EVE Search - Local chat changes=game ending.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Test Server Feedback

Local chat changes=game ending.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)
Vanthropy Minmatar	Posted - 2008.10.25 02:47:00 - [61] way to make it all happy and better... i love this change idea, but perhaps this suggestion, first, friendly automatically show up, second.. the number in local stays accurate. this change is again, pure genius. thank you ccp you are rocking my world with these new changes, frankly all of your current SiSi stuff and you current suggestions are baller! i'm blinkin happy after not having any updates for a couple months there after the initial speed patch scare :D "SPEED + GANK = SPANK... Spank that ***** up"
Qlanth Caldari Merch Industrial GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.25 02:48:00 - [62] I forgot to mention that having level 3 and 4 missions in high sec already makes 0.0 pretty unappealing in the first place. If this change goes through I think all level 3, 4, and 5 missions should be moved out of high-sec completely. And Level 5 missions should only be offered in 0.0, and not just NPC space, all of 0.0 Not that it matters. I already had to cancel my other account because of the ghost training changes. If I can't even make money anymore I will probably just quit altogether.
Razin The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx	Posted - 2008.10.25 02:56:00 - [63] Edited by: Razin on 25/10/2008 02:58:10 A few choice quotes from CCP Zulupark: Local as an info tool: We want to put local in 0.0 as a delayed mode channel so only people who talk in the channel are shown. We are also looking at other alternatives but if we find nothing better this will be put in testing at least. Local changes: Yeah, I actually thought that was so obvious that I didn't need to mention it. But yes, any changes to local will of course have to be hand-in-hand with changes to scanning mechanics. You must be able to somehow get quick-ish intel on the basic status of the system you're in. Timeframe for local changes: I'd like to see it q1 next year but I can't really promise it. I'll do everything I can to make it happen though :) /quote ...
Miriyaka GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.25 02:58:00 - [64] If the balance team hadn't hamfisted the speed nerf so badly, I'd expect good things from this. Removing local as an intel tool while providing new, different tools (destructible/incapacitatable anchored intel structures in 0.0 for example) could be a pretty cool direction for the game. But I hardly trust them to get it right after everything else I've seen.
Morris Falter The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:09:00 - [65] I will attempt to take a balanced point of view. - Removing local / putting on a delayed mode without balancing the loss of this warning mechanism is clearly out of the question - Having an instant warning when anything that bears even a remote possibility of interrupting your time in the next 1-2 minutes in _zero security space_ is clearly bull****. - Hunting / scanning / ability to localise players in 5-20s _without probes_ is a proper skill to be learnt in the game, and this kind of gameplay should be encouraged. Somewhere between this lies the path eve will take. Adapt or die.
Kayosoni Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:12:00 - [66] make the scanning arrays at pos's useful: have them make local show who's in system to their corp/alliance people in local.
Anonymous Troll	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:12:00 - [67] Originally by: Corp Quas Edited by: Corp Quas on 24/10/2008 19:51:54 Quote: Local as an info tool: We want to put local in 0.0 as a delayed mode channel so only people who talk in the channel are shown. We are also looking at other alternatives but if we find nothing better this will be put in testing at least. I swear to you CCP if you mess this up in any way you will lose at least 6 more accounts. This is primarily only catering to the roaming PvP pilots. There are far more people that need local to work as-is to enjoy this game. Changing it will be a drastic "last straw" change and you will lose alot of players. In 0.0 as we get intel of hostile gangs via local we can form defence gangs to prepare. With the proposed changes roaming gangs will have ultimate power over 0.0 space. There will not be defence gangs because no one will even know any hostiles are there until it is too late. Can I have your 6 accounts worth of stuff?
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:15:00 - [68] Removing local as an intel tool and then handing Corps/Alliances something like fixed POS based system scanners is totally defeating the purpose of removing local. The point is to remove locals current functionality, not replace it with an exact duplicate. Particularly one that is a 3rd party construct.
Morris Falter The Collective Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:22:00 - [69] Originally by: Kayosoni make the scanning arrays at pos's useful: have them make local show who's in system to their corp/alliance people in local. On surface a reasonable idea, but this kind of thinking has left us with the legacy of sovereignty and intensely dull pos-based gameplay. Zulupark said recently, and explicitly that they want to move away from that, which is a wise move. No to retrogression.
Straight Chillen Gallente Solar Wind	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:33:00 - [70] Bring on the changes! Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint

Miriyaka GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:37:00 - [71] There are plenty of ways to implement anchorable or ship-based early warning systems with obvious (even if partial) vulnerabilities to covops and recon ships that enable rather than discourage small-gang and defense gang action. None of them involve anything with POSes. Ugh.
Shard Merchant Minmatar	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:37:00 - [72] Why is this not in Quantum Rise? Making us wait another six months is giving the ignorant whiners time to thread bomb. I'd rather not see this very important change buried under "compromise solutions".
IceGoon GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.25 03:57:00 - [73] Unless theres a giant ratting/mining buff were you can make isk hand over fist in 0 0.0, everyone will just go run lv4's in empire. This would creates a severe risk vs reward inbalance in 0.0. Why would you want to rat/min in 0.0 with all these risks when you can make the same ammount running empire lv4's with little to no risk?
Haakelen Gallente Nation of Muppets	Posted - 2008.10.25 06:12:00 - [74] Just when I think CCP has gone and completely lost it, they redeem themselves. Awesome. Go go go!
Del Narveux Dukes of Hazard	Posted - 2008.10.25 06:37:00 - [75] The hilarious irony of removing local is it may actually lead to more attacker tears than defender tears, once they start having to spend 10 minutes scanning every (95% of the time empty) system to see if theres stuff to shoot at, instead of a quick glance at local and move on. So a 2 hour op roaming through 25 systems and engaging 5 targets becomes a 2 hour op roaming through 10 systems and engaging 2 targets. Personally I dont really care either way though. _________________ [IMAGE REMOVED] -- aka Cpt Bogus -- Is that my torped sig cloaking your base?
TZeer Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.25 06:46:00 - [76] If they change local to how alliancechat work, that would be great. Show amount of people, but not who it is, until they speak/type whatever... - You wouldnt need to sit scanning nonstop - You would be able to see if local rises And best part, noone would be able to tell if that new guy in local is hostile or friendly until they let them self be known or someone scan him down or get visuals on him. Bring it!!! Of course this would need to be implemented together with a change in cloaks and stuff, where specced ships works as before and non spec ships could be scanned down with some extra effort.
Moostang DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.25 06:56:00 - [77] Originally by: Del Narveux The hilarious irony of removing local is it may actually lead to more attacker tears than defender tears, once they start having to spend 10 minutes scanning every (95% of the time empty) system to see if theres stuff to shoot at, instead of a quick glance at local and move on. So a 2 hour op roaming through 25 systems and engaging 5 targets becomes a 2 hour op roaming through 10 systems and engaging 2 targets. Personally I dont really care either way though. You're wrong. The map will still be able to show hotspots of players. Roaming gangs will simply bounce between them killing off anyone remotely trying to make any isk. Removing local will in the long run remove targets since people wont be in 0.0 anymore, what will be the point...
