EVE Search - [ISSUE] Modify LOCAL chat

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Assembly Hall

[ISSUE] Modify LOCAL chat

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tyrrhena Maxus Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.09 14:28:00 - [1] My suggestion is to modify local chat so that it doesn't show who is in system. Local chat is currently used as a tactical tool and I believe this hinders the atmosphere and game play potential of the game. This would make space much more exciting, potentially lead to more dynamic pvp opportunities and would encourage people to work together more and in new ways. It would make space feel like the giant ocean it is, not just a series of interconnected fishbowls. I believe that CONSTELLATION chat should auto-update, rather than local chat. This way hostiles can still be located but not instantly pinpointed to a single system. I think this would be a balanced change for the better, as though it may benefit a potential attacker, it may also benefit someone who doesn't want to engage ie a miner or someone hauling. It would make fleets more reliant on intelligence from players rather than from a box full of names. Discuss
Tyrrhena Maxus Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.09 14:28:00 - [2] My suggestion is to modify local chat so that it doesn't show who is in system. Local chat is currently used as a tactical tool and I believe this hinders the atmosphere and game play potential of the game. This would make space much more exciting, potentially lead to more dynamic pvp opportunities and would encourage people to work together more and in new ways. It would make space feel like the giant ocean it is, not just a series of interconnected fishbowls. I believe that CONSTELLATION chat should auto-update, rather than local chat. This way hostiles can still be located but not instantly pinpointed to a single system. I think this would be a balanced change for the better, as though it may benefit a potential attacker, it may also benefit someone who doesn't want to engage ie a miner or someone hauling. It would make fleets more reliant on intelligence from players rather than from a box full of names. Discuss
Ilvan Post with your Brain	Posted - 2008.06.09 14:31:00 - [3] I'm all for this. _______________________________ In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only lag
Ilvan Post with your Brain	Posted - 2008.06.09 14:31:00 - [4] I'm all for this. _______________________________ In the grim darkness of the far future, there is only lag
LASER WATCHER GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.09 14:57:00 - [5] yeah but who uses constellation chat _____
Nariana Verex Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.06.09 15:05:00 - [6] Originally by: Tyrrhena Maxus It would make fleets more reliant on intelligence from players rather than from a box full of names. Discuss Isn't most intel posted from Local anyhow? IE, so and so reds in system X? Do the right thing. Don't leave shuttles in space.
White Ronin Screenout	Posted - 2008.06.09 15:05:00 - [7] Everyone if this change was made. Something has to be done to stop the "cloakers scare me" people.
Zulu Six State War Academy	Posted - 2008.06.09 15:13:00 - [8] Edited by: Zulu Six on 09/06/2008 15:13:18 Originally by: LASER WATCHER yeah but who uses constellation chat If a change like this would be implemented, EVERYbody would use const chat. Duh? I am Havohej's alt. I would post with my main, but it's banned vOv
Stevobob Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.09 15:18:00 - [9] Local is too powerful of a defense tool.
Dal' Hassen	Posted - 2008.06.09 15:19:00 - [10] Edited by: Dal'' Hassen on 09/06/2008 15:21:06 I agree that Local chat should be changed to the way that Tyrrhena described, however I think that local chat is useful for new characters just getting the hang of the game and would probably be better to have it function much like the rookie help channel. And I know that you would say that 'whats stopping someone creating new players all the time' and your right.

Farrqua Turbo Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.06.09 18:04:00 - [11] Originally by: Dal' Hassen Edited by: Dal'' Hassen on 09/06/2008 15:21:06 I agree that Local chat should be changed to the way that Tyrrhena described, however I think that local chat is useful for new characters just getting the hang of the game and would probably be better to have it function much like the rookie help channel. And I know that you would say that 'whats stopping someone creating new players all the time' and your right. Actually if you just introduce the n00bs right to it, it becomes second nature before the trial is up. So at least by then they have one less thing to think about when they start getting into the meat of the game. Supported
Ethaet Aliastra	Posted - 2008.06.09 18:26:00 - [12] Edited by: Ethaet on 09/06/2008 18:26:03 lol, no. If local is nerfed, even less people will go to lowsec/0.0 edit: typo -------------------------------------------------------------- Seriously, we need some kind of separation between the post and signature. There you go. Now that wasn't so hard
Mr Stark	Posted - 2008.06.09 19:30:00 - [13] agree.
Tyrrhena Maxus Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 09:12:00 - [14] Originally by: Ethaet Edited by: Ethaet on 09/06/2008 18:26:03 lol, no. If local is nerfed, even less people will go to lowsec/0.0 edit: typo What makes you think that this change would make lowsec/0.0 any more dangerous than it already is? In fact, it would give players more time to notice that a hostile gang is incoming, or camping a gate. To be quite honest this change would be a boost to small gang/solo pvp, and increase the chance of remaining undetected in lowsec/0.0. It's no secret that the majority of players who hang out in lowsec/0.0 are pvp'ers, and thats why they live in these areas. Of course the risk vs reward of lowsec/0.0 is quite horrible if you want to line your space wallet with isk, but that is a side issue to this debate.
Aaron Static Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 09:29:00 - [15] /signed
hiremerc Royal Amarr Institute	Posted - 2008.06.11 10:55:00 - [16] I am in agreement. This topic does get a great deal of coverage however.
sakana North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.06.11 11:47:00 - [17] Agreed, Local is a pretty powerful intel tool, and yet another problem that is making pvp that much harder to find. I like the idea of everyone showing in Const. chat though.
marie blueprint	Posted - 2008.06.11 12:02:00 - [18] yes yes all pirats want this no no no no no bad idea lowsec is bad enuff the uber bad kill way tooo often now stop whining
Evesham Decorum Inc Tygris Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.11 12:08:00 - [19] /signed For those people who are worried about new players learning the Intricacies of Eve you could leave local as it already is in Empire and just remove the auto update function of local chat in low sec/0.0. Just make it that once you have spoken in local until you leave you remain visible to those in local when you spoke.
Tyrrhena Maxus Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 12:21:00 - [20] Originally by: marie blueprint yes yes all pirats want this no no no no no bad idea lowsec is bad enuff the uber bad kill way tooo often now stop whining why don't you farm some isk about it?

Kelsin Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 12:40:00 - [21] Agreed! But along with this I would ask the CSM to recommend introducing a new more robust scanner system to give that "Submarine Sonar" feel to figuring out who else is out there.
kaahooters Phantom Squad Insurgency	Posted - 2008.06.11 12:49:00 - [22] ok, getting rid of local, or changing it, has been a recuring thing for ages now, it was tryed accidently once, due to a patch bug, and it was pants, co ops alts were everywhere. theres no real easy way out of it, and tbh, the "update when somone speeaks" argument will only worlk till somone comes up with a lil mod to get around it, much like the standings + or - in local. local use to not show who was in local till they spoke, but that changed with a patck cos ppl wanted it, iirc.
Ethaet Aliastra	Posted - 2008.06.11 12:52:00 - [23] Local is fine as it is. Anyway, nerfed local = less people in lowsec/0.0, and you don't want that, do you? -------------------------------------------------------------- Seriously, we need some kind of separation between the post and signature. There you go. Now that wasn't so hard
Xplained Welsh Wizards	Posted - 2008.06.11 13:14:00 - [24] Edited by: Xplained on 11/06/2008 13:14:21 EVE is not just a pvp game and removing local for all of eve would be a totaly stupid and irresponsible move. I would vote for removing local from all 0.0 space. Hence no vote from me!
Jade Constantine Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.06.11 13:49:00 - [25] Definitely in favor of the principle of altering Local chat. We need to get a range of opinions and options on how to do it, but I'm in favor of bringing up the ISSUE for serious consideration.
Tyrrhena Maxus Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 13:59:00 - [26] Edited by: Tyrrhena Maxus on 11/06/2008 14:01:29 I think its quite funny that the people arguing against my idea: a) can't spell, b) haven't formed any constructive argument at all, ("no its a bad idea" adds nothing to the discussion) d) think this relates only to pvp, e) believe because this issue has been raised in the past means that it is a dead issue and won't give it a moments consideration, and f) probably didn't even notice I skipped out 'c' because they are too busy nerd raging. Arguing that the only reason people are in 0.0/lowsec is because they can see peoples names in local is an absurd and unrealistic argument. If you are opposed to this idea, before you post I ask that you take this viewpoint: Imagine what I have detailed in the op IS being implemented, what checks and balances would you suggest should go hand in hand with this change? Would shifting scan able asteroid belts, similar to the instances that can be found using the basic ship scanner satisfy you? (I believe this was the way that CCP was talking about modifying asteroid belts at some stage) Or do you have another reasonable suggestion? edit: hey look the guy the majority of you voted for agrees with me
Heinz Rand Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 14:03:00 - [27] I support this suggestion if it goes along with making the belts objects that move and have to be scanned out. This would alleviate some of the issues that it unfairly works in the favor of pvpers. It gives the miners/ratters the ability to do their own scans as soon as constellation goes hostile. This game isn't about making it safe to afk mine/rat in complete safety, it's about balance. I think it will make pvp more spontaneous rather than the easy scouting job it is now. There are x hostiles in local knowing exactly their numbers without even having to be in sight of the enemy or run scans that would have to be constantly updated. At least make the scouts work at scanning the hostiles numbers/movement. Also, right now if you have larger numbers, the other side is either stupid without scouts of any sort or wants the fight where without local you'd be able to force fights by not knowing full well what you are facing without good scouting.
Rosur Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.06.11 15:38:00 - [28] yea make it so local dosnt show what corp etc the perosn is in though still shows how many people are there. Untill you speak then it will show the corp stuff and name. This with the constalation chat idea would be a good idea.
sophisticatedlimabean Terra Incognita.	Posted - 2008.06.11 15:44:00 - [29] The "local scanner" as that is what it really is, should be removed or at least only show those who chat in it while you are in the system.
Jonis Sinmaker Biometronics Ltd	Posted - 2008.06.11 18:33:00 - [30] I agree 100% with this idea. This idea has been thrown around for years by many of the player base and maybe it is about time CCP take a constructive look at it. This would not only make pvp more dynamic it would also give smaller corporations and groups a chance to break into 0.0 for pvp and/or industrial operations. It would suck at first getting used to it, but to be honest this would change the shape of eve as we know it if implemented.

