally by: Andrahkon
So in the end its only an attacker/pirat advantage...and unbalanced
And now its unbalanced toward the defender, but this seems to be ok in your book?? Please also note that the situation of ratters wouldn't be so helpless as you try to put it, not being shown on local works both ways so the attacker also doesn't know who lurks in there. Baiting would be a viable tactic since the attacker wouldn't know if single Megathron on belt belongs to experienced PVP pilot (yes you can tell it by just looking at their employment history) or a newbie NPCer. ----- Arbitrator - Life & Death |
Andrahkon
UNITED STARS ORGANISATION
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 11:19:00 -
[75]
Edited by: Andrahkon on 14/09/2007 11:19:46
Originally by: Khan Soriano
And now its unbalanced toward the defender, but this seems to be ok in your book?? Please also note that the situation of ratters wouldn't be so helpless as you try to put it, not being shown on local works both ways so the attacker also doesn't know who lurks in there. Baiting would be a viable tactic since the attacker wouldn't know if single Megathron on belt belongs to experienced PVP pilot (yes you can tell it by just looking at their employment history) or a newbie NPCer.
I understand your point but what you do isnt an objective discussion youre arguing for your playstyle and not for improving the game.
And to your points...@ the moment the attacker has an advantage over the defender or better over ratters/miners because you need 1 ressource to do the business thats your pvp fitted ship.
The miner and ratter is fitted to kill rats or roids and not for pvp so he always need a 2nd ressource to backup his business. Now if you remove local you have always to search for backup if you want to do your business what means no backup no business or no backup your dead or why should i rat/mine a day and @the end of the day i get blown up..so the playstyle of them is waste of time and money
I dont argue for the one or other side im not in 0.0 atm but as it shows to me all who wants the local removed are only after more easy ganks thats all
------------------------------------------------------------- Selling Carrier with fuel and Mods - preorders accepted |
Khes
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 11:35:00 -
[76]
Edited by: Khes on 14/09/2007 11:41:44 Edited by: Khes on 14/09/2007 11:39:13
Originally by: Khan Soriano
Originally by: Andrahkon
And now its unbalanced toward the defender, but this seems to be ok in your book??
If anything, defence should be slightly favored over agression unless you want the game go totaly nuts and chaotic where everyone constantly attacked everyone like a complete universal wide deathmatch on stereoids (though I belive some would love that)
Aggression should in my book be saved for planning the right place at the right time in the right situation and not somthing you do everywhere all the time just because it is allways better to attack then defend if you know what I mean.
|
StellarSheep
Amarr
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 11:56:00 -
[77]
Remove local in 0.0 and use constelation chat. With that u can see if there is any hostile in your constelation but u dont know where exactly. It`s in my opinion fair trade for both pvps and pves. ________________________________________________
StellarSheep
|
Arkyk
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 12:55:00 -
[78]
Originally by: Tobizuru As I see it when you see a person in Local it means that their "com-links" are online and public. So if you were to shut off your own public communications it would render you hidden to the rest of the system but at the same time you wouldn't know who else is in the system, who is coming in and out and so on. Just somethin' that I thought about when reading the subject.
This is an interesting idea.
Kinda reminds me of that old mech game where you could choose between active and passive scanning . . . ---------------- Mostly harmless. |
Tzrailasa
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 12:59:00 -
[79]
Edited by: Tzrailasa on 14/09/2007 13:04:36
Originally by: StellarSheep Remove local in 0.0 and use constelation chat. With that u can see if there is any hostile in your constelation but u dont know where exactly. It`s in my opinion fair trade for both pvps and pves.
Except that NOBODY (or very few) would PvE......
Compare to today: Knowing local is friendly: People PvE Not knowing: People cloak at safespot
Why should that behavior change if the top option is completely removed?
While I have at times cursed local to hell for revealing me, I don't really see any good replacements... Any system replacing it has to strike a balance between the PvE'er and the PvP'er. All the suggestions in this thread massively favor either one or the other. Current local is a reasonably fair compromise. People PvE'ing and paying attention don't get ganked, people not paying attention get ganked.
Especially the complete and stupid ignorance of the 'remove-local' crowd continues to amaze me. Tell me again... Why is it exactly that the people you're hunting will still be stupidly doing their PvE after a local nerf when they have no way of avoiding getting killed (apart from pressing 'scan' every 2 seconds for hours on end)? PvE'ers can count ISK just as well as anyone else.... If they go from a reasonable risk to a no-defence-but-pressing-scan-every-2-seconds risk scenario, they'll not be there! They'll be in empire doing L4's....
For there to be targets to hunt in 0.0, activities there has to be relative low-risk, since otherwise people won't be doing them! A lot of people in this thread seem to have great difficulty grasping this truth...
My views are my own. They do not represent the views of my corporation or alliance. |
Nakirash
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:03:00 -
[80]
Originally by: Arkyk
Originally by: Tobizuru As I see it when you see a person in Local it means that their "com-links" are online and public. So if you were to shut off your own public communications it would render you hidden to the rest of the system but at the same time you wouldn't know who else is in the system, who is coming in and out and so on. Just somethin' that I thought about when reading the subject.
This is an interesting idea.
Kinda reminds me of that old mech game where you could choose between active and passive scanning . . .
One person in gang having com-links on, 10 having it off.....
Idea broken....
|
|
James Duar
Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:12:00 -
[81]
Originally by: Tzrailasa For there to be targets to hunt in 0.0, activities there has to be relative low-risk, since otherwise people won't be doing them!
Quoted for truth.
A ratting battleship (T1) is about a 40m ISK investment after insurance. People are not going to rat to go from one ratting battleship to another.
|
Cheese999
Minmatar Australia and New Zealand Eve Corp Ekliptika
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:19:00 -
[82]
Originally by: Nakirash
Originally by: Arkyk
Originally by: Tobizuru As I see it when you see a person in Local it means that their "com-links" are online and public. So if you were to shut off your own public communications it would render you hidden to the rest of the system but at the same time you wouldn't know who else is in the system, who is coming in and out and so on. Just somethin' that I thought about when reading the subject.
This is an interesting idea.
Kinda reminds me of that old mech game where you could choose between active and passive scanning . . .
One person in gang having com-links on, 10 having it off.....
Idea broken....
How is it broken? Its no different to scouting with n00b alts. -----
There is no Spoon Minmatar: Bending over for Tux since RmR
Originally by: Outa Rileau bring a nosdomi to a fleet, and your fc will most likely call you primary.
|
Nakirash
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:27:00 -
[83]
Originally by: Cheese999
Originally by: Nakirash
Originally by: Arkyk <removed for clarity>
One person in gang having com-links on, 10 having it off.....
Idea broken....
How is it broken? Its no different to scouting with n00b alts.
This part of the Tobi's suggestion is broken, because it wouldn't be true:
Quote: ...but at the same time you wouldn't know who else is in the system, who is coming in and out and so on.
|
Arkyk
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:32:00 -
[84]
Originally by: Nakirash
Originally by: Arkyk
Originally by: Tobizuru As I see it when you see a person in Local it means that their "com-links" are online and public. So if you were to shut off your own public communications it would render you hidden to the rest of the system but at the same time you wouldn't know who else is in the system, who is coming in and out and so on. Just somethin' that I thought about when reading the subject.
This is an interesting idea.
Kinda reminds me of that old mech game where you could choose between active and passive scanning . . .
One person in gang having com-links on, 10 having it off.....
Idea broken....
Not really. If you're mining with local turned on, and you see a hostile appear in local, assume there might be more and beat a hasty retreat.
Or just turn local off, and then the scout for the group won't be able to see you anyway. ---------------- Mostly harmless. |
Nakirash
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:38:00 -
[85]
Originally by: Arkyk <see above>
Not really. If you're mining with local turned on, and you see a hostile appear in local, assume there might be more and beat a hasty retreat.
Or just turn local off, and then the scout for the group won't be able to see you anyway.
It would still give way too big an advantage to the attacker....
Scout jumps in.... comms off... Warp to each belt in turn (cloaked)... Target found (who has NO chance of seeing them) Rest of gang jumps in.... comms off... Warp to scout, kill target Absolutely NO chance for target...
In other words, he'd never have been there in the first place since he'd KNOW he wouldn't have a chance.
|
Arkyk
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:40:00 -
[86]
Originally by: Nakirash
Originally by: Arkyk <see above>
Not really. If you're mining with local turned on, and you see a hostile appear in local, assume there might be more and beat a hasty retreat.
Or just turn local off, and then the scout for the group won't be able to see you anyway.
It would still give way too big an advantage to the attacker....
Scout jumps in.... comms off... Warp to each belt in turn (cloaked)... Target found (who has NO chance of seeing them) Rest of gang jumps in.... comms off... Warp to scout, kill target Absolutely NO chance for target...
In other words, he'd never have been there in the first place since he'd KNOW he wouldn't have a chance.
A valid complaint, but that's a different issue from having one person "scout" with their comm on. ---------------- Mostly harmless. |
Tenerhaddi
Trinity Corporate Services
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:47:00 -
[87]
Edited by: Tenerhaddi on 14/09/2007 13:56:33
Originally by: theteck the local its important tactical information
yer and it shouldn't be! should be set like Alliance show when you chat. When you don't know body knows! I mean it wouldn't kill EVE FFS just makes it more interesting!
Ok here an Idea! If you have local but nobody talk then we cant see each other until we say something right. Now with this Sov system we have why dont we have Scanners in system at POS to warn Friendly's of Hostile's in the area.
I mean If you have a pos near a gate have a scanner in range. Hostile jumps in and in your chat window message shows saying Warning Hostile incoming or something. If a mining party in a 0.0 system and doesn't have a sov then they have to have scouts! at he gates!
Remove easy intel and make covo op harder! 0.0 should be harder. Also Only way that these ratters to be safe is to have risk but good isk for it! simple more tools for POS I think ----------------
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1771556
|
Nakirash
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 13:50:00 -
[88]
Originally by: Arkyk ...
A valid complaint, but that's a different issue from having one person "scout" with their comm on.
See post #83 why it was broken....
|
Tenerhaddi
Trinity Corporate Services
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 14:00:00 -
[89]
Originally by: Nakirash
Originally by: Arkyk <see above>
Not really. If you're mining with local turned on, and you see a hostile appear in local, assume there might be more and beat a hasty retreat.
Or just turn local off, and then the scout for the group won't be able to see you anyway.
It would still give way too big an advantage to the attacker....
Scout jumps in.... comms off... Warp to each belt in turn (cloaked)... Target found (who has NO chance of seeing them) Rest of gang jumps in.... comms off... Warp to scout, kill target Absolutely NO chance for target...
In other words, he'd never have been there in the first place since he'd KNOW he wouldn't have a chance.
then good its 0.0! there ratter I come across just log off when someone jumps in! and if you stay in that system that ratter just log on and then off if they see you! Log off will be dead when local off!
0.0 is dangerous cant handle it then dont go to 0.0. After all CCP is promoting team work so no solo unless your propared to take the risk ----------------
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1771556
|
Nakirash
|
Posted - 2007.09.14 14:08:00 -
[90]
Originally by: Tzrailasa Ehem, Nakirash is my scouting alt (which the forum somehow had reset to being default posting char). I thought it best to continue that thread on that char...
Confirm...
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |