EVE Search - Local is essential for War! Period!

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Local is essential for War! Period!

» 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 - 0 post(s)
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:35:00 - [1] Local is essential for War! Period! If local goes, something equal has to replace it or how else are you going to find people your at war with or have bad standings with? I am not using locator agents for everyone in EVE just to see if they are in my system and i am not getting info on everyone just to check standings either, that is just absurd! You need some tool, whether its local or not to show you who is in a system and what their standings are to you. Without this, War is effectively ended in EVE. EVE is a PvP game! Please think this through people, local and war is at the very heart of EVE and a change by getting rid of either will change EVE (for the worst) forever. Carebears have ruined every single MMO where their whines have been yielded to. Trammel and Felluca, anyone????
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:38:00 - [2] It has been said time and time again: Local is too powerful. Simply removing local would leave a gaping hole and make many professions unplayable. Local needs to be removed and replaced with an integrated, effective, realistic, but inherently limited tool. The Jury is still out on what exactly that replacement should be... ------ Originally by: Dark Shikari The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:42:00 - [3] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 12:44:12 Originally by: Patch86 It has been said time and time again: Local is too powerful. I'm sorry i can't see your argument, because whatever replaces local, it will have to have the same functionality of being able to see who is in a system and what standings they have to you because these are essential for war, which defeats the object of making a change.
Lrd Byron	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:51:00 - [4] I do have to say, from a purely role playing perspective, local makes a lot of sense. Its completely believable that the owners and operators of the jump gates keep track of everyone who comes into and out of them. It'd be weird if they didn't frankly.
Abrazzar	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:55:00 - [5] Local: Automatic, No requirements, No effort Intel Tool: Optional, Skill Requirements, Effort Here is your difference. Maybe now you can see what this discussion is all about. Personally, I'd like to make intel gathering a profession for non-combat pilots. -------- Ideas for: Mining Clouds
Captain Falcord Gallente The Scope	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:56:00 - [6] Originally by: Lrd Byron I do have to say, from a purely role playing perspective, local makes a lot of sense. Its completely believable that the owners and operators of the jump gates keep track of everyone who comes into and out of them. It'd be weird if they didn't frankly. And you assume it's also believable that these owners and operators share their information with EVERYONE
Fugly McTastic	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:57:00 - [7] ok, how about loose local, but add BACON?
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:57:00 - [8] Originally by: Kale Kold Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 12:44:12 Originally by: Patch86 It has been said time and time again: Local is too powerful. I'm sorry i can't see your argument, because whatever replaces local, it will have to have the same functionality of being able to see who is in a system and what standings they have to you because these are essential for war, which defeats the object of making a change. Who says it needs to be the whole system, and who says it needs to be instant? A tool that provides all the necessary information, but has a limited range (variable according to ships, modules, skills, whatever) and takes a short, several second scanning period to pick up the more detailed details (pilot name and corp, for example) would still provide all the functionality required to PvP (and avoid PvP), just not in the same all-seeing all-powerful immutable way that Local does. Local isn't the only way of solving the intel problem, and a replacement tool doesn't need to mimic it exactly to be effective. But I don't really want to get stuck in to this debate; it's been debated 100,000 times before. Everything that is humanly possible to say on this issue, both for and against a change, has been said to death already. ------ Originally by: Dark Shikari The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways.
Tamia Clant New Dawn Corp New Eden Research	Posted - 2008.04.27 12:59:00 - [9] Originally by: Fugly McTastic ok, how about loose local, but add BACON? BACON works by using information from Local... Looking for queue-free research slots? Click here!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:01:00 - [10] Originally by: Abrazzar Local: Automatic, No requirements, No effort Intel Tool: Optional, Skill Requirements, Effort Here is your difference. Maybe now you can see what this discussion is all about. Personally, I'd like to make intel gathering a profession for non-combat pilots. First of all, Local is Automatic, No requirements and No effort for EVERYONE at the minute! But you want to penalise people who PvP to more skill training and effort to use a local replacement. Thats not balanced and pretty one sided isn't it!

Tommy TenKreds Animal Mercantile Executive	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:03:00 - [11] Very few people advocate the removal of local without any form of at least partial intelligence gathering replacement. That said, heaven forbid that you would have to replace your dependence on complete intelligence with actual strategy. Bandures > tommy you like a cowboy harry )
Indigo Johnson Minmatar	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:03:00 - [12] Originally by: Kale Kold If local goes, something equal has to replace it New local RAAAAAWWWWWWRRRRRR!!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:04:00 - [13] Originally by: Patch86 Who says it needs to be the whole system, and who says it needs to be instant? You don't do a lot of PvP do you! For war you need instant and full intel on entire systems at a time. Of course whatever replaces Local (if a replacement is waranted at all) will have to be instant and give good intel on entire systems! It's that simple or war ends in EVE!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:05:00 - [14] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 13:05:23 Originally by: Tommy TenKreds That said, heaven forbid that you would have to replace your dependence on complete intelligence with actual strategy. In war, you formulate stragey from intelligence!
Tommy TenKreds Animal Mercantile Executive	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:07:00 - [15] Originally by: Kale Kold Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 13:05:23 Originally by: Tommy TenKreds That said, heaven forbid that you would have to replace your dependence on complete intelligence with actual strategy. In war, you formulate stragey from intelligence! Gaining useful intelligence requires it's own strategy. Bandures > tommy you like a cowboy harry )
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:12:00 - [16] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 13:12:19 Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Gaining useful intelligence requires it's own strategy. Lol! Come on then tell me your strategy for gaining intel without local for a tactical advantage in PvP? ...Oh wait... your a carebear corp (Animal Mercantile Executive), headquartered in Jita 4-4, so i guess your PvP experience is kinda thin and you really don't know what the hell you are talking about!
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:13:00 - [17] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Patch86 Who says it needs to be the whole system, and who says it needs to be instant? You don't do a lot of PvP do you! For war you need instant and full intel on entire systems at a time. Of course whatever replaces Local (if a replacement is waranted at all) will have to be instant and give good intel on entire systems! It's that simple or war ends in EVE! I've been pretty much solely a PvPer for 2 years, in both 0.0 and Empire wars. How long have you been PvPing? I would have no problem doing roaming PvP with a range-limited scanner, and with a short delay in pilot/corp information. Fleet combat with full scout support would be even easier. It'd be a little more tricky, but thats the idea; local is too powerful. Replacing it with something less powerful will obviously make things less easy. Thats what "too powerful" means. ------ Originally by: Dark Shikari The problem with killing Jesus is he always just respawns 3 days later anyways.
Tommy TenKreds Animal Mercantile Executive	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:18:00 - [18] Edited by: Tommy TenKreds on 27/04/2008 13:21:44 Originally by: Kale Kold Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 13:12:19 Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Gaining useful intelligence requires it's own strategy. Lol! Come on then tell me your strategy for gaining intel without local for a tactical advantage in PvP? ...Oh wait... your a carebear corp (Animal Mercantile Executive), headquartered in Jita 4-4, so i guess your PvP experience is kinda thin and you really don't know what the hell you are talking about! Oh get a clue mate, really. The whole of issue of what kind of strategy for gaining intelligence should replace local is currenly under debate. Most people seem to be at least happy to engage in that debate and consider ideas. Others, like you, feel the need to start yet another thread to communicate their completely inflexible and entrenched viewpoint. Gratz. Local is too damn easy. It's really that simple. Why should perfect intelligence from local preclude any possibility of more interesting intelligence gathering game play? Only lazy or short-sighted people cannot even consider other arguments. Cue the ill-informed ad hominem attacks from desperate 0.0 carebears. You figured out that TTK is a carebear. Well done. Now tell me about my other four mains. Oh wait, you can't cos you don't know who they are. That'll be the limited intelligence I leak. Try harder. Bandures > tommy you like a cowboy harry )
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:18:00 - [19] Originally by: Patch86 I would have no problem doing roaming PvP with a range-limited scanner, and with a short delay in pilot/corp information. We'll im glad your not making the decisions!
Commander Criton Gallente K.I.S.A. Accord Corporate Enterprise Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:20:00 - [20] Simply replace local with a stats window when you look at the local channel all you see is basic information here is an example: There is 16 players with neutral standings in the system There is 5 players with Negative standings in the system There is 97 war targets in the system There is 1 Player with good standings in the system

Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:20:00 - [21] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 13:23:39 Originally by: Tommy TenKreds The whole of issue of what kind of strategy for gaining intelligence should replace local is currenly under debate. I'm sorry but the argument for replacing Local still hasn't been made!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:23:00 - [22] Originally by: Commander Criton Simply replace local with a stats window when you look at the local channel all you see is basic information here is an example: There is 16 players with neutral standings in the system There is 5 players with Negative standings in the system There is 97 war targets in the system There is 1 Player with good standings in the system And how do you Know their names? Know their age? Check their title? Check their bio? Check their corp? Check their alliance? These are all required intel needs!
Tommy TenKreds Animal Mercantile Executive	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:24:00 - [23] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Tommy TenKreds The whole of issue of what kind of strategy for gaining intelligence should replace local is currenly under debate. I'm sorry but the argument for replacing Local still hasn't been made! Try one of the other threads that are debating it. You frankly don't deserve spoon feeding of arguments. Bandures > tommy you like a cowboy harry )
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:24:00 - [24] Clearly we all need to listen to Kale Kold and Vicious Little Killers, some of Eve's foremost PvPers. If they can't handle it, and Kale here is one of the greatest PvPers in all of New Eden, how will us lesser forces cope? Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
Commander Criton Gallente K.I.S.A. Accord Corporate Enterprise Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:25:00 - [25] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Commander Criton Simply replace local with a stats window when you look at the local channel all you see is basic information here is an example: There is 16 players with neutral standings in the system There is 5 players with Negative standings in the system There is 97 war targets in the system There is 1 Player with good standings in the system And how do you Know their names? Know their age? Check their title? Check their bio? Check their corp? Check their alliance? These are all required intel needs! Thats half the problem with local you get all that information for nothing and simply answer is a recon or covort ops ship will have to i dont know do recon/scout?
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:25:00 - [26] Originally by: Tommy TenKreds You frankly don't deserve spoon feeding of arguments. Because there isn't one! And yes i've read the other carebear whines, but still there isn't a valid reason to even consider replacing Local!
Segge Bolled Caldari Dirty Sexy Pilots New Age Solutions Amalgamated	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:34:00 - [27] Originally by: Tamia Clant Originally by: Fugly McTastic ok, how about loose local, but add BACON? BACON works by using information from Local... Yes but it doesn't mean you'd necessarily need to have Local there to see, in order to use that data for something else in the client. For example: with Local removed and people turning to the larger Constellation chat if they want to communicate that way, you'd have audio tones (similar to BACON) telling you what was going on in local - but not exactly what was going on ... Of course, an immediate issue there would be the number of people who play with EVE sound turned off, or those players who might be deaf. Perhaps you could tie the audio cues to small visual cues, something similar to those indicating when a address book occupant has logged on/off. So, a small arrow pointing up when someone enters the system and pointing down when they leave. Color the arrows according to the respective user settings for entity icons. One way to explain the change in-game, would be to say that worsening relations between the Empires has forced the SCC (?) to reduce inter-system communications relay coverage, resulting in only basic data transfer being supported, or ships having to rely on IFF transmissions. Or something. Probably full of holes, but just an idea.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:35:00 - [28] Originally by: An Anarchyyt Clearly we all need to listen to Kale Kold and Vicious Little Killers, some of Eve's foremost PvPers. If they can't handle it, and Kale here is one of the greatest PvPers in all of New Eden, how will us lesser forces cope? Lol! You guys better pray that any changes made are made from arguments made by PvPers, or you guys are screwed too. This is a direct challenge on war by carebears, put simply. If local is removed and something put in its place that doesn't atleast do the job as well as local, then war is over.
Commander Criton Gallente K.I.S.A. Accord Corporate Enterprise Syndicate	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:35:00 - [29] Originally by: Kale Kold Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 13:28:19 Originally by: Commander Criton ...and simply answer is a recon or covort ops ship will have to i dont know do recon/scout? And then get info on all targets found, etc. Do you realise how utterly boring and long winded that will make finding valid targets and gathering intel? By the time you might find them in the system they would of gone because they got bored looking/getting intel on you! This is supposed to be fun and engaging. Yep i see its boring but the idea is to make roles more important and to pro-long the fights so maybe a new type of probe that picks up ships registry information? giving you the ship owner which in turn gives you their corp info etc.
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:35:00 - [30] Originally by: Kalahari Wayrest Quote: Clearly we all need to listen to Kale Kold and Vicious Little Killers, some of Eve's foremost PvPers. If they can't handle it, and Kale here is one of the greatest PvPers in all of New Eden, how will us lesser forces cope? Thread won, everyone can go home now. (and yes, that is all I'm going to contribute to this thread ) Best post in this thread. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:38:00 - [31] Originally by: Commander Criton Yep i see its boring but the idea is to make roles more important and to pro-long the fights so maybe a new type of probe that picks up ships registry information? giving you the ship owner which in turn gives you their corp info etc. Then when such a probe is picked up on scan (as every decent PvPer mashes) everyone docks up and effectively everyone is now invisible, that will be a war to remember.
Ringo Jeicha Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:40:00 - [32] Edited by: Ringo Jeicha on 27/04/2008 13:41:18 Quote: Lol! You guys better pray that any changes made are made from arguments made by PvPers, or you guys are screwed too. This is a direct challenge on war by carebears, put simply. If local is removed and something put in its place that doesn't atleast do the job as well as local, then war is over. No, war will be more difficult than learning a monkey to do f1-f8.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:42:00 - [33] Originally by: Ringo Jeicha You were owned once by looking at an alts bio and concluding he/she/it is a carebear, now stfu, carebear. In real-life, will the invading country tell the invaded country with how many men and equipment they will come? Post with your mains you cowards! ...plus Intel will provide that info and btw EVE != RL!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:43:00 - [34] Originally by: Ringo Jeicha No, war will be more difficult than learning a monkey to do f1-f8. Nice carebear quote again. Coming straight from SWA!
Ringo Jeicha Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:45:00 - [35] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Ringo Jeicha No, war will be more difficult than learning a monkey to do f1-f8. Nice carebear quote again. Coming straight from SWA! And again you seem to fail in understanding the concept of alts.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:45:00 - [36] Originally by: Ringo Jeicha Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Ringo Jeicha No, war will be more difficult than learning a monkey to do f1-f8. Nice carebear quote again. Coming straight from SWA! And again you seem to fail in understanding the concept of alts. And again you fail to understand the concept of coward!
Ringo Jeicha Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:46:00 - [37] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Ringo Jeicha You were owned once by looking at an alts bio and concluding he/she/it is a carebear, now stfu, carebear. In real-life, will the invading country tell the invaded country with how many men and equipment they will come? Post with your mains you cowards! ...plus Intel will provide that info and btw EVE != RL! Too bad it isnt, it would have scared you to ever join eve in the first place
Ringo Jeicha Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:46:00 - [38] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Ringo Jeicha Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Ringo Jeicha No, war will be more difficult than learning a monkey to do f1-f8. Nice carebear quote again. Coming straight from SWA! And again you seem to fail in understanding the concept of alts. And again you fail to understand the concept of coward! Pff you fail
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:48:00 - [39] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 13:48:06 Originally by: Ringo Jeicha You fail! Why the need to go personal? ad hominem and post with ur main!
An Anarchyyt Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:49:00 - [40] Sometimes I just minimize local for days at a time, and still blow up stuff. Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person

Ringo Jeicha Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:50:00 - [41] Edited by: Ringo Jeicha on 27/04/2008 13:54:12 Edited by: Ringo Jeicha on 27/04/2008 13:52:16 Edited by: Ringo Jeicha on 27/04/2008 13:51:46 Edited by: Ringo Jeicha on 27/04/2008 13:51:02 Originally by: Kale Kold Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 13:48:06 Originally by: Ringo Jeicha You fail! Why the need to go personal? ad hominem and post with ur main! I simply refuse to see the need! So you can wardec my corp who has really nothing to do with my opinion? How lame can one get, and yes i am getting personal now And in any case, a discussion works simple, you make a statement, and you provide proof. So far I haven't seen any elegible proof besides a whine that it will cost you time. I do however support the need of an active radar, which is directly dependent of the ship's sensor strenght
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:56:00 - [42] Originally by: Ringo Jeicha And in any case, a discussion works simple, you make a statement, and you provide proof. So far I haven't seen any elegible proof besides a whine that it will cost you time. For a start, im -10.0 im not going anywhere but lowsec. Second, it doesn't bother me if Local goes really, 'cos i'm a lowsec pirate/gatecamper i kill anything that comes through. I am fighting for PvP as a whole, Local being replaced is Trammel all over again!
Freya Runestone Minmatar	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:59:00 - [43] Originally by: Kale Kold Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 12:44:12 Originally by: Patch86 It has been said time and time again: Local is too powerful. I'm sorry i can't see your argument, because whatever replaces local, it will have to have the same functionality of being able to see who is in a system and what standings they have to you because these are essential for war, which defeats the object of making a change. It's not essential for war. It's only "essential" because you're relying 100% on it currently. Which coincidentally is also the exact reason it's too powerful. Local is an effortless intelligence tool. Requires no skill (player skill, not a game-skill) to use, and has no flaws or risks involved. It should be replaced by something, obviously, but moving around unseen should also be possible. And right now it just isn't.
Istvaan Shogaatsu Caldari Guiding Hand Social Club	Posted - 2008.04.27 13:59:00 - [44] Naw, it's not essential. Let me put it in a way you geeks might grasp. Let's say you're playing World of Warcraft. Your level 83 Chaos Dwarf Semenweaver enters Elwynn Forest. Does he immediately see every hostile in the zone? No, he sees some trees and sheep. He's gotta run around and explore a bit if he wants to find someone to gank. Are they hiding behind that tree? Are they in the inn? You get my drift. Now you have Eve. There's way less locations to be in an average system, than there are potential locations in Elwynn Forest. Yet somehow, the moment we enter Eve's version of a zone, we are immediately aware of everyone in the zone. You've just taken away the thrill of the hunt. Now there's no need to check behind that tree, or visit the inn. You've also taken away surprise. Forgot to use your scanner and warped into a gatecamp? Oops!
Poht Minmatar Taurus Inc	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:05:00 - [45] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Ringo Jeicha And in any case, a discussion works simple, you make a statement, and you provide proof. So far I haven't seen any elegible proof besides a whine that it will cost you time. For a start, im -10.0 im not going anywhere but lowsec. Second, it doesn't bother me if Local goes really, 'cos i'm a lowsec pirate/gatecamper i kill anything that comes through. I am fighting for PvP as a whole, Local being replaced is Trammel all over again! Ahhh,,, which means you won't be able to safespot when big gangs travel through your gatecamp! OK I get it, you want local as a sa***uard for your own hide!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:07:00 - [46] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 14:07:27 Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu Naw, it's not essential. Let me put it in a way you geeks might grasp. Let's say you're playing World of Warcraft. Your level 83 Chaos Dwarf Semenweaver enters Elwynn Forest. Does he immediately see every hostile in the zone? No, he sees some trees and sheep. He's gotta run around and explore a bit if he wants to find someone to gank. Are they hiding behind that tree? Are they in the inn? You get my drift. Now you have Eve. There's way less locations to be in an average system, than there are potential locations in Elwynn Forest. Yet somehow, the moment we enter Eve's version of a zone, we are immediately aware of everyone in the zone. You've just taken away the thrill of the hunt. Now there's no need to check behind that tree, or visit the inn. You've also taken away surprise. Forgot to use your scanner and warped into a gatecamp? Oops! Elwynn Forest = few hundred meters square? Any EVE system = 10-100AU square? Big difference! WOW = medieval times? EVE = Uber hi-tech? Would people really not know whos in a system with (record keeping?) gates? Finding people really is the first step in any war, the second is formulating a strategy based on who's there/their capabilities, etc to successfully defeat that force. But if you can't find them or know what their capabilities are how you gonna defeat them?
Danton Marcellus Nebula Rasa Holdings	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:09:00 - [47] If local goes how would that affect logon traps? Assume a fleet is waiting to be logged on at first contact, can they really be sure another fleet isn't hiding in the system already if they're not on themselves scanning every corner of it? Should/would/could have, HAVE you chav! Also Known As
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:09:00 - [48] Originally by: Kale Kold Local is essential for War! Period! No it isn't. War worked just fine before standings in local appeared. ...
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:15:00 - [49] Originally by: Rawr Cristina Originally by: Kale Kold Local is essential for War! Period! No it isn't. War worked just fine before standings in local appeared. Do you really want to take a step backward?
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:16:00 - [50] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Rawr Cristina Originally by: Kale Kold Local is essential for War! Period! No it isn't. War worked just fine before standings in local appeared. Do you really want to take a step backward? Do you know why standings in local appeared in the first place? ...

Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:18:00 - [51] Originally by: Rawr Cristina Do you know why standings in local appeared in the first place? Enlighten me.
TimGascoigne	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:20:00 - [52] Edited by: TimGascoigne on 27/04/2008 14:23:21 Originally by: Patch86 It has been said time and time again: Local is too powerful. Simply removing local would leave a gaping hole and make many professions unplayable. Local needs to be removed and replaced with an integrated, effective, realistic, but inherently limited tool. The Jury is still out on what exactly that replacement should be... oh how is local to powerful? I am in 0.0 all the time and every four seconds I have to check local otherwise I will lose my ship. Seriously you have to look through the entire channel as often as an airport security desk has to scan luggage. Why do people and CCP think that it is too easy to use local it becomes a second in game job especially if you're in systems which have 40+ in them and are 0.0 trade hubs. Getting back to the OP he mentioned that local needs to be replaced with something similar he did not specifically rule out removing local. Although it begs the question if you're going to replace local with something similar why bother at all you just risk damaging gameplay and creating more bugs eve is complicated enough as it is. Let's just have something simple that works like local. If there was a new tool that would mean even less space for me to watch a fight. I don't know how many people in this thread have noticed that the majority of your screen is filled up by things like overview and chat channels and ship interface. You don't actually see that much of space any more especially if you're on a 17 inch screen. Or even better lets..... wait for it...... not change anything and just stop changing things
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:24:00 - [53] Originally by: TimGascoigne Edited by: TimGascoigne on 27/04/2008 14:21:04 Originally by: Patch86 It has been said time and time again: Local is too powerful. Simply removing local would leave a gaping hole and make many professions unplayable. Local needs to be removed and replaced with an integrated, effective, realistic, but inherently limited tool. The Jury is still out on what exactly that replacement should be... oh how is local to powerful? I am in 0.0 all the time and every four seconds I have to check local otherwise I will lose my ship. Seriously you have to look through the entire channel as often as an airport security desk has to scan luggage. Why do people and CCP think that it is too easy to use local it becomes a second in game job especially if you're in systems which have 40+ in them and are 0.0 trade hubs. Getting back to the OP he mentioned that local needs to be replaced with something similar he did not specifically rule out removing local. Although it begs the question if you're going to replace local with something similar why bother at all you just risk damaging gameplay and creating more bugs eve is complicated enough as it is. Let's just have something simple that works like local. If there was a new tool that would mean even less space for me to watch a fight. I don't know how many people in this thread have noticed that the majority of your screen is filled up by things like overview and chat channels and ship interface. You don't actually see that much of space any more especially if you're on a 17 inch screen. Or even better lets..... wait for it...... not change anything and just stop changing things this This is exactly my point. Nobody really has a case for removing or even changing Local. Without it more people are going to get very annoyed if something isn't available as a replacement which does the same thing. And then you ask yourself why bother changing it at all?
TimGascoigne	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:27:00 - [54] Originally by: Rawr Cristina Originally by: Kale Kold Local is essential for War! Period! No it isn't. War worked just fine before standings in local appeared. yes I guess war will work just fine because you wouldn't be able to have effective scouts and the alternative is to bring all of your friends and move as a blob all the time which would cause another problem. I think you can guess what that is.
Abrazzar	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:29:00 - [55] Troll thread is full of troll. Throws over a troll pelt, grabs a femur and does the troll dance -------- Ideas for: Mining Clouds
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:32:00 - [56] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 14:32:29 Originally by: Abrazzar Troll thread is full of troll. Throws over a troll pelt, grabs a femur and does the troll dance We are trolling? why? Because we don't agree with carebears and we care about game balance and not wasting so much time doing long winded, boring shift work on poorly implemented systems?
Rawr Cristina Caldari Naqam	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:36:00 - [57] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Rawr Cristina Do you know why standings in local appeared in the first place? Enlighten me. Someone had managed to hack the client through whatever means to display standings in local. I can only assume CCP had no way of detecting who was doing it, or preventing it - the only way to even the field was to give everyone standings in local. CCP has already stated that they didn't intend local to be the overpowered intel tool it currently is. People generally think it's essential to the game ATM because they're so used to it they can't imagine other ways to find people. Yes, it would need a replacement - whether that be an active, limited-range scanner, ability to detect the presence of cloaked ships (perhaps with a module), remotely accessible locator agents, or whatever. ...
Istvaan Shogaatsu Caldari Guiding Hand Social Club	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:38:00 - [58] Originally by: Kale Kold Elwynn Forest = few hundred meters square? Any EVE system = 10-100AU square? Big difference! WOW = medieval times? EVE = Uber hi-tech? Would people really not know whos in a system with (record keeping?) gates? Uhhh... Since you seem to be roleplaying a justification, I'll roleplay one back at you. How would the gate maintenance personnel react when they released local information to capsuleers, who promptly used it to conduct a space massacre? Remember, the guys working the gates are normal humans, not pod captains, they still have regard for the six thousand human lives aboard every battleship that dies as a result of their local logging. I think they'd start withholding that information, not wanting to have the blood of hundreds of thousands on their hands ;)
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:42:00 - [59] Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu Originally by: Kale Kold Elwynn Forest = few hundred meters square? Any EVE system = 10-100AU square? Big difference! WOW = medieval times? EVE = Uber hi-tech? Would people really not know whos in a system with (record keeping?) gates? Uhhh... Since you seem to be roleplaying a justification, I'll roleplay one back at you. How would the gate maintenance personnel react when they released local information to capsuleers, who promptly used it to conduct a space massacre? Remember, the guys working the gates are normal humans, not pod captains, they still have regard for the six thousand human lives aboard every battleship that dies as a result of their local logging. I think they'd start withholding that information, not wanting to have the blood of hundreds of thousands on their hands ;) Even if their faction was the victor? But enough of this RP BS!
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:46:00 - [60] Edited by: northwesten on 27/04/2008 14:49:25 Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: northwesten This thread fails and a troll! move along now Oh not get rid of local just make it like alliance chat! when someone speak they appear. If they don't then stay hidden. That easy If you really need local then maybe work on your skills on getting intel than been a lazy ... Again coming from a carebear mining corp who have no experience of PvP. no pvp experiance? LMAO dude you dont know me do you? lol I been playing this game for 4 years and how about you look at my history before making a fool of your self! thank and gd bye! mm looked at your history and way you talk here i am woundering how much did you buy this toon for? Trinity Corporate Services

Furb Killer The Peacekeeper Core	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:46:00 - [61] And of course 0.0 is filled with tradehubs where at least 40 persons are. Welcome to the real world, 0.0 is mostly empty. Right now local helps pvp'ers as much as it makes it harder for them. Of course gatecampers who are afraid for a fair fight are basicly the only group who want to keep local. Oh noez, they come with as much ships as we have, lets run. For pirate gangs in low sec it is much better without local (yeah they are too pvp'ers, not all camp gates to gank noob ships, like you probably do). Sure you dont know immediatly if there are ratters in belts, but that is like making 3 warps and you got entire system covered with directional scanner (and then you got more info than you had from local). And unless the ratting carebear is seriously bored, he wont be pressing directional scanner every second, and he wont run because he doesnt know the pirates are there. Which makes it basicly a bit strange that he calls everyone who disagree with him a carebear, since the carebears are arguably those who loses most with removal of local. (as in low sec/0.0 carebears, high sec carebears wont care, and if they have an opinion they want to keep it).
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:50:00 - [62] War will suffer! Mark my words.
Shepard Book Imperial Academy	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:55:00 - [63] The sky is falling without local is a joke and so is local. I could not believe this game even had it when I first started. Everyone has had farmers log out on them as soon as you enter system. Where is the pvp in that? Local in this game is a crutch that should be removed from 0.0. Everyone already knows the popular systems. Let low sec and empire have their care bears and farmers. Allow everyone to use the other tools in game such as a scanner and probes.
Furb Killer The Peacekeeper Core	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:56:00 - [64] Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 14:56:02 I'll take that as a: "I lost but i am too ******** to admit it". That was at kale
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:57:00 - [65] Originally by: Furb Killer Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 14:56:02 I'll take that as a: "I lost but i am too ******** to admit it". That was at kale thats what i was thinking :) Trinity Corporate Services
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:57:00 - [66] Originally by: Furb Killer Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 14:56:02 I'll take that as a: "I lost but i am too ******** to admit it". That was at kale Sorry did i miss something? Give me one good reason why local is either overpowered or needs getting rid of and i'll give you a counter! Your turn!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:58:00 - [67] Come on bring it on!
MineralOel Steuer Amarr OP EC	Posted - 2008.04.27 14:59:00 - [68] Originally by: Kale Kold Come on bring it on! oh my stfu troll
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:00:00 - [69] Originally by: MineralOel Steuer Originally by: Kale Kold Come on bring it on! oh my stfu troll Ad hominem ...again!
Furb Killer The Peacekeeper Core	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:02:00 - [70] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Furb Killer Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 14:56:02 I'll take that as a: "I lost but i am too ******** to admit it". That was at kale Sorry did i miss something? Give me one good reason why local is either overpowered or needs getting rid of and i'll give you a counter! Your turn! So wannabe gatecamping pirates cant run when another gang approaches with a size that comes close to the size of the gatecamping gang. So macro'ers cant log off when someone enters local. So people actually got to use those nice scanners for knowing if there is someone in a system So more strategies are possible, when you can hide in a system without everyone knowing who is there, from which corp/alliance and how many. Obvious failure is obvious

Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:06:00 - [71] Originally by: Furb Killer Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Furb Killer Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 14:56:02 I'll take that as a: "I lost but i am too ******** to admit it". That was at kale Sorry did i miss something? Give me one good reason why local is either overpowered or needs getting rid of and i'll give you a counter! Your turn! So wannabe gatecamping pirates cant run when another gang approaches with a size that comes close to the size of the gatecamping gang. So macro'ers cant log off when someone enters local. So people actually got to use those nice scanners for knowing if there is someone in a system So more strategies are possible, when you can hide in a system without everyone knowing who is there, from which corp/alliance and how many. Obvious failure is obvious 1. Anti-pies wont be able to see pirates in the newly removed local! 2. Someone entering the system won't see the macro miner! 3. Will the scanner reach that far? What are you saying? 4. You will never know how many people are hiding in a system, so any strategies are moot! Obvious failure is Obvious!
Furb Killer The Peacekeeper Core	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:13:00 - [72] Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 15:14:57 1. you realise they actually use intel channels, so they know where you are... 2. Thats why the scanner was invented (idiot) 3. Exactly, scanner wont reach that far. So you can hide somewhere if you got a nice safespot without being scanned (or at least not being scanned from the gates). 4. Your stupidity is becoming legendary. Anyway i checked some of your 'pvp' activity on battleclinic. Care to show me your last fair fight? I checked a bit your last kills, and i have found an astonishing one pvp ship you destroyed in the last 30 kills, and that was 3v1 with HIC + battlecruiser + command ship vs 1 battlecruiser. Obvious moron is obvious. You make it pretty clear that local can be removed as intel channel without large problems, as long as the average eve player got a higher iq than 30, unlike you. But you are too stupid to think of any other way than local to get intel.
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:18:00 - [73] Originally by: Furb Killer Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 15:14:57 1. you realise they actually use intel channels, so they know where you are... 2. Thats why the scanner was invented (idiot) 3. Exactly, scanner wont reach that far. So you can hide somewhere if you got a nice safespot without being scanned (or at least not being scanned from the gates). 4. Your stupidity is becoming legendary. Anyway i checked some of your 'pvp' activity on battleclinic. Care to show me your last fair fight? I checked a bit your last kills, and i have found an astonishing one pvp ship you destroyed in the last 30 kills, and that was 3v1 with HIC + battlecruiser + command ship vs 1 battlecruiser. Obvious moron is obvious. You make it pretty clear that local can be removed as intel channel without large problems, as long as the average eve player got a higher iq than 30, unlike you. But you are too stupid to think of any other way than local to get intel. signed claps lol Trinity Corporate Services
AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:20:00 - [74] eh? I could form my own one man corp. Declare war on some 30-50 man empire corp. Then kill alot of them in a week by trawling the main travel routes. While helpfull local isn't vital for this.
MineralOel Steuer Amarr OP EC	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:22:00 - [75] Originally by: AKULA UrQuan eh? I could form my own one man corp. Declare war on some 30-50 man empire corp. Then kill alot of them in a week by trawling the main travel routes. While helpfull local isn't vital for this. and this is bad?
northwesten Amarr Trinity Corporate Services	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:23:00 - [76] Originally by: AKULA UrQuan eh? I could form my own one man corp. Declare war on some 30-50 man empire corp. Then kill alot of them in a week by trawling the main travel routes. While helpfull local isn't vital for this. yer you could! so this would bring the real solo pvper fighter back in play! or small gangs! This would be fun too :) Trinity Corporate Services
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:29:00 - [77] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 15:30:34 Originally by: Furb Killer Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 15:14:57 1. you realise they actually use intel channels, so they know where you are... 2. Thats why the scanner was invented (idiot) 3. Exactly, scanner wont reach that far. So you can hide somewhere if you got a nice safespot without being scanned (or at least not being scanned from the gates). 4. Your stupidity is becoming legendary. Anyway i checked some of your 'pvp' activity on battleclinic. Care to show me your last fair fight? I checked a bit your last kills, and i have found an astonishing one pvp ship you destroyed in the last 30 kills, and that was 3v1 with HIC + battlecruiser + command ship vs 1 battlecruiser. Obvious moron is obvious. You make it pretty clear that local can be removed as intel channel without large problems, as long as the average eve player got a higher iq than 30, unlike you. But you are too stupid to think of any other way than local to get intel. 1. And your going to join every intel channel in every system you visit, kinda like a 'Local' channel? 2. Really? 3. Yay, we can all hide from each other, that will be fun. Loggin in to sit in the dark for 6hrs straight! 4. Ad Hominem ...again! Obvious moron is obvious. See my other posts. Btw i see you have hardly no kills! and are ranked 98000 or sumits!!! like you should be telling me about PvP??? lol!
Ban Shui Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:30:00 - [78] I haven't read the thread, so sorry if this has already been said, why not allow the scanner to see names and standings - perhaps limiting this function to an omnidirectional scan?
JADE DRAG0NESS Dark Scorpions Fate Weavers	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:31:00 - [79] Local is essential to carebear pirates and there wars because its been there crutch for a long time. Get rid of local and any intelligent player will adapt to the change. "Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god." -- Jean Rostand
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:34:00 - [80] Originally by: JADE DRAG0NESS Local is essential to carebear pirates and there wars because its been there crutch for a long time. Get rid of local and any intelligent player will adapt to the change. Actually Local is trivial for pirating. See my other posts.

AKULA UrQuan Caldari STK Scientific Black-Out	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:39:00 - [81] Originally by: northwesten yer you could! so this would bring the real solo pvper fighter back in play! or small gangs! This would be fun too :) Or someone who's name starts with the letter "A". Poping up at the top of local just plain sucks. Have far better luck with the minnie alt since it gets lost in the middle of local long enough to attack something.
Furb Killer The Peacekeeper Core	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:43:00 - [82] Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 15:43:59 I indeed dont have much pvp kills. Earning isk for nicer mission ship, then gonna do pvp again. But i do it solo, and wont run away for a fight like you would. I am not a pirate, if i wanted i would have had twice as many kills. If you would look at those kills, you would know they all had combat fitting (well except the pod, but he was stupid enough not to warp out), and that it was a 6 vs 1 situation. I knew they outnumbered me, but i didnt run like you would. I accepted it and made the best of it. I took out 4 of their ships before i was destroyed, and that was the first time i did solo pvp. Intresting huh, my first time solo pvp i got more fair kills than you with all your experience. You dont need much pvp experience to use some logic and realise you are stupid. 1. Just the locals need to be in that channel, so they can kick your ass before you dock/log. 2. Yes 3. Epic stupidity. That is just the truth, live with it. Why would you hide for 6 hours without doing anything? Not logging in is much easier. System got gatecamp. Group got a cov ops frig, black ops BS that is probably boosted with dedicated fuel bay, and a group recon ships and others who can be bridged. They jump in far from the gatecamps scanners. Then they warp toward the gatecampers and have fun. Even the ships that cant warp cloaked wont have a problem, since the campers cant get out fast enough when they only see the attackers when they are warping toward them. Or of course you just hide the entire fleet in a system you know your enemy is coming through. 4. I prefer to call it the truth! 5. You seem to mistake pirating with senseless gatecamping to get easy kills.
Tortun Nahme Minmatar Umbra Synergy Final Retribution Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:48:00 - [83] the problems with local: whether they change it or leave it someone is going to whine the problem with changing it: making a simple too more complicated leaves more room for bugs and more people complaining than before Originally by: Cecil Montague They should change that warning on entering low sec to: "Go read Crime and Punishment for a few days then come back."
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:50:00 - [84] Originally by: Furb Killer I indeed dont have much pvp kills. No **! Originally by:** Furb Killer Earning isk for nicer mission ship, then gonna do pvp again. But i do it solo, and wont run away for a fight like you would. I am not a pirate, if i wanted i would have had twice as many kills. What 12 kills instead of 6? Don't talk to me about PvP noob! Originally by: Furb Killer If you would look at those kills, you would know they all had combat fitting (well except the pod, but he was stupid enough not to warp out), and that it was a 6 vs 1 situation. I knew they outnumbered me, but i didnt run like you would. I accepted it and made the best of it. I took out 4 of their ships before i was destroyed, and that was the first time i did solo pvp. Intresting huh, my first time solo pvp i got more fair kills than you with all your experience. You dont need much pvp experience to use some logic and realise you are stupid. And none of my kills are PvP fitted? purlease! 1. You wont know im there without Local! 2. Lol! 3. Do you really think we dont ALL have covert/black ops alts? 4. ? 5. We don't just gatecamp you know!
Primnproper	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:56:00 - [85] Personally i think that they should replace local with a system based on submarine sonar with active and passive modes and maybe a 5-10 au range on passive and 100 au range on active but of course using active would pin point you and shout your presence to every one in system. The data from this system would of course have to be shown immediately on some sort of long range overview so that you didn't have to spam the scan button all the time. A system like that would not end wars it would lead to more interesting wars where the gathering of intel was a risky and interesting business that was an intergral part of warfare, much like it is in real war.
RuleoftheBone Minmatar Veto. Veto Corp	Posted - 2008.04.27 15:58:00 - [86] Originally by: Kale Kold You need some tool You got that right "Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way" General George Patton USA
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:06:00 - [87] Originally by: RuleoftheBone You got that right Agreed!
Furb Killer The Peacekeeper Core	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:14:00 - [88] Edited by: Furb Killer on 27/04/2008 16:15:13 Do you have more real kills than i have? Your last kills: iteron IV (cargo expanders) caracel (pve fit) dominix (no tank fitted at all, pve logistic setup) ferox (pve setup) drake (pve setup) ibis (normal setup) kestrel (not really fitted) mammoth (cargo expanders) caracel (circus fitting) imicus (no fitting) vexor (warpstabs vs hic) drake (half fitted) imicus (noob fitted, pve) iteron IV (mining fitted i guess) kestrel (pve fitted) ibis (normal fitting) prowler (no cloak fitted = dead) bestower (cargo expanders) drake (pve fitted) myrmidon (w00t first pvp fit, sucky one though. And 3v1) kestrel (pve fitted) caracel (half pve fitted) merlin (cargo expanders) badger (no fitting) omen (pvp fitting, wow second one) raven (pvp fitted i guess, too bad he forgot to fit his tank) taranis (pvp fitted, yeah 3 in a row) covetor (expanders) After that i had enough of it. Really impressed by your kills. I suppose fair fights arent your strongest point. I think we got different definitions of pvp fitted, but i think it is safe to say 80-90% of your targets have no defense, and of the remaining targets 80% is outnumbered.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:15:00 - [89] Originally by: Furb Killer Do you have more real kills than i have? Your last kills: iteron IV (cargo expanders) caracel (pve fit) dominix (no tank fitted at all, pve logistic setup) ferox (pve setup) drake (pve setup) ibis (normal setup) kestrel (not really fitted) mammoth (cargo expanders) caracel (circus fitting) imicus (no fitting) vexor (warpstabs vs hic) drake (half fitted) imicus (noob fitted, pve) iteron IV (mining fitted i guess) kestrel (pve fitted) ibis (normal fitting) prowler (no cloak fitted = dead) bestower (cargo expanders) drake (pve fitted) myrmidon (w00t first pvp fit, sucky one though. And 3v1) kestrel (pve fitted) caracel (half pve fitted) merlin (cargo expanders) badger (no fitting) omen (pvp fitting, wow second one) raven (pvp fitted i guess, too bad he forgot to fit his tank) taranis (pvp fitted, yeah 3 in a row) covetor (expanders) After that i had enough of it. Really impressed by your kills. I suppose fair fights arent your strongest point. And i bet i've made money in the last 2 weeks than you've ever seen! Pirating is about money not fair fights!!!
Furb Killer The Peacekeeper Core	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:16:00 - [90] Lmao, you have no idea what pirating is. How much isk did you make from the ibis? And all the kestrel's?

Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:17:00 - [91] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 16:19:14 Originally by: Furb Killer Lmao, you have no idea what pirating is. How much isk did you make from the ibis? And all the kestrel's? Actually Mr Jolly, one of my corp m8s killed an ibis the other day that had a dread BP in it so there you go. Originally by: Furb Killer And why exactly would remove local hurt you? So you cant run anymore when enemies come... You wouldn't find me without local!
Tommy TenKreds Animal Mercantile Executive	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:19:00 - [92] Originally by: Kale Kold Actually Mr Jolly, one of my corp m8s killed an ibis the other day that had a dread BP in it so there you go. Yeah this really contributes to the debate, gg. Have you managed to figure out yet that while intelligence is essential to warfare, local is not? Bandures > tommy you like a cowboy harry )
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:20:00 - [93] Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Have you managed to figure out yet that while intelligence is essential to warfare, local is not? Ad Hominem!
Furb Killer The Peacekeeper Core	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:21:00 - [94] I asked you how local helped you, not how local helped us. Finding you is btw pretty easy. I have played long in low sec, and i dont recall i ever didnt notice a gatecamp i went through...
ArmyOfMe hirr Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:21:00 - [95] let this thread die, op is clearly a moron. learn to adapt just like everyone else playing
Cordran Li Gallente The Really Awesome Players Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:22:00 - [96] What do you mean by "an argument hasn't been made to replace local?"
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:22:00 - [97] Originally by: ArmyOfMe let this thread die, op is clearly a moron. learn to adapt just like everyone else playing Ah an intelligent answer from an old enemy ...oh wait!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:25:00 - [98] Originally by: Cordran Li What do you mean by "an argument hasn't been made to replace local?" Well what is it then? because nobody can make one that stands scrutiny!
Cordran Li Gallente The Really Awesome Players Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:27:00 - [99] You didn't answer my question.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:33:00 - [100] Originally by: Cordran Li You didn't answer my question. An argument has not been made that warrants the Local channel being examined to see of it is overpowered or is needing to be replaced by another intel tool. As far as i am aware the Local channel is available to everybody in exactly the same capacity so as not to give any particular group of people an unfair advantage. This has so far to be challenged in any decent and intelligent way, other than 'waaaa i tried to gank that macro miner and he logged when i entered system, waaa'.

Caiman Graystock Quantum of Solace	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:39:00 - [101] Why the sudden surge of threads about this, are they actually considering removing local?
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:41:00 - [102] Originally by: Caiman Graystock Why the sudden surge of threads about this, are they actually considering removing local? It has been said that Local is being changed, although i can't find the dev post now.
Tommy TenKreds Animal Mercantile Executive	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:48:00 - [103] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Have you managed to figure out yet that while intelligence is essential to warfare, local is not? Ad Hominem! What? What a joke.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 16:55:00 - [104] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 16:55:09 Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Tommy TenKreds Have you managed to figure out yet that while intelligence is essential to warfare, local is not? Ad Hominem! What? What a joke. Ad Hominem! Stay on topic please.
Col Callahan Caldari DAB	Posted - 2008.04.27 17:14:00 - [105] Edited by: Col Callahan on 27/04/2008 17:20:03 OK, PVP is much "easier" to stack odds in ether or favor. so in turn a fleet will not engage a fleet fight they are not going to win. In turn no much fighting goes on unless you find a equal force to fight thats also willing to fight or trap a smaller fleet some how. Now care bear side, with this intel, all you have to do is pull a omg log-off-ski and your safe once a red or nute drops in local. yet again. pvp suffers. In real life fighting powers use radar to scan down and fight targets. 140AU safe spots are not commin so the argument is not valid that fleets could hide there all the time. if you wish to be safe then have scouts and have radar out all the time. maybe a scanner setting that scans skill that allows for Early warning systems from your scanner. if something is with in 5AU incoming at lvl one and 50 AU at lvl 5 with refesh rates of like 10 secs. To sume it up, local kinda takes the fun out of opening up the map.....seeing were there is a lone rating . ploting a course and scaning him down for a sweet stealth gank. what I wouldn't give for the days back when you could sneak up on some one in a belt....... and on that note, can't wait to see belts go to. SCANING WTF, not local free bee.
El Mauru Amarr The Kobayashi Maru Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2008.04.27 17:23:00 - [106] Originally by: Primnproper Personally i think that they should replace local with a system based on submarine sonar with active and passive modes and maybe a 5-10 au range on passive and 100 au range on active but of course using active would pin point you and shout your presence to every one in system. The data from this system would of course have to be shown immediately on some sort of long range overview so that you didn't have to spam the scan button all the time. A system like that would not end wars it would lead to more interesting wars where the gathering of intel was a risky and interesting business that was an intergral part of warfare, much like it is in real war. I'd like to highlight this as an excellent idea in an otherwise sub-par thread. IMHO a person should appear in local and as an "active beacon" in the following cases: 1. He/she has activated a module (MWD, mining laser, weapons). 2. He/She has typed in local There should be like a 2-3 minute timer on this. In case 1 everybody could do a warp-to at a random point about 50-200KM from the person. After this period the person disappears from local again. This would not stop people from finding targets to pewpew, but filters out AFK people and allows for masking fleets. I.e.: Intel gathering helps avoid traps but does not prevent one from finding pvp.
Trathen	Posted - 2008.04.27 17:31:00 - [107] Hey! Biters! Originally by: Trathen I definitely think CCP could take a look at some sub sims to get some inspiration.
Andreya Direct Intent	Posted - 2008.04.27 17:50:00 - [108] Originally by: Kale Kold Local is essential for War! Period! Please think this through people, local and war is at the very heart of EVE and a change by getting rid of either will change EVE (for the worst) forever. Trammel and Felluca, anyone???? HAHAHA war is not the heart of eve... 0.0 is.. try living out there. local is beneficial to both attackers and defenders... everyone stop being little girls and live with teh fact that noone is goign to tell you if your going to be robbed mugged or shot in real life... and noone SHOULD tell you (automatically) if your about to be ganked in a videa game... get over it... insurance payouts are already to high as it is. live with dying _________________________________________________________ Only once you've lost everything, are you free to do anything. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Navigator ([email protected])
Ringo Jeicha Caldari State War Academy	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:02:00 - [109] Ad hominem: It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it. With other words, every time he said that, he couldnt find anything to back it up. Sort of a geeky did to, did not.
Primnproper	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:04:00 - [110] Originally by: El Mauru I'd like to highlight this as an excellent idea in an otherwise sub-par thread. IMHO a person should appear in local and as an "active beacon" in the following cases: 1. He/she has activated a module (MWD, mining laser, weapons). 2. He/She has typed in local There should be like a 2-3 minute timer on this. In case 1 everybody could do a warp-to at a random point about 50-200KM from the person. After this period the person disappears from local again. This would not stop people from finding targets to pewpew, but filters out AFK people and allows for masking fleets. I.e.: Intel gathering helps avoid traps but does not prevent one from finding pvp. I like the idea of warping or using mods making you show (to anyone in range) but not as a warpable beacon, i think that would overpower the system in favour of incomming hostiles. It could bring in new mechanics too, like going into silent running and sit there without any mods turned on, though maybe for proper silent running you'd need to power down your ship with maybe a 30 second power up/down time so that you can't just disappear instantly and so that you can't instantly pounce without giving away your presence.