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.10.25 07:34:00 - [78] If we assume that a new type a scanner replace local as an intel tool, but doesn't give friend or foe identification, there will be side-effects. For one, alliances renting space from another will quickly find themselves kicked back to empire by the big alliances, who won't be able to differenciate them from enemies without direct, visual contact. speaking in local won't happen because it give away the element of surprise. identification in intel channels won't happen because the sheer number of requests will turn it into spam. So there need to be a way to see standings directly on the scanner. ------------------------------------------
ghosttr Amarr THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.25 07:49:00 - [79] Am I the only one here who believe both local, and directional scanner need changing. Just setting the local channel to delayed is just a meatfisted way of doing it and wont bring any player benefit, it would just make things more tedious for all parties. A internet-spaceship game of marco-polo anyone
Ziester GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.10.25 08:30:00 - [80] Originally by: Kayosoni make the scanning arrays at pos's useful: have them make local show who's in system to their corp/alliance people in local. Titans are already enough of an anti-fun fleet fight mechanism without removing the ability to see the names of the pilots in local so that you can tell that a titan pilot is there. With everyone and their mother getting a titan this will ensure that 0.0 warfare is nothing but nuking fleets at gates.

Grim Vandal Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2008.10.25 09:06:00 - [81] OMG local will be gone, AWESOME
Kayosoni Caldari Destructive Influence Band of Brothers	Posted - 2008.10.25 09:10:00 - [82] Originally by: Ziester Originally by: Kayosoni make the scanning arrays at pos's useful: have them make local show who's in system to their corp/alliance people in local. Titans are already enough of an anti-fun fleet fight mechanism without removing the ability to see the names of the pilots in local so that you can tell that a titan pilot is there. With everyone and their mother getting a titan this will ensure that 0.0 warfare is nothing but nuking fleets at gates. there should only be 1 DD allowed in a system per day across any and all titans.
Bellum Eternus Gallente Death of Virtue	Posted - 2008.10.25 09:22:00 - [83] Originally by: Kayosoni Originally by: Ziester Originally by: Kayosoni make the scanning arrays at pos's useful: have them make local show who's in system to their corp/alliance people in local. Titans are already enough of an anti-fun fleet fight mechanism without removing the ability to see the names of the pilots in local so that you can tell that a titan pilot is there. With everyone and their mother getting a titan this will ensure that 0.0 warfare is nothing but nuking fleets at gates. there should only be 1 DD allowed in a system per day across any and all titans. So the Euro jerks prep a system for fighting by cynoing in right after DT and pop a cyno, thereby ensuring that no cyno will happen for the next 23 hours? I don't think so. Bellum Eternus Inveniam viam aut faciam.
Havus Mauth	Posted - 2008.10.25 09:33:00 - [84] Edited by: Havus Mauth on 25/10/2008 09:42:20 CCP i hope you have something reasonably planned out in mind. Cloakers are already a huge problem in 0.0 and basically the only recourse right now is for miners/ratters is to turtle up. If you go through with this, you'll have taken all player value out of 0.0. Ratting and mining in 0.0 is already incredibly risky because of roaming gangs and theres virtually no recourse except to control-q against a cloaker. What you're proposing in letting solo-gankers find inhabited systems via the map, letting them probe ratters/miners out from afar, and giving 0.0 inhabitants no means whatsoever of knowing about an attack (assuming the attacker isnt a complete and total nincom****) and no means of protecting themselves from one. Assuming this change goes through in isolation, why in the seven suns would anyone ever stay in 0.0 to make money? Making money in empire is basically risk free, and it sounds like you are honestly considering taking the only defense against cloakers out of the game. If you introduce this change, players need some form of recourse against cloakers. Otherwise the equation is one sided: fit a cloak, be undetectable, do whatever you want. We've seen hurf and we've seen burf from CCP before, but it honestly sounds like they're ready to empower what already is the most powerful and most dangerous threat in the game with nigh-unto-untouchability. I'm really hoping your talking about a system scanner that gives "faint" indicators for cloaked ships or some such. Life as a player trying to rat/mine in 0.0 is hard already, you cant seriously be considering giving them no way of detecting trouble.