Goumindong Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.11 19:06:00 - [31] Originally by: Tyrrhena Maxus If you are opposed to this idea, before you post I ask that you take this viewpoint: Imagine what I have detailed in the op IS being implemented, what checks and balances would you suggest should go hand in hand with this change? The entire idea would be scrapped, because its ********. The only way to remove the function of the local channel and have a semblance of balance would be to duplicate its functionality right into the scanner. A system wide count of friendlies, hostiles, and neutrals. This would be even easier for you to read and would actually increase the ability of the defenders to keep themselves alive. Yes, the only way to balance local removal would be to duplicate its functionality to a point where it would actually be easier to identify enemies in your system. More information: See post 40 and 41 http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=729912&page=2#40
AlphaViscera	Posted - 2008.06.11 20:39:00 - [32] I support the idea of a change to Local, however I don't believe in removing the ability to gain an understanding about who is in the system with you. Think of it like this, You are on the battlefield, you know how many you have in your ranks, however you can always survey the enemy and find what they are. Scan probes would be our way of doing this, however that mechanic is quite slow, and it dosnt give you an idea of who is blue/red. Perhaps adding in another type of scan probe or system of scanning that can be used to get ideas of these numbers.. Now for fluidity's sake, this information could be rounded down or rounded up to say the closest 5 or the closest 10 for anything that isnt blue, say there was 33 in local, 14 blue, 17 red 2 neutral it would report Blue=14, Red 20, Neutral=0 Obviously this is an early idea, but it gives a overview of the field, it dosnt have to be an accurate guide, just something that gives some idea and allows for quick and semi-accurate ideas of whats out there.. much like a recon mission would in real world battlefields. It could be used say every 30 seconds or so.
Reiisha Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence	Posted - 2008.06.11 21:39:00 - [33] I direct thee to this little thread of mine... http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=779290
Athre The HIgher Standard	Posted - 2008.06.11 22:20:00 - [34] I'm against removing the local names. How about pirates be more cunning than beg for more loopholes.
Ms Linne Omiracon Technologies Nex Eternus	Posted - 2008.06.11 23:31:00 - [35] that would take pvp to the next lvl!!! I APPROVE IT!!!
Zorok LEGI0N F.E.A.R Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.12 02:08:00 - [36] I'm totally against this proposed change. As I've said, the pirates already have things going for them in their favor, the only thing you could do more for the pirates is to give all of them an "I Win" button. Making local an "optional" channel will only make things perilous for the non-pirate players.
Evesham Decorum Inc Tygris Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.12 08:30:00 - [37] Originally by: Zorok I'm totally against this proposed change. As I've said, the pirates already have things going for them in their favor, the only thing you could do more for the pirates is to give all of them an "I Win" button. Making local an "optional" channel will only make things perilous for the non-pirate players. I'm not even a pirate and I LoL'd at this. When you enter low sec/0.0 you are agreeing that you are a viable target to those players who want to shoot people so you should always be ready to defend yourself. I have done a lot of Cov Ops work for my current/previous corps and the only time I worry is when jumping into a system which may/may not be camped on tother side, if local is hot then I have ways of getting to next gate/wherever without putting myself in danger however if local is empty I just warp to next gate. If I have no idea how many people are in local then I have to fly by the seat of my pants in EVERY system surely this is only a good things as it make life more fun/dangerous. Entering lowsec or 0.0 and moaning you have been killed is ridiculous because Eve is all about the intel. Play smart, adapt to the surroundings.
Tyrrhena Maxus Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.12 09:46:00 - [38] Hey look all the carebears are still nerd raging and haven't contributed anything to the thread except whining. Even if this change made it easier to gank miners/ ratters etc, (which it would not), pvp'ers would actually want to hang around where their buddies are ratting/mining in order to protect them and get fights at the same time. You must admit that to see a group of industrialists and a group of pvp'ers working together is RARE in this game, and to me that is quite absurd. Why are things like this? Because if you want to be 100% completely safe in 0.0, you can be if you know what you are doing. Basically what you are saying is this: "I want all the rewards and none of the risk" in an area that is designed to be a risk/reward environment. As Co-Ceo of a corporation, the idea of my logistics and pvp players having a reason to work closer together a) makes sense, and b) makes my heart sing with joy. Scenario: There is no such thing as local chat and 'Mr Jones' rat killer extraordinaire is happily blasting away at some serpentis in his laser raven without a care in the world. A crow warps in and a rapier decloaks 15km's away from him because he was too lazy to be watching his scanner. Luckily he was aligned, he hits warp and is gone before either can lock him. So basically I am saying that any argument you big girls have brought to the table is not a solution to the discussion at hand. Get a better argument or get out of my thread.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.06.12 15:31:00 - [39] Edited by: Razin on 12/06/2008 15:32:13 There should not be any mandatory chat channel that auto-shows everyone who's joined. The intel function of the current Local should be performed by an improved (but still limited in range and other functionality) ship's scanner. Let me reiterate: a Constellation chat as described by the OP is a very bad idea (as bad as current Local).
Kage Toshimado Kage Clan	Posted - 2008.06.12 18:15:00 - [40] Edited by: Kage Toshimado on 12/06/2008 18:17:21 I vote no and here is why. You can spend long amounts of time scanning in local and find dozens of ships on scanner. How am I supposed to know if those ships are being flown, or if they are parked or what? I don't want to come into every system and ask "is anyone in here?" and have to constantly scan to find a target and see if it is actually moving. Local is fine the way it is. You say it helps the miner, not really... the miner will have to constantly scan if someone could be warping in on him. Helps the potential attacker? I disagree, you just made him have to scan local to find out if anyone is actually in it now, then pinpoint him and this just adds time to his overall game play. Where as previously he could just warp into a system, see zero targets, and move on. I can agree with your point that it provides information that there are "people" in the system but you don't neccessarily know where and what they might be flying, or if they are cloaked etc. It doesn't give THAT much intel, just a heads up "hey pal, you're not alone in here." So again, I vote no. Leave it alone. *Also please notice I know how to spell and I am giving you a reason per your request OP. EDIT: What may be a solution, is a ticker that actually shows how many people are actually IN the system currently, but not who. But again. I have been playing for a few years and this is a constant that I and many other players are used to. Removing it is kind of like losing a thumb.

Faekurias Black Legion Command Red Dawn Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.12 18:21:00 - [41] Why couldn't local work the way like many other chats? As in - only show those who chat. Maybe keep number of people in system still there though.
Che Biko	Posted - 2008.06.12 21:50:00 - [42] Edited by: Che Biko on 12/06/2008 21:55:12 Pro vs. Local, Against Constellation.
Nara Krylov	Posted - 2008.06.13 01:15:00 - [43] Removing local = removing the only viable ratter/miner/etc defense. Spamming scan 360 isn't much of an option. But I have to admit, it would make the game more interesting. Of course, nerfing gate camping and/or warp jamming would be nice, too.
Jonis Sinmaker Dead Hooker Industries	Posted - 2008.06.13 14:09:00 - [44] Edited by: Jonis Sinmaker on 13/06/2008 14:10:16 Originally by: Athre I'm against removing the local names. How about pirates be more cunning than beg for more loopholes. Originally by: Nara Krylov Removing local = removing the only viable ratter/miner/etc defense. Spamming scan 360 isn't much of an option. But I have to admit, it would make the game more interesting. Of course, nerfing gate camping and/or warp jamming would be nice, too. Outstanding contribution to this thread....I give you guys a -9 out of 10 for your effort and ability to see the big picture instead of your own narrow minded portion of the picture. to think of local as your only viable defense is why you die to pirates and gank squads. This game is about thinking, adapting, and teamwork. This is why the majority of all updates to the game are "team oriented". This is a multiplayer game, not a single player game. If this change is made it would make it that much more important for players to work as a team to get things accomplished. Players would have to depend on teamwork to get through dangerous areas of space, just like with real life. I don't see a local chat when I go into the wrong end of town telling me there is a guy there ready to mug me. What the Op is suggesting is an outstanding way to improve not only pvp (not just pirating) but also a way for miner's and haulers hide more efficiently. No more will a small gank squad be able to roll into a system and instantly see who is there. If the miners or haulers use a scout on ingates and in scan spots they will know when a hostile or shady character enter's system and will be able to warn his gang members....open your eyes and look at both sides of the picture. If you use team work within this game you can eliminate half of the idiotic carebear kills in the game, but those who die while mining, ratting and hauling die because they are doing it alone and/or without a scout. This game wasn't built for solo play...it was build for team play and once you start playing as such you will see how much more productive you can and will be.
SunglassesInSpace GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.13 21:47:00 - [45] A chat channel should not be used for intel. 100% behind this.
Nynaeve Ares Animus Incarnate	Posted - 2008.06.13 23:41:00 - [46] Edited by: Nynaeve Ares on 13/06/2008 23:46:11 I would be for this but "active pilots in space" option on the map would have to be removed to make it workable for ambushes and fair for carebears. Until then no support. PS. Perhaps also as compensation, show a standings column on the scanner otherwise i think gathering intel will be too tedious.
Cursive Ars ex Discordia GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.14 00:13:00 - [47]
Corp Quas	Posted - 2008.06.14 00:37:00 - [48] I completely disagree with your idea in its current form. I would rather have it changed in one of these forms: (1) create a skill that allows a 2 second delay in when you appear in local per level. At lvl 5 it would give a 10 second delay. AND (2) create a ship that hides you from local for an additional 30 seconds. However, this ship would be the equivilent of a shuttle but the size of a cruiser (all that built in anti-Local electronics are heavy!) with no offense, no defense and no way to cloak. It would ONLY be a scout.
Salastil GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.14 02:59:00 - [49] Let me illuminate for the more dimwitted folk in this thread. People are proposing that Constellation, not local. Is the main channel. That is, the 4-6 systems around you will all condense into one large "Local". This means if a hostile in in the Constellation you won't be able to tell where he is, however you'll see gatecamps long before you arrive to them and also you'll see hostiles approaching more often than you would. Your reaction time goes up as you see them father out, but their actual location is obfuscated. Blackops will gain purpose for bridging past gatecamped systems without them being sure if you've actually done it. Ratters will see that large gain inbound or even gatecamps ahead in the pipe depending on how the constellation is formed. This isn't a single faceted fix or nerf. Both sides will take a hit but gain from it. Overall I believe the game gains more than is restricted by this.
Windjammer	Posted - 2008.06.14 03:12:00 - [50] Edited by: Windjammer on 14/06/2008 03:13:41 No support. Local is fine just the way it is. I won't bother to offer reasons for this. Your own Goumindong (post 29 on page 1 of this thread) states the case well. I will simply add that the change you propose benefits hunting packs at the expense of miners, haulers and mission runners. Your assumption that defending PvPer's would want to hang around these people on the off chance of intercepting pirates, etc, is self serving absurdity and would rarely happen save perhaps in the case of a large corp and/or alliance. Oh...look.....you're in a large corp and/or alliance. What a surprise. What's next? Nerfing cloaks? This is at least the second time this week that I've found myself in agreement with Goumindong and it's ****ing me off. Please coordinate your communications within goonswarm to avoid this in the future. Thank you. Windjammer

Gantrithor105 Acerbus Vindictum Critical Dissent	Posted - 2008.06.14 05:26:00 - [51] I absolutely and fully believe this would be the single best change to the eve interface available (and I'm almost never in local low-sec/0.0)
SunglassesInSpace GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.14 08:34:00 - [52] Edited by: SunglassesInSpace on 14/06/2008 08:35:21 Originally by: Windjammer Edited by: Windjammer on 14/06/2008 03:13:41 No support. Local is fine just the way it is. I won't bother to offer reasons for this. Your own Goumindong (post 29 on page 1 of this thread) states the case well. If you listen to anything goumindong says you're an idiot.
Tyrrhena Maxus Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.06.14 08:46:00 - [53] Originally by: SunglassesInSpace Edited by: SunglassesInSpace on 14/06/2008 08:35:21 Originally by: Windjammer Edited by: Windjammer on 14/06/2008 03:13:41 No support. Local is fine just the way it is. I won't bother to offer reasons for this because I can't. Originally by: Windjammer Your own Goumindong (post 29 on page 1 of this thread) states the case well. If you listen to anything goumindong says you're an idiot. This, I didn't even think his post deserved a reply.
Sigul Siento	Posted - 2008.06.14 09:44:00 - [54] Agreed with the principle of altering local, even if not necessarily exactly as the OP suggest.
Hegotu Alecto Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.06.14 10:23:00 - [55] this has many pro's and cons. from a PVP standpoint it can be both, the ability to move a sizable fleet practically undetected, the con is the poor sods getting blobbed. CON, chinese farmers will find it easier to farm with little risk of detection , PRO more secure transports through high sec. etc, im sure we could carry on, atm i cant think of any way to balance things but i will have a think more on it
Siona Windweaver	Posted - 2008.06.14 11:01:00 - [56] Edited by: Siona Windweaver on 14/06/2008 11:06:46 Dont completely remove it, instead modify it to have a range of 20 AU (maybe more or less, i just threw a random number) in low and null sec. This way scouting will actually mean something. Make it so that cloaked ships shows as "unidentified flying object". This way you'll know there is a cloaked ship, but you wont know who it is. Cloaked ships should also have a scanning penalty (like -50% to -75% penalty on system scans) so they wont be overpowered. If someone types something into local, they basically broadcasts a message across the solar system, this way the chat function also protected. Make it so that every station and stargate has an inherent 100AU scanner range in high sec that will give the system info between each other and then, to players, like an information web. This will ensure local will stays as more or less same in high sec as it is today. Thats my 2 ISKs.
Windjammer	Posted - 2008.06.14 23:14:00 - [57] Originally by: SunglassesInSpace Edited by: SunglassesInSpace on 14/06/2008 08:35:21 Originally by: Windjammer Edited by: Windjammer on 14/06/2008 03:13:41 No support. Local is fine just the way it is. I won't bother to offer reasons for this. Your own Goumindong (post 29 on page 1 of this thread) states the case well. If you listen to anything goumindong says you're an idiot. Normally I'd agree and that's what's ticking me off. In this, though, he has the right of it. Windjammer
Zaran Darkstar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2008.06.15 03:13:00 - [58] Would make ratting/mining on 00 practically unavailiable. Reason is that a recon would travel each belt cloacked to see if something is there then all of a sudden the miner/ratter would have a whole gang scrambling him. Let alone that the small gangs would no logner camp the gates. They would simply sit in safespots within popular ratting/mining systems as are OE-4HB 42x- etc on Tenal and have a couple of covert ops to scan for ratters miners. In the end of the day they would simply log out at the safespot only to reappear the next day to do some more griefing. Is this your idea of fun? The alliances would be practicaly impossible to scan the systems with covert ops daily. The so called "sovereignity" would be a joke since there wouldn't be any way to actually control/take advantage of system like this. That is why i am against this idea
Reiisha Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence	Posted - 2008.07.14 11:13:00 - [59] Bumping up this one again, with some more references: I linked my own thread above, about making local optional, just like the constellation and regional chats. The consequences should have been discussed for the most part in that thread. Now, the issue comes up in how the intel can still be retained in a simple, but effective fashion, albeit somewhat more limited. An extra function on the overview, which would simply display 3 numbers in a seperate area: blue, white, and red, which represent the standings, and how many pilots of each standing are within x range. Some AU's would be advisable, but not system-wide. This doesn't replace the scanner, as that can still be used to determine precise range and direction, and it doesn't show anything else than ships in range. How this mechanic would deal with cloaked ships remains to be seen, but this is another issue entirely. This still provides an early warning system for anyone wary of pirates, while not being as overpowered as local is now. You have to remember that this will make life harder on the attacker aswell. Everyone is screaming how they won't be able to detect pirates early enough if local is removed in it's current form, however, pirates also won't be able to find you as easily. Coupled with this small change to overview, i think this would be an acceptable solution for everyone (except the whiners :P ) EVE History Wiki
Reiisha Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence	Posted - 2008.07.14 11:15:00 - [60] Originally by: Zaran Darkstar Would make ratting/mining on 00 practically unavailiable. Reason is that a recon would travel each belt cloacked to see if something is there then all of a sudden the miner/ratter would have a whole gang scrambling him. Let alone that the small gangs would no logner camp the gates. They would simply sit in safespots within popular ratting/mining systems as are OE-4HB 42x- etc on Tenal and have a couple of covert ops to scan for ratters miners. In the end of the day they would simply log out at the safespot only to reappear the next day to do some more griefing. Is this your idea of fun? The alliances would be practicaly impossible to scan the systems with covert ops daily. The so called "sovereignity" would be a joke since there wouldn't be any way to actually control/take advantage of system like this. That is why i am against this idea If alliances wouldn't try and take control of several regions at once, this problem would be trivial, as smaller space is easier to control with the same amount of members than larger space. This change would force most alliances to reconsider their territorial aspirations, giving way to new alliances, aswell as making room for a lot more players in between. Alliances being able to control fewer systems at the same time is only a good thing. BoB, RA and Goonswarm are the perfect examples why. EVE History Wiki

J'Mkarr Soban Proxenetae Invicti	Posted - 2008.07.14 11:56:00 - [61] Edited by: J''Mkarr Soban on 14/07/2008 11:56:22 I'm surprised no-one has mentioned the fact that CCP themselves have commented on the use of local as an intel tool, and that it isn't what they want. Removing the list of people in system from local doesn't do anything other than remove the intel tool. People can still talk on it if they wish, but they might give themselves away. -- These are my personal views and in no way represent the views of Proxenetae Invicti, which maintains a neutral stance stemming from the strong ethics demanded of its work.
Akiba Penrose PAK	Posted - 2008.07.14 12:14:00 - [62] /signed.
Falkrich Swifthand eNinjas Incorporated	Posted - 2008.07.14 12:30:00 - [63] Edited by: Falkrich Swifthand on 14/07/2008 12:44:36 Originally by: AlphaViscera Perhaps adding in another type of scan probe or system of scanning that can be used to get ideas of these numbers.. Now for fluidity's sake, this information could be rounded down or rounded up to say the closest 5 or the closest 10 for anything that isnt blue, say there was 33 in local, 14 blue, 17 red 2 neutral it would report Blue=14, Red 20, Neutral=0 It could be used say every 30 seconds or so. Something like a person-scanning multispec probe? No pinpointing anything, but telling you what there is to be found? EDIT: and /signed to looking at local. A compulsory chat channel's member list shouldn't be the intel tool. I'd prefer some kind of fast-cycling module to replace local for intel, and I wouldn't even be against it giving more information than local. Oh, and preferably don't let cloaked ships show up in this scanner. nullnull My sig is not my sig.
Unreal5 Malicious Intentions	Posted - 2008.07.14 12:44:00 - [64] Edited by: Unreal5 on 14/07/2008 12:44:26 agreed ASD
Bad Borris 20th Legion Digital Renegades	Posted - 2008.07.14 12:55:00 - [65] The scanning system needs an overhaul. When that is done then it will be time to reasess the situation and i believe that is already on teh drawing-board at ccp. Until their is a viable scanning system which doesnt involve the npcer spamming scan and the attacking player getting bored and frustrated then removing local wouldnt be a good idea tbh. With the current state of the game removing local would favor the attacker too much in 0.0 for a start. Attackers would gravitate toward low true-sec systems and just roam the belts all day. At least thats what i would do.
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.07.14 18:01:00 - [66] IF you want to remove local, you need to replace the scanning system with something that actually works. Longer scanning ranges, automatic scanning (a radar screen in the UI) instead of the current system. Then you need to deal with cloakers too, in some way. Attackers do have an advantage, they will go to the -1.0 truesec systems where they know the ratters/miners will be. Sitting there cloaked, they will paralyze all of the attractive parts of 0.0 to the point where they become useless.
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.07.14 18:39:00 - [67] The idea is terrible unless rewards obtained by being in space in 0.0/lowsec are increased substantially. By moving everything to const. chat it makes it so a small recon gang can shut down the ratting in a constilation in not just a single system. If rewards are increased such that the risk of ratting with these hostiles around is worth the reward, then I would be for this change. --
Kovid Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.07.14 18:56:00 - [68] I agree. As it is now a good fight could happen. But one side sees the number in local spike quickly and before the enemy loads or hit warp to the fight the other side calls for an evacuate. Remove local and you give people who specialize in covert operations a role, if people are smart enough to use them. Then again they don't even need to be covert ops but it just makes them better. There are plenty of other situation where local is used purely for intelligence purposes. BACON was an extension of that, but it will always remain a problem until it's ajusted. Just make it not update until you talk. I believe one argument CCP brought up in the past is without local space would feel empty and such the game would suffer without it. Space is big and an empty void. It should feel like that. Spruce up the scanning a bit to compensate and make it not so cumbersome.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.07.14 21:07:00 - [69] Originally by: Malachon Draco IF you want to remove local, you need to replace the scanning system with something that actually works. Longer scanning ranges, automatic scanning (a radar screen in the UI) instead of the current system. Then you need to deal with cloakers too, in some way. CCP has a plan: Originally by: CCP Greyscale If/when we do revisit Local, cloaked ships and the general intel-gathering arena, it will likely be as a complete package, with the aim of creating an integrated set of mechanics. This will mean changes for established mechanics, but they'll be changes to rather than changes from. With regards to concerns about Local,, the reason we haven't just removed it or flipped it into delayed mode is that the role it provides - being able to see who's around - is critical to many elements of gameplay and isn't covered sufficiently by other existing tools. We're aware that sitting there hitting "scan" on the directional scanner every five seconds isn't a good substitute, which is why we're waiting until we can improve those tools before we change anything. With regards to cloaking, it's likely that we will differentiate in some manner between "cloaking-oriented" ships (covert ops, force recons, stealth bombers and black ops ships) and "cloaking-optional" ships (everything else) in any solution we come up with. It's also very likely that it won't be anything so simple as flipping off the "can't probe" switch on cloaked ships and leaving it at that. The exact approach we take depends on what we do to the probing system as a whole though ...
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.07.15 06:07:00 - [70] I don't think they can reasonably do this without losing subscriptions. To remove it they'd need a similar almost effortless means of acquiring the same data. At the same time for a tech angle it is most likely they'd still have to report the information to your computer so it can interact. If you code it such that it doesn't show someone will just make a program that lets them see it. So its probably not a wise investment for CCP to program it out. Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.

Allaria Kriss Minmatar Elipse Inc.	Posted - 2008.07.15 06:54:00 - [71] I have more faith in CCP reworking this problem without screwing over everyone than I do in this idea. Simply removing Local and hiking it all over to Constellation doesn't work, especially in system with a lot of POS activity where parked and empty ships will confuse the scanners. The grand irony is the thought that removing Local will increase PvP. It won't. It will decrease PvP for a few very simple psychological reasons. One, people already take the risk of being killed on sight in low-sec and no-sec. Now that you've taken away their ability to watch for hostiles, they're less likely to go there in the first place if other profitable avenues exist, and there are. Two, more people that do go there will fly cloak-capable ships, so they are capable of quickly getting out of a bad situation since they no longer have any way to see it coming, and they will run and cloak faster than before. Three, more alts will be made for the purpose of keeping eyes on the gates so people know when something bad has entered system. This means a potential PvPer has fewer and more paranoid targets, which translates into less PvP. I say we wait and see what CCP is planning before we start beating this dead horse anew.
Theronnos Aliastra	Posted - 2008.07.15 08:30:00 - [72] Agree, though it needs some good looking at.
Kalintos Tyl	Posted - 2008.07.15 11:49:00 - [73] mhm player chosse to be in local or leave?
Macheriel State War Academy	Posted - 2008.07.15 12:07:00 - [74] Agreed. Local need some rebalancing.
Carina Calypso	Posted - 2008.07.15 14:16:00 - [75] I like the thought that you have to enter a system, open your local scanner and scan to see if anybody is around a lot better, than seeing it right away... I favor change. A) remove names and pics from local B) introduce a local scanner option that shows people in the system after 30 seconds scan time My2cent
Matrixcvd Caldari Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.07.15 14:38:00 - [76] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Malachon Draco IF you want to remove local, you need to replace the scanning system with something that actually works. Longer scanning ranges, automatic scanning (a radar screen in the UI) instead of the current system. Then you need to deal with cloakers too, in some way. CCP has a plan: Originally by: CCP Greyscale If/when we do revisit Local, cloaked ships and the general intel-gathering arena, it will likely be as a complete package, with the aim of creating an integrated set of mechanics. This will mean changes for established mechanics, but they'll be changes to rather than changes from. With regards to concerns about Local,, the reason we haven't just removed it or flipped it into delayed mode is that the role it provides - being able to see who's around - is critical to many elements of gameplay and isn't covered sufficiently by other existing tools. We're aware that sitting there hitting "scan" on the directional scanner every five seconds isn't a good substitute, which is why we're waiting until we can improve those tools before we change anything. With regards to cloaking, it's likely that we will differentiate in some manner between "cloaking-oriented" ships (covert ops, force recons, stealth bombers and black ops ships) and "cloaking-optional" ships (everything else) in any solution we come up with. It's also very likely that it won't be anything so simple as flipping off the "can't probe" switch on cloaked ships and leaving it at that. The exact approach we take depends on what we do to the probing system as a whole though and see, here we go again, and this is what the giagantic problem is with CCP. They look at local chat and brainstorm all the possibilities on how to feck it up even moar, tabs anyone? alt key anyone? THis is so simple its ludicrous. 1 Add an automated scanner function that you can toggle. Either the way it is now, or you hit the auto button and it constantly scans as many times as lag/server calls allow for 2 Entrance into local chat is delayed for 2 minutes, or unless typing into it. If you can't scan someone down in 2 minutes you fail 3 if you wanna get crazy, and i mean CRAZY, have a low HP anchorable, within 25km from the gate, report to the pilot any gate fires, no distiniction between outgoing or incoming, and have that show up on the scanner module. and thats it. 1, 2 are perfectly fine, 3 is thrown in for the lulz. EIther way, what we probably will get is just a bunch of nonsense and overbloated changes to game mechanics that weren't really necessary, but since CCP loves to "Go Big" and lay an egg with the simplest changes or concepts... i can't wait
Threv Echandari K Directorate	Posted - 2008.07.15 15:08:00 - [77] /signed ---------------------------------------- Happiness is a Wet Pod
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.07.15 15:12:00 - [78] Originally by: Mecinia Lua To remove it they'd need a similar almost effortless means of acquiring the same data. At the same time for a tech angle it is most likely they'd still have to report the information to your computer so it can interact. If you code it such that it doesn't show someone will just make a program that lets them see it. So its probably not a wise investment for CCP to program it out. The data would not be available at any range, as it is currently. The range would be calculated server side before the information is made available to the client, so no bacon-like hack would work. Oh, and the whole point of this is to remove the "effortlessness" with which this data is currently acquired. ...
Malachon Draco eXceed Inc. eXceed.	Posted - 2008.07.15 15:19:00 - [79] Any radar system introduced to replace local would at the very least be permanently available and have a working IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) included in it or it won't be properly functional. Then it also needs considerably extended range compared to current scanners. And I don't know if its even feasible with the current cloaks. Who could ever go mine again in deep 0.0 if the risk exists there are 20 force recons waiting in the belts for anyone to show up? What would be needed I think at the very least is cloaking ships showing up as a blip on radar, but never good enough to pinpoint them. Just a blip that basically says: Recon within roughly 1 AU of planet X. Otherwise you will screw up most 0.0 activities outside of moonmining.
TheEndofTheWorld Republic Military School	Posted - 2008.07.15 15:20:00 - [80] Edited by: TheEndofTheWorld on 15/07/2008 15:20:51 Very simple. Local shows three different icons: 1. pilot(s) with + standing in local 2. pilot(s) with neutral standing in system 3. pilot(s) with - standing in system. The end. This would nerf local as the best intel tool, but would keep it as a defensive tool. Complete removal of local would be too much for 0.0. Making the scanner too strong would nullify the point of local nerf. Constellation local is too strong, because the majority of constellations have only a few system worth visiting. Not to mention afk cloaking.

Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.07.15 17:28:00 - [81] Edited by: Razin on 15/07/2008 17:28:40 Originally by: Malachon Draco Any radar system introduced to replace local would at the very least be permanently available and have a working IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) included in it or it won't be properly functional. Then it also needs considerably extended range compared to current scanners. I suspect that in addition it would also need to be able to discriminate between piloted and pilot-less ships at a minimum, and possibly possess such capability as detecting warp and cloak signatures. All at varying ranges. I kinda disagree on the "considerably extended range compared to current scanners" bit. In my opinion the long range stuff should be left for probe scanning. Originally by: Malachon Draco And I don't know if its even feasible with the current cloaks. Who could ever go mine again in deep 0.0 if the risk exists there are 20 force recons waiting in the belts for anyone to show up? What would be needed I think at the very least is cloaking ships showing up as a blip on radar, but never good enough to pinpoint them. Just a blip that basically says: Recon within roughly 1 AU of planet X. Otherwise you will screw up most 0.0 activities outside of moonmining. Something like that. ...
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.07.15 17:42:00 - [82] Originally by: TheEndofTheWorld Edited by: TheEndofTheWorld on 15/07/2008 15:20:51 Very simple. Local shows three different icons: 1. pilot(s) with + standing in local 2. pilot(s) with neutral standing in system 3. pilot(s) with - standing in system. The end. However this information is displayed within the new scanning system (in Local, or some scanner display/tab), I hope it's not available at infinite range as it is currently. ...
Ivena Amethyst	Posted - 2008.07.16 10:25:00 - [83] keep local but make it not auto update who's on the system, however show total number of ppl in system modify constellation channel to show everyone in constellation make everyone who as spoken i local visible in local to everyone that was in local when the person spoke, this way a gang searching for someone in constelation can easily say something like "report" and all friendlys in system would say something so that the gang can see if any hostile is there (or if a friendly is afk lol)
Inertial The Python Cartel	Posted - 2008.07.16 11:58:00 - [84] I like this idea. we are recruiting!
Dianalexia	Posted - 2008.07.18 13:18:00 - [85] Support for this. Also the same thing should apply to constelation chat. There you should have only the numbers, not the actual players. For those concerned that removing local will brake 0.0 activities: it will not happen. It will hurt a little only those big alliances with huge chunks of undefended space behind chokepoints. Well, some will no longer be able to pay for 5 accounts with farmed ISK then
Tchell Dahhn Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.07.18 14:53:00 - [86] I support this idea, and would like to put forth an additional [IDEA] which might better support it. As 'Locater Agents' are an attainable resource, (yet only available to a character who has worked at Missioning to achieve) I would recommend enhancing the structure, so that when one is station-side, they would be able to perform a scan that could provide them with intel on where a group of War Targets might be. This could be a whole other skill set, such as "Science Officer" or some such, whereby scanning the system would be based upon 'chance', with improved identification of War Target location based upon the level of skill achieved. Let's say that my Corporation is at war, and I'm docked up. The Warring Corporation is currently camped outside my Station, and by checking the 'new' Local, I get no information on whether or not they are in my System. I use my "Science Officer" skills to do a scan of the system, to find out that there are 2 War Targets identified as being 'within range' of my scan. Aware that my War Targets usually fly small ships like Cruisers, I say, "Ok, I'll take my chances and undock in my Battleship." When I undock, I find out that my skills only identified 2 War Targets out of the 10 actual War Targets that are camped outside ('failed my saving throw, ftl!') and get OMGWTFBBQ'd. I do support the removal of Local as an Intel device, however, I think we also need the ability to have some type of visibility when undocking, so that we won't need to lose a ship, just to 'test the waters' and see if it's safe to undock the rest of our Corporation Fleet. We're Recruiting!
Kelron Queldine Beyond Divinity Inc	Posted - 2008.07.18 15:17:00 - [87] Local change is needed. I'm not too bothered about the details as long as you can no longer instantly see the occupants of a system. The constellation chat option would be fine.
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.07.18 16:36:00 - [88] I support this thread and would like to see formal discussion of the issue with CCP - will be adding it to the agenda for CSM discussion on 20/7/2008 Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.07.18 18:03:00 - [89] Originally by: Jade Constantine I support this thread and would like to see formal discussion of the issue with CCP - will be adding it to the agenda for CSM discussion on 20/7/2008 That's good news. Has anyone thought how this would effect gate travel in 0.0? Currently, if the system you've entered is empty, you just warp to the next gate. With the Local gone every gate would require a scanning BM. Maybe CCP could just give us a "drop-outa-warp" button? ...
NanDe YaNen The Funkalistic	Posted - 2008.07.18 19:22:00 - [90] Originally by: Bad Borris With the current state of the game removing local would favor the attacker too much in 0.0 for a start. Attackers would gravitate toward low true-sec systems and just roam the belts all day. At least thats what i would do. Less ability to pick and choose engagements means: Less throwing together really expensive ships and expecting to be able to only partake in opportunistic engagements. More surprises and ships looking at each other 30km away wondering if they want to commit to the engagement or not. "Are we both flying bating ships..?" Arazus and rapiers get huge boost to importance. Boosts to T1 ships you don't have to worry about losing, because you have to worry about losing everything when any target can be a trap. More traps and shady tactics. More ninja carebear action, especially at complexes, since they could deploy for a long time in a system without drawing attention, and the image of getting ganked while going after a hauler will be in many people's minds. Cloakers could use a bit more sensor nerfing. It's a fair trade to lose the ability to force engagements offensively in cases where you want to pick and choose engagements. Major changes to undocking risk mechanics. Could use some help there.

Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.07.22 14:23:00 - [91] Originally by: Jade Constantine I support this thread and would like to see formal discussion of the issue with CCP - will be adding it to the agenda for CSM discussion on 20/7/2008 So, how did the discussion go? ...
Jade Constantine	Posted - 2008.07.22 14:53:00 - [92] Originally by: Razin Originally by: Jade Constantine I support this thread and would like to see formal discussion of the issue with CCP - will be adding it to the agenda for CSM discussion on 20/7/2008 So, how did the discussion go? Well the bad news is that the CSM initially voted it down: 18:41 + After discussion the issue was supported by Lavista, Jade, Dierdra Val, opposed by Hardin, Bane, Inanna, Tusko, Serenity, Ank. However, Tusko does want another attempt to get the issue onto the table with a more detailed proposal that he's working on and we should get to vote on that prior to the end of august online meeting with CCP. I'm disappointed we couldn't get the issue in principle on the agenda last sunday but as you can see from the meeting chatlog there are quite split opinions on the issue. I however remain convinced its a vital issue and we need it raised to CCP so am eagerly looking forward to Tusko's take on the problem. Star Fraction \| Dare to Dream!
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.07.22 15:17:00 - [93] Originally by: Jade Constantine Well the bad news is that the CSM initially voted it down: 18:41 + After discussion the issue was supported by Lavista, Jade, Dierdra Val, opposed by Hardin, Bane, Inanna, Tusko, Serenity, Ank. However, Tusko does want another attempt to get the issue onto the table with a more detailed proposal that he's working on and we should get to vote on that prior to the end of august online meeting with CCP. I'm disappointed we couldn't get the issue in principle on the agenda last sunday but as you can see from the meeting chatlog there are quite split opinions on the issue. I however remain convinced its a vital issue and we need it raised to CCP so am eagerly looking forward to Tusko's take on the problem. Thanks for the answer! From the transcript I see that possibly 2 votes may reverse, provided the proposed implementation becomes more attractive. Where is the current proposal (the "document") published and/or being discussed? ...
Mister Xerox	Posted - 2008.07.22 15:38:00 - [94] Have to say NO to this one. No local = very, very empty universe. Not only do the 'locals' not know who's come into the system unless they task some poor slub to stare at the gate(s) in infinitum, but the 'hostiles' don't know if there's anyone there to bother with. This leaves both parties stuck spamming their scan buttons hoping for a hit before they show up on the other guy's scan spam. Even in empire space this would leave Eve full of... solo pilots, because that's how they would feel wherever they went when their only visal contact with other players would be at gates or stations.
Blind Molechild	Posted - 2008.07.22 15:54:00 - [95] carebears love their local. i guess if you allready have 10 alts in hulks in a belt it would be hard to manage #11 in a scout ship. how about we remove local and get a "save" function implementet. endofflame having something like a multispec probe that detects new ships in system, would definitly be enough to replace "local" as it is now. then again if you have a probe doing exactly what local did, why get rid of it? or you enable a local chat for alliances who hold sov in system i.e. u got a system scanner at your pos, and your "sov local" shows you all people in system. introduce some sort of hacking module, allowing enemy players to link onto the system scanner for 10-30 sec, hacking should be detectable though. just some ideas.
Alz Shado Ever Flow	Posted - 2008.07.22 16:12:00 - [96] The problem isn't that local is so powerful, it's that the scanner sucks so bad. Removing local in it's current form without making the proper fixes to the scanning system would be a huge mistake. If I had five minutes to come up with a better solution, here's what I would do: 1) Highsec - Nothing at all. Social channels in .5+ systems should remain as they are. The only parties to be affected by a change here would be corporations at war, but in this case they shouldn't be given any additional penalties/benefits while in an otherwise high security area. 2) Lowsec - Only show pilots with standings in local -- positive OR negative. Neutrals boost the population counter, but their portraits don't appear on the local toolbar until they speak in local, are scanned or seen on grid. This will place more emphasis on personal relationships, as well as keeping better track of who your friends and enemies are. 3) Nullsec/No Sovereignty - Local population count ONLY. No portraits appear in local until they speak, are scanned, or appear on grid. This would boost player interaction by Hailing new pilots in system, to give them an opportunity to reveal themselves as friendly or not a threat. Scanners get "pings" that show gate activation. 4) Nullsec/Sovereignty - In systems where your alliance has sov, the intel displayed in local approaches that of highsec, but only for your alliance leaving attacking forces would be at a severe disadvantage. Forces enemies' scouts to be more diligent about collecting intel. Also boosts the importance of having sovereignty. //// ---------=== []= ---------=== \\\\ Rifter(RedBad) "Kill a man one is a murderer; kill a million, a conqueror; kill them all, a God." -- Jean Rostand
Monuturattilor	Posted - 2008.07.22 22:57:00 - [97] I completly agree local chat should get either removed or just not show who is inside the system. I have nothing not previously said to add though,
Foulque	Posted - 2008.07.23 01:17:00 - [98] Originally by: SunglassesInSpace A chat channel should not be used for intel. 100% behind this.
Kazuma Saruwatari Caldari	Posted - 2008.07.23 04:31:00 - [99] I will only support this proposed local change IFF: -the ship scanner that is built-in into ships currently is made more user-friendly -that there is some sort of visual cue as to being scanned by such a scanner -
Xyzibit	Posted - 2008.07.23 05:02:00 - [100] supported... BUT.. constellation chat sounds like a great idea but then there needs to be something done about spammers ESPECIALLY for JITA.... in jita constellation chat there would be way on top of 1.5k people and local spammers would be happy about that... plz dont get me wrong im just afraid of the empire constellations with more than 1k ppl in there i can remember once ccp had something like a global chat which you could close but autojoined after login (at least for the first time) ... that was awful

Dev Rom Caldari Masterminds Industries	Posted - 2008.07.30 21:18:00 - [101] I would totally eliminate the local-intellychat. If you want to see people billions miles away, you have to scan for it! Take a recon, place some scan-tower that spread that intellgence infos to your corp or ally. But if you roam in the wild, you have to risk. Why I can't see rats in belts from the stargate? Or I can't see complexes without scan for it? So I can't see people in system if their ships aren't in overview-range or scan range (if I scan). I am not your carpet ride, I am the sky..
Madscience	Posted - 2008.07.30 21:33:00 - [102] a big NO for this idea so now you want to turn this game into who has the most time, the most people at the time to enjoy the game?
Dyon Axio	Posted - 2008.07.30 21:45:00 - [103] Ok, here is an idea (which has been stated over and over again). If this is implemented, i would expect: The ability to put system scanner modules at poses WITHOUT sov. that the ship scanner showed ONLY ships that have pilots in them and some kind of IFF system where you could "Ping" a ships IFF scanner, and it would return "friend" for blue or "unknown" for neut or hostile. Local beacon counter (ovbiously) Because a soverien power over a system with sov controls the gates, their members should have an accurate local channel showing EVERYONE, since they control the gates and they should know who is in a system anyway.
Ruze Amarr No Applicable Corporation	Posted - 2008.07.30 21:51:00 - [104] I love this idea. I fully support removing local as an intel tool, and replacing it with more active means of gathering intelligence. Ganking someone in your system should be about just watching local for an arrival, and keeping an eye on your six should have more involved then popping a cloak every time an unknown pops up. Moving the local info into constellation chat is just a step in the right direction, as long as I'm allowed to close both. "The greatest offense is no defense."
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.07.30 22:28:00 - [105] Edited by: Marcus Gideon on 30/07/2008 22:28:07 It is SO simple to fix Local, without getting rid of it completely. Make Local chat a "Recent Speakers" channel, instead of an "Immediate" one. Then you have a total count, but the only faces you see are those that speak. You can still gab with all your friends... but you'll have no idea that some *Outsider* is about unless they choose to start gabbing too. --- Don't take my ranting personally. I may just be arguing the topic, unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word. "Players don't want Variety. They want THE BEST"
gladitoor	Posted - 2008.07.30 22:53:00 - [106] I think nobody should be visible to you in local chat unless they either speak in chat (thereby breaking radio silence) or they are directly in the same grid as you. The idea of me knowing who's jumping in and out of the system while I'm sitting in some belt so many AU away is pretty unrealistic.
Case Kovaks Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.07.30 22:57:00 - [107] Edited by: Case Kovaks on 30/07/2008 22:56:55 Agreed.
Vigilant Gallente Vigilant's Vigilante's	Posted - 2008.07.31 02:25:00 - [108] How about ... Remove Local in Low Sec. / Null sec. But leave the same as it is now in High Sec. Best of both worlds ... PvP / Pirate crowd is happy and the "carebear crowd" is unaffected.
Kahega Amielden	Posted - 2008.07.31 02:35:00 - [109] Removing local flat out is a bad idea until they improve scanning. Make it constellation.
Fahtim Meidires Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.07.31 02:36:00 - [110] Originally by: Vigilant How about ... Remove Local in Low Sec. / Null sec. But leave the same as it is now in High Sec. Best of both worlds ... PvP / Pirate crowd is happy and the "carebear crowd" is unaffected. It is not so cut and dry. I think local is fine.