Reiisha Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:13:00 - [111] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Commander Criton Simply replace local with a stats window when you look at the local channel all you see is basic information here is an example: There is 16 players with neutral standings in the system There is 5 players with Negative standings in the system There is 97 war targets in the system There is 1 Player with good standings in the system And how do you Know their names? Know their age? Check their title? Check their bio? Check their corp? Check their alliance? These are all required intel needs! That's the entire reason why local (and it's functionality) should be nerfed. You can see too much too easily. You should not be able to see exactly who is in the system at all times, as this forces (amongst other things) blob warfare to happen. The way local works now, it simply ruins wars, and makes life hellishly easy for griefers, macro'ers, farmers and alts (and those last 3 groups especially benefit from local as it is now),especially with BACON to support this. Before trying to defend something, try and defend it from the point of view of the issue, not from your point of view. Also, if you want to diss me because of my corp, check my employment history first. A EVE History Wiki
Lee Thrace Universal Securities	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:13:00 - [112] Originally by: Kale Kold Please think this through people, local and war is at the very heart of EVE and a change by getting rid of either will change EVE (for the worst) forever. Carebears have ruined every single MMO where their whines have been yielded to. how can you be sure this will change eve for the worst? that sounds like your opinion m8. i must say i have been looking forward to local being gone since i started eve back in 2005! just think of all the not knowing that will come of it. my heart starts racin'just as i think of it :) goes out to get pacemaker really, dont say no before you try it. people will always find a way to gather intel in another way.
Piotr Anatolev Gallente The Black Rabbits The Gurlstas Associates	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:26:00 - [113] Originally by: Kale Kold Local is essential for War! Period! Allow me to disagree. Players should have to build and deploy their own robotic sentry networks and relays to populate the map with dots of whatever intel they would like on it - as well as local. Lets say you have an enmy blob at station, you place a covert ops there and voila you have those pilots thats on the same grid as the covert showing up in local. Or if you had a covert sensor sentry on the station grid you d get the same result. There could be tactical and stratecgic categories of sensor sentry probes. Those that give intel on the grid they are deployed inside, those that give intel on the whole system and those that give intel on the system and surrounding ones within x lighyears. They should require fuel to operate, all models except the smallest ones. They should also have a limited lifespan which could be exteded through repairs. Whats essential with fuels and repairs is that a network of sensor sentries requires maintenance but over longer period of times than POS s. they should also be scannable and destroyable but not a simple pushover to find and take out. Mind you taking out nodes in an enemies intel network will attract some attention - great for creating diversions. Theres so many interesting options to replace local with that it makes you wonder why the current implementation has been dragged along all these years.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:28:00 - [114] Originally by: Lee Thrace i must say i have been looking forward to local being gone since i started eve back in 2005! just think of all the not knowing that will come of it. Yeah your gonna have to take your entire fleet with you at all times, just incase you meet another blob which you can't see.
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:36:00 - [115] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Lee Thrace i must say i have been looking forward to local being gone since i started eve back in 2005! just think of all the not knowing that will come of it. Yeah your gonna have to take your entire fleet with you at all times, just incase you meet another blob which you can't see. Unless large blobs / fleets are the very thing that do appear on the scanner. The argument for removing local has come a long way from just getting rid of it: you really need to keep up. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:38:00 - [116] Originally by: Cailais Unless large blobs / fleets are the very thing that do appear on the scanner. The argument for removing local has come a long way from just getting rid of it: you really need to keep up. Ok, so what constitutes a large fleet/blob? 5 ships?, 10 ships?, 15 ships?, 20 ships?, 50 ships? You see what i did there? It's a stupid idea!
Cordran Li Gallente The Really Awesome Players Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:47:00 - [117] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Cailais Unless large blobs / fleets are the very thing that do appear on the scanner. The argument for removing local has come a long way from just getting rid of it: you really need to keep up. Ok, so what constitutes a large fleet/blob? 5 ships?, 10 ships?, 15 ships?, 20 ships?, 50 ships? You see what i did there? It's a stupid idea! Ad hominem
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.04.27 18:53:00 - [118] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Cailais Unless large blobs / fleets are the very thing that do appear on the scanner. The argument for removing local has come a long way from just getting rid of it: you really need to keep up. Ok, so what constitutes a large fleet/blob? 5 ships?, 10 ships?, 15 ships?, 20 ships?, 50 ships? You see what i did there? It's a stupid idea! Well you might see it as a stupid idea. Luckily we dont have to rely upon just numbers of ships as all ships have a Signature Radius which roughly corresponds to their size. Total the Signature Radius of these ships and you get a overall Signature Radius in one area: if it exceeds a given value those players are revealed on scan or in the local chat window. Now the area in which the sigs 'add up' is open for debate and the value at which a blob must be to exceed the 'fog of war' is open to debate. Ive further argued elsewhere that this 'fog of war' can be tied into environments - meaning it may not need be a static value across systems but can change by locality. Therefore there might be small areas (like gas clouds, near stars, specific belts etc) where you can 'hide' a large fleet - just as there will be areas where you cannot hide even a small frigate. So in answer to your question, no I dont 'see what you did there' and posting 'thats a stupid idea' doesnt advance the topic at all. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Anubis Xian Vertigo One	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:05:00 - [119] what is going to happen if local is removed? Tactical Skill. Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal. I'm the Juggernaut, *****!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:11:00 - [120] Originally by: Anubis Xian what is going to happen if local is removed? Tactical Skill. Explain please.

LittleTerror Caldari Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:16:00 - [121] Edited by: LittleTerror on 27/04/2008 19:16:41 I'd much prefer like I seen in another thread the scanner having a section which shows you ships entering your range of 14 AU or what ever the max scan range is, that with standings colours shown. Systems owned by alliances in 0.0 could have fitted a longer range scanner at a POS which broadcasts people entering local, ship type and standings, that could be broad casted into alliance chat maybe.
Cordran Li Gallente The Really Awesome Players Privateer Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:18:00 - [122] Although, if they do get rid of local, how can we smack talk each other?
OffBeaT	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:22:00 - [123] Edited by: OffBeaT on 27/04/2008 19:25:45 Edited by: OffBeaT on 27/04/2008 19:24:17 Edited by: OffBeaT on 27/04/2008 19:23:06 Edited by: OffBeaT on 27/04/2008 19:22:32 man, earn your kill track & him, it might take you a few weeks too find him but you can do it.. you guys just sound lazy too me. i tracked a pirate one time hafeway across alliance space in 00 systems without a tracker agent or local too do it. when finally i found him he wouldnt come out but i fond him. i asked people along the way if they saw him or where he was last seen they where more then willing too help. i used the kill boards too start my hunt it was a blast to do it the right way, homwork, skill, contacts with other alliance members who new this pirate. it took me a few days but i cought up too him.. you guys who clam this is just being lazy & you just dont wont too put the work into it..
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:25:00 - [124] Originally by: Cailais Total the Signature Radius of these ships and you get a overall Signature Radius in one area: if it exceeds a given value those players are revealed on scan or in the local chat window. Problem: 5 inties > 1 tech 1 cruiser. 5 inties sig < 1 tech 1 cruisers sig Vote Goumindong for CSM
Haalanii	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:30:00 - [125] 1) If you want to use an accurate WoW analogy jumping / warping where the game moves your character long distances is much more like taking a flight path. If you had to do this as often in WoW as you do in Eve you'd want to know if there was something in a zone before you traveled to it too. Additionally, you can use commands like /who to see friendlies and if you enter Arenas, Battlegrounds or any PVE encounter the game ensures the content is there. Besides, PvP in WoW doesn't carry anywhere near the same level of risk as Eve. Apples and Oranges. WoW is densely content rich, you always have stuff to do. Eve is very empty and VAST. This brings me to... 2) Roaming lowsec often means you go through empty systems or systems with 1 person who may be neutral or blue or just plain docked. Having to scan every damn planet and visit every station just to know if there is a target in your system is ridiculously boring. Low sec doesn't need to be any worse than it already is. A "raw numbers" system of sorting local could solve part of this problem, but they would need to do more. 3) They could switch to a raw number system if they overhauled scanning and implemented a new HUD-style minimap that showed traffic statistics, numbers in system, players on scan near you (I'd like scanning to have an automatic element as well as a more powerful active search mode that perhaps even gave clues to your own location) and other easily toggleable information without having to load the current map fullscreen. 4) Local chat would become just plain silly without the intel mixed in. Player A: Hello anyone here? Player B: No. Player A: ... Player A: Marco? 5) Oh, and why shouldn't entry/exit info from gates be public? The traffic / congestion levels are public, and the gate owners have no reason to keep pilot information confidential as they are not being paid by pilots for the use. 6) I'd be more open to this change if they gave us a counter to cloaked ships, especially those ships that are not designed to be stealthy to begin with.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:31:00 - [126] Originally by: OffBeaT man, earn your kill & track him, it might take you a few weeks too find him but you can do it.. you guys just sound lazy too me. If it took me weeks to find someone, i'd cancel my sub and play a game that was fun. No seriously are you saying war should be more protracted?
Lisento Slaven Amarr The Drekla Consortium	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:53:00 - [127] Anything that replaces local does have to include a way for the player to distinguish their standings. There was a reason CCP added this function to local (boosted local) and I imagine that this reason will STILL exist if local is removed. --- Put in space whales!
OffBeaT	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:56:00 - [128] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: OffBeaT man, earn your kill & track him, it might take you a few weeks too find him but you can do it.. you guys just sound lazy too me. If it took me weeks to find someone, i'd cancel my sub and play a game that was fun. No seriously are you saying war should be more protracted? hehe..protracted is my new word for the day, i had too look that one up too make shoure i comprehended it right. i dont see your point, i am not talking about war on a large scale. i am talking about bounty hunting or just plane getting even with somone. what are you saying here you should have a easy time of it too gank a guy in under 5mins like that or somthing with no real afferd too the hunt. it wont take weeks too find anyone in this game more like days or a day unless thay are barried deep within a alliance system and hidden & protected buy them & thats ok too me i can stealth my way in do my homwork use drones buy informent and catch upto him. this all can be done & why should it not. i say ccp is on the right track here and keep it up..
Science Lord	Posted - 2008.04.27 19:57:00 - [129] The Problem with your Therrory is that it wuld be a Boom to pirates. Reason Bears like me would wander out there and Play. As it is Fudge you and your Alliance wars
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 20:05:00 - [130] Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Patch86 Who says it needs to be the whole system, and who says it needs to be instant? You don't do a lot of PvP do you! For war you need instant and full intel on entire systems at a time. Of course whatever replaces Local (if a replacement is waranted at all) will have to be instant and give good intel on entire systems! It's that simple or war ends in EVE! I've been pretty much solely a PvPer for 2 years, in both 0.0 and Empire wars. How long have you been PvPing? I would have no problem doing roaming PvP with a range-limited scanner, and with a short delay in pilot/corp information. Fleet combat with full scout support would be even easier. It'd be a little more tricky, but thats the idea; local is too powerful. Replacing it with something less powerful will obviously make things less easy. Thats what "too powerful" means. Yes. BUT, what I believe he is getting at is empire pvp. The directional scanner is stupid in empire, as you cannot tell what the hell is where. There are random people all about, how are you supposed to tell them apart from war targets on the scanner. Ship names can be changed you know. --

Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.04.27 20:46:00 - [131] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Cailais Total the Signature Radius of these ships and you get a overall Signature Radius in one area: if it exceeds a given value those players are revealed on scan or in the local chat window. Problem: 5 inties > 1 tech 1 cruiser. 5 inties sig < 1 tech 1 cruisers sig Im not sure that's a problem - the high mass signatures Im refering to are full sized fleets probably consisting of large numbers of Battleships and / or capital vessels: again though that would be effected by the environment in which the fleet was stationed. Ill do some detailed analysis of the various signature radius possibilities - the idea might need a mulitplier to achieve reasonabley balanced conditions. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
OffBeaT	Posted - 2008.04.27 20:47:00 - [132] Yes. BUT, what I believe he is getting at is empire pvp. The directional scanner is stupid in empire, as you cannot tell what the hell is where. There are random people all about, how are you supposed to tell them apart from war targets on the scanner. Ship names can be changed you know. you got a real good point here and this should be worked out.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.27 21:11:00 - [133] Originally by: Cailais Im not sure that's a problem - the high mass signatures Im refering to are full sized fleets probably consisting of large numbers of Battleships and / or capital vessels: again though that would be effected by the environment in which the fleet was stationed. Ill do some detailed analysis of the various signature radius possibilities - the idea might need a mulitplier to achieve reasonabley balanced conditions. C. The issue is that roaming doesn't become "small numbers of ships" it becomes "large numbers of small ships" Vote Goumindong for CSM
Oam Mkoll Caldari The Legion of Spoon Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 21:15:00 - [134] All this whining about local with walls of text about realism and overpowered tools is pointless as long as the combat and stangings remain the way they are now. ---
Aria Seniste	Posted - 2008.04.27 21:30:00 - [135] Anyone who claims that people who think local should stay are just "lazy" have clearly never PVPed. Ok, let me ask you something: How do you "Stop being lazy and get intel" as seems to be the suggestion of what to do when local is gone? ...Scouts on EVERY stargate? Ok, so now you need a covert ops cloaked on every gate for say.. 3-4 jumps around to see what comes in and out of a system. If a gate isn't covered, an enemy fleet can completely dissapear by jumping through it. Oh, that will create a fun new intel gathering profession! Let me tell you, the most exciting thing I've ever done in EVE is sitting at a gate, cloaked, for several hours during a long engagement.. on the chance that enemies might come through. That sounds much more fun than fighting. And as for intel.. people seem to forget something: Local only gives names and standings. It does not give a fleets position in that system. It does not give ship types. What do you need to find where the fleet is sitting in a system and what ships they're flying...? Scouts! Oh my, isn't this a strange turn of events. You mean.. local isn't a 100% perfect intel tool? Honestly. Put some thoughts into your post. You need scouts if you want to see a fleet several jumps out, even if they're just watching local. Should a 100 man fleet be able to dissapear into your home system without leaving you any knowledge, even if they've logged out or are still around? ITT: Carebears pretend to have solutions, because they read threads about local and that makes them experts.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 21:52:00 - [136] Originally by: Aria Seniste Anyone who claims that people who think local should stay are just "lazy" have clearly never PVPed. Ok, let me ask you something: How do you "Stop being lazy and get intel" as seems to be the suggestion of what to do when local is gone? ...Scouts on EVERY stargate? Ok, so now you need a covert ops cloaked on every gate for say.. 3-4 jumps around to see what comes in and out of a system. If a gate isn't covered, an enemy fleet can completely dissapear by jumping through it. Oh, that will create a fun new intel gathering profession! Let me tell you, the most exciting thing I've ever done in EVE is sitting at a gate, cloaked, for several hours during a long engagement.. on the chance that enemies might come through. That sounds much more fun than fighting. And as for intel.. people seem to forget something: Local only gives names and standings. It does not give a fleets position in that system. It does not give ship types. What do you need to find where the fleet is sitting in a system and what ships they're flying...? Scouts! Oh my, isn't this a strange turn of events. You mean.. local isn't a 100% perfect intel tool? Honestly. Put some thoughts into your post. You need scouts if you want to see a fleet several jumps out, even if they're just watching local. Should a 100 man fleet be able to dissapear into your home system without leaving you any knowledge, even if they've logged out or are still around? ITT: Carebears pretend to have solutions, because they read threads about local and that makes them experts. Full of Win! And iterates exactly all my points! You Win the thread!
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2008.04.27 21:57:00 - [137] Actually, it's the carebears that want to keep local. Being able to see a hostile enter system and log/cloak/dock is perfect for the avoidant of risk. 'intel' works two ways - you need to find your target, but then they don't get to see you coming, as soon as you enter system. Local didn't used to have standings. Wars worked then, too. But y'know, I think you're attacking a straw man here. No one's suggesting 'just removing it', because both sides of a fight are disadvantaged. Most of the suggestions I've seen are along the lines of replacing it, with a more coherant intel system, that isn't quite as trivial as 'check a chat channel'. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.27 22:01:00 - [138] Edited by: Kale Kold on 27/04/2008 22:01:57 Originally by: James Lyrus Actually, it's the carebears that want to keep local. Being able to see a hostile enter system and log/cloak/dock is perfect for the avoidant of risk. 'intel' works two ways - you need to find your target, but then they don't get to see you coming, as soon as you enter system. Local didn't used to have standings. Wars worked then, too. But y'know, I think you're attacking a straw man here. No one's suggesting 'just removing it', because both sides of a fight are disadvantaged. Most of the suggestions I've seen are along the lines of replacing it, with a more coherant intel system, that isn't quite as trivial as 'check a chat channel'. Yes but if you replace it, the replacment has to have at least the same functionality, thus negating the need to replace it. Adding skills to the mix just adds more overhead for newer people, which are the ones that do most whining?
Blane Xero Amarr The Firestorm Cartel	Posted - 2008.04.27 22:22:00 - [139] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: northwesten This thread fails and a troll! move along now Oh not get rid of local just make it like alliance chat! when someone speak they appear. If they don't then stay hidden. That easy If you really need local then maybe work on your skills on getting intel than been a lazy ... Again coming from a carebear mining corp who have no experience of PvP. All i'm gonna add is this - Your intel gathering sucks, you look at a corp HQ and name as their representative. If this is how you gather intel, then yes your going to have problems, but everyone else with more reliable intel wont struggle.
Anubis Xian Vertigo One	Posted - 2008.04.27 22:26:00 - [140] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Anubis Xian what is going to happen if local is removed? Tactical Skill. Explain please. People will be forced to increase their intel gathering methods, whether from scanner, the map or from scouts. They will have to learn to be aware of what goes on around them or die by those that do. 1. Remove Local's all seeing eye. 2. Allow free warping. 3. Perhaps implement a more logical long range sensor scanner, but much less able to see what it shouldnt. 4. Get rid of Stargates and allow all ships the ability to Star Jump. Limit their range so they have to make stops along the way, much like capitals do. 5. Change the function of the Star in a System to an Interstellar Nav Point with a 1000 km random jump in radius (to help limit the effect of concentrated camping like happens at Stargates). 6. Focus High Sec System Navies around the Star. 7. Allow 0.0 Systems to have one POS (this POS also might be the Sovereignty Keystone if made more valuable than moon orbiting stations) built within the Star Jump Horizon (keep their range limited to 250 km). 8. Give POSes an Array that will do system sweep scans that will let friendly interceptors warp to the resulting contacts. 9. Change station dynamics to require an actual docking sequence similar to Freelancer. 10. Allow Capitals to transit empire space as long as they do not try to warp from the Star (CONCORD will call that criminal behaviour and kill you). Does any of the above sound bad? Keep or implement a similar link system like what the current stargate network uses to help control traffic flows. Pirating may become easier or harder depending on how CCP would implement the Star Drive mechanics. Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal. I'm the Juggernaut, *****!

