| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Sun Ra
   |
Posted - 2004.03.11 12:34:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Sun Ra on 11/03/2004 12:36:37
 Quote:
Getting rid of local is a stupid idea, how the hell is any1 going to find anybody else?
If you were to take local away and add the map lag to that, alot of people would be chasing their own shadows around.
Pirates could not tell where their prey is(hard enough to do now), bounty hunters could not see pirates. Alliances couldnot see who is in their systems.
Whoever thought of this, have a bit of common sense and stop thinking of your own greedy needs.
Local is nice just the way it is!!
I think it will make life better for both partys, it just means more work using scouts and the scanner.
ATM if local fills you can just quickly run to a safespot cos you know your gonna be attacked.
I think the opting out of local should have a few mins delay on it.
|
Severus Trajan
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 12:50:00 -
[32]
Quote:
If they continue this line of thinking SoonÖ your autopilot will buy X cargo, undock, fly Y route, dock, sell X cargo and repeat.
Uh...suggest reading the whole chat?
They said that they had deliberately NOT added auto-dock for this very reason - the escalating demands for more automation. Seems to me they don't need a whole lot of convincing to consider the problem with AFK "playing", hm?
|
Severus Trajan
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 12:54:00 -
[33]
Quote:
allow people to disable being visible in local... at the penalty that in case they get podkilled, their clone is restored only with amount of skill points they had when the 'transmission device' on the pod was enabled last time?
Seems like a pretty good suggestion. Another is to disable (or reduce to base 40%) insurance payouts while not in local, since shutting down the transmission means no verification about destruction can be obtained either.
Just throwing another suggestion out...
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 15:51:00 -
[34]
Quote:
Quote:
If they continue this line of thinking SoonÖ your autopilot will buy X cargo, undock, fly Y route, dock, sell X cargo and repeat.
Uh...suggest reading the whole chat?
They said that they had deliberately NOT added auto-dock for this very reason - the escalating demands for more automation. Seems to me they don't need a whole lot of convincing to consider the problem with AFK "playing", hm?
When Solaris has the gall to say
Quote:
SolarisCCP > The problem with piracy at the gates has most to do with the fact that players are often afk travelling (espesially in the high security areas) and dont have a chance of defending themselves.
I find what t0rfiFrans stated more believable. The entire attitude behind Solaris' words suggests they're more than willing to allow people to AFK anything if they whine enough.
After all it's not the player's fault they chose to go AFK when travelling through dangerous areas. It's the pirates fault for being there. And the obvious solution is to move the pirates, so you can continue on your AFK merry way.
^--- That's sarcasm btw.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
Naz Farooq
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 16:04:00 -
[35]
Quote:
I think it will make life better for both partys, it just means more work using scouts and the scanner.
<snip>
I think the opting out of local should have a few mins delay on it.
Aye, tho I like the transponder idea (and all the additional feedback on it) as it would add a bit of depth, what would probably be easiest to test the effectiveness would be to simply implement a 5-minute delay to the local update in 0.4-0.1 and a 10 minute delay in 0.0. Call it due to budget cuts in jump gate operations or whatever (which could be a nice lead-in to transponders being implemented later...). I think folks would enjoy it, tho I also think 'roid spawn in 0.4-0.1 should be tweaked to make it more profitable, especially if folks will need to be constantly watching their scanners and pc pirates will have a good chance of actually surprising someone at a belt.
Sure, everyone supports saving Einstein's brain, but when you put it in the body of a Great White Shark, suddenly you've "gone too far". |
Jowen Datloran
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 18:11:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Jowen Datloran on 11/03/2004 18:12:34
Great questions and great replies.
I for one will be sticking with this game for a long time more, even if I should happen to be the only one around.
If you can't addapt to what's comming you better be going now.
----------------
What's a rumor on page one is a fact on page two |
Triniton
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 19:39:00 -
[37]
/emote hugs CCP and staff for makeing probably one of the most promising game TOTAL CRAP. 
I guys are full of it and its a shame to listen to the same old sh1t every damn CSM chat.