Vigilant Gallente Vigilant's Vigilante's	Posted - 2008.07.31 02:40:00 - [111] Originally by: Fahtim Meidires Originally by: Vigilant How about ... Remove Local in Low Sec. / Null sec. But leave the same as it is now in High Sec. Best of both worlds ... PvP / Pirate crowd is happy and the "carebear crowd" is unaffected. It is not so cut and dry. I think local is fine. Yeah so do I m8, but figured I would find a happy middle of the road I can see how it really plays a part in low sec / null sec.
Lolarina	Posted - 2008.07.31 03:09:00 - [112] Edited by: Lolarina on 31/07/2008 03:09:35 I haz idea. Local sucks. No local sucks. Let's go 50/50. Systems randomly lose local for a random period of time due to ion storm.
Heomos Ricedi Russian SOBR	Posted - 2008.07.31 05:12:00 - [113] /signed
Arngorf Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2008.07.31 05:43:00 - [114] an easy solution is just making ppl not appear in local chat until they vocalize themself with a chat message.. Else make it possible to disable local chat so that you cant see it and no one else can see you since you are'nt in that channel... simply not joining the local channel unless you want to..
Mecinia Lua Galactic Express Burning Horizons	Posted - 2008.07.31 08:37:00 - [115] Edited by: Mecinia Lua on 31/07/2008 08:38:19 Originally by: Razin Originally by: Mecinia Lua To remove it they'd need a similar almost effortless means of acquiring the same data. At the same time for a tech angle it is most likely they'd still have to report the information to your computer so it can interact. If you code it such that it doesn't show someone will just make a program that lets them see it. So its probably not a wise investment for CCP to program it out. The data would not be available at any range, as it is currently. The range would be calculated server side before the information is made available to the client, so no bacon-like hack would work. Oh, and the whole point of this is to remove the "effortlessness" with which this data is currently acquired. I think your incorrect it is reported to your computer. Displaying the information is just flipping a flag. Completely stripping it out would require a much more concerted effort and probably a lot of programming time that could be better used on other aspects of the game. Just like one alliance first hacked and got the standings in the local window and then we all got it because it was an unfair advantage, this is pretty much the same thing, that's why CCP has never removed it except for that hiccup once upon a time, they can't figure out how to do so economically. Personally many of those calling for removal of local will not find the situation they want if it is removed. It would actually make the game harder for both the hunted and the hunter. The hunted would most likely retreat to empire, if they leave hi sec it will be only to do exploration sites and generally in groups becasue any other activity would just be to dangerous. They'll either look to stay in NPC corps to avoid war declares or gravitate to that as the hunters become more bored in low and 0.0 sec and look to empire for targets. The hunters would become bored because of decreasing targets. In both cases ultimately folks would probably leave the game faster than the current average. It would probably lead to a slow decline of the game at best and at worst a very drastic decline of the game as what happened to SWG Thoughts expressed are mine and mine alone. They do not necessarily reflect my alliances thoughts.
Dev Rom Masterminds Industries	Posted - 2008.07.31 10:47:00 - [116] Edited by: Dev Rom on 31/07/2008 10:55:11 Leaving local chat a recent chat, is the best e easy way imho. Evolving che scan system will be needed of course. I don't think it will become boring. We speak about pvp in general, not only 1vs1. So you need a fleet and an organization, and so eliminating local intellychat would improve cooperations: some explore to hunt down, some gate camp. Not simply wait at gates or at belts to kill people. Camping is not pvp imho. Even now people remain in game corp to not risk a war, so changing the local system would not alter their gameplay and a recent chat wouldn't hurt them. Leave the possibility to drop probe and scan pos would render hunting people fun and easy. Freighter fleet in null sec doesnt change, becouse you have to have a recon ship in fleet to scan gate and system ahead, so what's the difference? Only that you will not have the exact number and name of people in system. Today noone could stealth himself without a cloacking device from AU away. This is a mess. Maybe some powerful ships would emit so much em-noise to speak loud in local chat, but what for a ship shutten down whit all systems off? The tactical sceniarios would be really vast. :) I am not your carpet ride, I am the sky..
JordanParey Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2008.07.31 10:59:00 - [117] I don't think this is a very good idea. You can want to change this so it doesn't show anyone in local, but don't go whining in C&P when someone sneaks up on you and pops you. Doing this would also make it much more difficult to tell if there are pirates in the area..war targets...alliance and corp members... it would make being in system a terrifying experience for some and a rush for others. Leave it be.
soldieroffortune 258	Posted - 2008.07.31 15:25:00 - [118] eh, not so sure, while it is used as a tactical tool by people, the potential victims could easily use it the other way around, the pirates use local to see who is in system, the victimes can use it to see who is yellow/ flashy red
soldieroffortune 258	Posted - 2008.07.31 15:28:00 - [119] Edited by: soldieroffortune 258 on 31/07/2008 15:35:40 Originally by: JordanParey I don't think this is a very good idea. You can want to change this so it doesn't show anyone in local, but don't go whining in C&P when someone sneaks up on you and pops you. Doing this would also make it much more difficult to tell if there are pirates in the area..war targets...alliance and corp members... it would make being in system a terrifying experience for some and a rush for others. Leave it be. the bolded mostly, but this entire post in general also states while it's not the best idea, and since you are here saying how its "being used as a tactical tool" im assuming your a non pvper, and if this was implemented, you would go whine on C&P very quickly, because at least local gives you the opportunity to scout for potential dangers, like you most certainly do now, but you probably dont realize it, and if you dont, well you better start, i do it without thinking, and fate decides to punish me when i dont, apparently the caldari have been camping neutral systems (concord, interbus) in gallente high sec, most of the time, i check local, make a quick scna down, to make sure no reds, or war targets pop up (or people i know, so i can start a conversation with them) anyway, im gonig to my corp, and im in my little salvage boat destroyer, and i come out of local, and see what systems i will be passing through (it was a 12 jump journey) and i didnt check local, im in the star map, and boom one of the caldari militia is camping the gate, im in star map, and hear the locking sound and think, oh well, it's a noob who thinks he can kill me or someone did it by accident, then the ship starts shooting me and it is then i realize its a WT, and i didnt check local, and look what happened, he shot me to like 50% structure before i got to the gate so, start using local to YOUR advantage instead of finding a way around it, which you are going to regret anyway
Belmarduk Amarr de Prieure Four Elements	Posted - 2008.07.31 15:44:00 - [120] I disagree CCP Please give us casual players a Skill-Queue !

Heartstone Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.07.31 16:16:00 - [121] Edited by: Heartstone on 31/07/2008 16:16:24 Support in theory. The exact roll out would need a lot of work though ---
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.07.31 18:59:00 - [122] Originally by: EXODUS Patch Notes Added region and constellation system channels. You can join Region channel through the Channels list, but Constellation is always shown. Both channels only show recent speakers and cannot be utilized as a tactical tool. This is for mingling only. Making Local a *Recent Speakers* channel would also mean it "cannot be utilized as a tactical tool". --- Don't take my ranting personally. I may just be arguing the topic, unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word. "Players don't want Variety. They want THE BEST"
Hottie McGee GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.07.31 19:21:00 - [123] Edited by: Hottie McGee on 31/07/2008 19:22:17 I love this idea. This would have covop frigates in higher demand, and can let said covops and recons scout without being known. having it be in 'delayed' mode would still allow people to talk to each other, but their presence would still be hidden until they decide to reveal it.
Harrii Karrie	Posted - 2008.07.31 19:49:00 - [124] No local, so when my mate jumps into a system I.m in, someone whom I may not seen for a while,who is in a different corp or alliance, and we may even be at war with each other.Means we can no longer pass the time of day with plesantries or smack. How against the ethos of EVE. Friendships begin and are formed through the local channel.No longer being able to exchange a few words with passing pilots is a massive down side to losing local. A second is when chasing enemy gangs it will be harder to track them down and follow because not every alliance has the numbers of goonswarm who could in therory place a covert ops pilot on every gate to moniter commings and goings. I believe local is a vital aspect of this game.
Hottie McGee GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.07.31 20:36:00 - [125] Originally by: Harrii Karrie No local, so when my mate jumps into a system I.m in, someone whom I may not seen for a while,who is in a different corp or alliance, and we may even be at war with each other.Means we can no longer pass the time of day with plesantries or smack. How against the ethos of EVE. Friendships begin and are formed through the local channel.No longer being able to exchange a few words with passing pilots is a massive down side to losing local. A second is when chasing enemy gangs it will be harder to track them down and follow because not every alliance has the numbers of goonswarm who could in therory place a covert ops pilot on every gate to moniter commings and goings. I believe local is a vital aspect of this game. if you read the thread, you'd see that people have suggested using constellation chat as auto-updating and you can chat in there.
Harrii Karrie	Posted - 2008.07.31 20:47:00 - [126] Dont have constalation channel active, have enougth without it.
Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.07.31 21:20:00 - [127] Edited by: Marcus Gideon on 31/07/2008 21:20:35 Originally by: Harrii Karrie Dont have constalation channel active, have enougth without it. That's as useful an argument as the other folks who say "If you don't like Local, then turn it off". The point is... Constellation chat spans too great a distance as far as people are concerned. They don't use it because they don't want to juggle all the conversations to look for anyone speaking directly to THEM. Local covers that area, right there... so you can gab with whoever you like. And if you happen to notice someone threatening, then you can take appropriate action. What isn't factored in, is the ships onboard sensors. There's no particular reason WHY you should know the instant someone Jumps into the area. I don't think that ships have little beacons that ring the doorbell and cry out "Honey, I'm home!" But that's exactly what we're calling a problem, when a spy wants to sneak unseen into enemy territory to spy on the gathering fleet. "I'll just creep up to this Gate. Hopefully no one is on the other end. Either way, I'll Cloak as soon as I get there, and sneak up to viewing range of their POS. Just gotta make this Jump first..." *HONEY!!! I'M HOME!!!* So taking Local away from everyone who is abusing it as a tactical intel tool... really shouldn't affect you who are only looking to gab with friends. You can just as easily ask "Anyone around here know where to find a Villard Wheel?" without seeing the faces of the people who will want to hurt you for asking. And as for knowing if friends or enemies are nearby... there's that little button for "Onboard Scanner" too. --- Don't take my ranting personally. I may just be arguing the topic, unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word. "Players don't want Variety. They want THE BEST"
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.07.31 21:20:00 - [128] Originally by: Mecinia Lua Edited by: Mecinia Lua on 31/07/2008 08:38:19 I think your incorrect it is reported to your computer. Displaying the information is just flipping a flag. Completely stripping it out would require a much more concerted effort and probably a lot of programming time that could be better used on other aspects of the game. That may be, we donÆt know how CCP would implement it. Originally by: Mecinia Lua Just like one alliance first hacked and got the standings in the local window and then we all got it because it was an unfair advantage, this is pretty much the same thing, that's why CCP has never removed it except for that hiccup once upon a time, they can't figure out how to do so economically. The standings data was always available to anyone by doing a ôget infoö on the portrait in local. Do you see any hacks that give a listing of all ships in system beyond the 13-AU range of your shipÆs scanner? Is it because theyÆre not there? Originally by: Mecinia Lua Personally many of those calling for removal of local will not find the situation they want if it is removed. It would actually make the game harder for both the hunted and the hunterà One of the points of this change is to make the game more complex. If that means ôharderö for you, then thatÆs a subjective assessment. ...
Sin Fae Income Redistribution Service	Posted - 2008.08.01 03:00:00 - [129] Absolutely agree. If (for whatever messed up reason) there must be a compromise, at the very least let covops ships pilots not show up in local "Suicide Gank Someone Day"(prizes)
Othe Noc	Posted - 2008.08.01 07:03:00 - [130] I think that to implement this would require a complete overhaul of the scanner. Which would probably include a feature to scan for active ships in the system . . . which would result in the same information anyways. And I don't think the presence of local chat has a particularly detrimental affect on cloakers, either. Knowing that someone is in system doesn't tell you anything other than that someone may have noticed YOU enter. They could be cloaked off a gate, they could be ratting in a belt, they could be docked in a station, or they could be sitting at another gate or a planet or a moon or a POS. You can try scanning them out, but you won't find them, and you'll assume they're somewhere else. You can try probing them out, but you'll get the same results. You know SOMEBODY is SOMEWHERE, but you don't know anything more until they uncloak. The idea of using a chat channel for intel does bug me a little. But I feel that it would be redundant to scrap it in favor of an ultimately identical feature in the scanner. If we want to overhaul the scanner and find cooler things to do with it, then having that new functionality replace Local Chat might be interesting. But I think any changes to this system should originate with discussion about the Scanner and only affect changes to Local Chat incidentally. And if you need an RP reason to justify it: each ship has a comm system capable of making links and communicating instantaneously across the cluster. There's actually a funny little article on it here. Since all of the ship's individual communications are ultimately networked together (sort of like the Internet, cough cough), it's clearly possible to scan for all connections originating in the same starsystem (Sort of like pinning down the location of someone's internet connection). In order to cut one's self off from the link and render one's self invisible to the chat channel, one would have to close off all connection to the communications net. This would involve severing connections to the chat channels, fleet coms, the market, the map, the Assets tab, the wallet . . . even IFF tags on ships, and the identifier signals of scanned ships and stations. We can call this maneuver "Logging off." Since a ship severed from the communications network is useless for nearly anything besides hiding, this maneuver is nearly always accompanied by the pilot shutting down the ship's power systems, rendering it effectively invisible.