The Djego Minmatar merovinger inc	Posted - 2008.10.25 09:56:00 - [85] Well you still have the number of Pilotes in Local I gess. If not, a option to see if a ship is piloted or just floating eamty at a pos would be quite nice. I don¦t want to search the hole system for a ship that got no pilote and is at a pos this is allready anoying atm in some systems having 10 Ships on scanner and you know only 2 are piloted. If you are general in the area you mostly know what kind of ships are allways there but this is quite anoying if you don¦t know the system allready.
sakana North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.10.25 10:13:00 - [86] I'm not going to deny that ratting may become riskier....actually lets face it, it might become risky, because atm there is no risk. However, if you are in an alliance or corp, living in your nice little area of 0.0, then you should have no trouble organizing yourselves to allow safe ratting. For example, scouts on gates/in pipes, take it in turns, use an alt, it's easy to do. Isk farming solo ravens however should get hurt A LOT by this change, and thats a good thing. Isnt it? Yes it is. And perhaps now people will have to put some effort into gaining intel about enemy fleets as well, a good change imo. This change will also give the solo roamer a bit more chance, at killing and surviving. It will now be slightly harder for alliances to know a solo roamer is heading their way, meaning perhaps they won't mass their entire alliance onto the gate with 10 bubbles and 1000 motherships..... Perhaps ratters will have to adapt...use scouts/fit stabs/neuts/whatever, but this is not "game breaking", this is a well needed step in the right direction. P.S I rat too btw, so there :P
Gneeznow Minmatar North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2008.10.25 10:42:00 - [87] I like the idea, or the idea of changing local to constellation, isk farmer ravens these days have become so bold they stay in the belt and let you even get close before warping out and mocking you in local, its getting pretty rediculous and I want to kill zem on the other side of that, I spend a lot of time ratting and I'm a bit of a carebear when it comes to making isk, but tbh there's no risk to it, I've not lost a hac while ratting ever, and by rights the amount of ratting I do I should, its just so easy to avoid being killed while ratting overall I think its a good change, you'll just have to carebear more carefully!
Nova Fox Gallente Novafox Shipyards	Posted - 2008.10.25 11:09:00 - [88] I demand my onboard scanner be userfriendly such as auto repeat and pulsing/beaming. Pre Order your Sisters of Eve ship today!!!
Kerfira	Posted - 2008.10.25 11:48:00 - [89] Edited by: Kerfira on 25/10/2008 11:52:31 There are a lot of balancing problems in removing local..... First of all, lets look into ISK making in the game. Atm, you can make a bit more ISK ratting in 0.0 that by running L4 missions in high-sec. However, this is only so because a good ratter doesn't lose his ship often enough to make a dent in the earnings. Now, let us say that either local is removed, moved to constellation, or just reduced so no cloaked ships is shown. In all cases, the vulnerability of a ratter goes up a LOT, especially since cloaked ships (especially recons) can get close enough to him to warp scramble him and hold him until backup arrives. In the case local is moved to constellation, a ratter will also suffer an income loss even if he's not killed. He'll simply not be able to rat while there are hostiles in constellation. So you have the case that a ratters income drops, probably by a fair amount, which'll make high-sec earnings the better option by far.... In short, soon there'll be nobody left ratting in 0.0. What are hunters to hunt then? I personally think the current local is too overpowered on the ratters side, but all the suggested changes moves it too far in the other direction. IMHO, local changes can only happen if there is a massive increase in 0.0 earning potential, massive DECREASE in high-sec earning potential, and some tools implemented for both the hunter and the hunted helping them hunt/escape. If you improve the vulnerability, you increase the loss rate and decrease the income. The increase in the 0.0 earning potential is to compensate for the loss rate, and the decrease in high-sec earning potential is to make sure people still go to 0.0 to make money. The decrease in high-sec earnings I mention is NOT L4's being moved to low-sec. This is a pretty stupid idea since it'll alienate the players who don't want to PvP (which're quite numerous and provide a lot of income to make the game better). They need a progression of challenges in high-sec too. However, earnings from high-sec missions (L3/4) can be adjusted.
Vanessa Vasquez Lyonesse. KIA Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.25 11:52:00 - [90] best change ever PS: Stuff, gimme!



Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.