Why dont u make it so that u can auto-mine, like somesort of autopilot thing, and haulers can auto-haul! WOULDNT THAT BE WONDERFUL cos now we can all AFK dock and stuff on autopilot IVE BEEN WAITING SO LONG FOR THIS OPTION WEEEEEEE 
ZOMBIE PRUNES! |
Tribunal
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 20:04:00 -
[38]
No thanks concerning removing local or delaying the time for someone to enter the channel. It is currently my only defense against pirates when I am mining. PKers catch tons of people not paying attention to local as is, there really does not need to be more added in thier favor when dealing with finding miners and NPC hunters. I will not agree to someone having a "stealth" pass to PK.
|
MrMojo
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 20:12:00 -
[39]
CSM
completely spurious misinformation
|
Sara Kerrigan
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 20:17:00 -
[40]
I seriously believe CCP is going in the wrong direction in regards to piracy. Instead of nerfing, they should learn from Blizzard's games. When one side gets too powerful, they dont nerf it, they make the others stronger. They shouldn't be wrecking all options of piracy, they should be improving the methods for anti-pirates.
______________
The Kerrigan Chronicles |
drunkenmaster
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 21:09:00 -
[41]
Quote:
I seriously believe CCP is going in the wrong direction in regards to piracy. Instead of nerfing, they should learn from Blizzard's games. When one side gets too powerful, they dont nerf it, they make the others stronger. They shouldn't be wrecking all options of piracy, they should be improving the methods for anti-pirates.
Makes sense.
But it takes a lot more time to buff several areas of the game than it does to just one.
.
|
Skaz
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 21:15:00 -
[42]
An Idea about the local issue...
How about that when you enter a system you appear in local for X amount of time, then disappear and remain hidden as long as you don't type anything or perform any aggressive actions then the timer starts over. That would mean that you could go "silent" as a manner of speaking. Would give purpose to scanning and finding out if someone is in system.
That would also allow for some new modules and ergo skills to be introduced, that would prolong the time that someone would detect you and such.
This might also add too or create a certain suspense factor.
This is just an idea...what do you say?
"No, I'm not alt.....even if I have been in Pator Tech School for 2 years..." |
drunkenmaster
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 21:46:00 -
[43]
the whole 'removing local' idea, and similar ideas would amuse me no end, if only to see the reactions when people found out there were 10 pirates camping the gate they're warping to. It just wouldn't be fair.
So I think, unless someone comes up with a *really* solid idea, that this is a no go.
.
|
Skaz
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 21:52:00 -
[44]
Quote:
the whole 'removing local' idea, and similar ideas would amuse me no end, if only to see the reactions when people found out there were 10 pirates camping the gate they're warping to. It just wouldn't be fair.
So I think, unless someone comes up with a *really* solid idea, that this is a no go.
I get you Drunken but alot of lacking ideas can be formed into a solid idea so we need people to keep posting their ideas. I'm totally against removing local but changing it is ok in my opinion.
Btw, nice videos 
"No, I'm not alt.....even if I have been in Pator Tech School for 2 years..." |
Tribunal
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 21:59:00 -
[45]
I do not like mining, but I am forced to do it to proceed forward in the game. When I am mining I am in a low offensive and low defensive ship. On top of that I am in astroids that can hang me up when trying to warping out of an astroid field. To put it bluntly a pirate will kill me 80 percent of the time he warps into a belt I am mining. My only two defensive things to do to avoid being blown to bits, while doing what I fricken hate which is mining, is to either try to warp away when the pirate enters the belt (which can be prevented by warp jammers) and watching the local channel. So, I will keep my strong view that local needs to stay exactly like it is. Pirates do not need an easier time killing players who are just trying to forward themselves through the other paths in EVE.
|
drunkenmaster
|
Posted - 2004.03.11 23:18:00 -
[46]
Quote:
Quote:
the whole 'removing local' idea, and similar ideas would amuse me no end, if only to see the reactions when people found out there were 10 pirates camping the gate they're warping to. It just wouldn't be fair.
So I think, unless someone comes up with a *really* solid idea, that this is a no go.
I get you Drunken but alot of lacking ideas can be formed into a solid idea so we need people to keep posting their ideas. I'm totally against removing local but changing it is ok in my opinion.
Btw, nice videos
thanks.
And you're right. I don't want people to stop coming up with ideas. The right one might come along, we just don't know.