Fahtim Meidires Caldari GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.08.01 07:17:00 - [131] Originally by: Othe Noc And if you need an RP reason to justify it: each ship has a comm system capable of making links and communicating instantaneously across the cluster. There's actually a funny little article on it here. Since all of the ship's individual communications are ultimately networked together (sort of like the Internet, cough cough), it's clearly possible to scan for all connections originating in the same starsystem (Sort of like pinning down the location of someone's internet connection). This is a pretty good RP reason for it. If not an excellent one. Read the link it's a good one. I actually hoped CCP had something like this, so this makes me . Quote: In order to cut one's self off from the link and render one's self invisible to the chat channel, one would have to close off all connection to the communications net. This would involve severing connections to the chat channels, fleet coms, the market, the map, the Assets tab, the wallet . . . even IFF tags on ships, and the identifier signals of scanned ships and stations. This, however, would just be terrible software engineering in a universe with lasers in space and warp technology. The first part is sufficient. Solid post though, and keep local.
Alex TheCat	Posted - 2008.08.01 08:25:00 - [132] Local as it is now should definitely be removed. I agree that it should show the amount of ships in the system with no ifs nor buts. It also should show the corp and alliance members in the list. But that's about it!
RuleoftheBone Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.08.01 10:04:00 - [133] Supported. Just show local numbers. Job done. "Lead Me..Follow Me..Or get the **** out of my way" General George Patton USA
Transmaniacon Strike-Force-Alpha	Posted - 2008.08.01 13:01:00 - [134] Edited by: Transmaniacon on 01/08/2008 13:01:24 This is an excellent idea, and really fulfills the unknown feeling of space. Using the constellation channel, one could see how populated it is, and an influx obviously signals a enemy gang. And while you don't know where they are, they don't know where you are either. It would require the use of actual scouting, not just an alt jumping into system and reporting what local says... Small cloaking ships would be invaluable for covering gates, stations, POS, etc to gain intel on enemy movements. I think this brings a new level of strategy to the game and as mentioned earlier, makes this much more realistic. This is one of the best suggestions I have read on these forums, and I would love for this to go through.
Dihania SniggWaffe	Posted - 2008.08.01 13:04:00 - [135] [hrhr] Sniggwaffe is recruiting. Visit channel "join sniggwaffe" in game.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.08.01 17:51:00 - [136] Originally by: Othe Noc I think that to implement this would require a complete overhaul of the scanner. Which would probably include a feature to scan for active ships in the system . . . which would result in the same information anyways. ... But I feel that it would be redundant to scrap it in favor of an ultimately identical feature in the scanner... Why is it so hard to understand that the "feature in the scanner" would not be identical to the current Local? This info would be available at LIMITED RANGE, unlike the current Local that gives this information at INFINITE RANGE. See the difference? LIMITED vs. INFINITE? I hope that was clear. ...
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.08.01 18:02:00 - [137] Originally by: Fahtim Meidires Originally by: Othe Noc And if you need an RP reason to justify it: each ship has a comm system capable of making links and communicating instantaneously across the cluster. There's actually a funny little article on it here. Since all of the ship's individual communications are ultimately networked together (sort of like the Internet, cough cough), it's clearly possible to scan for all connections originating in the same starsystem (Sort of like pinning down the location of someone's internet connection). This is a pretty good RP reason for it. If not an excellent one. Read the link it's a good one. I actually hoped CCP had something like this, so this makes me . Not really. If we start on the RP path someone would have to explain why the Local intel on a particular system is not available in other systems. Not even in delayed form. What with the FTL comm and stuff. Surely this would be as simple as providing market listings across the region. ...
Trojanman190 D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.08.01 19:54:00 - [138] This change will just make blobbing even more the answer to everything. You won't know who you are going to face or how many friends your enemy has so the best bet is to bring as many buddies as possible. This is realistic but not fun.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.08.01 20:37:00 - [139] Originally by: Trojanman190 This change will just make blobbing even more the answer to everything. You won't know who you are going to face or how many friends your enemy has so the best bet is to bring as many buddies as possible. This is realistic but not fun. This really depends on, for example, how the new scanning system is implemented. Blobs may be made to have some considerable visibility disadvantages making them easily avoidable. ...
Faeyde	Posted - 2008.08.01 21:34:00 - [140] Originally by: Kelsin Agreed! But along with this I would ask the CSM to recommend introducing a new more robust scanner system to give that "Submarine Sonar" feel to figuring out who else is out there. Indeed. How is it that in the several thousand years humanity have advanced in Eve, they've completely lost the ability to make active radar systems, with FoF built in?

Marcus Gideon Gallente Excessive Force	Posted - 2008.08.01 22:41:00 - [141] "Recent Speakers" --- Don't take my ranting personally. I may just be arguing the topic, unless you're saying something stupid, and then I mean every word. "Players don't want Variety. They want THE BEST"
Phony v2 Heavens Gate Consortium	Posted - 2008.08.02 01:07:00 - [142] I agree completely ______________________________________________ Save a flame, post with your main!
Joiske	Posted - 2008.08.02 17:46:00 - [143] not agreeing with this
kryptteacher	Posted - 2008.08.02 20:45:00 - [144] oooo yeah i would be stoked to see constellation chat used instead of local. BUT if you have a heavily populated constellation would there be a lag factor?
Alpha Prime Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.08.02 20:59:00 - [145] /Signed. I fully endorse this suggestion. There is no price on true lojalty
Aiko Intaki	Posted - 2008.08.02 21:04:00 - [146]
NanDe YaNen The Funkalistic	Posted - 2008.08.02 21:32:00 - [147] Had a very cool idea: To extend the place of small ships in a universe without local, make scanner accuracy dependent upon sig radius. In a system that would be hit or miss while trying to jump on top of enemy forces, small ships would have the advantage. Say there was something like jump resolution that allowed your warp drive to lock onto ships on scanner with a certain level of accuracy. Big ships are for getting the job done. Small ships are for opening, closing, and finding doors.
ceyriot Entropians on Vacation	Posted - 2008.08.02 22:06:00 - [148] Originally by: Dal' Hassen Edited by: Dal'' Hassen on 09/06/2008 15:21:06 I agree that Local chat should be changed to the way that Tyrrhena described, however I think that local chat is useful for new characters just getting the hang of the game and would probably be better to have it function much like the rookie help channel. And I know that you would say that 'whats stopping someone creating new players all the time' and your right. Maybe have this implemented, buy only in lowsec/0.0? Roleplay reason would be CONCORD isn't there to count every single player. Faction Store - Killboard
Tallai Reeca	Posted - 2008.08.04 13:36:00 - [149] Fully support this idea. In my view, local is completely unrealistic and the game's single most used exploit. It has the effect of strongly favoring some playstyles while making others unplayable that would otherwise be perfectly viable. It goes against Eve's very nature as a realistic combat and economy simulator. That said, I also think local could be retained in its current form in high sec. Like others have pointed out, that would be way more realistic while allowing for even more playstyle diversity than eliminating local altogether would. How about: High sec: local works like it does today everywhere Low sec: local has no auto-discovery; however, constellation channel does Deep space: neither local nor constellation have auto-discovery
Louie Salz	Posted - 2008.08.04 13:37:00 - [150] Supported.

Zaranya Amarr	Posted - 2008.08.14 05:11:00 - [151] If the local was taken away it would be nice if the scanner could differentiate between unoccupied ships and active ones. Instead, maybe you wouldn't even have the ship type on scanner but rather it's size? That could be more interesting. But overall, let's get rid of low sec and 0.0 local.
Maulos the united	Posted - 2008.08.14 12:40:00 - [152] /signed
dethleffs The Paratwa FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.08.15 09:58:00 - [153] i agree with the op, as do i agree that if this is to be implemented the scanner would need some kind of overhaul.
Dana Serenity Guerillaz	Posted - 2008.08.15 18:58:00 - [154] Agreed... BUT! I can see a problem. Imagine jumping into the constellation which houses Jita and having the constellation chat window update everytime someone jumps into that constellation. 3000+ people in a chat channel spamming away while it updates with portraits from the hundreds of players leaving and entering the constellation from loads of different gates in different systems at the same time would frankly be very annoying (And I'd imagine a little bit laggy). I think it can work though, maybe; 1.0 to 0.1 space - Local chat is in "Immediate Mode" and Constellation chat is in "Delayed Mode 0.0 space - Local chat is in "Delayed Mode" and Constellation chat is in "Immediate Mode" I think this would work because the amount of traffic in 0.0 is considerably less than empire. It would work with the risk vs reward factor aswell, Lowsec would as it is now would be more dangerous than 0.5+ however not being able to use local as a tool in 0.0 makes the dangers of 0.0 higher with its obvious higher rewards It may need a little bit of mapping to make sure all 0.0 space does not have lowsec/empire systems within the same constallation though I think this is already the case
Synthia Sin Amarr Lilith Inc.	Posted - 2008.09.07 02:33:00 - [155] In modern air combat simulators, you have active and passive radar systems. While active radar provides the pilot with more situational awareness, it's disadvantage it gives away information to passive systems. So why not give local a switchable passive and active mode? Active = as is (with the exception of not seeing players in passive mode) and Passive mode = invisable (but able to see players in active mode). This system could only be implemented fairly if asteroid belts HAD to be scanned in order to be found, as hunting miners and ratters, would be too 'casually' easy. Then the 'hunter(s)' would have to scan for belts etc. causing a brief portrait/name to appear in the 'passive' local window. The 'hunter' finds a ship, scans again, to locate it. This is even better than local, as it indicates 'intent' but if the miner/ratter is AFK or not paying attention, they get ganked. The constellation solution would do, if asteroid belts weren't made scan-able. If I can't dance to it, it's not my revolution.Emma Goldman
Ackuula	Posted - 2008.09.07 20:10:00 - [156] Making local a little less local. I like it. Good idea
Ash Bringer	Posted - 2008.09.07 21:18:00 - [157] If u don't show local you boost cloaker recons to such extend you can not believe... Gate camps become so more potent... 0.0 Becomes so much more deadly. I'm pretty sure every ratter will die in 0.0 daily. As a gang scouted by a cloaking ship will be virtually invisible now. And If u remove local every ratter will use scanner every 30secs. Can be a demanding job for ccp servers. Remember why local is showing reds and blues now. And pls be realistic. And auto updating constellation chat will kill The Forge. What 1000 ppl updating every sec.. If it won't slow the game though I can live with it. But honestly local is in favor of defender or weak atm.. Do u really want to tip the ballance?
Opertone SIEGE. The Border Patrol	Posted - 2008.09.07 21:25:00 - [158] support
Draygo Korvan Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.09.07 22:32:00 - [159] Originally by: Ash Bringer If u don't show local you boost cloaker recons to such extend you can not believe... Gate camps become so more potent... 0.0 Becomes so much more deadly. I'm pretty sure every ratter will die in 0.0 daily. As a gang scouted by a cloaking ship will be virtually invisible now. And If u remove local every ratter will use scanner every 30secs. Can be a demanding job for ccp servers. Remember why local is showing reds and blues now. And pls be realistic. And auto updating constellation chat will kill The Forge. What 1000 ppl updating every sec.. If it won't slow the game though I can live with it. But honestly local is in favor of defender or weak atm.. Do u really want to tip the ballance? You are basically right except for one thing: no ratter will be killed because there will be no one ratting (or very few). Why risk a ship and your pod killing rats when you can just run level 4's? --
Rhaegor Stormborn Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes	Posted - 2008.09.08 01:39:00 - [160] /signed