Tortun Nahme Minmatar Umbra Synergy Final Retribution Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.27 22:28:00 - [141] unrealistic ideas FTW Originally by: Cecil Montague They should change that warning on entering low sec to: "Go read Crime and Punishment for a few days then come back."
Aria Seniste	Posted - 2008.04.27 22:33:00 - [142] I fully support removing stargates for ships to warp from star to star. Make it based on distance, similar to jump bridges. It makes more sense. Honestly, the fact that you can hold a chokepoint when there are literally lightyears of empty space that a route could be carved through is a bit silly. Theres no reason you should have to go one star at a time to travel. Of course, it won't be implemented.. but it would be a more interesting mechanic than flying 20 systems one gate at a time.
El Yatta Mercenary Forces	Posted - 2008.04.27 22:35:00 - [143] Edited by: El Yatta on 27/04/2008 22:36:19 OP, your posts appear inconsistent. Firstly, you have repeatedly said "ad hominem", a phrase which I would question your understanding of when you accused half of the people who disagreed with you of being carebears who have no valid opinion on combat matters. If that isnt an ad hominem, what is? I wonder if you'll have the gall to make the same accusations at me? No? Ok, then perhaps I can make a few points. I can agree with you that removing local requires an intel tool to replace it. What I do NOT agree on is that it has to have ALL the attributes of local - numbers, standings, names, and thus corp/alliance history, age, etc, in order to PVP. What in fact you are saying is that you require that inte, free, immediately, as a crutch. If sufficient intel to prevent us all being completely blind is provided, the good players will adapt to the loss of that crutch. I beleive there should be two tools, some sort of system-wide ability, which out to be fairly vague, and near-immediate (perhaps 15-60 seconds margin of error), and a more accurate one, which perhaps ought to be the current scanner upgraded to closer to 25 au and with some standings ability. The below all concerns any immediate/quick and system-wide tool. In nullsec, all that is needed is number. Most of space, especially for the solo or small gang player is empty. Anyone else is a threat. If you are in a bigger gang, you should have intelligence gathering capabilities of your own - scouts watchign key gates,sufficient probers, etc.In highsec, some sort of standings knoweldge is needed more system-wide. In lowsec, it could go either way - and thats where the debate should be, on how much standings info should be given. I have yet to see a compelling argument as to why info on exact people in space should be given. Conversely, the argument for removing local is simple - intelligence gathering is a skill. When it is given freely to everyone, it makes PVP and avoiding it too easy, too simple. When you are left to gather your own, it makes the best win. What remains to debate is the degree to which that should be provided - have everyone 100% in the dark (imo one too far, very difficult for newbies and too radical a change) to having everyone know 100% everything (as now.) The only convincing argument I can think of against changing and removing local is that the only way to test an intel tool, is on TQ. You cant test how easy it is to hunt, to avoid hunters, to find targets in empire and 0.0, to track enemy gangs and fleets, on SiSi, because people dont behave as normal there. They crowd into FD and shoot each other in funnymoney setups. The only reason not to change local is that you can only test your solution on TQ, and if it goes wrong, well.... Lastly, you keep lashing out at "carebears" (whoever they are) by saying it is them that whine to remove local. Its not. Those that dont PVP (thats not the correct definiton of carebear, but never mind) would be the biggest losers, unable to tell if they are being stalked until its too late. I would love that, but Im sure they wouldnt. Put it like this, right now, to find miners/ratters in a 0.0 system, I can go to planets with belts and scan, and use my directional scanner to pick up other planets/clusters. I only do this in systems with people in it. If we're all blind, no local, (which is NOT what I'm advocating, but the most extreme version that we can imagine) I now have to do this on EVERY system. But If i do that, I will find something, and whne I do, they wont have had any advance knowledge until I drop out of warp. Previously they had from the time I first enter system, which could be anywhere between 30s and 3-4 minutes depending on how big the system, how many celestials to cover, whether or not they recognise my covops alt, etc. _______________________________________________ Mercenary Forces
James Lyrus Lyrus Associates	Posted - 2008.04.27 22:44:00 - [144] Originally by: Kale Kold Yes but if you replace it, the replacment has to have at least the same functionality, thus negating the need to replace it. I'm afraid that's where your whole argument breaks down. When you replace something, you don't need to replace it with something identical, because ... as you correctly point out, that means there's no point. However if you redesign the gameplay mechanic behind it, such that it's both functional and interesting, then you get a better system all around. And yes, that does mean that it's probably not quite as trivial as 'check targets in local', but on the flip side, the targets won't immediately be able to see you in local, either. I don't know in full detail as to what would make a 'good' replacement. But personally, I think some kind of 'range based' ship detection and identification system would be good. Thinking something like the current probing mechanics, but combined with identifying the pilots. Maybe even having an active/passive system, like you see in submarine films - you can turn on you scanner, and see stuff coming, but hilight yourself, or you can turn it off and 'run quiet'. shrug. There's lots of room to redesign 'target finding/evasion' such that it serves the needs of both parties, and making it an interesting game of hide and seek. -- Crane needs more grid 249km locking?
OffBeaT	Posted - 2008.04.27 22:52:00 - [145] Edited by: OffBeaT on 27/04/2008 22:52:17 If we're all blind, no local, (which is NOT what I'm advocating, but the most extreme version that we can imagine) I now have to do this on EVERY system. But If i do that, I will find something, and whne I do, they wont have had any advance knowledge until I drop out of warp. Previously they had from the time I first enter system, which could be anywhere between 30s and 3-4 minutes depending on how big the system, how many celestials to cover, whether or not they recognise my covops alt, etc. all the more reason why i wont too see decoy probes & counter worp jamming drones in the game just for that kind of attack on me ratting tanked where i cant use stabs.. you should have too hunt like this..
Brun Thorvald	Posted - 2008.04.27 23:05:00 - [146] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Lee Thrace i must say i have been looking forward to local being gone since i started eve back in 2005! just think of all the not knowing that will come of it. Yeah your gonna have to take your entire fleet with you at all times, just incase you meet another blob which you can't see. No Kale, I'm going to patrol in an expendable frigate. You gank my Slasher. I find where you are, and what you're flying. C-o-m-b-a-t I-n-t-e-l
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.04.27 23:12:00 - [147] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Cailais Im not sure that's a problem - the high mass signatures Im refering to are full sized fleets probably consisting of large numbers of Battleships and / or capital vessels: again though that would be effected by the environment in which the fleet was stationed. Ill do some detailed analysis of the various signature radius possibilities - the idea might need a mulitplier to achieve reasonabley balanced conditions. C. The issue is that roaming doesn't become "small numbers of ships" it becomes "large numbers of small ships" Well, that depends on your definition of what a large gang is - we already have fairly large gangs of roaming ships so Im not sure my proposal will exaccerbate this - and is it actually a big problem in and of itself? 15 interceptors vs 15 interceptors sounds quite interesting to me: as opposed to being blobed by the same number of carriers. Something which also struck me whilst reviewing the numbers here is the impact of using a MWD. Now under my proposal MWDs have a big imapct on intel: A Gall Recon for example has a Sig Radius of 155m with MWD off - turn it on however and it rockets to 968m. 2 MWD'ing HACs/Recons then have the equivalent Sig Radius of a Dreadnought! My proposal therefore has ramifications in regard to nano-ships and blobs - whilst making the lone mission runner / miner (AB) actually less obvious in comparison. C. A new look at Local - IDEA
Commander 598 GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.27 23:13:00 - [148] Originally by: El Yatta I beleive there should be two tools, some sort of system-wide ability, which out to be fairly vague, and near-immediate (perhaps 15-60 seconds margin of error), and a more accurate one, which perhaps ought to be the current scanner upgraded to closer to 25 au and with some standings ability. I thought half the point was to remove the system wide thing so space might actually appear a little bigger? Depending on where you are and how thorough whoever looking for you is, you could go completely unnoticed. Also: Someone said "free warp" and that definitely needs to be done. Why can't I just pick a spot on the system map and warp to it? It would work quite well with the local nerf.
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.27 23:25:00 - [149] Originally by: Cailais Well, that depends on your definition of what a large gang is - we already have fairly large gangs of roaming ships so Im not sure my proposal will exaccerbate this - and is it actually a big problem in and of itself? 15 interceptors vs 15 interceptors sounds quite interesting to me: as opposed to being blobed by the same number of carriers. Something which also struck me whilst reviewing the numbers here is the impact of using a MWD. Now under my proposal MWDs have a big imapct on intel: A Gall Recon for example has a Sig Radius of 155m with MWD off - turn it on however and it rockets to 968m. 2 MWD'ing HACs/Recons then have the equivalent Sig Radius of a Dreadnought! My proposal therefore has ramifications in regard to nano-ships and blobs - whilst making the lone mission runner / miner (AB) actually less obvious in comparison. C. Everyone uses an MWD which simply makes it hard to balance. If a fleet turned on their MWDs to burn out of a bubble they would spike just as well. Anchor some large bubbles on gates and even small forces are going to ping on your scan. Regarding the "Large fleet" issue. Its that ships do not increase in power linearly as they get larger. Due to ewar and other things a coordinated gang of smaller ships is typically much stronger than the larger ship. So while it might take 2-4 cruisers to fell a BC or even more to fell a BS when they are all DPS ships. So now you have a "gang" with the "size of a cruiser" except its not, its 3 inties and a kitsune which packs cruiser level ewar, and 600 DPS out of the inties [while being faster etc]. This means that larger gangs of smaller ships look "smaller" than they really are. This pushes you towards two extremes of fighting. Either bring a small ships, or bring a lot battleships Vote Goumindong for CSM
Cailais Amarr VITOC Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.04.28 00:08:00 - [150] Originally by: Goumindong Originally by: Cailais Well, that depends on your definition of what a large gang is - we already have fairly large gangs of roaming ships so Im not sure my proposal will exaccerbate this - and is it actually a big problem in and of itself? 15 interceptors vs 15 interceptors sounds quite interesting to me: as opposed to being blobed by the same number of carriers. Something which also struck me whilst reviewing the numbers here is the impact of using a MWD. Now under my proposal MWDs have a big imapct on intel: A Gall Recon for example has a Sig Radius of 155m with MWD off - turn it on however and it rockets to 968m. 2 MWD'ing HACs/Recons then have the equivalent Sig Radius of a Dreadnought! My proposal therefore has ramifications in regard to nano-ships and blobs - whilst making the lone mission runner / miner (AB) actually less obvious in comparison. C. Everyone uses an MWD which simply makes it hard to balance. If a fleet turned on their MWDs to burn out of a bubble they would spike just as well. Anchor some large bubbles on gates and even small forces are going to ping on your scan. Regarding the "Large fleet" issue. Its that ships do not increase in power linearly as they get larger. Due to ewar and other things a coordinated gang of smaller ships is typically much stronger than the larger ship. So while it might take 2-4 cruisers to fell a BC or even more to fell a BS when they are all DPS ships. So now you have a "gang" with the "size of a cruiser" except its not, its 3 inties and a kitsune which packs cruiser level ewar, and 600 DPS out of the inties [while being faster etc]. This means that larger gangs of smaller ships look "smaller" than they really are. This pushes you towards two extremes of fighting. Either bring a small ships, or bring a lot battleships I understand where youre coming from - but how often do you see gangs of 3 inties and a EAS frigate? Also Local equates to player numbers not ship types. Currently if 4 people jump into a system and Im ratting in my curse I might dock. Why? Well Ive no idea if theyre in 4 BSs, 3 Rapiers and a Carrier or 3 Inties and a EAS so I dock to be on the safe side. However, Id happily take on 3 Inties and an EAS in curse. Itd probably be quite a good fight aswell. (Also youre using the extreme end of the ship scale. 2 cruisers are roughly the same size sig radius wise as 1 BC). What Im driving at is by providing a degree of uncertainty theres an added level of tactical consideration. - Lets say you jump into a system with 15 BSs. The system looks empty and so you settle down to camp the gate. Unfortunately your blob of BS is blatantly obvious to everyone - what's not obvious to your fleet is the 20 BSs dispersed across the system hidden amongst the radiation of the belts and planets... C. A new look at Local - IDEA

Seth Tiburius Decorum Inc Tygris Alliance	Posted - 2008.04.28 00:24:00 - [151] Originally by: Cailais I understand where youre coming from - but how often do you see gangs of 3 inties and a EAS frigate? This might be the case if people want to fly 'under the radar' so to speak though. Not necessarily a bad thing, as the majority are also advocating small gang fights, as opposed to larger blobs. Originally by: Cailais Also Local equates to player numbers not ship types. Currently if 4 people jump into a system and Im ratting in my curse I might dock. Why? Well Ive no idea if theyre in 4 BSs, 3 Rapiers and a Carrier or 3 Inties and a EAS so I dock to be on the safe side. Which is the opposite of the system proposed I guess (disregarding the number of pilots, and just looking at signature radius); something that can be solved with a hybrid system with an offset for the number of ships, and then ad the signature radius on top of that. But I really like the idea of passive/active scanning, messing with the chance of being scanned down perhaps? E.g. if someone's ratting and using his scanner in an active mode, he's going to be easier to find, but also have the advantage of seeing any incoming boogies from a farther distance or with more detail.
Colonel Rykef Ministry of War	Posted - 2008.04.28 00:57:00 - [152] Local is far too overpowered for war, you dont have to do anything to get all this intel which can give you a fair idea of if your going to win or not, meaning a smart FC can pick and choose his winning battles very often. By making it harder to get intel you open the floor to more pvp, hunting people will be harder but the reward is that its much easier to sneak up on them. For the war debate, I agree with an idea suggested earlier in the thread, stats should be made available such as 10 war targets have passed through this system in the last hour/30mins/5mins, giving you some clue as to when to start hunting for them.
TimGascoigne	Posted - 2008.04.28 01:22:00 - [153] Originally by: Colonel Rykef Local is far too overpowered for war, you dont have to do anything to get all this intel which can give you a fair idea of if your going to win or not, meaning a smart FC can pick and choose his winning battles very often. By making it harder to get intel you open the floor to more pvp, hunting people will be harder but the reward is that its much easier to sneak up on them. For the war debate, I agree with an idea suggested earlier in the thread, stats should be made available such as 10 war targets have passed through this system in the last hour/30mins/5mins, giving you some clue as to when to start hunting for them. dude this game has over 4000 solar systems just finding the correct system is a challenge in itself. Also all because you can gauge numbers does not mean (A) thats all of them because who knows how many reinforcements lay in wait behind the next gate. (B) the number of times I have been in a fight which we should have won and then super capitals are cyno'ed in (C) more numbers does not mean victory at all I have been in gangs of 30 people and being victorious against gangs of 50 people and of course naturally I have been in the reverse shoes and lost. So what are you going to do replace local with something that is all but local in name...... because if you do then you open the way for a more complicated interface and bugs. And if you don't then you will have to undock in a very large blob every time to ensure you have the upper hand and this will make particularly 0.0 inaccessible to smaller organisations which corp used to be.
Dr Zoidbeirg	Posted - 2008.04.28 01:26:00 - [154] Have a "local" type window which you have to refresh manually. Or a system scanner which shows you whats there but not where (also manual refresh only).
TimGascoigne	Posted - 2008.04.28 01:30:00 - [155] Originally by: Dr Zoidbeirg Have a "local" type window which you have to refresh manually. Or a system scanner which shows you whats there but not where (also manual refresh only). I think the code writers will be making the macro for this even before it is launched lol
Goumindong Amarr Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.04.28 01:45:00 - [156] Originally by: Cailais I understand where youre coming from - but how often do you see gangs of 3 inties and a EAS frigate? Also Local equates to player numbers not ship types. Currently if 4 people jump into a system and Im ratting in my curse I might dock. Why? Well Ive no idea if theyre in 4 BSs, 3 Rapiers and a Carrier or 3 Inties and a EAS so I dock to be on the safe side. However, Id happily take on 3 Inties and an EAS in curse. Itd probably be quite a good fight aswell. (Also youre using the extreme end of the ship scale. 2 cruisers are roughly the same size sig radius wise as 1 BC). What Im driving at is by providing a degree of uncertainty theres an added level of tactical consideration. - Lets say you jump into a system with 15 BSs. The system looks empty and so you settle down to camp the gate. Unfortunately your blob of BS is blatantly obvious to everyone - what's not obvious to your fleet is the 20 BSs dispersed across the system hidden amongst the radiation of the belts and planets... I am using the extreme case because its the easiest to make a clear example of and because its the easiest to exploit. You've got 20 BS, what is to say instead you don't have 200 interceptors? If you can hide fleets then you have the same problem as before just in a different manner. No one camps except with bait and a bubble and fast tackler then the rest of the fleet hides. I.E. your change doesn't fix the problem it just makes the problem look different Vote Goumindong for CSM
Novemb3r Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2008.04.28 02:04:00 - [157] I don't like local. I want it gone. If you would like to argue about PvP credentials then please be my guest. I'm fairly sure my corp and alliance ticker speak for themselves. And now an example!! Recently we declared war on an alliance. We moved all our stuff and got stuck in. At first things went well. We killed them, they killed us. Then we killed them a little too much and they stopped playing. They huddled in their home system. Every time I jumped into this system to get a fight what I actually got was blobs camping all the gates because they knew straight away that I was there. Result - Either they all docked or I got blobbed. No fun. Without local I could jump in and cruise around looking for someone to kill. This has an upside and a downside for me. The upside is that they don't know I'm there until I do something. The downside is I don't know if they are there at all and if they are there could be 50 of them If they are smart and in gang that means they could all warp on top of me at once. This provides a little excitement in my life. Now I need to be aware of what's going on. This is merely my opinion on the matter. I just figured I'd add my 2 cents as you seem to be blasting other posters based on their perceived lack of PvP experience. I'm just talking from the perspective of someone who does, in fact, participate in PvP and wars on a pretty regular basis. -
Spacy Tracy Science and Trade Institute	Posted - 2008.04.28 02:28:00 - [158] Originally by: Novemb3r Then we killed them a little too much and they stopped playing. They huddled in their home system. Every time I jumped into this system to get a fight what I actually got was blobs camping all the gates because they knew straight away that I was there. Result - Either they all docked or I got blobbed. No fun. Just lol. How about a module you could mount that would make outposts disappear, jettisoning all contents and inhabitants into space when you arrive? If there was ever a perfect example of how the desire to remove local is simply the desire to get ganks served up on a silver platter, it is this. It's amazing to me how many convoluted ways people have come up with to try and smokescreen "I want everyone to die before me".
Novemb3r Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2008.04.28 03:09:00 - [159] Originally by: Spacy Tracy Just lol. How about a module you could mount that would make outposts disappear, jettisoning all contents and inhabitants into space when you arrive? If there was ever a perfect example of how the desire to remove local is simply the desire to get ganks served up on a silver platter, it is this. It's amazing to me how many convoluted ways people have come up with to try and smokescreen "I want everyone to die before me". Ganks are of no interest to me. It has nothing to do with people being easier for me to kill. I don't care if they dock up. They can all run for the hills, cancel their accounts and go play WoW when I enter local for all I care. It doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that they have the chance to do this for free as soon as I enter local. Without having to put in any effort. If I want to kill them I have to come in, avoid the gate camp, then scan or probe down someone and hope that they are still there when I warp in and there's not 50 other guys waiting to drop capitals on my head. All they have to do is sit there with local open and hit "dock" as soon as I jump in. They don't have to think or pay attention. They don't have to do anything. All I'm saying is make it take at least a bit of effort to know I'm there. Have a scout on the gate. Have a module that scans for me. I don't care if they know I'm there and 100 of them dock when I come in in a shuttle. They just shouldn't get that info for free. -
Xioden Acap Lightspeed Enterprises Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.04.28 03:23:00 - [160] Originally by: Novemb3r Originally by: Spacy Tracy Just lol. How about a module you could mount that would make outposts disappear, jettisoning all contents and inhabitants into space when you arrive? If there was ever a perfect example of how the desire to remove local is simply the desire to get ganks served up on a silver platter, it is this. It's amazing to me how many convoluted ways people have come up with to try and smokescreen "I want everyone to die before me". Ganks are of no interest to me. It has nothing to do with people being easier for me to kill. I don't care if they dock up. They can all run for the hills, cancel their accounts and go play WoW when I enter local for all I care. It doesn't bother me. What bothers me is that they have the chance to do this for free as soon as. I enter local. Without having to put in any effort. If I want to kill them I have to come in, avoid the gate camp, then scan or probe down someone and hope that they are still there when I warp in and there's not 50 other guys waiting to drop capitals on my head. All they have to do is sit there with local open and hit "dock" as soon as I jump in. They don't have to think or pay attention. They don't have to do anything. All I'm saying is make it take at least a bit of effort to know I'm there. Have a scout on the gate. Have a module that scans for me. I don't care if they know I'm there and 100 of them dock when I come in in a shuttle. They just shouldn't get that info for free. For a second lets say local is completely removed. So now people have to rely on the scanner to check for potential hostiles. So now your potential targets instead of watching local, have to keep spamming their directional scanner, once they see an unidentified ship, they'll dock up much like they do when they would have seen you in local. Now the only difference is you still have to try and scan out your targets, you just don't know if they're there to begin with, and your potential targets have to sit their spamming their scanner constantly. It also might just be my imagination, but it just seems like everyone screaming about removing local in one form or another seem to overlook the fact that they won't have local either... But bottom line something should potentially change, its just a matter in my opinion of making sure the change isn't to something annoying. It's still a game at the end of the day. Spamming scanner or having to sit at a gate to watch for potential hostiles is annoying and not what most people would consider fun.

Novemb3r Vale Heavy Industries Molotov Coalition	Posted - 2008.04.28 03:29:00 - [161] Originally by: Xioden Acap For a second lets say local is completely removed. So now people have to rely on the scanner to check for potential hostiles. So now your potential targets instead of watching local, have to keep spamming their directional scanner, once they see an unidentified ship, they'll dock up much like they do when they would have seen you in local. Now the only difference is you still have to try and scan out your targets, you just don't know if they're there to begin with, and your potential targets have to sit their spamming their scanner constantly. It also might just be my imagination, but it just seems like everyone screaming about removing local in one form or another seem to overlook the fact that they won't have local either... But bottom line something should potentially change, its just a matter in my opinion of making sure the change isn't to something annoying. It's still a game at the end of the day. Spamming scanner or having to sit at a gate to watch for potential hostiles is annoying and not what most people would consider fun. I understand that I won't have local either. The difference is that I know where my targets are because we spend the weeks leading up to a war scouting them out, finding out their habits, travel routes and bases. So even without local I have a pretty good idea of where I can find people. And if they decide to up and move, well then I guess I just have to track them down again. The game already provides me the tools for this in locater agents. And I agree, whatever method is put in to replace local it shouldn't be a mad button mashing thing like the current scanner is. I'm not saying I know the answer. I was just trying to give an example of why I think it's not a good thing to have and to rebut the OP assertion that local is needed for wars.
Eval B'Stard Minmatar Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.04.28 04:46:00 - [162] In all this thread I've heard people banging on about how it shouldbe harder to find targets, local should be removed and replaced with something that makes it harder to find people. Why ? This is a game right ? and in a game your MAIN objective should be to have fun, if the game turns into more of a chore it becomes less fun. Removing local or replacing it with something that takes even MORE WORK reduces the fun factor. If you want more realism go join the Army and fight for your country, I want to have FUN I don't want to have to spend precious GAME time going through rakes of scanner data just to see if there might be a war target in system. I don't want my fleet sitting around twiddling thier thumbs whilst the scout gathers intel on a system, we do enough of that already. Some of you take this GAME far too seriously. When a GAME becomes more of a chore then it becomes less FUN. There is already plenty to think about in this GAME without adding more unnecessary work.
Skjorta	Posted - 2008.04.28 05:00:00 - [163] The game would get really boring really quickly, spending days looking around empty systems for players. You all act as if local tells you exactly where they are, what they are flying and how their ship is set up. It gives you a name and maybe a colored box. The rest you have to deduce and decide for yourself. Which is very reasonable tbh.
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.28 07:45:00 - [164] Originally by: Skjorta The game would get really boring really quickly, spending days looking around empty systems for players. You all act as if local tells you exactly where they are, what they are flying and how their ship is set up. It gives you a name and maybe a colored box. The rest you have to deduce and decide for yourself. Which is very reasonable tbh. Exactly! Who wants to work in a game!
Lee Thrace Universal Securities	Posted - 2008.04.28 15:29:00 - [165] Originally by: Eval B'Stard This is a game right ? and in a game your MAIN objective should be to have fun, if the game turns into more of a chore it becomes less fun. what if i say i'd have more fun with local gone? it's just your opinion and there are gonna be people that quite possible enjoy the game more with local out the window in the end, it's all relative anyway. i think local will certainly spice up the game and add MORE fun instead of decreasing it. however i cannot say this for sure as i havent experienced this yet c'mon take a chance!
Kale Kold Caldari Vicious Little Killers	Posted - 2008.04.28 17:52:00 - [166] Originally by: Lee Thrace c'mon take a chance! And risk halting the enjoyment of hundreds of thousands of players and collapsing CCP's as a business? NO!!!
Karlemgne Tides Of War	Posted - 2008.04.28 18:26:00 - [167] Originally by: Kale Kold Originally by: Patch86 Who says it needs to be the whole system, and who says it needs to be instant? You don't do a lot of PvP do you! For war you need instant and full intel on entire systems at a time. Of course whatever replaces Local (if a replacement is waranted at all) will have to be instant and give good intel on entire systems! It's that simple or war ends in EVE! cough cough bull**** cough cough If you need local to fight a war, and cannot think of any way you might go about fighting a war without local, you're inept and incompetent. Personally, I don't think you're either... you are just trying to be alarmist because: 1. You are a troll 2. You don't want the current system to change so you're going to sit in the mud and scream about the sky falling until you get your way. -Karlemgne
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.04.28 18:43:00 - [168] Originally by: Kale Kold Trammel and Felluca, anyone???? This is the only thing I agree with from the OP, whatever is done to local (if anything) must be done in both 0.0 and empire or you have the Fellucia affect as the OP mentioned (wiki it if you don't know, its from Ultima Online). IMO, local should be removed and replaced with a more functional / 3D scanner and/or some way of determining if war targets are in system (crucial for Empire related stuffz), it could also be motivation for 0.0 entities to War Dec each other. -- Originally by: CCP Oveur ...every forum whine feels like a baby pony is getting killed
egegergergsdgedgege	Posted - 2008.04.29 11:38:00 - [169] Originally by: Kale Kold Trammel and Felluca, anyone???? Indeed. Ultima Online was ruined with that change. In the beginning UO had much in common with EVE. It had Towns that were like highsec and it had a kind of lowsec outside the Towns, where you got flagged criminal for illegal actions and even got perma red if u killed too many inocent people. This all was lost with the split to Felluca and Trammel. The Carebears had won. Riskfree farming for everyone. How exciting.


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.