But I can't see how pirates being able to 'hide' from local will benefit anyone but pirates (not that I'd mind too much)
.
|
Mrissa Easeah
|
Posted - 2004.03.12 00:41:00 -
[47]
Just an idea,
Have local load automatically in Empire space as its part of their system communications infrastructure, have people blanked from local in 0.0 space until they get tagged by your scanner, which is then verified by the jumpgates in system, so that they remain visible until they leave system again.
Exception: The moment you type in local, you're no longer blanked.
Alternate, additional. Cloaking automatically blanks you from local as long as you remain cloaked, whether from arriving from jump, or using a module.
As to the CSM chat as a whole, I think the limited number of Dev's present might also account for a lot of the answers, depending on who's in charge of what, so I'd take a lot of the policy stuff with a grain of salt anyway.
|
Jash Illian
|
Posted - 2004.03.12 05:35:00 -
[48]
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
the whole 'removing local' idea, and similar ideas would amuse me no end, if only to see the reactions when people found out there were 10 pirates camping the gate they're warping to. It just wouldn't be fair.
So I think, unless someone comes up with a *really* solid idea, that this is a no go.
I get you Drunken but alot of lacking ideas can be formed into a solid idea so we need people to keep posting their ideas. I'm totally against removing local but changing it is ok in my opinion.
Btw, nice videos
thanks.
And you're right. I don't want people to stop coming up with ideas. The right one might come along, we just don't know.
But I can't see how pirates being able to 'hide' from local will benefit anyone but pirates (not that I'd mind too much)
Best I can think of is making Local show only the ship name and putting a significant service charge on changing the registry of your ship.
Hunters would have choice of making frequent payments to maintain anonymity or having the prey learn their reputations. But the difference is they'd have the ability to choose a method of disguise.
And obviously ship names would have to become unique.
I mean its like you want corporations to oblige each other like its sex or something. Pffft I would rather **** my enemy.- Rohann
Be careful out there. That other guy waiting in the queue for the gate MIGHT be a baby-munching frock-burner, YOU JUST DON'T KNOW!- Lallante |
ChaosHybrid
|
Posted - 2004.03.12 15:25:00 -
[49]
While a lot of what has been said in this forum I can agree with, I also think that some people just need to stop trying to get the game machanics to work for them and really play the game in the sense of your work around the game machanics. Where there is an issue - work round it. It's not that hard. And enough with all this auto stuff- the idea is you PLAY the game, if you wanna sit and watch buy a DVD instead.
|
Mon Palae
|
Posted - 2004.03.12 15:59:00 -
[50]
Quote:
But I can't see how pirates being able to 'hide' from local will benefit anyone but pirates (not that I'd mind too much)
Having thought on this some more I have to agree. At first I thought it might prompt pirates to be more likely to wander through belts to find some prey. However, pirate hunters benefit from the same "no local" and can lie in wait and pounce on the pirates when they drop by. As such you would be making wandering through belts much more dangerous for pirates and I expect most would opt for camping a gate where they are far safer. What's more, the gate camp would become far mroe profitable as now no one would have any chance at figuring they are there till they are in the kill zone. Great for pirates, bad for everyone else.
As mentioned earlier the best responses by CCP would be to give more tools to non-pirates to avoid pirates (and I don't mean by just logging off when you see them). Make ships more resilient, minimum target lock times no matter how many buffs the attacking ship has, ability to warp to a nearby ship ratehr than fly to it, jump to warp more quickly, etc.
I am NOT throwing those ideas out as necessarily correct ones or a complete list. Just food for thought. Players ability to defend against pirates should come at a cost as well in terms of mods and their downsides. Want to make a hauler jump to warp more quickly perhaps its max warp distance gets severly hammered (like say 60au in one go). Up side is you go to warp faster...downside is your trip gets longer due to multiple jumps. Up to the player to decide what tradeoffs they wish to make. Again...just a top of the head idea and not necessarily a good one but something like this is waht I would rather see than just turning up the juice on gate guns and/or CONCORD.
|
Perdita X
|
Posted - 2004.03.13 10:52:00 -
[51]
Quote:
Auto-docking autopilot? When is the auto-selling cargo upon auto-docking autopilot option coming in? If they continue this line of thinking SoonÖ your autopilot will buy X cargo, undock, fly Y route, dock, sell X cargo and repeat.