Jerni	Posted - 2008.09.08 06:49:00 - [161]
Irsy	Posted - 2008.09.08 08:46:00 - [162] /signed
Synthia Sin Amarr Lilith Inc.	Posted - 2008.09.09 02:08:00 - [163] I withdraw my lukewarm support for this proposal, on the grounds that: 1. RP reasons, My Toon is hardarsed anarchist in an unforgiving and deadly universe, yet somehow makes no attept to disable that 'iff' device that broadcasts her presence across the consellation, yet for some inexplicable reason the device fails in the system that she's in. How are the backstory writers going to explain that one? 2. Peeps, like their Local, why take away their favorite social tool, for the dubious justification, of making covert-ops work as intended. 3. The constellation solution, only displaces an implausable intelligence tool from one chat window to another, achieving nothing. If instantly knowing who is in local is a problem, then why is instantly knowing who is in a constellation an improvement? Local as it stands, doesn't make sense. I should have the option of 'radio' silence. I should light up like a christmas tree when actively scanning for victims. Asteroid belts should move and be found through scanning (If only to add a level of complexity for Macro coders) If I can't dance to it, it's not my revolution.Emma Goldman
hired goon Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2008.09.09 11:56:00 - [164] how do i do thumbs down lol oh shi- -omg-
s33ker Cry Havoc.	Posted - 2008.09.09 19:58:00 - [165] Yes. Local shows only those who've spoken until they leave. Const. Chat shows everyone in the const. just like local works now. This change would be balanced without benefiting a single segment of players any more than another. I don't buy into the argument that it would make less people go into low sec and 0.0... that's bullsh*t. Low sec population is another issue imo.
TimMc Gallente SolaR KillerS	Posted - 2008.09.09 21:43:00 - [166] As nice as this idea is, I'm not sure 100% about it. Carebears - would be able to see people coming from ages away. At first they would dock, but when they get bored of docking constantly they will start working anyway but scanning constantly. Server lag might increase a bit. Covert Ops instantly become hugely powerful for landing ontop of carebears before they can scan you in nearby belts. PvPers - Can now see if anyone is in the constellation, rather than flying around so much. Bottleneck gatecampss will form on the fishtank edges where the constellations change. Holding constellations is now hugely important so that the chat is kept clear most of the time. I think it will too heavily increase gatecamping, and make isk generation in 0.0 alot harder. I mean... its not even that much better than high sec atm. They would have to heavily buff 0.0 rewards or nerf high sec if this was followed through.
Dizeezer Velar Caldari League of Disgruntled Fast Food Employees	Posted - 2008.09.09 21:49:00 - [167] while I like the idea, you would be unable to tell if a wartarget is in the system and vice versa. How would you suggest getting around that problem? I'm talking about high-sec and low sec here, as its not an issue in 0.0
Pin Par Vaere Family Mining Ltd	Posted - 2008.09.09 22:30:00 - [168] I like the idear.
Devilish Ledoux Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction	Posted - 2008.09.10 09:18:00 - [169] What I'd like to see: Local works much like certain chat channels do now. You can see how many people are in local, and you can see anyone who spoke in local since you entered (unlike the regular chat channels, however, they would not appear to be in local after they've left). You would not know who is in local unless they say, "It's me" or something to that effect in local. I also think that the Constellation should work the way Local does now. You'd still be able to use it as an intelligence gathering tool, supplemented by your knowledge of how many people are in a given solar system. However, while you'd be able to use local to track the movements of larger fleets, it will be much less useful in tracking the movements of small gangs and nearly useless for tracking single ships. _
Javelin6 Dirt Nap Squad Dirt Nap Associates	Posted - 2008.09.10 15:24:00 - [170]

Karii Ildarian Eve University Ivy League	Posted - 2008.09.10 15:58:00 - [171] Agreed. I would like to see local functionality replaced by, an albeit less powerful, ship scanner system. This passive system will warn the pilot when a warp signature is detected within it's scan range, (4.1 AU, I think). I would also like a Stargate activation warning, to be issued to all pilots in the local system. This warning could contain information like which Stargate was activated (for systems with multiple gates, of course) and vessel type. Keep chat at a constellation level, if really needed, I guess...
Matrixcvd Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.09.10 22:29:00 - [172] OMGZ no need to fool around, have a 1 minute update timer, if you can't find someone in 1 minute then you deserve to die and eat the scanner, NO FREE INTEL show up after 1 minute in system NUFF SAID
Kira Morganstien	Posted - 2008.09.12 02:28:00 - [173] A very interesting topic, I support. Oh and a few other ideas. Hi-Sec could be auto-update too, since it is suppose to be high-security and ran by huge empires. Also, if not implemented at least give cloakers the ability to stay off local chat, maybe even constellation and stuff to, I dunno. I haven't really looked into the balance for that to much, but I hate being seen in local while cloaked.
Havohej Comply Or Die G00DFELLAS	Posted - 2008.09.12 07:10:00 - [174] Originally by: CCP Explorer You can still steal their stuff.
Dana Serenity Caldari Guerillaz	Posted - 2008.09.17 11:02:00 - [175] As much as I agree that changing constelation to immediate and locl to delayed would work. There is a problem that needs to be considered with this; If we take busy regions such as "The Forge" which can see 200+ players in 1 system. If we then use constelation chat in immediate mode instead of local, we would end up probably seeing this chat channel with 1000's of players all chatting away and updating constantly as players jump in and out of the consteallation from considerably more gates that local has to update with. I know this is a social game however this would franky be a little bit annoying while at the same time I don't think it would help lag to much. I know this link is my own idea but I think it would work better Linky
Jeal Tersen	Posted - 2008.09.17 12:52:00 - [176] support
Reithan Dead 2 Rights TransWarp Ventures	Posted - 2008.09.17 21:00:00 - [177] Personally I think the way that Local can be so abused as an intel device in this game is ridiculous. The ONLY channels that should be able to be set auto-update should be Corp/Alliance channels, or possibly moderated Player-made channels. No more easy-mode intel. Learn to use the goddamn scanner. Oh and before anyone whines about "But dah ebil piwats will getz me!" remember - YOU won't show up on local, either.
Reithan Dead 2 Rights TransWarp Ventures	Posted - 2008.09.17 21:06:00 - [178] Originally by: Synthia Sin In modern air combat simulators, you have active and passive radar systems. While active radar provides the pilot with more situational awareness, it's disadvantage it gives away information to passive systems. So why not give local a switchable passive and active mode? Active = as is (with the exception of not seeing players in passive mode) and Passive mode = invisable (but able to see players in active mode). This system could only be implemented fairly if asteroid belts HAD to be scanned in order to be found, as hunting miners and ratters, would be too 'casually' easy. Then the 'hunter(s)' would have to scan for belts etc. causing a brief portrait/name to appear in the 'passive' local window. The 'hunter' finds a ship, scans again, to locate it. This is even better than local, as it indicates 'intent' but if the miner/ratter is AFK or not paying attention, they get ganked. The constellation solution would do, if asteroid belts weren't made scan-able. If you're gonna go at this from a fully RP-angle, then this is crap. Local in EVE works via a quantum-entagled router system managed by CONCORD (I think? Maybe some other big corp, Lai Dai?). Radar or signals have nothing to do with it. Your only Radar is your scanner. And remember kids, if I'm in scan range, you're in scan range.
Feriluce Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.12 01:32:00 - [179] Local is a ridiculous intel tool indeed. Some sort of Delay...like possibly 5 min (you wouldnt show up in local if you're less than 5 min in the system. It would work the other way too, so you wouldnt see anyone that had been in the system for a while until 5 min after you jump in) would be acceptable. I'd prefer to remove local completely though, and have the scanner modified so it would be more useful. Possibly make the scanner autoupdate in a way, but only within normal scan range. That way as a gang you would be able to sneak through systems, without whatever random ratter there would relay intel to the rest of his alliance, making surprise attacks on enemy home systems possible if they dont have dedicated scouts out.
Col Callahan Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.10.12 09:10:00 - [180] /Signed, as much as I live free intel, it's just that,free over powered intel. _ Clusters shut down, and then you stare at a black screen for 5 hours.

Jin Labarre	Posted - 2008.10.12 22:12:00 - [181] 1 Up
Ice Baby Ice Cream Express	Posted - 2008.10.13 00:14:00 - [182] ------------------------------ Adding bounty will not make it easier to kill me.
Lysander Kaldenn Viper Intel Squad Sons of Tangra	Posted - 2008.10.13 05:13:00 - [183] I've always liked this idea. Give us a chance to actually catch cloaking isk farmers. The Constellation chat would replace local for intel... could be very interesting.
Feriluce Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.13 15:14:00 - [184] Another option would be to Make the normal scanner systemwide, and autoupdate with a certain interval (to remove the need to spam the scan button every 5 sec). The downside of the systemwide scanner would be that it gets more inaccurate the further away you are from the object. For example 50% chance to get wrong results at 20 AU.
IT Yassir	Posted - 2008.10.16 01:26:00 - [185] I suport the idea but have a realy hard felling lets do a background chek : We whanted nano's nerfed (first nerf when domis wore going 8 km/sec)they changed it to curent sistem we whanted more nerf we are getting ab's better then mwd So as a great man spoken :No battle plan ever survises contact with the enamy so do i say no nerf plan ever survises with ccp If they will nerf it it will be nerfed so hard u wont be able to find ure corp mate if u are 1 au from him Nerf it but do it gentle
Zathrus	Posted - 2008.10.18 02:41:00 - [186] It would be great to see Local only show you if you speak. All for changing it.
shadowtech commander Shad0wtech	Posted - 2008.10.18 19:49:00 - [187] if i may speak from a none pvp'er point of view here.the only people that this would benefit are those that are actively seeking combat and wish to hide their numbers and general presence from other people in the system. I dont think that would be very fair to the poeple that just want to go about their business without being ganked all the time by people that are actively looking to do such. I know that happens anyway, but with instant local at least people have a chance to get away or whatever they want to do. Calling for a nerf to catch cloaking isk farmers is really just cloaking the reason behind the thread
Ignition SemperFi Private Nuisance	Posted - 2008.10.19 18:37:00 - [188] this would be too much of an imbalance to the game. Not supported, even though i would love to see it from a pew pew perspective. ------ People Say Im paranoid because I have a gun, I say I dont have to be paranoid because I have a gun. Garmon - "I LOK ON TO ROMULAN WARBIRD AND GO POW POW POW"


Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 :: [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.