Actually, I think I've discovered exactly what these people want and how to give it to them:
A Massively Multiplayer Online Screen Saver!
You'd watch a pretty space ship of your choice autowarp around, jump, dock, buy and sell, the number in your wallet going up up up! all the time, add a chat client and they'd never know the difference!
Meanwhile, the rest of us could play EVE Online.
It's a sure winner people!
------
.sig? I don't need no steenking .sig! |
Tyrrax Thorrk
|
Posted - 2004.03.13 11:26:00 -
[52]
Please please please remove local, local is bull****, always has been always will be. If you want that kind of service you should have to pay tons of isk to some superagent :|
Oh and why the hell aren't Jash Illian and Sara Kerrigan in the CSM ?
|
Tyria Evenstar
|
Posted - 2004.03.13 14:04:00 -
[53]
Quote:
Oh and why the hell aren''t Jash Illian and Sara Kerrigan in the CSM ?
Jash Illian has already been in a CSM, and Sara Kerrigan isn't because I don't think the time it's on is good for her. It's too bad, cos I'd like to see both of them woop CCP ass in front of CCP.
-Tyria.
|
McWatt
|
Posted - 2004.03.13 19:37:00 -
[54]
better questions, horrible answers.
was there anything told apart from "maybe in shiva" or "after shiva"???
Quote:
SolarisCCP > The problem with piracy at the gates has most to do with the fact that players are often afk travelling (espesially in the high security areas) and dont have a chance of defending themselves.
SolarisCCP > Some might say that this is their own fault, but the number of jumps people are travelling makes people go afk in so many cases.
whoTF is this quy? terrible.
new comment system is good, makes it more of a discussion. could be used more often.
still: why not color/highlight the questions? makes it so much eassier to read and search for certain stuff.
|
EvilDoomer
|
Posted - 2004.03.17 14:53:00 -
[55]
Quote:
I seriously believe CCP is going in the wrong direction in regards to piracy. Instead of nerfing, they should learn from Blizzard's games. When one side gets too powerful, they dont nerf it, they make the others stronger. They shouldn't be wrecking all options of piracy, they should be improving the methods for anti-pirates.
I agree, If the pirates are really strong thats ok.
BUT, put some arkonite in empire space and let some of the little corps get stronger.
Keep nerfing pirates I will not have any fun.
Who will I be able to shoot....... CONCORD!
And please FIX the rating system currently is sucks.
My rating has been 0.0 since castor. :( And I kill alot of rats.
Thanks
EvilDoomer
Chicago Mobsters
** Ghost Fleet Pilot **
|
EvilDoomer
|
Posted - 2004.03.17 15:02:00 -
[56]
T2, where are you.
Why not let the t2 stuff out.
Lottery? NOT!
Why not just pass them out to the stations and let the people have fun. From what I have seen to make t2 stuff is going to be harder and require alot more element and cost alot more to produce.
Sometimes trying to balance this game so that everyone is happy might not be the correct way and it is making this game boring.! I hear about t2 but there is almost none anywhere. And now everyone is waiting including me for Shriva. Why! I guess we are going to fly over t2.
Sorry If i sound negative.
I just want to play and have fun but, going into a station and seeing t2 stuff and cannot purchase or use any doesnot seem to make good sense to me.
Thanks
EvilDoomer
Chicago Mobsters
** Ghost Fleet Pilot **
|
Kilhu Emmek
|
Posted - 2004.03.17 16:38:00 -
[57]
Just adding my voice to the "stealth local" contingent.
It just doesn't make strategic sense for everyone to be able to see who's in a system by default. Maybe in high sec space, as the stargates and/or stations could broadcast "transponder information" across the system, but even then ...
As far as pirates and/or miners "hiding" in local space goes, there are plenty of ways to do progressive scans to see who's near gates or belts, and I think this would significantly add to the strategic aspects of the game (eg. having a scout frig that could exhaust its cap and "dead cap" warp towards a gate or planet or belt so it could scan from "non-visual" range, etc.) This could also make planets and moons near stargates or belts viable strategic staging areas, which would (one hopes) increase the amount of combat that takes place there.
As it is, the local channel makes stealth and covert ops almost impossible.
Gradient is hiring.
Read our Code of Conduct before applying.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |