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) |
Corp Quas
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 19:52:00 -
[1]
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.
|
Good Sir
Gallente The Accursed
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 19:59:00 -
[2]
Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it. |
Corp Quas
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:05:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Good Sir Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it.
Apparently you dont even know much about the onboard scanner as it has no way to show friend or foe.
Also, having to click the scanner every 2 seconds while i'm already doing 10 other things isnt exactly a balance. |
Darth Worm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:05:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Darth Worm on 24/10/2008 20:06:31 I have to say this is the type of change that would ruin this game. Way to drastic of a change when there is nothing wrong with the current local status. I can't even think of any positives for this only negatives. Unless you think about the fact that you will get a lot of free kills.
Negatives - I am sure there are more than this 1. Intel would be hard to come by when you could march a 300 man gang across the universe undetected unless someone sees them on overview 2. It would take forever to find someone because you would have to scan down each system you go in. Its already hard enough to scan people down when you know they are in local. 3. You would absolutely kill off most ways of people making isk...No one would want to mine or rat when they have no warning if hostiles are around or can't watch local. No one wants to die with no warning at all. This is a space ship game for Gods sake. Having to press the scan button over and over and over is really weak for an advanced space ship game.
Positives - I can't think of any positives except if you are a pvp'r. It will still take you a long time to scan down people but at least when you do it will be a free kill with no warning for your victim.
I agree with Corp Quas.....this is to drastic of a change. If you can't name more positives than negatives to any change it should be re-thought. You will lose my 4 accounts if you make this change without thinking this threw properly.
WHO WANTS TO HIT THE SCAN BUTTON A MILLION TIMES WHEN YOU ARE ALREADY MINING OR RATTING IN AN ADVANCED SPACE SHIP GAME!!!!
Uncle Worm |
Moostang
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:07:00 -
[5]
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.
I agree. This would be an E.L.E. when it comes to my time in eve.
|
Vim
Spook Division
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:12:00 -
[6]
thank god for lowsec missions is all I say then.
|
Aero Zolic
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:14:00 -
[7]
I don't know. It seems to me that when you get bored there in CCP you come up with a new stupid idea and run to test it out. Maybe ask people first? Is this idea really coming from people living in 0.0? I don't think so to be honest. If it's not an idea from people actually living in 0.0 then please don't even consider it, ok?
Drop that idea and you're doing a huge favor for 0.0 and yourself.
|
Isek
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:16:00 -
[8]
Why not just put up an option in the chat windows. nr.1: See everyone on local. Nr.2: Only see those who are writing in local. Nr.3: (don't know, maybe something else). (default setting = Nr.2)
Just a thought.
|
Diehard Si
UK1 Zero G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:21:00 -
[9]
i hadn't realised they were doing this.
Should of been done ages ago imo, how silly is it being able to see who is in system just by landing in it.
the isk farmers going to hate it though. |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:34:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Corp Quas
Originally by: Good Sir Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it.
Apparently you dont even know much about the onboard scanner as it has no way to show friend or foe.
Why not ask in Local? Or in the intel/corp/alliance channel? Don't know how to setup channels?
Originally by: Corp Quas Also, having to click the scanner every 2 seconds while i'm already doing 10 other things isnt exactly a balance.
Almost every request to CCP to remove Local as an intel collecting tool talks about buffing the ship's scanner to assume the current Local's intel gathering functionality, though at a limited range. CCP devs themselves have stated that this is the way they plan to go.
The new intel tool would provide the essential information, but without the current Local's omnipotence. How hard is that to understand?? |
|
Georn
VIRTUAL LIFE VANGUARD Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:35:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Georn on 24/10/2008 20:37:15 Where did you get that Quote?
Edit: found it http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=905941 |
Daelin Blackleaf
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:44:00 -
[12]
Dear Chicken Licken.
The lack of free intel will swing both ways. Tools already exist for you to forewarn yourself of an approaching hostile. Never fly anything that you cannot afford to lose.
Now if you'll excuse me I have acorns to throw. |
Corp Quas
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:45:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Razin
Why not ask in Local? Or in the intel/corp/alliance channel? Don't know how to setup channels?
Almost every request to CCP to remove Local as an intel collecting tool talks about buffing the ship's scanner to assume the current Local's intel gathering functionality, though at a limited range. CCP devs themselves have stated that this is the way they plan to go.
The new intel tool would provide the essential information, but without the current Local's omnipotence. How hard is that to understand??
Omnipotence? I think not. It only shows people in the solar system not where in the system they are. Even if it was Omnipotence you're wanting to change it to Oblivious so that it requires alot more effort, time, personel to do even the simpliest of 0.0 activities somewhat safe.
Good pvp'ers can still get plenty of kills with local being what is currently is. Removing local will create a blackhole of oblivious gank fests that will cause CCP's bottom dollar/profit to fall because I know my 6 accounts will not be the only ones to go. |
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:47:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Crackzilla on 24/10/2008 20:51:41 Edited by: Crackzilla on 24/10/2008 20:50:42
Originally by: Darth Worm Negatives - I am sure there are more than this 1. Intel would be hard to come by when you could march a 300 man gang across the universe undetected unless someone sees them on overview
Could put scouts on the gates. The 300 man gang doesn't know precisely what they're up against as they might run into a small gate camp that turns into a 400 man gate camp. So this cuts both ways.
Originally by: Darth Worm
2. It would take forever to find someone because you would have to scan down each system you go in. Its already hard enough to scan people down when you know they are in local.
However most space is a wasteland. Local with perfect intel can render the space of hundreds of au's worthless because hostiles know there is some one in there.
Macro ratters would be impacted. This would make ninja ratting easier. Some tactics would allow for a battleship to rat so that a covops/recon would be needed to have a chance of catching it. Of course looting etc would be difficult and popping your wrecks all important.
The up shot is that pvp'ers would find more targets. Ratters would have more space to hide in. This would be mostly about tactics and technique.
Might change some stuff and make an assault frig the best ratting ship due to its ability to escape a hostile fleet bouncing in a belt.
Originally by: Darth Worm
3. You would absolutely kill off most ways of people making isk...No one would want to mine or rat when they have no warning if hostiles are around or can't watch local.
And war decs would be more dangerous. Either way it'll drive numbers to empire mining/missioning.
But there are ways to make isk. Most it is about technique. I suspect most pve ships would carry cloaks. Likely also a huge recon buff.
Originally by: Darth Worm Having to press the scan button over and over and over is really weak for an advanced space ship game.
I would hope if the scanner were to autorefresh when on screen. So you could configure it, then wait for something to pop up.
Originally by: Corp Quas Omnipotence? I think not. It only shows people in the solar system not where in the system they are.
if hostiles know where folks are with limit options to leave, there isn't anywhere to go. There isn't any way to hide in system and be productive. It is all about who is willing to log off longer or go afk longer.
Originally by: Corp Quas
Good pvp'ers can still get plenty of kills with local being what is currently is. Removing local will create a blackhole of oblivious gank fests that will cause CCP's bottom dollar/profit to fall because I know my 6 accounts will not be the only ones to go.
"Good pvp'ers" mostly gank fools. Some farm npcs. Others farm those farming npcs. Not much different than today. What will keep people alive are tactics and being prepared.
Not sure this is positive or negative. It is interesting.
|
Bobbechk
The Priory
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 20:50:00 -
[15]
could still show numbers and i'd be fine =)
(apart from the fact that theres still lvl 3-4 missions in highsec)
|
Ashley Thomas
Kiith Paktu Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:14:00 -
[16]
wait, whats this, local got nerfed? is it true? /me does happy dance |
DMF KingBob
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:14:00 -
[17]
i mean this will be funny a long time ago i got an bug that doesnt show me the local and that was not bad i lost my ship but there is an chance given to make better fights like a game without wallhack....
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:19:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Daelin Blackleaf Dear Chicken Licken.
The lack of free intel will swing both ways. Tools already exist for you to forewarn yourself of an approaching hostile. Never fly anything that you cannot afford to lose.
Now if you'll excuse me I have acorns to throw.
Dear fellow player.
Two seconds of thinking indicate that your reasonning is deeply flawed.
While both sides are theorically going blind, the pvper has a good idea where to find a ratter, since systems with a decent number of belt aren't that common.
And the main tool of forewarning, the scanner, is not meant for extensive use. First because of limited range, you could very well see an hostile coming and already run out of time to align and warp out. Second, do you really see yourself clicking refresh on the scanner every five seconds, for literally hours?
If this goes live, I'll take the most-profitable-over-long-term-use route, and go grind missions in high-sec, and do only pvp in 0.0. Most will do the same, and a few weeks later people like you will complain about lacking targets.
Removing local without greatly improving scanners first would be ever dumber that the remote doomsday crap. |
Ferocious FeAr
THE FINAL STAND
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:23:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Good Sir Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it.
You win the thread. |
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:37:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Shadowsword While both sides are theorically going blind, the pvper has a good idea where to find a ratter, since systems with a decent number of belt aren't that common.
The pvper has the element of surpise while the ratter can use scouts. It'll take more time for the pvper to check the belts. Likely the pvper warps to zero.
Originally by: Shadowsword
the scanner, is not meant for extensive use.
Scanner isn't practical for this agreed. CCP has said that the scanner would be updated to provide limited information. It might be something like the overview showing those on grid, however the range might be something like 12au. The scanner would update just like the overview shows who is on grid.
Originally by: Shadowsword
First because of limited range, you could very well see an hostile coming and already run out of time to align and warp out. Second, do you really see yourself clicking refresh on the scanner every five seconds, for literally hours?
If I were doing something that put me at risk then I might bother. Otherwise technique wins.
Create safe spots so that I warp to a snipe spot. Snipe the rats. Warp out. Use a smaller fast ship to loot. It'll take recons or cov ops to get kills. If the bs aligns quickly and varies the safe spots the ratter will have a decent chance.
Otherwise small ships will be better for ratting.
And consider that CCP wants to remove fixed belts. So rather then 12 belts on overview, the belts must be located via exploration.
Originally by: Shadowsword
If this goes live, I'll take the most-profitable-over-long-term-use route, and go grind missions in high-sec, and do only pvp in 0.0.
I agree that most people will over react. I also agree that empire mission running is a better way to make isk now.
Originally by: Shadowsword few weeks later people like you will complain about lacking targets.
If ratters/miners are paying attention than roamers should have _zero_ kills now. Most kills are due to someone having poor technique or doing something silly.
|
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Out of Order
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:37:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Megan Maynard on 24/10/2008 21:37:53
Originally by: Darth Worm Edited by: Darth Worm on 24/10/2008 20:08:16 Edited by: Darth Worm on 24/10/2008 20:06:31
WHO WANTS TO HIT THE SCAN BUTTON A MILLION TIMES WHEN YOU ARE ALREADY MINING OR RATTING IN AN ADVANCED SPACE SHIP GAME!!!!
Uncle Worm
I think CCP has very clearly shown in the past that they do not like "free" isk in any form, or unbalanced combat.
You mining in a raven ratting with a cloak, and warping whenever local jumps is NOT freaking balanced in any shape or form.
GET RID OF ACTIVE LOCAL CHAT NOW!
|
Koyama Ise
Caldari Equestrian Knight Order of Lolicon
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:47:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Koyama Ise on 24/10/2008 21:47:20
------ FIX THE BLOODY OVERVIEW ALREADY! SPEED NERF! RUN FOR THE HILLS! |
Beep BeepCLick
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:49:00 -
[23]
i like the ideal of the Easy Intel local going away but there needs too be something better then scanner smashing all day.
So before you kill local add tools that replace the job it does.
long lasting sentry probes that send reports too your ship of ships going by it. all should should come with a cheap version built in. the better ones taking a Slot too use. we got FoF system in eve now ( red minus or Blue Plus) that could also be added too the report.
the ship scanner could Auto run so you know whats around you at 14 AU.
many more things need too be done before Local takes the Nerf bat. |
whisk
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:51:00 -
[24]
BEST CHANGE EVER |
Jason Rockefeller
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 21:59:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Darth Worm Edited by: Darth Worm on 24/10/2008 20:08:16 Edited by: Darth Worm on 24/10/2008 20:06:31 I have to say this is the type of change that would ruin this game. Way to drastic of a change when there is nothing wrong with the current local status. I can't even think of any positives for this only negatives. Unless you think about the fact that you will get a lot of free kills.
Negatives - I am sure there are more than this 1. Intel would be hard to come by when you could march a 300 man gang across the universe undetected unless someone sees them on overview 2. It would take forever to find someone because you would have to scan down each system you go in. Its already hard enough to scan people down when you know they are in local. 3. You would absolutely kill off most ways of people making isk...No one would want to mine or rat when they have no warning if hostiles are around or can't watch local. No one wants to die with no warning at all. This is a space ship game for Gods sake. Having to press the scan button over and over and over is really weak for an advanced space ship game.
Positives - I can't think of any positives except if you are a pvp'r. It will still take you a long time to scan down people but at least when you do it will be a free kill with no warning for your victim.
I agree with Corp Quas.....this is to drastic of a change. If you can't name more positives than negatives to any change it should be re-thought. You will lose my 4 accounts if you make this change without thinking this through properly.
WHO WANTS TO HIT THE SCAN BUTTON A MILLION TIMES WHEN YOU ARE ALREADY MINING OR RATTING IN AN ADVANCED SPACE SHIP GAME!!!!
Uncle Worm
I completely agree. CCP, a move like this would be what I refer to as a "game killer". The first game I experienced this with was Star Wars Galaxies. Having moved on from that game and found a new game to love and enjoy, I sincerely hope that you do not make a move such as the one described above to kill this game I enjoy so much.
As Darth said, this has no real pros. Even for someone who enjoys hunting people down it means you will have to warp into a system not knowing if someone is there, spend no telling how much time checking to see if someone is there, and tracking down whatever is (or isn't) in that system. Even if you do find that there is someone there, they may have picked up scan probes on their ship scanner and warped away.
Another point Darth makes, this kills the two main ways pilots make money in the game, A) Mining and B) Ratting / Running Plexes. What is the point in trying to do either of these when there is no way of knowing whether or not it is safe to do so. Is it worth risking 100+ million ISK ships for this? It isn't for me.
My two accounts will be gone along with many more I am sure if a change of this magnitude is made.
J Rock
|
Mirirar
Solstice Systems Development Concourse
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 22:00:00 -
[26]
Argh, the whining.
Get a buddy to patrol the gates for you. It's not a solo game.
If you can't manage that, odds are you actually aren't ready to be in the space you're in.
|
Deva Blackfire
D00M.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 22:23:00 -
[27]
Originally by: whisk BEST CHANGE EVER
/signed
At least scouting will be real profession not just some alt sitting in ibis in one place waiting to get popped. You want eyes on hostile fleeT? get more than 1 covops to follow em coz you might lose em easily.
|
Vim
Spook Division
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 22:30:00 -
[28]
Patroling the gates means to split profits. =missions in empire far far safer thank you :) Lets not forget trading, lets not forget ppl that already made all the isk they need or whom sell gtcs and have no need to fund their pvp fun and would be delighted to prey upon thoose of us not so fortunate with isk or rl cash.
We shall see, if ccp makes something as good as local. Fine fine. I see increased blobage, if you know its a 5 man gang, you dont need to bring a hundred.
|
5n4keyes
D00M. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 22:39:00 -
[29]
This is a bad bad feature, and heres why!
From now on, to check local people will just keep hitting scan.
Now I cant imagine how much server load a single scan would do, but i can imagine people pressing it atleast once every 30 seconds.
Even 10,000 people doing this... thats 20,000 scans that didnt exist before now going to happen.
I cant imagine at a time when were trying to lower the number of requests to the server, CCP are going to want to implement something thats going to undo peoples work!
Something that would be a little more acceptable, is if local updates once every 1 minute, keeps the roamers happy, and would probably save on some server requests! |
Seishomaru
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 22:59:00 -
[30]
pff peopel as usuall blind to their own belly.
Local nerf is not a boost to roamign and pirates and a nerf to ratters. Its balanced.
Because the pirates also do not know that you are in local so they need more time to check whole dam system. That makes much easier to stay hidden and avoid them as well.
More important a solo ship has a better chance of not being dectected than a giant blob. So this is a boost for small gangs against blobs! Finnaly
This will be THE best and most important change ever.
|
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:05:00 -
[31]
Insanely stupid idea.
How to gank anyone at any time:
1. Get a group of recons into a system at an off-hour.
2. Log out.
3. Login when you expect to find targets.
4. Scout belts with recons.
5. Wipe out any and all miners/ratters.
6. Profit
7. Whine as noone in their right mind rats or mines again in 0.0.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:07:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Seishomaru pff peopel as usuall blind to their own belly.
Local nerf is not a boost to roamign and pirates and a nerf to ratters. Its balanced.
Because the pirates also do not know that you are in local so they need more time to check whole dam system. That makes much easier to stay hidden and avoid them as well.
More important a solo ship has a better chance of not being dectected than a giant blob. So this is a boost for small gangs against blobs! Finnaly
This will be THE best and most important change ever.
Incorrect. As a ganker I will know where my enemy is mining. It will be in that -1.0 system with the mercoxit, crokite, bistot roids. Same place where he is ratting. |
Moostang
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:35:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Moostang on 24/10/2008 23:41:03 Edited by: Moostang on 24/10/2008 23:38:47
Originally by: Seishomaru pff peopel as usuall blind to their own belly.
Local nerf is not a boost to roamign and pirates and a nerf to ratters. Its balanced.
Because the pirates also do not know that you are in local so they need more time to check whole dam system. That makes much easier to stay hidden and avoid them as well.
More important a solo ship has a better chance of not being dectected than a giant blob. So this is a boost for small gangs against blobs! Finnaly
This will be THE best and most important change ever.
This is a HUGE boost to roaming gangs. Roaming gangs KNOW exactly where people are making isk...in the BELTS. The people in the belts will be completely blind. Roaming gang simply needs a covert ops or recon to scout for them. Recon/Cov ops warps to a planet with alot of belts, scans, finds targets. This will simply cause a huge influx of people using cloak-while-warping ships to be used so they are invisible to all types of defence. Hell, you wont even know if friendlies are in system to help you. Where as the people making isk grind the scan button and never see anything. Where is the balance in that?!?!?!?! It's not there.
Roaming gangs get plenty of kills right now. If you're in a roaming gang and cant get kills then you are the point of failure, not local.
Keeping scouts on the gates just so you can mine/rat is an ignorant solution to the removal of local also especially when systems can have 4+ gates. What a waste of time and effort for 4 people to sit idling on 4 gates so one person can rat or mine....
And what about hostiles that log out in the system when no one is on the gates and logs back in the next day or so. 0 balance...this is a huge nerf to everyone in 0.0 that cannot keep the gates monitored 23/7. |
Stretchmeat Crotchquake
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:48:00 -
[34]
Edited by: Stretchmeat Crotchquake on 24/10/2008 23:51:38 Edited by: Stretchmeat Crotchquake on 24/10/2008 23:48:30
Originally by: Good Sir Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it.
Good thing those gankers don't have probes that go a lot farther than the onboard scanner...
I mean... good thing the warp-in range on them is bad, it's not like they can get a recon and...
Well, good thing we know they're in the system so we can hide before they...
Um... well, at least we can spot them on their way in and they can't completely evade defense gangs with cloaks on their way out...
.... hmm....
(puts barge alt on eBay) |
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:51:00 -
[35]
What is the goal though of all the proponents for removing local? If it's the hope of easy ganks and invasions on enemies, well that can happen to you too. And, if it creates too much risk in building in 0.0 noone will.
Agreed, this could kill 0.0, or the servers, unless other automated mechanisms for intel were placed in the game. Hopefully ones involving sovereignty, so it would pay to invest infrastructure in 0.0 (and thus not be open to ISK-selling poachers).
However, if it's anger over all the cloaked isk-selling achura-occupied ratting ravens, there are better ways to accomplish this. For instance, disallow cloaks on all _____ (cruiser?) or larger ships, except of course the black ops BS and recons. So, if you are an ISK-selling Raven you absolutely have to log out if you are not going to ss and possibly fight when you are probed out. Or you are gonna have to train those ISK-selling toons into specialized ships and have ratting efficiency reduced. Or you might see herds of ISK-sellers that cannot cloak or will not log-out their BS when the patrol shows up, but instead will fight for their opportunity to be extracting resources in an area. Now that would be fun. That would be what this game is about!
Or make cloaks use fuel . . . etc
Regardless, I'm sure there are many better ways to accomplish what people who advocate removing local really want.
|
Azuse
Brotherhood of Suicidal Priests Pure.
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:51:00 -
[36]
Catch 22. Risk vs. Reward model broken.
The main draw of 0.0 is the isk making possible, this doesn't do anything to increase the appeal of 0.0 while drastically increasing the risk. Increase the ability to make isk by an equal proportion and it would be balanced e.g duble rat bounties/ores players stand to make far mroe isk/hr in 0.0 than empire however doing so would increase the odds of them loosing their ship drastically.
As a pvper i welcome this, might not make killing easier but it sure makes dieing less frequent.
As someone who has spent years holding space, and on occasion used it to make isk, i despise it. Why? well one it means the chances of loosing a ship are massively increased but the isk i'm making has not increased by equal proportion. Two, it means gangs will become mandatory so everyone can warp to everyone else when they get caught. It also means the "no talking in local" rules won't become common place, they'll become common-sense.
Actually that brings me back to my first point, ganged player respond faster which actually makes killing and surviving harder.
If the isk to be made in 0.0 increased it would work. If pvping was actually a viable career (ie made decent money rather than being a complete and total isk sink) it would work.
Actually, why is it eve is the only mmo where when you want to pew pew you need a secondary income rather than it being your income? |
Stretchmeat Crotchquake
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:53:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Stretchmeat Crotchquake on 24/10/2008 23:54:57
The problem with the "risk vs. reward" assumptions is that with the current lack of defensive intelligence mechanisms and the inability to locate cloaked ships, there is NO risk for gankers without local unless people are actively sitting on gates in friendly territory.
Add gate alarms and cloak-penetrating scans and we'll talk. Hell, you want better ganking capacity, add cloak-penetrating scans anyway, and leave local alone. |
Xaldarion
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:58:00 -
[38]
This is a horrible idea. You don't have to be a carebear to get frustrated quick in a universe owned by pirates. What kind of economy can survive that environment?
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Out of Order
|
Posted - 2008.10.24 23:58:00 -
[39]
Originally by: 5n4keyes This is a bad bad feature, and heres why!
From now on, to check local people will just keep hitting scan.
Now I cant imagine how much server load a single scan would do, but i can imagine people pressing it atleast once every 30 seconds.
Even 10,000 people doing this... thats 20,000 scans that didnt exist before now going to happen.
I cant imagine at a time when were trying to lower the number of requests to the server, CCP are going to want to implement something thats going to undo peoples work!
Something that would be a little more acceptable, is if local updates once every 1 minute, keeps the roamers happy, and would probably save on some server requests!
Hearing that reasoning is the most reasonable thing I've heard all day.
Get rid of local but only if they fix scanning.
|
Irie Alixyar
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:00:00 -
[40]
Down with Change!
|
|
Kara DaArmie
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:03:00 -
[41]
I agree that this is a bad move. Being able to look at local and tell who is there in an important part of 0.0 life. Also, several people in 0.0 solo mine high end minerals to build ships. With out all those solo miners prices are going to greatly increase. Solo 0.0 travel will also be harder.
If this happens you will probabaly lose my 3 accounts.
|
Solomon XI
Hoist The Colors. Pirate Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:08:00 -
[42]
*Delayed* mode is a bad idea, period.
Allow me to offer a better suggestion:
Local --> Constellation
Subject To: On-Board Scanner & Probe Improvements |
Galactic Overlord
The Fantastically Pantless Sporkmen
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:16:00 -
[43]
The having to scan over and over and over is the worst idea of a solution. Does that add a ton of database calls to the server load? Is the scanner going to get a major overhaul so that the info in it is far more useful? I could maybe see a constellation level local in 0.0 instead of local, but that does no good if they are jumping into your system from a seperate constellation. Right now roaming gangs can fit for speed and hit anytime. The only way to combat that fully is to do boring guard duty 23/7, yeah that'll make the game a lot funner.
|
Poast Warrior
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:18:00 -
[44]
Yet another horrible idea and quite frankly encourages blobbing that much more.
CCP will ruin this game with the current path they're on IMO.
|
Shard Merchant
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:33:00 -
[45]
If you think removing local in 0.0 is bad for the game, then you should pretty much keep your opinions on game design to yourself.
This would be one of the best changes to ever happen. And mind you, it should've happened years ago when it became apparent local was a huge issue.
I for one, am looking forward to new danger and tactical warfare.
|
Dominic Raynor
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:33:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Poast Warrior Yet another horrible idea and quite frankly encourages blobbing that much more.
Everything that people don't like "encourages blobbing" apparently...
|
Shard Merchant
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:34:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Poast Warrior Yet another horrible idea and quite frankly encourages blobbing that much more.
CCP will ruin this game with the current path they're on IMO.
lol, local has been more responsible for blobbing than any mechanic. That includes POS reinforced timers.
|
Ashley Thomas
Kiith Paktu Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:34:00 -
[48]
its 0.0, its supposed to be risky, its supposed to be dangerous. a change like this will make people group up for safety or learn how to use the onboard scanner. what risk is there for the barge mining away at the belt when all he has to do is watch local and either safespot and log or log off entirely when someone jumps in. Eve is a dark, cold and dangerous place. Get used to it or gbt WOW
This message brought to you by a carebear.
|
Shard Merchant
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:37:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Ashley Thomas its 0.0, its supposed to be risky, its supposed to be dangerous. a change like this will make people group up for safety or learn how to use the onboard scanner. what risk is there for the barge mining away at the belt when all he has to do is watch local and either safespot and log or log off entirely when someone jumps in. Eve is a dark, cold and dangerous place. Get used to it or gbt WOW
This message brought to you by a carebear.
AMEN BROTHA, PREACH THE GOOD WORD ^___________^
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:47:00 -
[50]
Edited by: MotherMoon on 25/10/2008 00:51:36 Edited by: MotherMoon on 25/10/2008 00:48:55 what do people mean ask us 1st?
This community has been whining for local removal forever from 0.0 space!
jez what carebares, Even wow doesn't tell you everyone in the area and when they get there and if they are red or blue.
What other mmorpg uses chat as an intel tool, seriously.
HOWEVER, I support making Constellation chat the new local so you knew they are around but can't know where and when.
Also an upgrade to the scanner should be put in place so it auto scanns every 20 seconds so you don't have to keep pressing the button.
or make it so if you have sov you can have everyone in the allaince see local but non-allaince members can't see local. That way if it's your space, you control it. If it's not your space, get used to it. |
|
Pac SubCom
A.W.M
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:58:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Pac SubCom on 25/10/2008 01:04:42 Absolutely great idea because something will replace it, and that something could be really good. For instance, there could be new sensor mechanics:
1. You have passive sensors and active sensors on your ship.
2. The passive sensors are always receiving and automatically warn you of ships in the vicinity (with a certain range based on sensor strength). They won't tell you the name of the pilot, but they do give a clue on how big it is and whether it's a combat ship or something civilian or whatever. The better your sensor skills (new types of skills), the more info you can get. On grid you might even get information on fitting. It's delayed though. Passive sensors need time to make out bogeys and discern details - so at first you don't see anything, then only have a red dot on your screen, and after a while it becomes clear what that thing really is.
Naturally passive sensors do not give your location away.
3. Active sensors give instant detailed information on ship and its location, but will also give your location and presence away.
4. Friendly ships are always in communication with each other and will alert their presence to you via radio (namely you will get detailed information immediately once their enter system just like local now, but also with ship details. This way you won't have false alarms.
5. There exist modules and skills which enhance the range, speed and detail of the sensors (although the skills would be must have). Active modules are med slot, passives are low slot.
6. Friendly stations and pos might link their own sensor data to your ship if they are equipped with sensor mods. Command ships and battlecruisers can equip sensor warfare links doing the same. The existing warfare links can also affect the new sensors.
7. Cloaks: Covops cloaks enable you to do passive scanning without penalty, other cloaks have such a penalty. Non-cloaking ships fitting a cloak will be blind! You can't see them, but they will also get no information on you... Recons will have the best sensors available.
8. Sensor attributes are based on the racial sensor types - e.g. Caldari will be slowest but longest ranged, Minmatar will be quick but low range.
There. --------------- ∞ TQFE
|
Moostang
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 00:59:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Ashley Thomas its 0.0, its supposed to be risky, its supposed to be dangerous. a change like this will make people group up for safety or learn how to use the onboard scanner. what risk is there for the barge mining away at the belt when all he has to do is watch local and either safespot and log or log off entirely when someone jumps in. Eve is a dark, cold and dangerous place. Get used to it or gbt WOW
This message brought to you by a carebear.
It wont be risky anymore.....it will be EMPTY. With the current implementation of local there is still plenty of risk to go around. Without local 0.0 would be ALL risk and little-to-no reward. It wont be worth it. 0.0 is already empty enough. CCP should be focusing on ways to bring MORE players to 0.0 not ways to ship them back to empire.
People will adapt by using OOC alts to run missions in empire which will cause 0.0 to be empty.
Moostang Darkstar 1 Goonswarm
Priceless Necro Thread |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 01:21:00 -
[53]
Good change, but only if you: (a) make scanner auto-update (seriously, asking for people to keep clicking is stupid) (b) nerf cloaking recons. They're already more fearsome then HACs in many ways while having ability to cloak, and therefore be invisible from all detection methods up until the 'oh, you're ****ed now' moment. At least you've got local now... if local gets removed, cloaking recons get insanely overpowered.
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 01:35:00 -
[54]
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.
Anyone who is in an NPC corp doesn't get to vote on the subject. STFU.
Bellum Eternus
Inveniam viam aut faciam.
|
Moostang
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 01:37:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Anyone who is in an NPC corp doesn't get to vote on the subject. STFU.
Nor anyone that is apart of any alliance or corp that doesn't actually hold any 0.0 space for that matter.
Moostang Darkstar 1 Goonswarm
Priceless Necro Thread |
Angelonico
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 01:47:00 -
[56]
Originally by: whisk BEST CHANGE EVER
Confirming this. Bravo CCP, it's about damn time.
Now for the love of god, don't nerf ceptors and battleships with your blanket speed changes please - tia.
|
Solomon XI
Hoist The Colors. Pirate Coalition
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 01:57:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Moostang
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Anyone who is in an NPC corp doesn't get to vote on the subject. STFU.
Nor anyone that is apart of any alliance or corp that doesn't actually hold any 0.0 space for that matter.
Oh shut up. =)
*** ~Solo Hoist The Colors. (CEO) Pirate Coalition (Yar?)
|
Jason Rockefeller
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 02:05:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Moostang
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Anyone who is in an NPC corp doesn't get to vote on the subject. STFU.
Nor anyone that is apart of any alliance or corp that doesn't actually hold any 0.0 space for that matter.
Agreed
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 02:25:00 -
[59]
Originally by: Jason Rockefeller
Originally by: Moostang
Originally by: Bellum Eternus
Anyone who is in an NPC corp doesn't get to vote on the subject. STFU.
Nor anyone that is apart of any alliance or corp that doesn't actually hold any 0.0 space for that matter.
Agreed
I'm looking forward to farming Goons. Not that they drop anything worth a **** anyway. |
Qlanth
Caldari Merch Industrial GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 02:45:00 -
[60]
Instead of logically trying to make 0.0 space more appealing it makes it even less appealing.
Unless you do this very, very carefully it will basically ruin the entire game. |
|
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! |
|
sakana
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 11:55:00 -
[91]
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.
I think this just highlights the fact that titans (doomsdays) need to be looked at. we shouldn't let that problem stop an overall improvement to the game being implemented.
|
Cpt Iwan
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 12:37:00 -
[92]
Finaly an end to local |
Destructor1792
Minmatar Malicious Intentions
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 12:38:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Destructor1792 on 25/10/2008 12:45:28 I LoL'd at this thread
First up, they scream that nano's are overpowered so the NERFBAT has been brought out & bounded around like no-ones business! (imo this is because people were just too damn lazy to try out other fits to counter them - On the other hand, certain ships were indeed going ludicrous speed so something had to give)
I'm all for changes to local in 0.0 Why?
I've stated on another thread my thoughts but to clarify:
0.0 is about anything goes. You have high end Ore to mine, Nice big belt rats to boost the coffers & the joys of POS c/w alliance controlled systems (that's the REWARD side covered.)
Problem is, with alliances controlling around 90% of 0.0 systems, where has the risk factor gone? It's still there to some degree yet 0.0 has become more like empire with bods casually doing their own thing and running (or cloaking) at the first sign of a neutral appearing!
Changing local from its current form should bring back some of the "FEAR" factor to 0.0 (this be the RISK factor which has been seriously lacking for a while now) The local count should still rise when someone jumps in but the char list should be delayedSome will agree, others wont yet I still look at the 3 zones in Eve as:
Empire: safest area (but not 100%) - Minimal risk, Minimal gains Low Sec: Ropey area (50% ish safe) - Medium risk, Minimal gains (something wrong there!!) Chance of PvP encounters with the local blinky blinkies 0.0: Not safe (0% safe) - High Risk, High chance of losing ships yet much greater rewards ( ore, rats, moons, officers, etc )
So will it kill 0.0 ? No Will it make 0.0 a more hostile & fun place to reside ? Definantly
That's my thoughts on the matter.. now I need a coffee to wake myself up a bit
|
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 13:35:00 -
[94]
Remove local completly would be to drastic. If something would change at least local count would still be apreciated. At least you would know that some other pilot would be in the system.
________________ God is my Wingman |
Ashley Thomas
Kiith Paktu Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 13:50:00 -
[95]
^ no, that would defeat the whole idea, people would still safespot and log when the numbers go up. its 0.0 A) never g it alone B) bring a good, skilled scout
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 14:01:00 -
[96]
Originally by: Ashley Thomas ^ no, that would defeat the whole idea, people would still safespot and log when the numbers go up. its 0.0 A) never g it alone B) bring a good, skilled scout
You're treating ratters like they're NPC's.... That they'll just respawn after a while....
Your suggestion just cut the ratters income in half (as he'll have to share with his scout)! Ratting earns you quite a bit less that twice L4 mission running in high-sec. Now, here is the 2 ISK question (yes, it is that easy): How long do you think it'll be before all the ratters are in high-sec running L4's for their ISK?
If you change the balance between hunter and hunted in favor of the hunter, the rewards for being the hunted has to be adjusted up. Otherwise your prey will disappear....
All the simple solutions doesn't work! If the current balance about local is to be adjusted, the change will have to involve far more gameplay mechanics than just local....
Note that I WANT people to hunt in 0.0. All the extremist solutions would remove them....
|
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 14:06:00 -
[97]
If you were to go somewhat more realistic, the player would have a list of all powered up ships in local, with the option to remove any that were broadcasting as friendly. Any new ships that were not verified would have their type (or maybe just class) show up, without identifying the pilot in question.
It would be more realistic rather than identifying the exact hostile pilot, to simply identify any ships that weren't confirmed to be friendly.
Originally by: CCP t0rfifrans CCP is a greedy money chewing monster
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 14:07:00 -
[98]
Is this a prelude to a cloaking removal/nerf?.
|
Vim
Spook Division
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 14:23:00 -
[99]
So it becomes less profitable to mine/rat in 0.0 due to the vastly added risk. Its such a shame all the ones in favour dosent seem to have any problems with making less isk, maybe they do it in highsec, trade or heck have to much rl cash to spend on gtcs. Just like lowsec, there is no reason to go run missions(Unless buddy with local pirates) because you will die devaluating from the extra isk gained compared to just being in highsec, there'll be little to no reason to go rat/mine in 0.0. Recons having no trouble sneaking up on you. Logging off in a system waiting for a peek time to log back in to get something in a belt. That 5 man gang being the tip of the 20 man gang behind it adding to the 'We need everyone in gang now! there's like 5->inf of them out there!'.
All can see the vast risk increase. To much risk without a very substanial increase over the current soso rewards will leave 0.0 dead as lowsec making the PvP pvers looking for ratters be just like pirates 'there are no targets!!! cry cry cry boost 0.0'. In the end, everyone with bear tendencies that x's up for fleets to defend/attack his home in times of need will be gone since the all time roaming around pvp playstyle dosent appeal and the isk made to fund things will set you back ships as the recons come.
0.0 wont be the same after any such change. Theres a vast empty void out there.
Now without being to negative, Ill have faith in ccp to undergo any such changes with a good look on playstyles and with a bunch of research from their economist to see if its finacialy sound to do.
|
Camdim
Caldari The first genesis INTERDICTION
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 14:45:00 -
[100]
I never thought it made sense to see everyone that is in local via a chat channel.
But I see the point in making it so you know hostiles are in the area.
So if this goes live I suggest the following things.
In the scanner items take on the same faction settings that the overview has. So a red in my overview would be red in my scanner. That way it can jump out at me while I have my scanner open.
Auto update option on the scanner. So it can be open in a corner and update every so often. Better scanner usage this is more information given and more accurate information given based on skills like astrometrics, electronics, survey ect.
A deployable system wide scanning array for 0.0 that can be placed and maintained by alliances/corps that lets them know a hostle is in system. This could be done in diffrent levels so that a level 1 will just tell you a boggie is in system but nothing else. Next level would give name and alliance info. Next level ship type. Next level relative heading and direction. 5th and final level exact position.
This array would work with astrometics skills to give this info out. So by default the level 1 info would be avaliable to anyone without astrometics. But it would require higher levels of skill to obtain more information.
The sensor array would be a prime target on any system for a covert ops force prior to an attack on a system.
The sensor array would have no shields as the electronics of a shield would interfer with the scanning but it would be decently armored. It would require pos type fuels to operate. Could have guns deployed around it manned simular to pos guns.
A cloaking device would give the operator full immunity to the scanner up to the diffrence of his level of cloaking skill and the scanners level. So a level 4 cloaker in a level 5 scanner system would show as a hostile but not any other details.
Now how this would work in Empire space.
Every system .5 or better would have a scanner array. It would be placed at the beginning of each month. Sometime during that month pirates of the level that spawn in the belts would make a run at the array to destroy it. Extra concord faction would be given for helping to stop such a raid. And concord would send some forces to help protect the array.
Every system below .5 would also get this array but no forces would show up to defend the array with the exception of contested space then members of the faction in control of the contested space would show up to defend the array. So alliances or corps that wanted to operate without showing up in local would want to take these arrays out. Others that want to know what is going on in system would want to protect these arrays.
All arrays placed by the NPC's this is all empire arrays would be a level 2 array meaning that everyone would still appear in local in empire. You wouldn't know where they are in local or what they are flying unless you see them directly so it would work exactly like it does right now for empire ( unless the array was destoryed ). Cloakers with level a high enough level would never show up in local in empire while the cloak was active. This also means that folks with low sec ratings would now be free to move into other areas of empire and not be automaticlly concorded if they have a high enough cloaking ability.
Now that all make cloaking a very dangerous thing some would say but there is more.
Cloakers can be scanned out ( new scan probes needed ) by scan probes and then forced to uncloak.
A bubble will cause a cloak to not work. So if you jump into a gate with a bubble up you can't cloak till your out of the radius of the bubble.
Smart bombs will uncloak a ship if that ship gets close enough to take damage from the smart bomb.
Otherwise I believe anything short of the above will simply give people far to easy a time to hide and will promote serious gate camping 23/7 and we all know how fun that is not.
Remember it is a game. |
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente Death of Virtue
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 14:49:00 -
[101]
The idea of static scanners able to be put up by alliances to replace local by showing any/all people in the system and showing enemies etc. is a horrible idea. Alliances already have a huge home base advantage as it is with stations and POSes and cyno jammers etc.
Forget it. |
Tac Ginaz
The Righteous Few
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 15:42:00 -
[102]
I think it is a great change.
Yes, it means roaming gangs will be quite powerful now especially vs the miners and ratters.
For that, I'd say CCP should also change the composition of the asteroid fields and the RAT behavior.
Simply put, have the asteroid fields be FAR apart. Say, an asteroid every 20km and the field encompassing a very large area (a whole grid).
Have the rats pop up in random locations inside the asteroid field grid.
When warping to an asteroid field, have the game drop the player in a random spot inside the grid.
What this will do is not only give the game a far more immersive feel to it, but also allow miners to make several warp-to's until they find the rock they want to mine and make a bookmark...
and if hostiles warp into the grid, they could appear 200km+ away from the miner allowing said miner to warp away.
Ratters will also have to warp-to a roid nearest to the rats and engage them..and can warp off if hostiles pop in the roid field grid.
For those that go HUNTING the ratters or the miners.. well, you will need a cloaked scout to not only find the targets but to get the jump on them.
... and then you'll have to ask yourselves... with the asteroids being 20km apart... will that scout be warping in his team into a possible ambush by stealth bombers?
Life in 0.0 is so exciting...
|
Darth Kuminos
Gallente Der Schattenaufstieg
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 16:10:00 -
[103]
I for one.. Like and dislike this change.
Until we know more, it will make it hard for most to see the benefit.
Most of the people talk that Local is an unfair advantage for the Carebears. Yes, and no. It is an advantage for all, and a disadvantage for all. Most say that other MMOs don't have this type of warning system. No, they don't, but they also have dedicated PvE and PvP servers too... are you saying that Eve should do the same thing?
I for one would like to see this change done right the first time, not like the last (aka "Speed Nerf").
Everyone jumps through a gate (unless you have a Cap with a jump drive)... so why wouldn't local show you in system? I remeber reading a post by a dev talking about the logic behind seeing people in local. The gate communicate with each other and the comm systems, Cap ships have to communicate witht eh gates for jumping in and out of system just as ships use the gate to jump in and out of system. This make logical sense.
Now.. if the changes are implemneted... i think we will need something and this is my suggestion:
Every ship that jumps into a system (cap and non-cap) are reported to a system that will show them. It will be seperate from the Scanner, but will rovide the intel that everyone needs. It will not show who the pilot is, their corp, or alliance, only that there is a Battleship (maybe even what ship it actually is). This remains reported as long as the pilot is in system, even if he logs provided they are in teir ships. The difference to keep local from being cluttered is that a ship without a pilot will not be reported until the pilot boards it.
Now, the Scanner would need to be improved too. It should have a longer range, and be tied to setting fromt he overview. This way non-friendly ships could be eliminated as they would be brocasting a IFF signal that would tell the if they are a friend. Foes would not be broadcasting, so they would show up.
I think this would be the begining of a system that would work to please both sides, and still make the game balanced. You would know something is there, but not who or where without doing some scanning with probes.
At the same time, yes the rewards of 0.0 do need a major improvment as the risks would not be worht the rewards. As would Industrial ships. I am not saying make a Hulk an uber miner/PVP ships, but it should have the ability to defend itlself against a ship. Not that it would always win, but it should have a chance. Like an increase to the drone bay to beable to fit multiple wings of large/heavy drones instead of small and mediums. This would give it a fighting chance, but not make it totally over powered.
This idea has merit, but it does need time to workout to solution that will please most of the people. From what I see in this thread is that it's about 50/50 split in terms of for and against. I am all for the change if done right... I am not for changes that are not well thought out and end up causing to many pilots to be affected. (To that example speed nerf). While I do feel that speed tanking is viable option for ships.. Having a few select ships able to reach insane speeds is not. Instead of making changes the would have brought the Non ships under control.. they did a wide sweeping changes that affects all ships.. and some have been affected very negatively. Not a well thoguht out plan. Hopefully, they see this and will make changes to improve the system while keeping game balance in check.... but we have seen how weel most MMOs have been at that, including CCP. |
Nietarr
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 16:27:00 -
[104]
What am I missing here? Doesn't this make it impossible to detect a player in a cloaked ship until it decloaks in front of you? Isn't that a bit too easy?
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 16:35:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Nietarr What am I missing here? Doesn't this make it impossible to detect a player in a cloaked ship until it decloaks in front of you? Isn't that a bit too easy?
Or a way of making ppl in space be always prepared.
|
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 16:45:00 -
[106]
Well anyway if this goes ahead I can see fleets being DDD all over the place with cloacking titans just waiting for a fleet to jump in.
I can also see NPC'ers/miners just go away from 0.0 space and go do missions, because the reward will not be worth the risk. And no people will not adapt... they will just go to a safer place (empire).
If CCP wants to remove local better start working on some scanning tools ...
________________ God is my Wingman |
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 16:49:00 -
[107]
Originally by: Murina Or a way of making ppl in space be always prepared.
...or, more likely, make people think "I'll go make money in high-sec....".
People don't WANT to make money in 0.0. There's no emotional attachment there. People will go where they, all in all, make most ISK/Hour. If losses become a regular event in 0.0 ratting, nobody will do it.... It's pretty simple really...
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Nietarr
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 16:49:00 -
[108]
True, of course it does, but then who will still want to rat in 0.0 anymore? It skews the risk vs. reward of 0.0 versus high sec drastically in favor of high sec. As a PvPer I think it would significantly reduce available targets and whatever was left would either be just as hard to kill as before the change or mind-numbingly easy kills.
|
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:16:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Tac Ginaz I think it is a great change.
Yes, it means roaming gangs will be quite powerful now especially vs the miners and ratters.
what miners and NPC'ers ??? They will not be there anymore. Will not be worth the risk-
Originally by: Tac Ginaz For that, I'd say CCP should also change the composition of the asteroid fields and the RAT behavior.
Simply put, have the asteroid fields be FAR apart. Say, an asteroid every 20km and the field encompassing a very large area (a whole grid).
Have the rats pop up in random locations inside the asteroid field grid.
When warping to an asteroid field, have the game drop the player in a random spot inside the grid.
What this will do is not only give the game a far more immersive feel to it, but also allow miners to make several warp-to's until they find the rock they want to mine and make a bookmark...
and if hostiles warp into the grid, they could appear 200km+ away from the miner allowing said miner to warp away.
Ratters will also have to warp-to a roid nearest to the rats and engage them..and can warp off if hostiles pop in the roid field grid.
For those that go HUNTING the ratters or the miners.. well, you will need a cloaked scout to not only find the targets but to get the jump on them.
... and then you'll have to ask yourselves... with the asteroids being 20km apart... will that scout be warping in his team into a possible ambush by stealth bombers?
Life in 0.0 is so exciting...
Well that would be a party for cloacked recons... |
plastic sauce
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 17:30:00 -
[110]
What an awesome change :D I can't wait for it myself. Recons will be the only ships able to catch people without getting frustrated. I know as soon as i see another ship on scan, I'll just log off. Where did i go, did i dock? go to the next system? log off? You don't know who I am so you can't tell if i did log or not. Is it worth your time to search the system and surrounding ones trying to find me? fun stuff :) |
|
D'Artagnan
Kaizokudo
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:13:00 -
[111]
Originally by: Poast Warrior Yet another horrible idea and quite frankly encourages blobbing that much more.
CCP will ruin this game with the current path they're on IMO.
I dissagree with you.
Here is how it will work
Day one this goes live
Alliance Y member 1 " Zomg we cant see local, the baddies are coming blob up"
Alliance X member 2 " lets relax for a bit let Alliance Y brick it for a while"
Day 2
Alliance Y member 1 " Zomg we cant see local, the baddies are coming blob up"
Day 10
Alliance Y member 1 " Zomg we cant see local, the baddies are coming blob up"
Alliance Y member 2 " Dude we have been doing this for the last 10 days and we have not seen as much as a tumble weed, I am off to npc."
Alliance X member 1 " Now is time, put on your viking hats its time to **** and pillage, "
This will remove the they have 300 we need atleast 300 to fight.
Best change ever. |
Shalmaneser ili
Caldari Gemeinschaft interstellarer Soeldner
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:18:00 -
[112]
I was wondering about when the odd "the sky is falling" post would pop up on the Eve-O forums after the large Q&A thread by Zulupark. I consider this to be one.
It's usually a pain to sift through these threads because only few posts contain actual level-headed feedback. A lot of posters also assume that the topic of removing local in 0.0, or more precisely switching it to delayed mode, does already apply to Sisi and/or the Quantum Rise expansion, which is totally not the case. Zulupark was very careful and said he is *hoping* to have it applied in Q1 2009. That is not a promise, not a release date, it is an intention to implement an idea.
Back to topic. See in the following post (#12) in reply to teji, second answer:
Originally by: CCP Zulupark 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.
Source: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=905941&page=1#12
This is a very sensible answer and was probably not read by most people after having seen the mere "remove local in 0.0" idea he said he likes. So.. no frantic ship-scanner refreshing creating lag of epic proportions. I personally support the idea he is having under the condition he stated. |
Lyvanna Kitaen
Minmatar Noonday Sun Corp
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:47:00 -
[113]
Are they also going to remove the ability to use the star map to see how many people are active or docked in 0.0 systems? At least with that, you have a chance to jump into a system and ninja mine, rat or whatever undetected. It seems unfair that a ganker can see how many are in the system without even going there especially since the defender won't know when he enters the system.
|
Nobues
Gallente Oberon Incorporated Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 18:56:00 -
[114]
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.
I agree with posted you remove local I'm gone with my 5 accounts. I've been playing from day 1. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:22:00 -
[115]
Originally by: D'Artagnan I dissagree with you.
Here is how it will work
Day one this goes live
Alliance Y member 1 " Zomg we cant see local, the baddies are coming blob up"
Alliance X member 2 " lets relax for a bit let Alliance Y brick it for a while"
Day 2
Alliance Y member 1 " Zomg we cant see local, the baddies are coming blob up"
Day 10
Alliance Y member 1 " Zomg we cant see local, the baddies are coming blob up"
Alliance Y member 2 " Dude we have been doing this for the last 10 days and we have not seen as much as a tumble weed, I am off to npc."
Alliance X member 1 " Now is time, put on your viking hats its time to **** and pillage, "
This will remove the they have 300 we need atleast 300 to fight.
Best change ever.
Day 11
Alliance Y members 1-200 "Well this sucks, I'm going to move all my moneymaking characters to the NPC corp and run highsec L4s in perfect safety from now on."
Alliance X member 1 "yarr yarr twisted twisted letsa go shoot some guys hell yeah derpderpderp" *5 hours of fruitless roaming later* "Dammit where did all our targets go this is terrible what happened? :( :( :( "
Alliance X member 2 "wow Megacyte prices just went through the roof, something must have happened to scare away all the 0.0 mining characters. Looks like we'll be paying higher prices for everything we need from now on guys." |
Seishomaru
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:26:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Originally by: Seishomaru pff peopel as usuall blind to their own belly.
Local nerf is not a boost to roamign and pirates and a nerf to ratters. Its balanced.
Because the pirates also do not know that you are in local so they need more time to check whole dam system. That makes much easier to stay hidden and avoid them as well.
More important a solo ship has a better chance of not being dectected than a giant blob. So this is a boost for small gangs against blobs! Finnaly
This will be THE best and most important change ever.
Incorrect. As a ganker I will know where my enemy is mining. It will be in that -1.0 system with the mercoxit, crokite, bistot roids. Same place where he is ratting.
daaa adn if they are so predictable thwn know what? youa re asw eell because they know where you will appear and they can have defense gangas to setup traps for you. that wil be far more effective and interestign than stupid gatecamps of today.
Its pretty simple you shoudl have gates blocked if you want a mining op or at least 1 person inthe most likely in gate. |
Zhang Ramses
Chaos From Order
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:30:00 -
[117]
Fantastic. The big 0.0 alliances that are way too spread out to begin with thanks to the easy transfer of intel will be forced to consolidate into fewer systems. This will open up 0.0 systems and constellations to smaller, hungrier groups. More competing groups in 0.0, less stagnation.
|
Syrinthal
Black Omega Security Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 19:55:00 -
[118]
I rat a bit, from time to time.
I support this change - stealthy logistical combat will increase - use of cov ops for real intel will increase - less blobbage cos of uncertainty etc.
ISK value "should" increase - as supply will drop, might drop GTC prices due to increased demand for ISK. Faction item value should increase (which may increase mission runners, which would make 0.0 hubs moar interesting) Ratters will get moar or equal income from the same amount of ratting - DUE TO THE INCREASE IN RISK.
Hell yeah, down with this.
|
Knawt Ongrid
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 20:09:00 -
[119]
Edited by: Knawt Ongrid on 25/10/2008 20:13:51
Originally by: Zhang Ramses
Fantastic. The big 0.0 alliances that are way too spread out to begin with thanks to the easy transfer of intel will be forced to consolidate into fewer systems. This will open up 0.0 systems and constellations to smaller, hungrier groups. More competing groups in 0.0, less stagnation.
No, because those small groups will get munched as well by massive reprisal fleets they cannot see. It won't take long before noone will invest in 0.0, because noone will have any security and noone wants/can monitor gates 23/7 (except maybe professional gamers/isk sellers).
However, removing local but allowing sovereignty based intel systems might be the way to go. Investment will be rewarded with some measure of security that comes free now with local for no investment.
A possible benefit of a player-maintained infrastructure of system or constellation intel might be that it would restrict what is occurring in 0.0 now, which is alliances effectively controlling more space than they have invested with infrastructure. This would be good for the game. More people/corps/alliances could get into 0.0, and politics will become more complex and fluid. This would happen because at a point all that pos fueling/defending would become burdensome even for the more professional alliances out there.
A defending alliance would have data on an invader once that invader actually enters a system with assets. The Invader might have some imperfect data on the defender through the map window with stats on pilots in system. Or could have some special ship or deployable structure to accomplish a lesser measure of intel.
It would certainly add another layer of complexity and character skill specialization which is not bad.
There is an ecology here that simply removing local would upset very badly. However, evolving the species in the ecosystem is not a bad idea. |
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 20:55:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Zhang Ramses
Fantastic. The big 0.0 alliances that are way too spread out to begin with thanks to the easy transfer of intel will be forced to consolidate into fewer systems. This will open up 0.0 systems and constellations to smaller, hungrier groups. More competing groups in 0.0, less stagnation.
Hungrier for what? The opportunity to lose hulks and ravens over and over to roaming HAC/Recon gangs that they had no way of telling were there until they showed up at the belt/gate with them? I can just see them now, rubbing their hands with glee and thinking "oh boy, I can't wait to get a little corner of 0.0 so I can be ambushed and ganked by a dozen hostiles whilst trying to earn a little money! That sure is a step up from the profitable highsec L4s I've been running in complete safety for the past year!"
If anything, the huge sprawling 0.0 alliances (such as mine) suffer the least because of this change, because we have hundreds of 0.0 systems to choose from for our money making opportunities and can just move on if one particular area gets too dangerous. Those smaller alliances confined to a constellation or two will suffer the most, because hostiles will know exactly where to look for them. -----------
|
|
necronarcosis
Shadow Company Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 21:16:00 -
[121]
Edited by: necronarcosis on 25/10/2008 21:16:01 will there be a counter to full on recon gangs that cant ever be tracked under the proposed changes?
|
Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 21:24:00 -
[122]
We don't even know when the changes will happen, what the sum total of them will be, and otherwise
I'm pretty much certain that there'll be some replacement intel tool similar in function to local, but much less "hay guys this is a chat channel you get to use for intel, too!" |
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 21:55:00 -
[123]
Without the local as it is now, without anything like the local as it is now - and of course an onboard scanner adjusted to this,
New never before seen tactics will take place in eve, whole fleets will escape if the enemie scouts arent smart enough. Scouts in general will be alot more important, a smart or dumb scout can send a fleet into death or victory - they will then be truly the eyes and ears of the fc.
It will be impossible to determine if the enemie fleet has 200 or 400 ships, parts of fleets can be hidden and join the fight lateron, an fc will have to be alot more wary of what is happening.
Fcs of small gangs will have to enter skirmishes without knowing the exact count of the enemie, no more OH GAWD HE HAS ONE FUKKEN MORE SHIP THEN US WE CANNOT RISK OUR PRECCCIOUS LIVES!.
Non alliance players can use the vast space held by alliance with only poses, with the current local never used but without localthose alliances have no idea what is going on there, it can take weeks or longer before an alliance notices that a small corp has made its home in a system right in the middle of the alliances territory.
Mining ops will have to be more organized, local isnt the perfect guard anymore - now you will need one or several emergency guards like falcons that can bail out scrambled hulks, at the same time one scout in a strategic system can warn and make a whole constellation disappear for a incomming fleet, for them to never see a target.
Recons andcov ops will see a revival in their true role, being undetected roaming behind enemie lines - at the same time an attacking recon never knows how many defending ships there really are when it uncloaks in scrambling range of the target.
-------
This change, when clever introduced will make the so boring, the so constant 0.0 as it is now into a fearsome, always pushing and adrenalin milking environment. Bring it on ccp, dont listen to the naysayers, only listen to the arguments against it, as there is a solution to all of them if you play it smart.
Very ineteresting times ahead, indeed. -
Boosters and PirateProfessions
|
Brigsby5987
Caldari 32nd Amarrian Imperial Navy Regiment.
|
Posted - 2008.10.25 22:41:00 -
[124]
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.
Stop whining.
Unsubscribe to eve please. And give me your stuff.
I could care less about you or your six accounts leaving. Less lag for me.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 00:03:00 -
[125]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists It will be impossible to determine if the enemie fleet has 200 or 400 ships, parts of fleets can be hidden and join the fight lateron, an fc will have to be alot more wary of what is happening.
Fcs of small gangs will have to enter skirmishes without knowing the exact count of the enemie, no more OH GAWD HE HAS ONE FUKKEN MORE SHIP THEN US WE CANNOT RISK OUR PRECCCIOUS LIVES!.
Instead we'll have OH GOD THEY MIGHT HAVE ONE MORE SHIP THAN US WE CANNOT RISK OUR PRECIOUS LIVES.
Newsflash: risk averse players will still be risk averse, gung-ho players will still be gung-ho. Removing a source of quick intel wont make risk averse players suddenly turn gung-ho, it just means they'll be spending even longer trying to scout and get relative numbers before they commit to a fight.
Quote: Non alliance players can use the vast space held by alliance with only poses, with the current local never used but without localthose alliances have no idea what is going on there, it can take weeks or longer before an alliance notices that a small corp has made its home in a system right in the middle of the alliances territory.
O hey a buff to chinese isk farmers that's just what EVE needs.
Quote: Mining ops will have to be more organized, local isnt the perfect guard anymore - now you will need one or several emergency guards like falcons that can bail out scrambled hulks, at the same time one scout in a strategic system can warn and make a whole constellation disappear for a incomming fleet, for them to never see a target.
In other words boring **** like mining ops will be even more boring because you need a bunch of falcons to sit doing nothing for hours on end while they babysit the miners and a group of covops sat doing nothing covering every approach system glued to the screen, all waiting for hostiles which may or may not ever show up. And of course, every Falcon and covops is one fewer mining ship, so we've succeeded in increasing the tedium of 0.0 mining whilst decreasing the profit. Hell YES.
Why would anyone want to live in 0.0 again?
Quote: Recons andcov ops will see a revival in their true role, being undetected roaming behind enemie lines - at the same time an attacking recon never knows how many defending ships there really are when it uncloaks in scrambling range of the target.
No, roaming and defence ops will become limited to cloakships only - "what, no you can't come in a HAC/ceptor/BC, you'll get scanned and give our presence away, get in a recon or don't come at all." -----------
|
Moostang
DarkStar 1 GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 00:03:00 -
[126]
Originally by: Brigsby5987
Stop whining.
Unsubscribe to eve please. And give me your stuff.
I could care less about you or your six accounts leaving. Less lag for me.
He wont be the only one. The more subs ccp loses the closer this game will be to going belly up as with all sub-based games and if you play this game because you enjoy it then you too will be hurt by this when CCP says "we're shutting this down". MMORPG's are a dime a dozen these days and holding on to subs should be the highest priorities. I've seen several games in the past several years go belly up. MMORPG's must fight for subs these days, they cant just throw them away if they want to survive.
This change is too drastic to be allowed to happen. To too have over 4 accounts and many other posters have relayed that they too will unsub. their accounts. Everyone is either content or happy with the current system. Content as in no one is relaying their intent on leaving if local isnt currently changed (though i'm sure some morons will after they read this).
Scouts are not even close to being a good substitute for local. Some systems have 4+ gates in them so what, 4 people are going to have to stay bored to hell for 23/7?? And if they leave to go crap, eat, spend time with their family, or whatever and a few hostiles slip in, no one will know. What if those hostiles log out in the system for a day, how will you know when they log back in and are a threat again?? Not to mention Cloaked-warped able ships will be immune to all detection once in system and will be the new flavor of the year(s).
Moostang Darkstar 1 Goonswarm
Priceless Necro Thread |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 00:43:00 -
[127]
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists It will be impossible to determine if the enemie fleet has 200 or 400 ships, parts of fleets can be hidden and join the fight lateron, an fc will have to be alot more wary of what is happening.
Fcs of small gangs will have to enter skirmishes without knowing the exact count of the enemie, no more OH GAWD HE HAS ONE FUKKEN MORE SHIP THEN US WE CANNOT RISK OUR PRECCCIOUS LIVES!.
Instead we'll have OH GOD THEY MIGHT HAVE ONE MORE SHIP THAN US WE CANNOT RISK OUR PRECIOUS LIVES.
Newsflash: risk averse players will still be risk averse, gung-ho players will still be gung-ho. Removing a source of quick intel wont make risk averse players suddenly turn gung-ho, it just means they'll be spending even longer trying to scout and get relative numbers before they commit to a fight.
Nope , people seimply cannto become more paranoid and afraid then they are. Because there is a limit. No local will make people more willign to engage at least in fast hit an drun tactics.
FINNALy tactics will mean something in eve.
Alliances wil have to concentrate on smaller pockets if they want to have safe operations. Its a price! Finnaly Risk reward applied to 0.0 because with current TQ status there is ZERO risk to make isk in 0.0 once you live in a region you control. Even if you are the only person in your alliance that lives in that station system.
|
Brugar
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 01:51:00 -
[128]
This change will increase bookmarks to an all time high again, bringing us back to the database issues and bookmarks. People will be making bookmarks at each and every gate they normally use so as to be able to safely check for bubbles and not get trapped. 150km+ bookmarks will be all over the place.
|
AmmoniaisNH3
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 02:16:00 -
[129]
i don't mind that change, but: please make the scanner active, so we don't have to spam 'scan' change the 'pilots in space the last 30 minutes' to a shorter period, 15 minutes or something
|
Kephael
Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 02:25:00 -
[130]
This seems like a great idea, CCP just need to make the scanner a like a modern radar type device. Have it rotate and if it's picking up an incoming vessel traveling at a high rate of speed (warp) towards your general area have an alarm go off in addition to the visual alert of the radar.
|
|
Ashley Thomas
Kiith Paktu Nex Eternus
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 02:26:00 -
[131]
Originally by: Brugar This change will increase bookmarks to an all time high again, bringing us back to the database issues and bookmarks. People will be making bookmarks at each and every gate they normally use so as to be able to safely check for bubbles and not get trapped. 150km+ bookmarks will be all over the place.
or they will run with a scout... if you wanna check for bubbles warp to nearest planet and... use the directional scanner. sure there's some gates that aren't by planets but its good enough.
|
Felix Dzerzhinsky
Caldari Wreckless Abandon G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 02:26:00 -
[132]
my problem with it is that it will make 0.0 even more lonely and will aid chinese farmers who can cloak and use the local delay to stay hidden.
My problem is that combined with cloaks on none-covert ships this feature makes it almost impossible to police your space. And while I would like the 'intel' aspect of local removed in an ideal pvp world, to remove it the way EvE is played now would give the gate camper/cloaker too much power. ----
ECCM is a Counter-measure not a defense. |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 02:27:00 -
[133]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 26/10/2008 02:27:53
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
Nope , people seimply cannto become more paranoid and afraid then they are. Because there is a limit. No local will make people more willign to engage at least in fast hit an drun tactics.
FINNALy tactics will mean something in eve.
There's only one small issue with local change: force recon gangs (which are very potent ships in themselves) are going to become insanely overpowered.
"Hit and run" might as well become "hit and stay around and hit again" and "bait and blob". At least now, your way to see that 4-5 cloaking recons are going to uncloak on you when you attack the bait ship is local (which might or might not give you a clue - in low-sec with many neutrals around, you often have to engage under very unclear circumstances, but if you frequent a area often you know who's who) and totally murder you.
Meaning, either be in your own cloaky gang or die. With local nerfing I have to say cloaking recons (which are very potent ships to begin with) are a bad idea to have in the game at all.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Veldya
Guristari Freedom Fighters
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 06:46:00 -
[134]
I think it is an important change. There is no real point to covert ops and stealth ops behind enemy lines when everyone knows exactly which systems you are moving through.
However, there need to be some dramatic UI improvements.
I think UI should be changed and have a box in the middle which incorporates your shield, armor and structure status but also includes your short-range sensor information.
Short range sensors should be passive. Their range based on the strength of your sensors. In the circle you are represented in the middle and the Sensors are tuned to pick up any ships with a friend or foe system where it will show green dots on the sensors for friendly+ ships in proximity and anything else neutral- represented as a red dot. That way when a ship comes close enough to within your detection range then you are made aware. Can set it for audio warnings when enemy craft get into sensor range.
Cloak ships wont be detected by short range sensors.
Probes should be able to detect cloaked vessels, just be a lot harder to accurately pin down. |
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 09:39:00 -
[135]
Have you guys heard of Login Traps ??? Yes, is metagaming but people do it all the time... Have people thought about what will happen with this new feature and the will of people at "win at all cost" ???
________________ God is my Wingman |
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 09:43:00 -
[136]
Originally by: DeadDuck Have you guys heard of Login Traps ??? Yes, is metagaming but people do it all the time... Have people thought about what will happen with this new feature and the will of people at "win at all cost" ???
These changes are hardly surprising if you look at the players ccp gathered to help them, armchair warriors and paper tigers the lot of them.
|
Zey Nadar
Gallente Heavily Utilized Mechanic Mayhem Einherjar Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 09:54:00 -
[137]
Originally by: Crackzilla
And consider that CCP wants to remove fixed belts. So rather then 12 belts on overview, the belts must be located via exploration.
My first thought was indeed "bye bye to 0.0 ratting", but if belts would indeed be more difficult to locate and possibly a slight buff to onboard scanner range (its currently not enough to guarantee your safety in the blind local scenario even when clicking it every 2 seconds) it would be a different story. I would really like non-fixed belts. |
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 10:35:00 -
[138]
So your roaming pilot/gang/fleet gains an extra level of surprise at the cost of an extra amount of work needed to locate targets.
Targets that either won't be in 0.0, or blobbed up to counter any surprises. Yes, that's an awesome buff to 0.0 small gang PvP.
There's a reason 90% of 0.0 systems are dead and empty, and it's not to do with PvP. It's because they're worthless. Making local "delayed mode" will not increase the number of targets available. |
Noelle Fay
SniggWaffe
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 12:35:00 -
[139]
OMG the carebears don't like this change, what a surprise!
Guys, 0.0 isn't meant to be a "oh local jumps, I just go cloak up and wait it all out" place. It is dangerous. Can't handle it? Go to lowsec. This might help populating low sec as well in the end..
I'm all for this drastic, yet good, change. -- -- -- -- -- -- -- The secret to success, whether it's women or money, is knowing when to quit. I oughta know: I'm divorced and broke. |
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 12:40:00 -
[140]
The best thing about this change if done properly, even considering the things i posted above - EVE will be Huge again, flying through 0.0 will feel like the first times again, when you didnt know whats next door, when things were "unexplored" and new.
Itll be freakin awesome, and all arguments against it that ive seen can be with some fixin cancelled out by ccp - again, if they do it properly. -
Boosters and PirateProfessions
|
|
Terra Mikael
Private Nuisance
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 13:30:00 -
[141]
Edited by: Terra Mikael on 26/10/2008 13:36:17
Originally by: Good Sir Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it.
Yes! Good Sir, you are a ****ing genious!
Next time I want to talk in local, I'll first use my scanner to see if anyone is even in system! Then, after checking all the stations, I'll be able to confirm weather or not people aren't answering me in local is because they aren't paying attention or because nobody is ****ing there
and to go a little further, maybe you ditto heads like to search a whole system before realizing (after 40minutes) that there isn't anyone in system. And if the scanner is as useful as you say it is, isn't it the same damn thing as having a local window? |
Jack Gilligan
Caldari THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 13:31:00 -
[142]
Edited by: Jack Gilligan on 26/10/2008 13:31:01 CCP: Don't even THINK about doing this unless you first revamp and improve the scanner and it's UI.
If local won't tell you who comes into your system, who is hostile and who is an ally, then the ship scanner SHOULD. And should do so at a reasonable range.
Furthermore, if you are part of the alliance that OWNS sov in a 0.0 system, local should work as is. I mean, it's YOUR system isn't it? Don't the gates also belong to your alliance? Shouldn't you get notification of hostiles entering?
This could work. But the scanner needs a fix to go ALONG with this, not to be done afterwords.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 13:33:00 -
[143]
Originally by: Good Sir Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it.
This.
/Thread |
Terra Mikael
Private Nuisance
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 13:41:00 -
[144]
Edited by: Terra Mikael on 26/10/2008 13:43:19
Originally by: Mirirar Argh, the whining.
Get a buddy to patrol the gates for you. It's not a solo game.
If you can't manage that, odds are you actually aren't ready to be in the space you're in.
So, if you need a buddy to hold your hand, then you're ready to take on the universe? Did I read this right?
seriously, only a former WoW player would suggest that you need a full party to play this game. you fail. |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 13:53:00 -
[145]
Originally by: DeadDuck Have you guys heard of Login Traps ??? Yes, is metagaming but people do it all the time... Have people thought about what will happen with this new feature and the will of people at "win at all cost" ???
Yeah, those will get far more powerful. I'm honestly more worried about cloaking recon gangs, however, they don't even need to logoff/logon, just sit there all day ;P
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Market Bandit
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:00:00 -
[146]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: DeadDuck Have you guys heard of Login Traps ??? Yes, is metagaming but people do it all the time... Have people thought about what will happen with this new feature and the will of people at "win at all cost" ???
Yeah, those will get far more powerful. I'm honestly more worried about cloaking recon gangs, however, they don't even need to logoff/logon, just sit there all day ;P
If they are willing to sit there all day....waiting patiently for the kill, then they deserve it. At least you don't have to worry about afk cloakers anymore, until they wake up but thats no less a threat than you have to deal with already.
Summation of the whines in this thread - ohnoes I can no longer safespot, cloak & ctrl-q as soon as a hostile appears in local...:emoragequit: Good riddance
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:15:00 -
[147]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon Alliances wil have to concentrate on smaller pockets if they want to have safe operations. Its a price! Finnaly Risk reward applied to 0.0 because with current TQ status there is ZERO risk to make isk in 0.0 once you live in a region you control. Even if you are the only person in your alliance that lives in that station system.
Yes, 0.0 ratting in the current game is completely risk free. All those killmails and lossmails on our killboard of ratting battleships caught by roaming gangs are faked. -----------
|
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:24:00 -
[148]
Originally by: Scatim Helicon
Originally by: Kagura Nikon Alliances wil have to concentrate on smaller pockets if they want to have safe operations. Its a price! Finnaly Risk reward applied to 0.0 because with current TQ status there is ZERO risk to make isk in 0.0 once you live in a region you control. Even if you are the only person in your alliance that lives in that station system.
Yes, 0.0 ratting in the current game is completely risk free. All those killmails and lossmails on our killboard of ratting battleships caught by roaming gangs are faked.
You forgot to mention how claiming Sov, removing opposing Sov claims, maintaining and defending said Sov claim is also completely risk-free. |
|
CCP Casqade
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:24:00 -
[149]
While I encourage people to discuss balancing changes, new ideas, old ideas, and such. Please do not take a one sentence reply to a specific question, get upset and think that we will put local in delayed mode on Tranquility without thinking, testing and getting feedback first. And please do not flame and troll others for bringing their thoughts and ideas to the table.
This is my personal opinion on this:
Quote: We want to put local in 0.0 as a delayed mode channel so only people who talk in the channel are shown.
- We acknowledge that Local at its current form is a way too powerful intel tool. Example: CCP Oveur has expressed this concern during an interview with EVE-TV. I do not remember the date, it could have been last Alliance tournament or Fanfest.
Quote: We are also looking at other alternatives but if we find nothing better this will be put in testing at least.
- We have ideas on this front, but if that doesn't result in something concrete we have the option to address the problem the other way around:
1. Put local in delayed mode on Singularity for testing purposes. 2. Get feedback on what issues arises, pros and cons. 3. Build and improve tools to balance the issues, pros and cons, based on the feedback. 4. Put the new tools on Singularity for testing purposes. 5. Get feedback on issues, pros and cons. 6. See point 3. 7. Weigh the old system against the new system - See what we learned and how we can continue. |
|
Gai Servos
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:34:00 -
[150]
Originally by: CCP Casqade While I encourage people to discuss balancing changes, new ideas, old ideas, and such. Please do not take a one sentence reply to a specific question, get upset and think that we will put local in delayed mode on Tranquility without thinking, testing and getting feedback first. And please do not flame and troll others for bringing their thoughts and ideas to the table.
This is my personal opinion on this:
Quote: We want to put local in 0.0 as a delayed mode channel so only people who talk in the channel are shown.
- We acknowledge that Local at its current form is a way too powerful intel tool. Example: CCP Oveur has expressed this concern during an interview with EVE-TV. I do not remember the date, it could have been last Alliance tournament or Fanfest.
Quote: We are also looking at other alternatives but if we find nothing better this will be put in testing at least.
- We have ideas on this front, but if that doesn't result in something concrete we have the option to address the problem the other way around:
1. Put local in delayed mode on Singularity for testing purposes. 2. Get feedback on what issues arises, pros and cons. 3. Build and improve tools to balance the issues, pros and cons, based on the feedback. 4. Put the new tools on Singularity for testing purposes. 5. Get feedback on issues, pros and cons. 6. See point 3. 7. Weigh the old system against the new system - See what we learned and how we can continue.
YOu cannot test something at this scale on sisi.
|
|
Poast Warrior
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:36:00 -
[151]
Local as it now is fine.
Removing the only real community part of the game (hai guyz) isn't going to help either.
|
|
CCP Casqade
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:45:00 -
[152]
Originally by: Gai Servos YOu cannot test something at this scale on sisi.
I believe you can, for the expressed purpose of finding what out what or at least getting a rough idea of what would be lacking if local was put in delayed mode. Why don't you think so? And what do you suggest instead?
|
|
Poast Warrior
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:49:00 -
[153]
I think most people living in 0.0 would suggest you guys just leave it alone and concentrate on other issues.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:52:00 -
[154]
Originally by: CCP Casqade
Originally by: Gai Servos YOu cannot test something at this scale on sisi.
I believe you can, for the expressed purpose of finding what out what or at least getting a rough idea of what would be lacking if local was put in delayed mode. Why don't you think so? And what do you suggest instead?
You cannot test the actual dynamics on how it would impact life in 0.0. Noone is going to be happy when local is gone. People who rat and mine wont be happy, because it would be insanity to rat or mine without local, the risk is too high. Then gankers wont be happy either because noone will be left in 0.0 except a few alliance people running moonmining POS. Everyone will get a level 4 missionrunner in Motsu and make 20m an hour riskfree rather than risking ratting in 0.0.
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 14:56:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists
This change, when clever introduced will make the so boring, the so constant 0.0 as it is now into a fearsome, always pushing and adrenalin milking environment. Bring it on ccp, dont listen to the naysayers, only listen to the arguments against it, as there is a solution to all of them if you play it smart.
Very ineteresting times ahead, indeed.
False. People will compare risk to reward and decide that level 4 missionrunning in Empire is more profitable than anything you could do in 0.0 if you need to have a gang of falcons and assorted combat ships babysitting 0.0 mining operations.
|
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 15:02:00 -
[156]
Originally by: Malachon Draco You cannot test the actual dynamics on how it would impact life in 0.0. Noone is going to be happy when local is gone. People who rat and mine wont be happy, because it would be insanity to rat or mine without local, the risk is too high. Then gankers wont be happy either because noone will be left in 0.0 except a few alliance people running moonmining POS. Everyone will get a level 4 missionrunner in Motsu and make 20m an hour riskfree rather than risking ratting in 0.0.
You don't need to run any tests to know what will happen, and the above is a good summary. Of course, nerfing local to the point where 0.0 inhabitants have to create a missioning alt to fund the 0.0 PvP experience is sound business sense. |
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 15:05:00 -
[157]
Originally by: CCP Casqade
Originally by: Gai Servos YOu cannot test something at this scale on sisi.
I believe you can, for the expressed purpose of finding what out what or at least getting a rough idea of what would be lacking if local was put in delayed mode. Why don't you think so? And what do you suggest instead?
Poeple don't rat or mine on Sisi, so testing this would be difficult...
It's not something that can be tested on the scale needed to see the impact on 0.0 live on general, so I suggest you think very, very carefully before tinkering with local in TQ. ------------------------------------------
|
|
CCP Casqade
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 15:12:00 -
[158]
Originally by: Malachon Draco Noone is going to be happy when local is gone. People who rat and mine wont be happy, because it would be insanity to rat or mine without local, the risk is too high.
I don't think you read my previous reply. You seem to assume that putting local into delayed mode would be a single change. I believe that it should be combined with new or changes to existing mechanics. This would make up for the loss of instant intel in local, but not be as powerful as local is in its current form. Depending on what changes or new features are combined with changes to local. This could potentially make the game more fun.
Ideas that come to mind are: Involve player skill (not skill points) on gathering intel of what is in local, give smaller ships, smaller gangs or cloakers an upper hand to avoid bigger fleets and remain undetected while in the same system.
I think the combinations and ways that this can be changed for the better are endless. We just need to find the proper balance between hunter and prey, risk vs reward as well as what is fun and what is not. |
|
El Mauru
Amarr Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 15:22:00 -
[159]
Edited by: El Mauru on 26/10/2008 15:22:59 I'm all for this if constellation chat gets introduced or local still shows the amount of people in system -
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 15:49:00 -
[160]
Originally by: CCP Casqade Ideas that come to mind are: Involve player skill (not skill points) on gathering intel of what is in local, give smaller ships, smaller gangs or cloakers an upper hand to avoid bigger fleets and remain undetected while in the same system.
You are completely ignoring the monotonous nature of ratting.....
A ratter who wants to make even decent money has to do several hours of ratting. If you make a mechanic that involves skill, then in essence you're back to the 'press scan button every 5 seconds' type of gameplay. If you do something automatic, then you're at the current 'local' type of gameplay.
If it is the 'press scan button' type of gameplay, then it'll seriously affect ratters. Ratting is almost as boring as mining, but you have to do it to make money. Right now, at least you can do semi-afk (browse the web, read an e-book, etc., while keeping an eye on local).
However, if whatever change you make increases the risks, even by a small bit, ratting as a way of making money goes dead! It already IS kinda dead as making money in L4 high-sec missions take WAY less attention, and make you almost the same money without risk.
Any change that significantly increases risk (to make the hunters happy), will make the hunted go to high-sec.
So, whenever you change things, you should consider this: If it involves increased attention, ratters will be negatively affected, and if it involves increased risk, ratters will be HUGELY negatively affected. Any negative effect will HAVE to be compensated by a change in reward balance 0.0/high-sec, or you'll simply invalidate ratting as a money making mechanic.
The funny thing is, if you just made that reward balance change now, it'd probably attract so many players back to 0.0 ratting that targets would be plentiful for the hunters, and you wouldn't even have to change local....
At the bottom of the problem, I think you'll find the reward imbalance as the fundamental problem. Local is just what most people blame for the lack of kills, but the real problem is that there are simply too few targets, caused by the reward imbalance....
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
|
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 15:55:00 -
[161]
Edited by: Lili Lu on 26/10/2008 15:57:23 Cascade, I am concerned that you keep mentioning putting local on delayed mode. Is this the only suggestion that you sound like you are already considering to introduce? What about sovereignty based intel systems, deployable intel systems, or shipboard intel systems?
Many of the more stupid hunters here are all gogo, remove local. The carebears and the wise hunters recognize that taking away local without replacing it with something comparable would be habitat destruction for the hunted species. In which case the hunted carebears would no longer inhabit 0.0. I suppose a few hunters would get off on canibalism for a little while, but would eventually starve.
My preferred solutions would be a mix of sovereignty, temprorary deployables and shipboard/mod systems of intel. These things might be testable on SISI. However, you would have to have scheduled events to try to gather a defending alliances and an invading fleets to see how it might work with 0.0 space holding alliances and alliance ops.
I prefer a sovereignty system because it rewards investment in a space, but does not allow for the disperse sovereignty system patchwork presently existing that allows alliances to control much larger areas than the individual systems they actually hold with soverignty-claiming POSs.
Simply delaying local is not a solution. It could still result in undetected invasion fleets so noone would bother investing structures in 0.0. Likewise I see it eliminating ratting or mining in 0.0 again because these prey would be too easy to kill and will quickly find the habitat unsupportive/undesireable.
|
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 16:14:00 -
[162]
Originally by: Kerfira You are completely ignoring the monotonous nature of ratting.....
A ratter who wants to make even decent money has to do several hours of ratting. If you make a mechanic that involves skill, then in essence you're back to the 'press scan button every 5 seconds' type of gameplay. If you do something automatic, then you're at the current 'local' type of gameplay.
If it is the 'press scan button' type of gameplay, then it'll seriously affect ratters. Ratting is almost as boring as mining, but you have to do it to make money. Right now, at least you can do semi-afk (browse the web, read an e-book, etc., while keeping an eye on local).
However, if whatever change you make increases the risks, even by a small bit, ratting as a way of making money goes dead! It already IS kinda dead as making money in L4 high-sec missions take WAY less attention, and make you almost the same money without risk.
Any change that significantly increases risk (to make the hunters happy), will make the hunted go to high-sec.
So, whenever you change things, you should consider this: If it involves increased attention, ratters will be negatively affected, and if it involves increased risk, ratters will be HUGELY negatively affected. Any negative effect will HAVE to be compensated by a change in reward balance 0.0/high-sec, or you'll simply invalidate ratting as a money making mechanic.
The funny thing is, if you just made that reward balance change now, it'd probably attract so many players back to 0.0 ratting that targets would be plentiful for the hunters, and you wouldn't even have to change local....
At the bottom of the problem, I think you'll find the reward imbalance as the fundamental problem. Local is just what most people blame for the lack of kills, but the real problem is that there are simply too few targets, caused by the reward imbalance....
Holy hell, that's one hell of an awesome post. Especially the bolded part. |
|
CCP Casqade
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 16:17:00 -
[163]
Originally by: Kerfira
If you make a mechanic that involves skill, then in essence you're back to the 'press scan button every 5 seconds' type of gameplay. If you do something automatic, then you're at the current 'local' type of gameplay.
Pressing a button every 5 seconds is not really what I call player skill. It is not really what I call fun either. See my quote:
Originally by: CCP Casqade I think the combinations and ways that this can be changed for the better are endless. We just need to find the proper balance between hunter and prey, risk vs reward as well as what is fun and what is not.
Originally by: Kerfira
However, if whatever change you make increases the risks, even by a small bit, ratting as a way of making money goes dead! It already IS kinda dead as making money in L4 high-sec missions take WAY less attention, and make you almost the same money without risk.
Any change that significantly increases risk (to make the hunters happy), will make the hunted go to high-sec.
So, whenever you change things, you should consider this: If it involves increased attention, ratters will be negatively affected, and if it involves increased risk, ratters will be HUGELY negatively affected. Any negative effect will HAVE to be compensated by a change in reward balance 0.0/high-sec, or you'll simply invalidate ratting as a money making mechanic.
See my quote again:
Originally by: CCP Casqade I think the combinations and ways that this can be changed for the better are endless. We just need to find the proper balance between hunter and prey, risk vs reward as well as what is fun and what is not.
Originally by: Kerfira
The funny thing is, if you just made that reward balance change now, it'd probably attract so many players back to 0.0 ratting that targets would be plentiful for the hunters, and you wouldn't even have to change local....
At the bottom of the problem, I think you'll find the reward imbalance as the fundamental problem. Local is just what most people blame for the lack of kills, but the real problem is that there are simply too few targets, caused by the reward imbalance....
Valid points and I agree with some of this.
Originally by: Lili Lu
Cascade, I am concerned that you keep mentioning putting local on delayed mode. Is this the only suggestion that you sound like you are already considering to introduce? What about sovereignty based intel systems, deployable intel systems, or shipboard intel systems?
You do not need to be concerned about this. The reason why I use "putting local in delayed mode" is because this what started the thread. The other examples you mention are all things that would be really cool to implement and I fully agree with you on this.
Originally by: Lili Lu
My preferred solutions would be a mix of sovereignty, temprorary deployables and shipboard/mod systems of intel. These things might be testable on SISI. However, you would have to have scheduled events to try to gather a defending alliances and an invading fleets to see how it might work with 0.0 space holding alliances and alliance ops.
These are all good ideas and the scheduled events you are talking about are things that we used when we were testing the new mechanics of factional warfare on Singularity.
Originally by: Lili Lu
Simply delaying local is not a solution.
Like I said earlier. We never said that it would be. It would be a part of a revamp with the goal to "find the proper balance between hunter and prey, risk vs reward as well as what is fun and what is not."
|
|
SunTzuCsu
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 16:20:00 -
[164]
Originally by: CCP Casqade
Originally by: Gai Servos YOu cannot test something at this scale on sisi.
I believe you can, for the expressed purpose of finding what out what or at least getting a rough idea of what would be lacking if local was put in delayed mode. Why don't you think so? And what do you suggest instead?
Because everyone and there dog sits in FD-, you know the test area. Everyone else on sisi, is so spread out as to render the whole test useless.
Originally by: CCP Casqade
Originally by: Malachon Draco Noone is going to be happy when local is gone. People who rat and mine wont be happy, because it would be insanity to rat or mine without local, the risk is too high.
You seem to assume that putting local into delayed mode would be a single change. I believe that it should be combined with new or changes to existing mechanics. This would make up for the loss of instant intel in local, but not be as powerful as local is in its current form. Depending on what changes or new features are combined with changes to local. This could potentially make the game more fun.
Fun? Travel is not fun as it stands now. So you want to make travel more tedious than it already is? Adding another time breaking element to the game, as if we don't have enough of them all ready.
I don't mean to be rude, but after seeing your collective attempt at cracking the nano nut, with a sledgehammer.... I'm not at all faithful, in any approach you may take as regards to local.
|
|
CCP Casqade
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 16:30:00 -
[165]
See new possibilities when there is change, solve problems, be creative and share your thoughts and ideas in a constructive manner. Be certain that when change comes to Eve Online you will play a part in its implementation.
|
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 16:40:00 -
[166]
Originally by: Gai Servos
Originally by: CCP Casqade While I encourage people to discuss balancing changes, new ideas, old ideas, and such. Please do not take a one sentence reply to a specific question, get upset and think that we will put local in delayed mode on Tranquility without thinking, testing and getting feedback first. And please do not flame and troll others for bringing their thoughts and ideas to the table.
This is my personal opinion on this:
Quote: We want to put local in 0.0 as a delayed mode channel so only people who talk in the channel are shown.
- We acknowledge that Local at its current form is a way too powerful intel tool. Example: CCP Oveur has expressed this concern during an interview with EVE-TV. I do not remember the date, it could have been last Alliance tournament or Fanfest.
Quote: We are also looking at other alternatives but if we find nothing better this will be put in testing at least.
- We have ideas on this front, but if that doesn't result in something concrete we have the option to address the problem the other way around:
1. Put local in delayed mode on Singularity for testing purposes. 2. Get feedback on what issues arises, pros and cons. 3. Build and improve tools to balance the issues, pros and cons, based on the feedback. 4. Put the new tools on Singularity for testing purposes. 5. Get feedback on issues, pros and cons. 6. See point 3. 7. Weigh the old system against the new system - See what we learned and how we can continue.
YOu cannot test something at this scale on sisi.
hehehe wanna bet?
put armageddon day o the test server and we'll talk again |
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 16:43:00 -
[167]
Originally by: CCP Casqade This could potentially make the game more fun.
Ideas that come to mind are: Involve player skill (not skill points) on gathering intel of what is in local, give smaller ships, smaller gangs or cloakers an upper hand to avoid bigger fleets and remain undetected while in the same system.
I don't see how it makes it 'more fun'. Coming from a low-sec pilot, where you as a rule have non-empty locals, local is the way of (not with certainity) determining wether that ship is bait for his 15 docked friends, wether you're in someone else's neighboorhood, wether a anti-pirate gang decided to blob you, and finally, helps determine what you're up against.
Scanner, as it is, particularly in low-sec (with POS-ed/etc ships on scan nearly all the time) and with the poliferation of the very powerful cloaking recons, not a good tool. Particularly the worrying part is cloaking recons; with local changes, there is no way of knowing wether a 10-man recon gang is going to murder you when you engage that bait ship or not / etc.
Conversely, blobbing with recons becomes the best way to PVP. Nobody can scout you, and you lose virtually no EW / range capability over combat recons, enabling you to engage what you want, when you want, and have a huge amount of battlefield control due to all the EW. Local changes are a massive buff to these ships (which are already, for all practical purposes, way better/more useful then HACs to start with - to compare them to something in their class). I admit I use local for figuring out we're facing ships like Falcons (I set all Falcon pilots who're scouted/encountered on negative standings personally) because failing to do so would be certain death for a small gang.
Without a major scanner overhaul: auto-update for starters, because spamming it is silly and stupid), some way of at least identifying friendly and unpiloted ships on scanner and (preferably) who they're piloted by, we're losing a very important information tool.
That said, cloaky recons need a massive overhaul (read: massive nerf) if local changes happen, because they'd be overpowered to hell and back. Cloaking gangs are powerful now, but at least you can get a bit of info that something is out there thanks to local.
|
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 16:49:00 -
[168]
Originally by: CCP Casqade See new possibilities when there is change, solve problems, be creative and share your thoughts and ideas in a constructive manner. Be certain that when change comes to Eve Online you will play a part in its implementation.
So to translate your throwing every and any random thought you have out their and are hoping or expecting the experienced player base to fine tune and whittle it down into a reasonable and programmable product?.
Ok here is one:
The player base you have at the moment joined and stay with eve because of the way things are on tq as we speak so its kinda daft to radically change them do you not think, especially considering how much poor feed back you have received?. |
Lili Lu
Purveyors of Uber Research Valuables and Ships
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 17:02:00 -
[169]
Yeah, if in conquerable 0.0 sovereignty allowed essentially a "local" record of who jumped through a gate into your system the roaming recon gang would be no stronger than it is now. However in low sec or NPC 0.0 cov ops cloaked recons would rule.
Possible compensating mechanisms for these areas of space might be deployable devices like a bubble that provide intel without constant mashing. Alternately, the gates are concord structures correct? even if concord is not policing them in 0.0 and only marginally policing them in low sec, how about some skill tree involving that under-used attribute charisma and standings. This new set of social skills would allow quicker info or varying levels of access to concord info on gate fires and thus who is in a system. And for NPC 0.0 maybe similar charisma based skills with pirate faction standings to gain intel there.
On a related issue - In conjunction with a change in local there would have to be a change with cloaks. Cloaking poacher ratting ravens are a problem. One could never control logoffski(it is a player action), although one could allow the logged off ship to be scanned for a longer period than one minute after logging off. However, cloaks on BS and larger just seem somewhat rediculous. Make them use a butt-laod of some fuel or have a time limit or something that limits/discourages their use. |
Beowulf Scheafer
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 17:32:00 -
[170]
i think theese changes suck balls. i need the local for both hunting AND avoid beeing hunted down equaly. therefore theese changes are wrong, and wrong in a way i mustn't adapt, sorry. |
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 17:37:00 -
[171]
To be fair no other mmorpg gives you such intel in PvP.
You've all gone soft. |
Murina
The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 17:43:00 -
[172]
Edited by: Murina on 26/10/2008 17:46:41
Originally by: MotherMoon To be fair no other mmorpg gives you such intel in PvP.
You've all gone soft.
Other mmorpg's have instances and or dirty great signs over their heads showing exactly where you are dude.
Although tbh i could not care either way as killing ppl is down to team work and personal piloting skill more than any other factor. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 17:45:00 -
[173]
Originally by: CCP Casqade See new possibilities when there is change, solve problems, be creative and share your thoughts and ideas in a constructive manner. Be certain that when change comes to Eve Online you will play a part in its implementation.
Agreed. Alot of the player base IS hoping for local to be removed and I hope you won't give in to these whine threads on this one. |
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 17:48:00 -
[174]
Originally by: Murina
Originally by: MotherMoon To be fair no other mmorpg gives you such intel in PvP.
You've all gone soft.
Other mmorpg's have instances and or dirty great signs over their heads showing exactly where you are dude.
you mean like the overview in eve? pointing out exactly where you are? I'm talking about in a large area. Hell you don't even have to actully see anything in eve, it's all list with a pretty wallpaper. I mean I love eve, and it's graphics to death, but you could play eve with nothing but the overview.
you don't get a list of every player that is within a large area of you. |
Perry
Amarr The X-Trading Company Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 17:49:00 -
[175]
How about...
Local Pod Probe (fits into Recon Probe Launcher) - analyzes the current System for active Pod-Transmitters - 15seconds needed to provide a list of players in this system
Local Pod Scanner Array (POS Module) - needs Sov 1 - changes Local from delayed to instant mode for every pilot in same ally (or for all players, if former doesnt work) |
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 17:56:00 -
[176]
Well if you want to remove local you could add a scanner with a large range in the player UI where hostiles could be shown has red dots. Something like a FOF system. At least you could see if a hostile was in system and their direction. Same for the hunters of course.
Also dont forget to change how cloacking works at the moment.
|
Niedar
MASS
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:04:00 -
[177]
I don't think anything more needs to be said then don't fix what isn't broken, and local isn't broken. |
Beowulf Scheafer
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:12:00 -
[178]
Originally by: CCP Casqade This could potentially make the game more fun.
it could very well be the complete opposite. It's a two-edged sword you are wielding there |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:14:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Niedar I don't think anything more needs to be said then don't fix what isn't broken, and local isn't broken.
It is broken. Has been broken. Just because something has been in a certain way for a long time doesn't make it not broken. |
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:20:00 -
[180]
Edited by: Crackzilla on 26/10/2008 18:22:19 One of the issues are cloakers as mentioned. What if the normal ship scanner or probers could see cloaked ships? So cloakers do not show on overview or on grid. But directional scan and probes work. For probes a cloak would effectively give the ship a 1% sig radius.
So a probe could be used to work out where the cloaker is. So a 20au probe might get you within 1au, then a 5au probe might give you a radius of thousands of km. Then directional scan to home in on the target. Then finally if the range is closed to 2k m will the cloaker be unveiled.
This way a cloak wouldn't buy invulnerability but time.
|
|
Ecky X
Shadow Company
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:24:00 -
[181]
I support CCP Casqade et al in their quest to fix local. There is a solution that will make everyone happier. Start throwing changes on Sisi and let us test them out! |
Thargat
Caldari North Star Networks Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:35:00 -
[182]
AWESOME. I have wished for this since Revelations rolled out and local was borked for several hours. Fun an exciting. It will also rid of us of applications such as those used by a few large "unnamed" alliances and corps whose members have already been in this thread posting about their concerns.
I can understand however, some of the worries voiced by some ppl in this thread. There's been PLENTY of posts on the forums during the years and people have added numerous smart solutions to the problems that arise if local is removed.
Extending scanning in various ways is a good way to improve intel gathering without local but a special solution explained in a thread I was following a few years back comes to mind (though I can't be arsed to go and find that thread so I'll try to summerize).
* Activating your scanner should show up in local somehow, like a "unknown" scan signal, possibly containing the scanning ships sensor type instead of character name and corp/alliance. So you either sit quiet and keep your scanner offline, or you scan and risk detection.
* Scanresults, range and direction should be tied to: sigradius, sensorstrength (if the target ship is activly scanning), active modules (or possibly even online modules). IE, by turning everything OFF you reduce the chance of being detected but it will also mean that you're vulnerable IF something happens.
* System scanning arrays should function likewise. If there's an active array the non friendlies should be notified of this at first "scan" from the array. Friendly ships in the system should be able to get the information from the array broadcasted to them at a cost (possibly even a module slot). |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:40:00 -
[183]
Originally by: DeadDuck Have you guys heard of Login Traps ??? Yes, is metagaming but people do it all the time... Have people thought about what will happen with this new feature and the will of people at "win at all cost" ???
Login trap has always been a valid ambush tactic. The shade of metagaming is a side effect of the perfect and free intel provided by Local.
If you don't want to be ambushed you can always stay docked. |
K'Ji
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:46:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Agreed. Alot of the player base IS hoping for local to be removed and I hope you won't give in to these whine threads on this one.
Also alot of the player base is not hoping for local to be removed and I hope they won't give in, to those whiners wanting that change in this thread. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 18:57:00 -
[185]
Originally by: K'Ji
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Agreed. Alot of the player base IS hoping for local to be removed and I hope you won't give in to these whine threads on this one.
Also alot of the player base is not hoping for local to be removed and I hope they won't give in, to those whiners wanting that change in this thread.
Why? Because it would remove the need to login trap people to hide your numbers and to not get scouted? Removing local will give MORE pvp to the people and handling fleets will require better scouts. Also more fun to scout for that matter then just looking at local and saying "clear" or "we are boned, log off". ----------------------------------------- [Video] Tempest of Change |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:00:00 -
[186]
Originally by: DeadDuck Well if you want to remove local you could add a scanner with a large range in the player UI where hostiles could be shown has red dots. Something like a FOF system. At least you could see if a hostile was in system and their direction. Same for the hunters of course.
As long as this new scanner has a range that is not infinite (as is the current Local).
Ideally the quality of intel from the new scanner would improve with range. For example, at the current limit of 13AU the best you'd get is a list of occupied ships by size (cap/bs/cruiser/frigate), and the friendly markers. Closer in, you'd get the type of ship, low resolution location vectors, and, finally, the names/alliances/corps with the corresponding standing markers.
It would be nice if the scanner resolution ranges would be modified by ship type and environmental factors. ...
|
K'Ji
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:02:00 -
[187]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: K'Ji
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Agreed. Alot of the player base IS hoping for local to be removed and I hope you won't give in to these whine threads on this one.
Also alot of the player base is not hoping for local to be removed and I hope they won't give in, to those whiners wanting that change in this thread.
Why? Because it would remove the need to login trap people to hide your numbers and to not get scouted? Removing local will give MORE pvp to the people and handling fleets will require better scouts. Also more fun to scout for that matter then just looking at local and saying "clear" or "we are boned, log off".
Why? Because you're frightened of a login trap, without local or cloaks you'll be hiding your numbers anyway and not get scouted. Removing local will give LESS PvP to the people and handling fleets will require more recons. Alsao less fun to move about and travel for that matter, as time is an issue, so seeing local is "clear" means my times not boned and I get to log off when I want.
|
lecrotta
lecrotta Corp
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:04:00 -
[188]
Edited by: lecrotta on 26/10/2008 19:04:35
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: K'Ji
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Agreed. Alot of the player base IS hoping for local to be removed and I hope you won't give in to these whine threads on this one.
Also alot of the player base is not hoping for local to be removed and I hope they won't give in, to those whiners wanting that change in this thread.
Why? Because it would remove the need to login trap people to hide your numbers and to not get scouted? Removing local will give MORE pvp to the people and handling fleets will require better scouts. Also more fun to scout for that matter then just looking at local and saying "clear" or "we are boned, log off".
So instead of looking in local the scout will report and then they will be "clear" or need to "log off".
I do not care either way about local, but this is another example of trying to change the game and thinking it will change human nature, i saw similar comments about nano causing players to "run away" or "not engage" and other Muppets claiming a nerf would change things but as with this a nerf and others it will not change personality types or how they choose to play.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:08:00 -
[189]
Originally by: K'Ji
Why? Because you're frightened of a login trap, without local or cloaks you'll be hiding your numbers anyway and not get scouted. Removing local will give LESS PvP to the people and handling fleets will require more recons. Alsao less fun to move about and travel for that matter, as time is an issue, so seeing local is "clear" means my times not boned and I get to log off when I want.
You think just because you'll get less immediate intel in a system that people will roam around less without a huge blob? You're wrong. You're forgetting that it is not only you that has a hard time seeing the enemy, it also works the other way around. The changes will promote people to roam around instead of sitting in their stations. People won't resort to login traps because local won't instantly give them away. Cloaks will work as ambush because you will not see them before they decloak. This means more pvp for recons infiltrating hostile areas. Today as soon as there is someone red in local you don't rat = no pvp for anyone = boring. The removal of local + a new type of system scanner is just what eve needs and they will probably do it because they have been talking about it for a long time now. |
Beowulf Scheafer
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:09:00 -
[190]
Edited by: Beowulf Scheafer on 26/10/2008 19:14:31
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
It is broken. Has been broken. Just because something has been in a certain way for a long time doesn't make it not broken.
local has been ingame like this from day ONE on, it is not broken, it is meant to be just like that from the very beginning...
people complaining in here removing local will increase the pvp. is say it is the other way round. as it is, you can jump into a system, have a short look and swiftly realize whether there are targets, enemies, opponents (whatever names you give thoose you want to kill for certain reasons)or not. if so -> probes, if not -> move on to the next system. i think alot of people will not care to scan and probe each and every system to counter the nerftimer. therefore i predict some people will simply not pvp anymore.
|
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:09:00 -
[191]
Originally by: lecrotta
So instead of looking in local the scout will report and then they will be "clear" or need to "log off".
That's certainly not how it will work because scanners unlike local has FINITE range. This means you can hide a HUGE fleet in one corner of the system and if it is not scouted they will not be seen. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:10:00 -
[192]
Originally by: Beowulf Scheafer
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
It is broken. Has been broken. Just because something has been in a certain way for a long time doesn't make it not broken.
local has been ingame like this from day ONE on, it is not broken, it is meant to be just like that from the very beginning...
In the beginning eve wasnt overcrowded. Local made it easier to just dismiss a system as empty while looking for action. Today eve is CROWDED, anywhere you go there are people around. Local has become an overpowered scouting tool that is not needed anymore to ensure action. |
Beowulf Scheafer
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:18:00 -
[193]
a space game looking like a shadowrun game is just wrong, no doubt on that one. eve is far overcrowded. but removing the local chat might be the wrong way to make people feel like space again. the easier solution might be to simply add more space, isn't it?
|
K'Ji
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:20:00 -
[194]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
You think just because you'll get less immediate intel in a system that people will roam around less without a huge blob? You're wrong. You're forgetting that it is not only you that has a hard time seeing the enemy, it also works the other way around. The changes will promote people to roam around instead of sitting in their stations. People won't resort to login traps because local won't instantly give them away. Cloaks will work as ambush because you will not see them before they decloak. This means more pvp for recons infiltrating hostile areas. Today as soon as there is someone red in local you don't rat = no pvp for anyone = boring. The removal of local + a new type of system scanner is just what eve needs and they will probably do it because they have been talking about it for a long time now.
You think just because you'll get less intel in a system that people will roam around more without a hugh blob? You're wrong. You're forgetting that because people are having a hard timing seeing anyone, as you do, the changes will promote the blob to roam around, instead of smaller gangs. People won't resort to login traps, because the blob will give anyone away almost instantly. Cloaks will work as an ambush, because if this change makes it through they will be overpowered. Without local people won't rat = no PvP for anyone = boring. The removal of local + a new type of system scanner is just what eve doesn't need, but they will probably do it, as whiners like you have been talking about it for a long time now.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:30:00 -
[195]
Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 26/10/2008 19:31:21
Originally by: K'Ji Without local people won't rat = no PvP for anyone = boring.
People won't rat without a local? Haha. This just shows how you people are used to easy mode. You're still invincible if you are aligned and keep an eye on your scanner (and recons take several seconds to lock you even if they decloak right next to you). Oh no, you can't simply watch local only now, how dare they nerf the easy mode ratting.
Both you and I know that removing local will only hit the lazy/unskilled players. ----------------------------------------- [Video] Tempest of Change |
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:43:00 -
[196]
To CCP: Before you thrown wild ideas about nerfing local out there, I would suggest you already work on the alternatives before you spend too much time on it. If the alternatives are not viable, you are wasting your time, and possibly ruining the game if you touch local.
Theoretically I could certainly see a viable alternative to local. It would involve a permanent radar on your screen updating you on ships in scanrange, probably including some sort of indication of covert ships (say an 'anomaly' on the scanner). Scanrange would need to be significantly bigger than 14 AU though, and would require an IFF element as well. I could see a system where you have frigs with a 10 AU scan/radar range, cruisers 20, battleships 40, carriers 80AU. Adds some variety and possibility of surprise while still making living in 0.0 possible.
But the main things I worry about is that you are gonna throw something half-assed out there, or that you find a solution that is so intensive in terms of server resources that it will increase lag in fleetbattles. And any decent solution would probably be so similar in eventual effect as the current local channel, so even if you find that perfect mix, I am not sure that it would actually really improve the game.
Because the bottomline is, if you want to replace local with something else, that something else needs to be very close to as good as local in terms of being able to find hostiles, otherwise you are making life in 0.0 pretty much irrelevant because its rewards would not live up to the risk. But if you succeed in that, what will you have changed really for the game?
|
Malachon Draco
eXceed Inc. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 19:45:00 -
[197]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Edited by: Lyria Skydancer on 26/10/2008 19:31:21
Originally by: K'Ji Without local people won't rat = no PvP for anyone = boring.
People won't rat without a local? Haha. This just shows how you people are used to easy mode. You're still invincible if you are aligned and keep an eye on your scanner (and recons take several seconds to lock you even if they decloak right next to you). Oh no, you can't simply watch local only now, how dare they nerf the easy mode ratting.
Both you and I know that removing local will only hit the lazy/unskilled players.
Yes, because its impossible that a cloaked ship would just bump you to make you not warp, that has never happened before. Or that a cloaked dictor is waiting for you in the next belt.
All you need is a cloaked falcon to do the initial tackling. Close with ratting BS, ram it to stop it from warping, jam and scramble it and your buddies will finish it off.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 20:01:00 -
[198]
Originally by: Malachon Draco To CCP: Before you thrown wild ideas about nerfing local out there, I would suggest you already work on the alternatives before you spend too much time on it. If the alternatives are not viable, you are wasting your time, and possibly ruining the game if you touch local.
Theoretically I could certainly see a viable alternative to local. It would involve a permanent radar on your screen updating you on ships in scanrange, probably including some sort of indication of covert ships (say an 'anomaly' on the scanner). Scanrange would need to be significantly bigger than 14 AU though, and would require an IFF element as well. I could see a system where you have frigs with a 10 AU scan/radar range, cruisers 20, battleships 40, carriers 80AU. Adds some variety and possibility of surprise while still making living in 0.0 possible.
But the main things I worry about is that you are gonna throw something half-assed out there, or that you find a solution that is so intensive in terms of server resources that it will increase lag in fleetbattles. And any decent solution would probably be so similar in eventual effect as the current local channel, so even if you find that perfect mix, I am not sure that it would actually really improve the game.
Because the bottomline is, if you want to replace local with something else, that something else needs to be very close to as good as local in terms of being able to find hostiles, otherwise you are making life in 0.0 pretty much irrelevant because its rewards would not live up to the risk. But if you succeed in that, what will you have changed really for the game?
Nice strawman.
The amazing thing about this thread (and all threads like this one) is that no matter how many times or how clear the main intent is stated and restated, it will be ignored in the 'arguments' against. ...
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 20:10:00 -
[199]
Originally by: Malachon Draco
Yes, because its impossible that a cloaked ship would just bump you to make you not warp, that has never happened before. Or that a cloaked dictor is waiting for you in the next belt.
All you need is a cloaked falcon to do the initial tackling. Close with ratting BS, ram it to stop it from warping, jam and scramble it and your buddies will finish it off.
All recons are not great bumpers, it's not 100% success tactic and if you're good at it whooptidoo. So there might be a slight risk that you might get bumped while you're ratting. Tbh if you can't take that risk then you don't belong in 0.0. |
Xavier Zedicus
Zardoz Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 21:18:00 -
[200]
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.
maybe you should just always have a defensive gang set up, that way it would actually require DEFENSE rather than defensive-style countering. |
|
Evan Batarr
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 21:52:00 -
[201]
Edited by: Evan Batarr on 26/10/2008 21:52:55
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer Today eve is CROWDED, anywhere you go there are people around. Local has become an overpowered scouting tool that is not needed anymore to ensure action.
ROFL
Where do you live? Jita?? I live in 0.0 most of the time and 90% of the area my alliance has sov in is EMPTY. Completely. Although we have over 1000 members and the area we inhabit is not that big. I don't think removing the current local is a good idea - even if it comes along with changes to the scanner mechanics. It is hard enough to make some ISK in 0.0 as it is now. If a new mechanic isn't very, very well balanced (and to be honest I doubt CCP is able to accomplish that - I just need to look at the upcoming changes and the many, many imbalances IG that REALLY need fixing) the result will be that 0.0 will be even emptier as it is now. Better not touch the local - the result could be devastating for EVE. |
SO Chong
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 22:05:00 -
[202]
I do Agree there is somethign we need to do against local. It is a no need for scanner thing that cuts out the element of suprise....BUT!
This will make a lot of things in 0.0 to hard or even in empire.
In 0.0 you can never jump in jumpfreighters or roquals. They have no defence and a covert ops ship can be your death. This is because if you jump to a jumpbeacon at a pos or a cyno field that everyone can see in the overview...they know where to get you. So moving capitals around without a complete fleet to cover is almost impossible.
Cloakers will be overpowered. I can't wait to get my Widow out if this happens. You can grief the hell out of everyone when you have a covert ops that will get close, scram and web and the widow jams you and kills you.
Empire wars the same. Now you could see when a wartarget was in system. Now a wardec will really criplle your corp. You can't do anything without support.
I think the risk will go up thus far that people will loose interest in doing war decs are living in 0.0
I would give it a try to live there, but after loosing several ships during ratting or mining or just treaveling, i would prolly head back to empire and do missons. A whole lot safer and will cost a lot less.
I think loosing local completely will really be a too big of a difference from the current situation.
|
Amoun Ra
Caldari Soulless Armada
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 22:14:00 -
[203]
I think removing local as an intel tool is an interesting idea simply because it make the game more exciting. Granted it makes life harder for ratters and miners but i like to think of it as eve getting harder as it grows which would make it more challenging thus more fun.
Think of it as a single player game level 1 you have the tutorial it shows you how to hold a gun point it and pull the trigger level 2 teaches you how to fire by shooting at a target that doesn't fire back level 30 all hell breaks loose and you have to rely on your acquired skills to win. EVE offers the same you have noob systems where ganking is not even allowed you have high sec space where you can safely run level 4 missions and earn a decent amount of isk and then you have low sec and 0.0 where all hell breaks loose, only difference is you choose the level of difficulty you wish to play.
I am not 100% sure about the local removal idea maybe its good maybe it will be a very bad idea but i am willing to give the devs a chance to figure out how to make it work and be fun then we can test it and then we can discuss with them any concerns regarding their implementation.
What i really don't like is for eve to become stale and boring with no change and no challenges. |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 22:16:00 -
[204]
Originally by: SO Chong I do Agree there is somethign we need to do against local. It is a no need for scanner thing that cuts out the element of suprise....BUT!
This will make a lot of things in 0.0 to hard or even in empire.
In 0.0 you can never jump in jumpfreighters or roquals. They have no defence and a covert ops ship can be your death. This is because if you jump to a jumpbeacon at a pos or a cyno field that everyone can see in the overview...they know where to get you. So moving capitals around without a complete fleet to cover is almost impossible.
Cloakers will be overpowered. I can't wait to get my Widow out if this happens. You can grief the hell out of everyone when you have a covert ops that will get close, scram and web and the widow jams you and kills you.
Empire wars the same. Now you could see when a wartarget was in system. Now a wardec will really criplle your corp. You can't do anything without support.
I think the risk will go up thus far that people will loose interest in doing war decs are living in 0.0
I would give it a try to live there, but after loosing several ships during ratting or mining or just treaveling, i would prolly head back to empire and do missons. A whole lot safer and will cost a lot less.
I think loosing local completely will really be a too big of a difference from the current situation.
That can be acomplished by CCP introducign another 2 types of ship.
A new role is HIDE other ships from scanners. Not absolute like cloak buit make harder to probe. That woudl make hiding rorquals and etc possible
And AWACS ships, ships with special roles and capabilities to detect info from people in system and even MAYBE some very small capability towards neighbor systems...
Those would add more depth in the game and enjoy this new face of the game. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
DeadDuck
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 22:19:00 -
[205]
With local being removed cloaking has to change.
Increase the consumption of CAP the cloaking requires. Specialized cloakers can stay cloaked for a while but not specialized cloackers will only be capable of cloack for a small amount of time. When the cap is over the ships uncloaks, and can only cloak after their cap reaches a predetermined level (80% cap for example).
________________ God is my Wingman |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 22:56:00 -
[206]
Originally by: Evan Batarr
Where do you live? Jita??
The issue is not that it is too dangerous to rat in 0.0, the problem is that it is too easy to make money without any risk in high sec. The risk vs reward is broken in high sec, not in 0.0. Don't make the local issue about something it is not. Remove local and nerf high sec money making. There ya go. ----------------------------------------- [Video] The Cruise |
SunTzuCsu
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 22:59:00 -
[207]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Evan Batarr
Where do you live? Jita??
The issue is not that it is too dangerous to rat in 0.0, the problem is that it is too easy to make money without any risk in high sec. The risk vs reward is broken in high sec, not in 0.0. Don't make the local issue about something it is not. Remove local and nerf high sec money making. There ya go.
erm, what?
So local should be nerfed, because it's too easy to make money in hi-sec? WTF has that got to do with local?
Your trolling just derailed.
|
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 23:01:00 -
[208]
Originally by: SunTzuCsu
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Evan Batarr
Where do you live? Jita??
The issue is not that it is too dangerous to rat in 0.0, the problem is that it is too easy to make money without any risk in high sec. The risk vs reward is broken in high sec, not in 0.0. Don't make the local issue about something it is not. Remove local and nerf high sec money making. There ya go.
erm, what?
So local should be nerfed, because it's too easy to make money in hi-sec? WTF has that got to do with local?
Your trolling just derailed.
huh? No, evan claimed that nerfing local is bad because it is dangerous enough already ratting in 0.0 compared to making money in high sec. Local needs nerfed, end of story. ----------------------------------------- [Video] The Cruise |
Rhadamantine
Game Community
|
Posted - 2008.10.26 23:29:00 -
[209]
Edited by: Rhadamantine on 26/10/2008 23:33:48
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
huh? No, evan claimed that nerfing local is bad because it is dangerous enough already ratting in 0.0 compared to making money in high sec. Local needs nerfed, end of story.
Actually I read it, that after you claimed eve was overcrowded and that Local has become an overpowered scouting tool. Evan pointed out that 0.0 is actually empty most of the time. Hence the question... "Where do you live? Jita??"
He then went on to say, why he didn't want local nerfing, regarding ratting etc.
You should really read the post right first.
The local nerf will only affect lo-sec and 0.0, unless you have a war dec ofc. So statements regarding overcrowding, are bound to get replies, as they don't sit well with the topic at hand.
Edit: Additional quote. |
Lyria Skydancer
Amarr Developmental Neogenics Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 00:18:00 -
[210]
Originally by: Rhadamantine Edited by: Rhadamantine on 26/10/2008 23:33:48
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
huh? No, evan claimed that nerfing local is bad because it is dangerous enough already ratting in 0.0 compared to making money in high sec. Local needs nerfed, end of story.
Actually I read it, that after you claimed eve was overcrowded and that Local has become an overpowered scouting tool. Evan pointed out that 0.0 is actually empty most of the time. Hence the question... "Where do you live? Jita??"
He then went on to say, why he didn't want local nerfing, regarding ratting etc.
You should really read the post right first.
The local nerf will only affect lo-sec and 0.0, unless you have a war dec ofc. So statements regarding overcrowding, are bound to get replies, as they don't sit well with the topic at hand.
Edit: Additional quote.
Alot of low sec areas and 0.0 systems are not empty at all. |
|
Lysander Kaldenn
Viper Intel Squad Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 00:41:00 -
[211]
Poor Isk farmers, scream louder please.
This would be an amazing boost for small gang/solo pvp. I pray that ccp does this. I love when people post saying "pvpers" like its a negative thing. If you don't like pvp go to empire please. Stop cloaking and ratting in the belts. Give up a decent fight once in your life.
|
Jack Gilligan
Caldari THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 00:47:00 -
[212]
Originally by: CCP Casqade While I encourage people to discuss balancing changes, new ideas, old ideas, and such. Please do not take a one sentence reply to a specific question, get upset and think that we will put local in delayed mode on Tranquility without thinking, testing and getting feedback first. And please do not flame and troll others for bringing their thoughts and ideas to the table.
Why shouldn't we panic? You guys are ramming the speed changes (and the massive collateral damage to lots of other things that weren't at all related to HACS moving at ludicrous speed) and haven't listened to one damn bit of feedback.
Simply put making this change to local in 0.0 will make 0.0 space impossible to defend from gangs. Local should show neutrals and hostiles at least to the members of a sov holding alliance.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 01:33:00 -
[213]
Originally by: Jack Gilligan ...You guys are ramming the speed changes ... and haven't listened to one damn bit of feedback.
Hey Jack "Wildman" Gilligan, seen this thread? Simply put you are not very well informed. ...
|
Evan Batarr
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 01:53:00 -
[214]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Originally by: Rhadamantine Edited by: Rhadamantine on 26/10/2008 23:33:48
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
huh? No, evan claimed that nerfing local is bad because it is dangerous enough already ratting in 0.0 compared to making money in high sec. Local needs nerfed, end of story.
Actually I read it, that after you claimed eve was overcrowded and that Local has become an overpowered scouting tool. Evan pointed out that 0.0 is actually empty most of the time. Hence the question... "Where do you live? Jita??"
He then went on to say, why he didn't want local nerfing, regarding ratting etc.
You should really read the post right first.
The local nerf will only affect lo-sec and 0.0, unless you have a war dec ofc. So statements regarding overcrowding, are bound to get replies, as they don't sit well with the topic at hand.
Edit: Additional quote.
Alot of low sec areas and 0.0 systems are not empty at all.
You really must live in Jita.
Plz do us all a favor - stop posting. Especially about things you obviously have not the slightest clue about.
|
Clavius XIV
Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 02:46:00 -
[215]
Originally by: Lyria Skydancer
Both you and I know that removing local will only hit the lazy/unskilled players.
Skilled players know how to min/max. They know how to make ISK with the least effort to fund their PvP (or industry if that is their thing).
Fleet style combat will not be seriously impacted, in fact it may improve.
But solo isk making in 0.0 will not be worthwhile compared to other options. Smart players in 0.0 won't be in the belts, they will just be tending their POSes and making isk with empire alts, just coming out for fleet fights when POS are threatened.
Personally I prefer a 0.0 that is actually populated and is a clone of empire except you can shoot anyone rather than a wasteland where you could go months without getting a decent non-fleet fight.
Decent non-gank fights happen when both pilots go in thinking they can win. Without reasonable intel and the ability to act on it before it is too late you just get more ganks and gate camping.
I do kind of like the idea proposed earlier in the thread with massive belts with random warp ins. Add debris clouds to prevent cloaking in belts, and then you might have the start of something interesting.
|
Jukhta Mein
Domini Umbrus Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 03:21:00 -
[216]
It's a fine change that would make things more exciting both ways, as long as they implement other intel-gathering mechanisms. For example, a ship that can be deployed to scan the nearest 5 systems. Intel would then flow back to HQ which decides what forces to deploy where. I think this is suggested in ambulation as well. |
Evan Batarr
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 05:24:00 -
[217]
Originally by: Jukhta Mein It's a fine change that would make things more exciting both ways, as long as they implement other intel-gathering mechanisms. For example, a ship that can be deployed to scan the nearest 5 systems. Intel would then flow back to HQ which decides what forces to deploy where. I think this is suggested in ambulation as well.
LOL. It's the same dumb idea as having scouts on each and every gate.
Tha main problem is not the defense of a 0.0 area against small or big gangs - the problem is how people make their living in 0.0. The risk vs. reward in 0.0 is already broken compared to Empire so if people have to take only slightly more risk they will just leave 0.0 for most of the time. Only clone-jumping back if needed. And 0.0 is already a wasteland in most areas. And the guys you get to gank now will be the first ones that leave.
|
Tchu
Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 05:25:00 -
[218]
Local should be removed. |
Emeline Cabernet
Amarr Amarr Border Defense Consortium Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 06:56:00 -
[219]
All and everyone wil then jump into recons. Sounds like alot fun.
|
Borgholio
Minmatar Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 07:05:00 -
[220]
I believe that CCP should take a cue from popular Sci-Fi. You never would expect a Star Destroyer to jump into a system and have the captain say "We found the Rebel base, Lord Vader. We see 40 Rebel pilots in local chat".
I think it would add to the game if local were indeed removed as a source of intel, but that something were added to make up for it, such as long range sensors. A small scanner window that you can place on your screen (or integrate into your overview). This scanner can not only automatically scan for shiptypes within a certain distance, but can also receive IFF signals from the entire system. That way it combines the current "click every 5 seconds" scanner, as well as giving you hard numbers as to how many hostiles / neutrals / friendlies are in system.
This system would replace local completely, but give people good intel without being overpowered. The only downside is that you won't know who is in the system while you're docked. In that case, I would suggest that the system-wide IFF part of the scanner should remain operational even when docked...but of course the shiptype scanner should be unavailable. |
|
Calvin Firenze
Minmatar Plundering Penguins Anarchy.
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 10:11:00 -
[221]
Edited by: Calvin Firenze on 27/10/2008 10:14:29 Jesus Christ CCP, is Barack Obama on your Dev team? I haven't heard this much harmful change proposed since he opened his mouth.
/end tasteless political joke
In all seriousness, I am completely against this change. What are we solo pvpers to do in 0.0 and lowsec now that you'll need a specialized scanning ship to find something to kill? I sure as **** can't kill something in a Cheetah or whatever the gallente one is that I can fly now unless its a shuttle. Sure, its a game focused on teamwork but occasionally people like to relax with some music on or whatever and do their own thing.
If its not broken, please don't fix it.
The main problem with the change is that it takes the fun out of playing eve and makes it more like work. Folks can flame me and call me a whiner all they want, but half the fun of pvp/solo pvp is catching someone not paying attention in the belts or wherever they are. Now we'll have to scan every system we come through if we want a kill. Fun.
I know that what your customers think about changes like this don't matter at all to you, if you have your mind set on something you'll make the change anyways, customers be damned. Sometimes its like Eve players are altar boys and CCP are catholic priests. Whether we like it or not, you're gonna give it to us.
Yes, CCP will lose 2 accounts from me if this goes into effect.
Edit: Yes, I'm drunk.
|
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 10:21:00 -
[222]
Originally by: Lysander Kaldenn Poor Isk farmers, scream louder please.
This would be an amazing boost for small gang/solo pvp. I pray that ccp does this. I love when people post saying "pvpers" like its a negative thing. If you don't like pvp go to empire please. Stop cloaking and ratting in the belts. Give up a decent fight once in your life.
Yes, I too like to PvP in a PvE ship. Rapier pilots rejoice! The land of milk, honey and defenceless Hulks is but a step away! |
Seishomaru
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 10:45:00 -
[223]
Originally by: Karina Bellac
Originally by: Lysander Kaldenn Poor Isk farmers, scream louder please.
This would be an amazing boost for small gang/solo pvp. I pray that ccp does this. I love when people post saying "pvpers" like its a negative thing. If you don't like pvp go to empire please. Stop cloaking and ratting in the belts. Give up a decent fight once in your life.
Yes, I too like to PvP in a PvE ship. Rapier pilots rejoice! The land of milk, honey and defenceless Hulks is but a step away!
You know that a rapier don't have the DPS to kill a properly tanked hulk... don't you?
|
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 10:57:00 -
[224]
Originally by: Seishomaru
Originally by: Karina Bellac
Originally by: Lysander Kaldenn Poor Isk farmers, scream louder please.
This would be an amazing boost for small gang/solo pvp. I pray that ccp does this. I love when people post saying "pvpers" like its a negative thing. If you don't like pvp go to empire please. Stop cloaking and ratting in the belts. Give up a decent fight once in your life.
Yes, I too like to PvP in a PvE ship. Rapier pilots rejoice! The land of milk, honey and defenceless Hulks is but a step away!
You know that a rapier don't have the DPS to kill a properly tanked hulk... don't you?
That's a pretty awesome counterargument you've got there. No, I can't see any flaws in... oh wait, maybe you heard of the concept of a 'gang'. A 'gang', if you will, who can sit cloaked in the next system, completely undetected, until such a time as the additional DPS they have is needed.
You see, you're arguing for what is technically a perfectly reasonable change to the game. What you're not seeing is that once you get said change, you ain't gonna find **** to kill. Because they won't be there, they'll be up in empire on a missioning alt. |
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 11:01:00 -
[225]
A question I do have:
Why should only 0.0 local be changed? |
Digital Anarchist
THE INTERNET.
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 11:03:00 -
[226]
Finally, a change that's good for gameplay :)
/me polishes his bomber/recon squads :)
Thank you, CCP! ------------------------ This space for rent |
Snow Banshee
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 11:03:00 -
[227]
Edited by: Snow Banshee on 27/10/2008 11:03:36 Frankly i like the idea. Those ratters that fear to be nerfed dont understand how much if boost non pvper in 0.0 .
Atm its waaaayyy to easy for an alliance spot people in his systems, most of them are emply with just some people pass occasionally. They see you in local and then they try to chase you. If local chat doesnt show you, 90% of the time they will simply pass. If they use scanners they will spot also ships docked near posses so its not so immediate notify someone in his territory. A ratter ( expecially if doing exploration) will be covered much more as it is now. Sure both mush scan, but the ratter have an advantage: he is sticking and will notify quicly a new ship in the list ... roaming pirates or someone in alliance that was just passing have fist to guess if those ships in scan are "active" or docked.
Ratting in a belt ( or mining) give you less advantages, but still you will first notice a "new" ship in the scanning list than a pvper that just came in system.
Imho this change will be welcome. Chat should be a chant not the most powerfull scanning tool in game.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 11:49:00 -
[228]
Originally by: Karina Bellac A question I do have:
Why should only 0.0 local be changed?
because CCp is still strugling to make carebears go form high sec to low se. And they don't want to scare them even more. But on 0.0 there is no such excuse, if you are there you are there for the worst. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Erienne
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 12:00:00 -
[229]
By all means get rid of local.
Just don't complain when the cloaked dictor uncloaks on your fleet jump in, bubbles them and jumps out laughing. You see nothing but know what's coming. Then the 50 red drakes uncloak and kill your fleet while you order a burn back to the gate in your nerfed BS. The FC will scream at the scout and he goes - but they weren't here when I jumped in!
Delaying local simply gives the defending team an incredible advantage and countering it will slow gameplay down to a crawl. Scouts will be obliged to jump in, wait for the local to catch up or scan down to see if anyone else is in EVERY system. Eve will become a game of cloak ambushes. How stale and boring is that!
Forget roaming gangs; it would take five hours to go thirty jumps and back with any modi****of safety.
|
Bad Borris
Most Wanted INC G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 12:06:00 -
[230]
Its going to be really funny when system lag becomes an intel tool.
|
|
Jason Edwards
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 12:16:00 -
[231]
Quote: Local chat changes=game ending.
No. Let me fix this.
Local chat changes=0.0 ending.
or
Local chat changes=0.0 moon mining era.
Basically nobody would fly non-caps in 0.0 unless the ship is a cynopopper throw away. Attacking each other would be very easy; defending would be nearly impossible unless you can basically secure the entire area @ a chokepoint. Which theoretically could be done. So many people would be running to high sec/low sec 0.0 would be deserted and big forces could claim large areas and punch up the choke points. Then you could theoretically do something safely inside that space.
The entire system working that way would be so utterly annoying and a farce. |
Jarne
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 12:36:00 -
[232]
You guys complaining about the scanner not being appropriate for getting good intel should remember that the scanner will be revisited in tandem with local.
I could think of some interesting changes to the scanner:
Make it able to differentiate between - empty and piloted ships - moving and stationary ships - friendly and hostile ships
Other things that would also be nice to consider:
- Add a standings flag (red minus or blue plus etc.) to cynos in the overview, according to the standing of the creating ship - Make it somehow possible to notice incoming travel at a jump bridge - Remove the "average nr. of pilots in local" statistics from map and API
Furthermore, you could always position scouts at gates to get even better intel than with current local.
Btw.: I find myself clicking the scan button very frequently even when I don't need to at all. I can't do anything about it... you'll get used to it, too :) - Success=Achievements/Expectations
|
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 12:54:00 -
[233]
Originally by: Jarne Furthermore, you could always position scouts at gates to get even better intel than with current local.
Doesn't detect people who login / logout in system. ;)
Always a danger in assuming you know things (like that local is clear) when you don't.
I wouldn't have the scanner point out 'hostile' ships. I'd just have ships that had you blue and they had you blue back broadcast some kind of identifier (IFF). At least in lowsec this wouldn't immediately flag hostile corps / pirates etc. ;) |
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 12:57:00 -
[234]
Originally by: Jason Edwards forces could claim large areas and punch up the choke points.
I think this is one of the issues, there are already some very safe constellations where if you're at the end of the pipe, you get at least a 5 jump warning that hostiles are incoming. With local removed those sort of constellations would be the only remotely 'safe' ones, as scouting five different gates isn't really feasible. They want to make the space we already have 'more' usable rather than less so...
Originally by: CCP t0rfifrans CCP is a greedy money chewing monster
|
Jarne
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 13:12:00 -
[235]
Good point, login of people into a system is one thing that would be nearly impossible to detect if it is at a good safe and not in station, absolutely impossible when the newly logged in pilot is in a cloaker. There should be some means to notify that. Logoff isn't that critical I think, wouldn't bother if I wouldn't notice that.
With such a notification, login traps would become much less effective than just normal roaming, which is a good thing IMO. |
Andrei Vassaliev
Altera Odyssea Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 13:13:00 -
[236]
Edited by: Andrei Vassaliev on 27/10/2008 13:14:13 A nanve comment about this:
What about removing the pilot's list currently displayed in local chat and replacing it only by the total number of pilots in the system, without any precision about their name/standings.
This way, you would have an intel about the number of pilots in a system, but no information if they're neutral, blue or hostiles.
|
Aaron Mirrorsaver
R.E.C.O.N. The Firm.
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 13:35:00 -
[237]
unfortunately for eve, the way they handle space travel sucks, i.e you can only travel inbetween stellar objects, or bookmarks, you cant fly manually any meaningful distance in space. this is partly due to the sheer size of space as well.
a game known as darkspace, had significantly smaller solar systems and fog of war. so looking at the tactical map, as you move across the system, you basically light your way, as you can see a significant area around your ship, similar to the solar system map in eve. and all enemy ships become visible once you are in range.
if you remove local, there needs to be a viable 'sensor' on ships and not that silly ass scanner, it needs to be able to give way more information. Such as what alliance/corp the ships are from. And a graphical representation of them on the solar system map once you have them on scanner.
i mean you need to be able to have a means or a technical 'gameplay' way of getting information on enemy movements or fleets, either for defense or offense, once local is removed, if its not done properly, eve will be chaos.
think people dont want to fight now? wait till they remove local. as soon as a gang warps in on your gang, your fc will be calling for a warp out cause you dont know what they have. ------
RECON is recruiting |
Karina Bellac
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 13:40:00 -
[238]
So, how many extra windows are we going to be staring at whilst committing the most heinous of heresies otherwise known as "0.0 PvE"?
And how reliable will these extra windows be? (Case in point: Fleet window)
And how will Rapiers/Pilgrims/Falcons/Arazus be detected?
At least local currently provides an easy method for finding targets. Yeah, it bites both ways, the targets have an easy method of spotting you. But then the bottom line you have to keep sight of is that EvE is a game. |
Tnam
Caldari Mortis Angelus The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 15:34:00 -
[239]
This change is to be commended, it rawks! Much of 0.0 is much too safe, people endlessly farm isk in cloakable ships and take no risk whatsoever at the moment... the nearest they get to risk is that a rat scrambles them and a very fast agressor finds them perhaps because they are on a belt near to the jump in gate.
The whole essence of 0.0 is risk/reward, ultimately the risk you take in a ratting ship is rather low anyway, it is likely insured and there's no meaninful reason to rig it unless to make it even more afk'able (certainly there is no BS that needs rigs to kill 0.0 rats).
As somebody who often roams 0.0 and has done for a long time, I can say that this change does also work both ways. The scout has to do more work to find the targets, whereas currently you can move a gang very fast because empty local means move on.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 16:29:00 -
[240]
Originally by: Borgholio I believe that CCP should take a cue from popular Sci-Fi. You never would expect a Star Destroyer to jump into a system and have the captain say "We found the Rebel base, Lord Vader. We see 40 Rebel pilots in local chat".
I think it would add to the game if local were indeed removed as a source of intel, but that something were added to make up for it, such as long range sensors. A small scanner window that you can place on your screen (or integrate into your overview). This scanner can not only automatically scan for shiptypes within a certain distance, but can also receive IFF signals from the entire system. That way it combines the current "click every 5 seconds" scanner, as well as giving you hard numbers as to how many hostiles / neutrals / friendlies are in system.
This system would replace local completely, but give people good intel without being overpowered. The only downside is that you won't know who is in the system while you're docked. In that case, I would suggest that the system-wide IFF part of the scanner should remain operational even when docked...but of course the shiptype scanner should be unavailable.
Exactly how would the system you described be different from the current Local? At the very least it needs to stop giving out the "hard numbers" of how many hostiles/neutrals are in the entire system. ...
|
|
Johann Jeneau
Gallente Cricas Portuguese Korp
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 16:36:00 -
[241]
Great news, this just need to come with increased rewards for 0.0 or less rewards for high-sec (i would go with both and also more rewards to low-sec) also, make the onboard scanner with bigger range (20au maybe) and make it work like a radar, and put cloaking ships to show on scanner, bye the way, remove the ability to use cloaks on everything except, covert-ops, stealth bombers, force recons and black ops.
their, eve is fixed |
Crellion
Art of War Exalted.
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 16:49:00 -
[242]
Another stupid idea. Currently local is a tactical tool. You use it TOGETHER with your scanner to identify possible enemies and ship types,possible reinforcements they can quickly receive and to respond to a sprining trap.
Remove it and its down to who has more friends.
This is not a bad idea for ratters and miners alone. It is an attack on intelligent pvp ers coming to the aid of random pvpers...
|
Roger Douglas
Infinite Improbability Inc Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 16:51:00 -
[243]
Well, if local is just going to be local, then maybe its time for a overlay that acts as a continuous scanner. Hostile pops in the system? No Problem! Your scanner will pick him up at a gate, maybe beep on detection or some such, or record a gate activation, and not even report a shiptype, etc. As long as you know something came in the system, that's really the point, isn't it? If you are paying attention, you get your warning. Roamer has a good shot at still killing you, etc, has to use his/her scanner, etc, everyone has a level playing field.
|
Borgholio
Minmatar Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 18:28:00 -
[244]
Originally by: Razin
Exactly how would the system you described be different from the current Local? At the very least it needs to stop giving out the "hard numbers" of how many hostiles/neutrals are in the entire system.
Currently you not only see the hard numbers, but you also see the names of every single person in the system. The method I propose will still give you the numbers, but you will no longer be able to get a complete list of the actual pilots who are in the system. |
Rumba Purring
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 18:48:00 -
[245]
IMO, this idea has lots of potential: both for making the game a lot more interesting/fun or too difficult for some people. The devil is in the details of implementation.
I would like to see a way to disable local with some ship/module/skill. This way, the defenders will get a warning, but will have to launch recon scouts to figure out details of invaders. The invaders can use this to conceal their capabilities and/or to 'jam' local as a distraction. Think of all possible tactical game play this could encourage!
In any case, a change like this is very disruptive to the game balance, and needs to be tested out well.
I don't know if this is even possible, but can CCP set aside a region on Tranquility server for 'piloting' changes like this? That way we can get real feedback (not limited testing by few people on Singularity server) on gameplay impact before committing the entire EVE universe to potentially damaging changes.
Just my 2 cents. Would you be ready if the gravity reversed itself? |
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 19:44:00 -
[246]
Most logical replacement, processor time permitting, is something keyed up into the current scanning system.
Essentially, just have an inbuilt 'probe' scan on your ship, that doesn't provide warpable results. If you turn it on, then you get to 'spot' ships in system - ability to see them is based on that signature radius vs. sensor strength calculation that's used by probes, so e.g. an inty will take longer to show up than a titan. Maybe your scan effectiveness is based on your ships sensor strength too.
Anyway, if your scanner is turned on, you'll be quickly visible to anyone in system - they'll see that you're 'broadcasting', even if they are not, but this will also be in the form of a 'not warpable' result.
Scanner shows up secondary information as time goes by, and 'keeps track' of stuff - so your gangmate who's warping back and forth to the station, will stay as a 'known' - a new contact entering local will take time to spot, and longer still to identify - this process being accelerated by 'electronic upgrades', such as ECCMs (more sensor power -> faster detection/classification) and ship scanners (can tell ship types, pilots, and fitting/stats given enough time).
Add in 'static scanner' anchorables, that are a bit like bubbles, but both detectable and warpable, and not very powerful, but good enough to detect a 500man fleet in the next system.
And 'POS scanner' anchorables which are a bit better.
Oh, and you share your 'intel zone' with your fleet and your fleet's probe network.
Don't arbitrarily limit detection ranges, just give a diminishing returns on the effectiveness, and allow people to fit stuff to improve this range too. You should be able to spot a titan in an ibis at 500AU if you're both in system for an hour.
'unknowns' and 'hostiles' can be set to trigger alarms on your system when detected, so you don't have to be staring at the scanner, either.
If you're wanting a 'pilot skill' element, add in 'vectored scanning' to allow you to scan a particular spot more effectively. Also add in a 'signature pattern' for a ship, that'll be vaguely random, but a good pilot may be able to identify. Maybe you start with a really low res image of the ship, and gradually improve the res? Or maybe you do a 'engine signature harmonic' wave, and have an overlayed pattern of pitch and harmonics on a spectrum analyser and wave pattern, that encoded within (and hidden by static) is details like ship race, size, class, model, and then pilot info 'IFF' which has a particular pattern for a given alliance/corp/pilot. Which you can memorize and recognise if you're so inclined.
But this is of course, not 'instant' info, it's buried in the background noise, so you may have to wait a while as the signal improves, deal with the fact that there's multiple signatures there drowning each other out, or otherwise can't identify it.
Erm. Yes. I am basically basing this on submarines, active/passive sonar, and the 'frequency matching' that you get when trying to identify a ship via audio. But EVE is basically internet space-submarines anyway, so I figured it'd work. |
Esmenet
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 22:28:00 -
[247]
If you thought people were whining about cloakers before, wait until after this change.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 23:06:00 -
[248]
Originally by: Borgholio
Originally by: Razin
Exactly how would the system you described be different from the current Local? At the very least it needs to stop giving out the "hard numbers" of how many hostiles/neutrals are in the entire system.
Currently you not only see the hard numbers, but you also see the names of every single person in the system. The method I propose will still give you the numbers, but you will no longer be able to get a complete list of the actual pilots who are in the system.
The number of hostiles/neutrals in system is by far the most useful intel-providing functionality of the current Local; specific pilot identification is of relatively minor usefulness, mostly for identifying supercap pilots or specific targets. This change to Local would be seemingly small; however, due to those small number of cases that such functionality is used, extremely unbalanced . It would be much better if all sides had equal opportunity to completely evade detection. ...
|
Borgholio
Minmatar Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 00:23:00 -
[249]
Originally by: Razin
The number of hostiles/neutrals in system is by far the most useful intel-providing functionality of the current Local; specific pilot identification is of relatively minor usefulness, mostly for identifying supercap pilots or specific targets. This change to Local would be seemingly small; however, due to those small number of cases that such functionality is used, extremely unbalanced . It would be much better if all sides had equal opportunity to completely evade detection.
I honestly can't imagine a situation where a 300 or 400 man fleet should be allowed to evade detection. Even if you consider smaller gangs or solo pilots, it'd completely change how the game is played. It would make certain kinds of activities such as mining and ratting very dangerous since a hunter would know just to search the belts one at a time, while the prey would be oblivious to someone entering the system. ----------------------------------- You will be assimilated...bunghole! |
Kadoes Khan
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 01:19:00 -
[250]
I wouldn't mind seeing how many people are in local but not necessarily who they are.
So if your by yourself it would be Local (1), if 5 people jump in with you, you see Local (6) but you don't see their pictures or names or anything until they say something at which point you'd see them. With the exception of people in your corp, fleet, alliance and/or militia... those would always show. -=^=- "Someday the world will recognize the genius in my insanity." |
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 02:20:00 -
[251]
Originally by: Borgholio
I honestly can't imagine a situation where a 300 or 400 man fleet should be allowed to evade detection. Even if you consider smaller gangs or solo pilots, it'd completely change how the game is played. It would make certain kinds of activities such as mining and ratting very dangerous since a hunter would know just to search the belts one at a time, while the prey would be oblivious to someone entering the system.
That would be the point of making such a change.
A large fleet has all the right to be able to evade detection if the opposing force does not field adequate scout teams.
One hopes that the new scanning tools would allow sufficiently (but no too) early warning of a possible hostile in proximity. Mining and ratting are currently almost completely risk-free. ...
|
Gallente Citizen20080612
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 03:28:00 -
[252]
Originally by: James Lyrus Interesting stuff.
I like where you're going with this, as it uses the existing scanner which everyone's farmiliar with. Also being sensor strength based is good because it gives larger ships another role to play as I think frigate sized ships are getting a huge boost post speed nerf. Also, finally a role for ECCM modules, even if it is a bit odd having a counter-measure used for recon...
My own take would be a bit of a mix of the existing scan system and the probing system.
Say, a ship jumps into system, turns on 360 scan and goes for infinite range. The results they get back depend on the size of the system and the signature size of the ships in system. A fleet of capitals should be an obvious entry. A shuttle, or even an interceptor may well not show up in the results. Everything else in the middle is the realm of "unknown" results in the scan with varying values of signal strength.
So you lower your scan angle to where you think the unknowns are and you get some results back, "Hey, a battleship!" and more unknowns but with a higher signal strength. You're on the right track. You jump to a planet/belt closer to your results and you start scanning again. The shorter range from your targets combined with the narrow scan angle gives you more ship results and less unknowns.
Now you adjust your scan distance to what you think they are away from you in AU. Too far, signal strangth goes down. Not far enough, no results. If you get close enough, you'll be greeted with the ship, it's pilot and their corp / alliance info. (Perhaps, if very acurate, you could get a warp-in spot on those that are in safe spots?) These names get plunked into local for you and your fleet, and also kept separate from the results in your scanner so you don't confuse them with ships you've not scanned down yet.
Big blobs of subcapitals that are all on the one grid should get a cumulative bonus/penalty to each other, making them all easier to spot on scanner. So there's not much hiding for fleets of 100 all humping each other.
Not sure how this changes cloaked ships... perhaps they become ships that have an extremely weak signal strength, in addition to being invisible while on grid?
Ditch the POS modules, let the players do the hard work in finding each other.
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 03:33:00 -
[253]
Originally by: Crellion Another stupid idea. Currently local is a tactical tool. You use it TOGETHER with your scanner to identify possible enemies and ship types,possible reinforcements they can quickly receive and to respond to a sprining trap.
Remove it and its down to who has more friends.
This is not a bad idea for ratters and miners alone. It is an attack on intelligent pvp ers coming to the aid of random pvpers...
This.
Originally by: Razin
A large fleet has all the right to be able to evade detection if the opposing force does not field adequate scout teams.
We have off-grid safes in a number of systems which are outside of 15 AU range from any celestial bodies and therefore require probing out (from a number of locations) to be found, a very time consuming operation. For every damn system.
Assuming people do not fit cloaks
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Cailais
Amarr VITOC
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 12:26:00 -
[254]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Crellion Another stupid idea. Currently local is a tactical tool. You use it TOGETHER with your scanner to identify possible enemies and ship types,possible reinforcements they can quickly receive and to respond to a sprining trap.
Remove it and its down to who has more friends.
This is not a bad idea for ratters and miners alone. It is an attack on intelligent pvp ers coming to the aid of random pvpers...
This.
Originally by: Razin
A large fleet has all the right to be able to evade detection if the opposing force does not field adequate scout teams.
We have off-grid safes in a number of systems which are outside of 15 AU range from any celestial bodies and therefore require probing out (from a number of locations) to be found, a very time consuming operation. For every damn system.
Assuming people do not fit cloaks
You're assuming that local is simply removed and there is no replacement mechanic to enable longer range (i.e beyond 15AU) detection of other players / ships.
I think its unlikely this will happen as CCP have already mentioned they are looking at introducing some sort of 'intelligence suite' - a boosted up scanning system - before they remove the current functionality of Local.
Im disappointed in you here Branko - you usually post more intelligent stuf .
C.
Originally by: Tarminic Your continued whining is somewhat diminished by your continued willingness to give your money to CCP.
|
Terra Mikael
Private Nuisance
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 13:15:00 -
[255]
Edited by: Terra Mikael on 28/10/2008 13:16:38
Originally by: CCP Casqade
Originally by: Malachon Draco Ideas that come to mind are: Involve player skill (not skill points) on gathering intel of what is in local, give smaller ships, smaller gangs or cloakers an upper hand to avoid bigger fleets and remain undetected while in the same system.
I think the combinations and ways that this can be changed for the better are endless. We just need to find the proper balance between hunter and prey, risk vs reward as well as what is fun and what is not.
Dude, do you play your own game? It's already hard to find small ships because of their signature radius. And with the changes to battleships and larger ships being virtually defenseless after the nano nerf against small ships, why the **** would anyone fly a large ship, which is easily found, that can't kill anything but ships in its own class.
Hello? I know you guys are having some economic problems over there in iceland, but is there an intellectual deficit there as well, or just a complete lack of communication between the devs?
I seriously think you guys should read up on what happened to star wars galaxies. Instead of adding content, SOE started doing the same things you're doing - making sweeping changes that only end up alienating players.
EVE is already lacking in the space department. You need more things to see, more challenges, more content. That's where your focus should be. But forget it. I'll watch another great MMO turn into poo because developers suddenly think they need to pull the rug out from under their players in order to "fix" the game for the long wrong.
edit: for the record, I'm a bomber pilot
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 14:00:00 -
[256]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Originally by: Razin
A large fleet has all the right to be able to evade detection if the opposing force does not field adequate scout teams.
We have off-grid safes in a number of systems which are outside of 15 AU range from any celestial bodies and therefore require probing out (from a number of locations) to be found, a very time consuming operation. For every damn system.
Assuming people do not fit cloaks
Any fleet would have to come out of hiding to move or fight, plus there is the map information. If the fleet was able to stay hidden, good for the fleet. Space is big.
On the cloaks: for one, I hope CCP gives them some kind of scannable signature; for two, any fleet that fits cloaks on it's ships of the line is not to be taken seriously. ...
|
Unfunny Alt
Anonymous Forumposters
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 14:06:00 -
[257]
As far as I understand the RP side of the whole channel thing: A neutral corp handles all the chat, kinda like a cell phone company. So if you don't want to show up in local, you shouldn't be able to talk to other people, except perhaps gang members in space. But those transmissions would be detectable, too.
Poster and Hauling Alt of Policy Handicapped Main |
Mussaschi
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 14:07:00 -
[258]
I still like the idea of making local passive. Though it would require some kind of proximity alert, that give you a warning, if someone is jumping to your position. I think that would be a rather balanced way of solving this issue
|
Xe na
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 14:16:00 -
[259]
Edited by: Xe na on 28/10/2008 14:17:45 I like that idea, it will stop the:"uhm they have more ppl in local we better leave"
|
Jarne
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations Vanguard.
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 15:21:00 -
[260]
Folks, just remember the whole Imperial fleet hiding behind the moon Endor ;)
Things I could think of as new intel tools:
- A new kind of "camera beacon" you could anchor on a grid which then shows the objects on that grid in your overview in addition to the objects on your current grid. Would mean that you'd have to have multiple grids loaded, thus of course it would have to be limited to just a few or maybe one of those cameras per pilot. They wouldn't be too cheap and of course could be blown away very easily (a Covert Ops would have to be able to do it)
- Notification of activating warp tunnels of some sort, e.g., if one end of a warp tunnel is in a certain maximum distance from you, you get a notification. Thus if a ship entered warp to your belt or a planet nearby or similar, you would know - Success=Achievements/Expectations
|
|
ghost st
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 15:43:00 -
[261]
Local needs to be fixed, but removing it in lieu of the directional scanner = barf. The directional scanner is overpowered anyways. Id rather keep local and fix the directional scanner first and go from there.
Directional scanner info first needs to be tuned down, or given a time to scan. Jumping into system and being able to see all poses/shiptypes within range, and to a degree of accuracy, and doing it instantly it a bit overpowered.
Poses shouldnt be on directional scan. And shiptypes shouldnt be easily recognizable, (just show shipclass, or even better just the sig radius). So that theres always some degree of uncertainty about what you are going up against.
|
Lynch Me
Caldari Science Industry and Nucleocosmochronology
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 15:46:00 -
[262]
Edited by: Lynch Me on 28/10/2008 15:49:49
Originally by: Darth Worm
[...]
Negatives - I am sure there are more than this 1. Intel would be hard to come by when you could march a 300 man gang across the universe undetected unless someone sees them on overview 2. It would take forever to find someone because you would have to scan down each system you go in. Its already hard enough to scan people down when you know they are in local. 3. You would absolutely kill off most ways of people making isk...No one would want to mine or rat when they have no warning if hostiles are around or can't watch local. No one wants to die with no warning at all. This is a space ship game for Gods sake. Having to press the scan button over and over and over is really weak for an advanced space ship game.
Positives - I can't think of any positives except if you are a pvp'r. It will still take you a long time to scan down people but at least when you do it will be a free kill with no warning for your victim.
I agree with Corp Quas.....this is to drastic of a change. If you can't name more positives than negatives to any change it should be re-thought. You will lose my 4 accounts if you make this change without thinking this through properly.
WHO WANTS TO HIT THE SCAN BUTTON A MILLION TIMES WHEN YOU ARE ALREADY MINING OR RATTING IN AN ADVANCED SPACE SHIP GAME!!!!
Uncle Worm
Count 2 more accounts. This change would put an end to pilots making a living in 0.0. Whether you're a PVP pilot or an industrialist, 0.0 is dangerous enough as it is, and one's chance to make isk for simply replacing a ship would slim down quite a lot. This is how I lived in 0.0 for more than a year: rat enough to get a ship, go pvp, eventually get it popped, rat some more for a new one, pop again. But if I'm out in a belt ratting and a gang of invisible hostiles drop by, I'd also have to support the costs of a new ratting ship. Fine, I'll buy a new one from a loan, I'll then rat to cover the loan and get popped again by invisible people. This time I won't get a new loan and I'll skip to the point: is this how you plan to make an attractive game, dear CCP devs?
Let's see what you have here:
EVE Online, an overly complicated space, battle, politics, market, strategy... game. I've been playing for 18 months, give or take, and I'm still learning new tricks. The only things that make this game playable are the simple ones: missions on a "kill that, get paid" or a "go there get that get paid" basis, ratting (kill and get isk), controls, targeting and basic fight system (i mean point and click, i'd hate to see pvp getting even more complicated with complex movement commands, such as X3 or other space sims), as well as several other things, among which there's the safety of always knowing what war targets, hostiles, neutrals, corp mates or gang members roam your system, by simply checking the local chat channel. This offers you the freedom to decide whether you'll flee for safety or stick for the battle, based on the proportion of friends vs hostiles in your system. The local channel allows fleet commanders to know whether the system they cross with the fleet is populated by hostiles, and thus be able to take a decision, whatever it may be. And other negative aspects.
People would obey in front of the demigod CCP and adapt silently to the new complication. In case they won't just leave the game. Because it's a game, and it's not a second job you have to pay for, and that brings new unforeseen career-wrecking challenges every day. And no matter how grim and complicated this game is right now, it needs those simple things to help out the player just a tiny bit. And this sort of decisions affect the very (slim) core of simplicity that renders a (this) game playable.
Terrible idea, CCP - implement a couple of those (after the arguable ghost training thing) and you're bankrupt.
EDIT: So you better have a damn good replacement for this problem
|
Vixisti
dearg doom
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 17:49:00 -
[263]
There will have to be a way of actively scanning piloted ships apart from those in pos's for this to work.
|
Caleb Defiance
Caldari eXceed Inc. Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 17:50:00 -
[264]
haven't read all pages and so..many peeps are going ape**** on this. I am convinced that CCP will not just drop local into delay moe and say:"Have fun...that's all." I am sure they will provide some way of keeping safe.
Cloaking ships like black ops and recons will for sure have a lot extra use now. They will become very powerfull. But i'm geussing CCP will also watch out for this effect. Balance is the key word.
The only thing i am really worried about is logistics in 0.0 because that is where you use jumpbridges and cynogens. If you can't check local and jump in on a good guess, it could cost you billions.
The main place to gank ships like jumpfreighters are Cynogens and their jumpbridges. Every large alliance sets cynogens up as a entry point to the jumpbridge network. Those keypoints will be the new camping spots for cloakers and the support fleet.
I really hope CCP keeps in mind that this is a change that would bring a real problem to people doing logistics for alliances in 0.0. Players will adapt to new features and stuff ina game...wallets done adapt that easy in EVE. ---- eXceed Inc.
|
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 20:09:00 -
[265]
Originally by: Caleb Defiance
The only thing i am really worried about is logistics in 0.0 because that is where you use jumpbridges and cynogens. If you can't check local and jump in on a good guess, it could cost you billions.
This.
Proud member of RZR - Decadence. |
Orange Faeces
Minmatar Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 20:48:00 -
[266]
A balanced solution here is simple -- link local information to the system sov. for pilots within that alliance. This has the advantage that it rewards people for investing in 0.0 infrastructure (towers, outposts, const. sov, etc...) and punishes isk farmers.
If you can't maintain 0.0 infrastructure, then why should you profit without risk from its wealth?
This would reward alliances with a brain, and punish ninja ratters. Yay!
oF |
Tasko Pal
Heron Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 01:27:00 -
[267]
Edited by: Tasko Pal on 29/10/2008 01:29:49 I agree that local should be nerfed in 0.0. Currently, it's too easy to hunt down parties in 0.0. You warp in and immediately know who is there. Scan and cloak also need to be worked on. Here's my take.
1) Make the proposed changes in local.
2) Scanning works less effectively against people in deadspace. You have to be closer to pick them up on the scanner.
3) Scanning has a chance of picking up cloaked people, if they're really close. To make it more fun, maybe directional scanner and range setting doesn't work for cloaked ships. Ie, you can tell there's a cloaked vehicle within 1000 km, but you don't know where it is within that range. Your scanner picks up the cloaked ship just the same whether you have it on max range and 360 degrees or 10 km and 5 degrees, any direction.
A passive scan sounds very nice. I'd prefer it to the scan every 30 seconds that I currently do.
|
Christari Zuborov
Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 04:57:00 -
[268]
I'm all for removing local - would make 0.0 much more fun.
When I heard this I posted that if implemented, it would solidly gain my vote of confidence that they haven't gone completely soft on us hard core players. This game is where we came many years ago for the sole reason that it's supposed to be the deadliest game out there.
There needs to be a real reason to go to cheaper fitted ships, and this would be a good reason to fly them. Don't undock what you can't afford to lose.
We need more blood in the water.
|
Jeremy Samson
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 07:48:00 -
[269]
A good change, should make life in 0.0 more interesting, and make iskfarming a bit harder.
|
Paradigma
Minmatar Konstrukteure der Zukunft
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 14:13:00 -
[270]
it is true, that intel gathering is pretty simple given the local-channel as it is now. removing a fast, simple way of telling, if anyone is in a system at all, would take a lot of speed out of the game - in every system you enter as a pvp'r you would have to spend a couple of minutes of mindless warping/scanning to tell if it is populated with targets.
we still don't know what and how the local-substitute will be, when ccp introduces these changes - something like a (roughly) systemwide realtime tactical overview could be a perfect alternative to local for intel gathering imo.
ships should then have the opportunity to activate some kind of IFF-system: If you have your IFF (identify friend & foe) active you can tell the standing of each character piloting a ship on your overview - but others see your standing too.
such a system could then be further enhanced by special modules/riggs/shiptypes that have bonuses on the range of that tactical overview or get more detailed tactical information.
how that would impact lag, is a totally different issue though...
still, we would have to change something about warpspeed, to give players a little more time to react to incoming ships: some ships are so dead slow, that they would be unable to leave a belt, even if the react prefecty and are experts in scanner-usage. just give the carebears a chance :)
|
|
Crellion
Art of War Exalted.
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 14:37:00 -
[271]
Originally by: Xe na Edited by: Xe na on 28/10/2008 14:17:45 I like that idea, it will stop the:"uhm they have more ppl in local we better leave"
That is exactly why its a ridiculous change.Because it encourages the random brainless people hoping to get a fight with the odds 5 to 1 in their favor...
Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim. |
Tnam
Caldari Mortis Angelus The Church.
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 15:27:00 -
[272]
Originally by: Crellion
Originally by: Xe na Edited by: Xe na on 28/10/2008 14:17:45 I like that idea, it will stop the:"uhm they have more ppl in local we better leave"
That is exactly why its a ridiculous change.Because it encourages the random brainless people hoping to get a fight with the odds 5 to 1 in their favor...
There is nothing wrong with people wanting to get 5:1 advantages in fights, the 1 is just a person that failed :) And people ratting without scouts and good intel, in 0.0 in a non-pvp worthy ship, should die! Griefing careless ratters is a very viable tactic and fun too. The fact that this can happen is a clear indication of lack of teamwork on the part of the carebear who is probably just leeching his space access for personal gain anyway...
Seriously, we've killed so many ratters that think its okay to fit a racial tank in 0.0, have no mods that can tackle etc. it is not okay. 0.0 is an asset and its dangerous, defend it...
|
Hugh Jassole
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 20:00:00 -
[273]
I'm undecided about this change. But one thing is for sure:
Before they put this change in, something needs to be about AFK cloakers. Already bad enough to have them when you KNOW they're in system, never sure when they'll come back to gank. But if you can't even tell if they're in local? Zero way of knowing. Scanner is empty b/c they're cloaked, local is gone unless they feel chatty. Is garbage.
|
Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 20:33:00 -
[274]
Originally by: Tnam Much of 0.0 is much too safe,
This is why there's no one in highsec running level 4's.
Originally by: CCP t0rfifrans CCP is a greedy money chewing monster
|
Crackzilla
The Shadow Order
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 20:37:00 -
[275]
Originally by: Tnam we've killed so many ratters that think its okay to fit a racial tank in 0.0, have no mods that can tackle etc. it is not okay.
That part is perfectly ok.
Its the bit about being careless is why they die. Everyone mocks a careless ratter/miner.
|
Freakdevil
Phantom Squad Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.29 23:51:00 -
[276]
Local should never have been provided IMHO. Gameplay is too static and predictable. Usual blob mentality applies. I have seen this attitude prevail gangs and people just log rather than look for options. Make people work for their meals.
If CCP really wants to take bold steps. Elminate local, provide more chokepoints into systems with more randomness and maybe just maybe more people will leave their level 4 safety net.
Oh and increase the attractiveness of low sec.
Just my .02
|
rciq
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 00:14:00 -
[277]
Dumb carebear whiners. Local was a total mistake since the beginning. Still I agree that spamming "scan" is far from comfort. If the local is gone, the scanner must get a change soonÖ. |
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar Infinity Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 00:20:00 -
[278]
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: Borgholio
I honestly can't imagine a situation where a 300 or 400 man fleet should be allowed to evade detection. Even if you consider smaller gangs or solo pilots, it'd completely change how the game is played. It would make certain kinds of activities such as mining and ratting very dangerous since a hunter would know just to search the belts one at a time, while the prey would be oblivious to someone entering the system.
That would be the point of making such a change.
A large fleet has all the right to be able to evade detection if the opposing force does not field adequate scout teams.
One hopes that the new scanning tools would allow sufficiently (but no too) early warning of a possible hostile in proximity. Mining and ratting are currently almost completely risk-free.
now somethign that must be tuned is. MAke way that smaller gangs have more chance of passing by undetected tahn large gangs.. why? because this creates for the very first time a drawback on beign on a blob!
IF the scan is changed so that its much easier to detect a large fleet, but very small gangs have more chance of not beign detected, taht would really HELP gerrilha warfare! Then CCp coudl achieve their promisse to not let eve become a blob online game. ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
|
Lysander Kaldenn
Viper Intel Squad Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 01:31:00 -
[279]
What about making blobs easier to scan out while small gangs are more difficult? I assume if local goes we'll get a scanner with a slightly bigger radius, maybe 20 AU. It would be nice if it were graphical and displayed transponder signals (ie: red for bad standing, gray for nuetral, blue for friendly.)
|
Felix Dzerzhinsky
Caldari Wreckless Abandon G00DFELLAS
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 01:35:00 -
[280]
I am against this change:
1) PvP is hard enough to find in EvE without hitting a pos. 2) Patroling your space in 0.0 becomes impossible. 3) Farmers will have a field day - they already have cloaks that make it very very hard to find people, this only makes them stronger. 4) Lack of intel means people will camp/bait even more.
Yes, local should not be an intelligence gathering tool - but to remove it is to make pvp even more rare then it already is. As it stands, traveling 30+ jumps for a fight gets old fast. Low and High sec pvp is all but dead already anyway. So all in all, this change will reduce the number of fights - and I think thats a bad thing. ----
ECCM is a Counter-measure not a defense. |
|
mamolian
Madhatters Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 02:11:00 -
[281]
Meh this game is going to **** tbh.. CCP send us a please resubscribe email when you figured your **** out. -----------
|
Elder Langley
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 17:41:00 -
[282]
Originally by: Pac SubCom Edited by: Pac SubCom on 25/10/2008 01:04:42 Absolutely great idea because something will replace it, and that something could be really good. For instance, there could be new sensor mechanics:
1. You have passive sensors and active sensors on your ship.
2. The passive sensors are always receiving and automatically warn you of ships in the vicinity (with a certain range based on sensor strength). They won't tell you the name of the pilot, but they do give a clue on how big it is and whether it's a combat ship or something civilian or whatever. The better your sensor skills (new types of skills), the more info you can get. On grid you might even get information on fitting. It's delayed though. Passive sensors need time to make out bogeys and discern details - so at first you don't see anything, then only have a red dot on your screen, and after a while it becomes clear what that thing really is.
Naturally passive sensors do not give your location away.
3. Active sensors give instant detailed information on ship and its location, but will also give your location and presence away.
4. Friendly ships are always in communication with each other and will alert their presence to you via radio (namely you will get detailed information immediately once their enter system just like local now, but also with ship details. This way you won't have false alarms.
5. There exist modules and skills which enhance the range, speed and detail of the sensors (although the skills would be must have). Active modules are med slot, passives are low slot.
6. Friendly stations and pos might link their own sensor data to your ship if they are equipped with sensor mods. Command ships and battlecruisers can equip sensor warfare links doing the same. The existing warfare links can also affect the new sensors.
7. Cloaks: Covops cloaks enable you to do passive scanning without penalty, other cloaks have such a penalty. Non-cloaking ships fitting a cloak will be blind! You can't see them, but they will also get no information on you... Recons will have the best sensors available.
8. Sensor attributes are based on the racial sensor types - e.g. Caldari will be slowest but longest ranged, Minmatar will be quick but low range.
There.
Amazing, you put into words what I have been thinking, but unable to describe. I 99% agree (I think your way is overly detailed and may need to be dumbed down, but mostly dead on).
|
TimGascoigne
The Graduates Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 19:28:00 -
[283]
Originally by: Good Sir Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it.
have you ever used the on-board scanner? It gives no clue as to who is piloting the ship. you will be reporting friendly gangs all day long.
how about we replace local with a scan which works in exactly the same as having local, or we could save ourselves lots of bother by leaving local as it is.
|
Borgholio
Minmatar Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 21:24:00 -
[284]
The only way to keep it fair for both hunters and prey is to give a reasonable chance for either side to detect and avoid detection. That will involve the introduction of a totally new system and more than likely having all sorts of balance issues to deal with. For the time being, local should stay as is until we know for a fact that the replacement system will be not only effective, but easy to use. ----------------------------------- You will be assimilated...bunghole! |
Rip Striker
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 21:46:00 -
[285]
Originally by: Rexthor Hammerfists Without the local as it is now, without anything like the local as it is now - and of course an onboard scanner adjusted to this,
New never before seen tactics will take place in eve, whole fleets will escape if the enemie scouts arent smart enough. Scouts in general will be alot more important, a smart or dumb scout can send a fleet into death or victory - they will then be truly the eyes and ears of the fc.
It will be impossible to determine if the enemie fleet has 200 or 400 ships, parts of fleets can be hidden and join the fight lateron, an fc will have to be alot more wary of what is happening.
Fcs of small gangs will have to enter skirmishes without knowing the exact count of the enemie, no more OH GAWD HE HAS ONE FUKKEN MORE SHIP THEN US WE CANNOT RISK OUR PRECCCIOUS LIVES!.
Non alliance players can use the vast space held by alliance with only poses, with the current local never used but without localthose alliances have no idea what is going on there, it can take weeks or longer before an alliance notices that a small corp has made its home in a system right in the middle of the alliances territory.
Mining ops will have to be more organized, local isnt the perfect guard anymore - now you will need one or several emergency guards like falcons that can bail out scrambled hulks, at the same time one scout in a strategic system can warn and make a whole constellation disappear for a incomming fleet, for them to never see a target.
Recons andcov ops will see a revival in their true role, being undetected roaming behind enemie lines - at the same time an attacking recon never knows how many defending ships there really are when it uncloaks in scrambling range of the target.
-------
This change, when clever introduced will make the so boring, the so constant 0.0 as it is now into a fearsome, always pushing and adrenalin milking environment. Bring it on ccp, dont listen to the naysayers, only listen to the arguments against it, as there is a solution to all of them if you play it smart.
Very ineteresting times ahead, indeed.
/SIGNED!1!!1!
|
chao226
Dark Entropy
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 02:01:00 -
[286]
Edited by: chao226 on 31/10/2008 02:03:04 Ok here is my thoughts on the matter. This is a much needed change although done as in change notting cept local would be a bad idea.... reasons for this is People are 2 dependant on the current system (even though it is hugely one sided)
people are lazy relying on local channel rather than other methods of gathering intel.
now my personal expiriance from years of 0.0 mineing and npc'ing I have only ever lost a ship when carebearing in 0.0 when I was drunk. if one moniters local vigilently they will never have losses, this should not be the case.
ok i have read some posts here and a few complaints have came up.
1. npc will apparantly all return to empire and do lvl 4 missions: i'm sure some will but I also belive risk vs reward is going to be rethought with this. for example exploration can get a huge bost more of thoses sites u scan with the on board scanner. this make you a lot harderto find as in soemone will needto takethe time to probe out somone who may not actily be there.
2. mineing:
rather simple pay scouts to sit at gates for ya and pick a system with onyl a few gates.
also I would add that recons stelth bombers ext would actuly relly fill there roles. black ops will become a lot more useful.
more intel tools will be needed but perhaps this will incurage people to deveop there own intel system ways of lettingthere aliance know if hostiles are spotted ect
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 02:40:00 -
[287]
Originally by: chao226
also I would add that recons stelth bombers ext would actuly relly fill there roles. black ops will become a lot more useful.
Recons already fill their role. With local removal, they're nothing short of totally OP.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Rexthor Hammerfists
Rage of Inferno
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 04:08:00 -
[288]
Now something constructive for a change,
the best idea ive seen in this thread to replace the current local imo, is to integrate a ships sensor strength in the scanning process, which itself then shows you more or less what is going on in your system.
I like using the sensor strength for the scanning as it gives certain ships such as covert ops, recons, EAF but also Hacs and battleships an advantage in scanning ships over interceptors, interdictors, cruisers etc.
With this implemented some ships are better for scouting, when ratting bigger ships such as battleships see enemie ships faster - but at the same time when ratting with an assault frigate you warp faster. When mining a rorqual with its strong sensor strength will be very useful for protection as well. Eccms will be a whole lot more important, this will solve the debate about falcons being overpowered.
The question is how to create a new system from the theory.
An idea i had was to use the system map as a ground layer and the ships sensor strength used to dictate a scanners maximum reach.
On this system map every ship emits a signal depending on its signature radius. A signal from a cruisersized signature radius, as example, could then create a 1AU radius on the system map which the onboard scanner can scan when in range. With a bigger signal from a bigger signature radius you will have a signal radius, as example when a cruisersized signature radius produces a 1Au signal radius, a battleship would produce a 4AU Signal radius - which is, of course, is more likely in range of a onboard scanner.
Now for fleets you could let signals add up when in range to each other, no matter if friend or fo, thus creating a bigger signal radius which can be scanned from further away.
When such a signal is scanned it would be appropiate to show how strong the signal is and whereabouts it is coming from. Altho the infos should be kept vague otherwise its too easy to predict an enemies ship etc.
Scanner should never fail to see a signal, if in range - otherwise you have ceptors on top of you before you know it. The whole point is that bigger ships are seen from further away then smaller ships.
When a battleships has a 4AU signal radius, which is a 10 seconds guess and will have to be balanced, a fleets signal radius of 50 battleships shouldnt be 4*50 but more like maybe 25AU or something sane.
I think it would be reasonable to increase the lock delay after uncloaking, a big increasement for normal and another 5seconds maybe for cov ops cloaks. In change cloaked ships have a minimum singal radius.
The signal radius`s should be liveupdated, or every few secs automaticly on your system scanner, this way miner and ratter can keep the system map open and keep on with their business. Some sort of out of system map warning when a new signal was detected should be implemented, too.
thats it, excuse me when i forgot some stuff, its 5 int he mornin here and feel free to take this idea and change it as much as you like. A local change is a chance to make the game so much more interesting, and when you have accepted that ccp will change the local - rather then complaniing that they will think of something youd like to see the local become to. -
Boosters and PirateProfessions
|
Philip Stark
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 04:56:00 -
[289]
Ok I can see the Pros and Cons of this. Hunters would have more power as they can scan the belts and the Miners and Ratters wouldnt know if someone was in system hunting for them. Pros are Hunters have the ability to seek and destroy, cons for them is they dont know if the prey is prey or just bait. (Cloaked Ships waiting for Hunters to show up). Pros and Cons for Ratters and miners are, Hunters dont know if they are there with out scaning the system(but we all know how easy it is to scan systems for ships look at how easy it is for gankers to find mission runners). Now the Miners/Ratters dont always have the mods to scan down the system to see if theres anyone hunting them while they are doing their job. Only current sulution to this is to have someone in gang actively scaning the entire system every sec, but I dont think teh probs work that fast.
Heres some solutions that might work might not work. Ok first of all All ships should have some form of IFF on them. (Identify Friend or Foe) For alliances that have Sov of systems this is simple. You have a POS structure that scans the systems for the IFF signals. This can be either something that CCP makes that everyship in the same Corp or Alliance always has so that if someone leaves the Corp its gone and they cant sneak into that alliance space. Or Every ship gets a special rig slot thats only for IFF moduals, and they have to be given that modual from the corp for every ship. Upon leaving the corp the rig is auto destoryed, but if a ship with this modual is destroyed theres a slim chance that it surivies and can be used on an enemy ship to sneak into that factions space. (very slim chance though so that Alliances dont have to worry about Gobs of Fleets sneaking in as a friendly fleet) Also maybe Make an extra IFF slot so that when Alliances join togeather they can use a common IFF rig so people dont get shot at. I know we have a current IFF scheme now, ie where people are orange to red and various shades of blue. But if you take away local, then using the IFF rigs and having a POS structure that can scan the entire system will let alliances know that someone with out the proper IFF rig has entered their space.
For the ratters/miners give us a new skill and mod that lets us scan for warp sigunatures comeing towards us. So ok we will need a new skill or two that and a mod that uses a mid slot. But think if we they have an active Scanner looking for Warp Siguatures coming towards them then at least its some sort of warning before the gankers get there. The skill could determin the range of when the scanner detects the incoming warp. But it would only detect uncloaked warping signatures, which would give cloaking gankers an edge, but theres still that time gap between cloak and ability to lock that would allow someone the ability to get away.
|
Nian Banks
Minmatar Berserkers of Aesir
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 07:31:00 -
[290]
Edited by: Nian Banks on 31/10/2008 07:32:49 I am for the change if and only IF they add one other change at the same time.
What needs to be added is to have corps/alliance owned systems post in local for members of the corp/alliance when an alliance-corp/friendly/enemy/unknown enters that system via a gate and in alliance chat posts when enemies enter via a gate any systems owned by that alliance.
That I believe is what must be done for the local change to be decent and workable.
It gives an advantage to the defenders, and so it should be that case.
|
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 08:06:00 -
[291]
well, I've started to hash together a 'local replacement' discussion, on F&I.
It's: Here
Comments/feedback (and resultant thread bumping ;p) is appreciated. -- 249km locking? |
Saraah Leeown
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 08:30:00 -
[292]
Holy crap, I read like 2 pages of this drivel before my eyes felt like they were going to bleed.
You guys just pick one small thing and blow it WAY out of proportion. CCP have said NUMEROUS times, that they wouldn't just straight out remove local, because it wouldn't make the game fun. They've also said that mashing the scanner button every few seconds isn't fun. During one of the live dev blogs it was mentioned that an overhaul of the probing/scanning system was being looked at in conjunction with the removal of local intel. In other words, they want to remove the intel part from local, and replace it with something else that will take a little bit of skill to use in order to get the same info.
In my opinion, this is an awesome idea, and I look forward to seeing how it's implemented.
I just hope it's soon, because otherwise we're going to continue to hear "OMG CPP YOU'RE DESTROYING THE GAME I'M GOING TO CANCEL MY ACCOUNT AND SO WILL EVERYONE ELSE THIS IS THE LAST STRAWAKFNKTRLIJHFL<KNSFL>M<DVLKJDSLKJFJ" from all the myopic idiots who read every comment from the devs as "We personally hate you and eve online, and are doing our best to ruin it just to spite you because even after 5 years of developing the greatest mmo out there, we still have no idea what we're doing"
I've been playing this game in one form or another for almost 2 years, and it just keeps getting better and better. Sure I don't agree with every change but I'm not going to nerd rage over it, coz eve's still the one game that holds my attention after all this time.
Honestly, a lot of you sound like you're 4 years old, and just been told you have to go to bed early coz it's a school night.
Stop being idiots and... well there is really no and, just stop being idiots
Thanks in advance
|
tachet
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 08:44:00 -
[293]
This has to be the worst idea i have ever heard from CCP and tbh im surprised they would suggest such a thing, I for one would never enter low sec again without blob fleet this would make the game so crap for people who want to rat or (try) and solo pvp...i have no words to discribe how appauled i am at this idea...just...no
|
Q429
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 10:50:00 -
[294]
As long as I can smack talk into the scanner/new local, and at least be able to tell if there is anyone in system (even it just said "presence detected" or whatever) then the social aspect of local would not go away.
also, players should have a way to have buddies, and it would notify each other that they are in system together. It would be something they both have to agree on of course.
|
Vyktor Abyss
IONSTAR Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 11:05:00 -
[295]
I personally think it would be a great improvement removing or delaying local, especially for 0.0 space, but you do need to make sure people can still easily gather intel locally.
My suggestion is simple.
Something that bugs me is if you can see talk locally across the vast AUs/light years of space then why not pictures........?
I'd like to see Camera Drones introduced that can be deployed (like fighters) and sent to view gates or belts and whatnot for your intel gathering needs.
I would like to see it so they could be deployed by ratters at gates so they can see who comes in or out of a system.
They could also be deployed by pirates/gangs to belts to look for ratters - this would work especially well if you had a varient (perhaps Tech II) that could cov ops cloak.
Ideally a mini window of the visual where they are deployed from their viewpoint would be good with a limited sub-overview showing ship/cans etc.
This brings a new 'cat and mouse' aspect to piracy. Fleets/gangs also have the great advantage of (cov ops) scouts being able to do real 'sneaky' scouting for targets.
If you combine this idea with some nifty scanner upgrades and I think local will be fine just as the chat channel it was intended to be.
Just my thoughts.
|
Dr Sheepbringer
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 11:05:00 -
[296]
Carebear whine. It's war out there. Stay in highsec then.
|
sdthujfg
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 16:55:00 -
[297]
Originally by: Dr Sheepbringer Carebear whine. It's war out there. Stay in highsec then.
QFT. Remove local, adapt or move to high sec.
|
Vengal Seyhan
Sten Industries
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 18:14:00 -
[298]
Originally by: Gai Servos
YOu cannot test something at this scale on sisi.
Wholeheartedly agreed. How you can mimic the large scale politics and strategies that dictate defense networks on sisi I can't imagine.
NB - This will promote blobbing, but of alliances. Only the large will survive.
As the CEO of a small, proudly independent corp with 0.0 access via political networking, this change troubles me. It may spell the end of our presence in 0.0 if it's wrongly implemented.
I, for one want an active scanner that updates at least every second, and with at least 21AU range! Right now, a fast inty can cover 13.5AU per second - that's enough to be next to you within a second. 21AU semi-active scanning would give you, maybe, enough warning to hit the warp button if someone appears on scan. 21AU also catches every type of scan probe except the ferret and observator - give people some reason to train Astrometrics 5.
Oh, and please make the probes selectable as a type on the overview. Having to turn off the 'use current overview settings button' to see them is really cr4ptacular.
|
Vengal Seyhan
Sten Industries
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 18:31:00 -
[299]
Originally by: Perry How about...
Local Pod Probe (fits into Recon Probe Launcher) - analyzes the current System for active Pod-Transmitters - 15seconds needed to provide a list of players in this system
Local Pod Scanner Array (POS Module) - needs Sov 1 - changes Local from delayed to instant mode for every pilot in same ally (or for all players, if former doesnt work)
NPC 0.0(eg Stain) becomes valueless without a deployable module of some description.
In addition to your above suggestions, an anchorable module, like a bubble, would be even better. Make people invest some time in setting up security for their ratting / mining.
PS - An Observator probe is a great solution to this problem - it covers an entire system and gives you location and shiptype for the entire system.
However, I sure as hell want an auto-repeat on that scan, or it's more button mashing. I'd also want it to be quickler than its current default speed of 120 seconds (minimun 24 approx, with a rigged covops).
I do not want to have to rely upon other people for my fun in game. I have played this game most of two and a half years mostly solo, and that's not going to change.. Politics and networking for cooperative support is one thing I can accept... but anything that makes solo ratting or mining in 0.0 impossible or massivly more of a pain in the arse is the death of the game for me.
...and my three active and one inactive acount.
|
Vengal Seyhan
Sten Industries
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 18:59:00 -
[300]
Originally by: Christari Zuborov I'm all for removing local - would make 0.0 much more fun.
When I heard this I posted that if implemented, it would solidly gain my vote of confidence that they haven't gone completely soft on us hard core players. This game is where we came many years ago for the sole reason that it's supposed to be the deadliest game out there.
There needs to be a real reason to go to cheaper fitted ships, and this would be a good reason to fly them. Don't undock what you can't afford to lose.
We need more blood in the water.
In contrast, I think that CCPs survival as a company, and hence survival of the game we all play, relies upon them attracting as wide and stable a userbase as possible.
'Hardcore' is niche; a bit like the top chain predator. For every wolf there are 100 bison, or elk. For every lion there are 100 wildebeest. Also: right now there's something of a drought on - it's called a global recession. People are going to be considering what they do with their hard-earned, and might not stump for as many eve accounts (you know, the people who run 6 accounts).
To maintain viability, and attract more casual players, rather than relying on a specialised group of PvPer, I think Eve probably needs to get less hardcore.
BTW : I'm one of those multiple accounts, but I have the luxury of not having to pay for them, because I farm ISK... That'll get harder to do as people find it harder to justify selling GTCs, and the prices go up.
|
|
Grim Vandal
Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 19:20:00 -
[301]
Originally by: Kagura Nikon now somethign that must be tuned is. MAke way that smaller gangs have more chance of passing by undetected tahn large gangs.. why? because this creates for the very first time a drawback on beign on a blob!
IF the scan is changed so that its much easier to detect a large fleet, but very small gangs have more chance of not beign detected, taht would really HELP gerrilha warfare! Then CCp coudl achieve their promisse to not let eve become a blob online game.
you win the thread ...
... not the spelling contest tho
Greetings Grim |
Raife Zetter
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 21:40:00 -
[302]
Edited by: Raife Zetter on 31/10/2008 21:41:35 my2p,
They should use a ~14AU scanner disc that works just like the original Elite, with ship indications rather than being a ''blob'' at the end of the height indicator, being the symbols you see in the overview.
|
SniperWo1f
Omega Enterprises 0mega Factor
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 21:45:00 -
[303]
Edited by: SniperWo1f on 31/10/2008 21:45:16
Originally by: Grim Vandal
Originally by: Kagura Nikon now somethign that must be tuned is. MAke way that smaller gangs have more chance of passing by undetected tahn large gangs.. why? because this creates for the very first time a drawback on beign on a blob!
IF the scan is changed so that its much easier to detect a large fleet, but very small gangs have more chance of not beign detected, taht would really HELP gerrilha warfare! Then CCp coudl achieve their promisse to not let eve become a blob online game.
you win the thread ...
... not the spelling contest tho
no... you do lmao!!
|
Alhana Sat'ir
Amarr z3r0 Gravity Tygris Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 23:57:00 -
[304]
My 2 isk:
Local changing to passive is a great idea. The proposed change forces people to work as a team to accomplish goals in 0.0/lowsec, namely making isk.
However, another possible change to complement this could be something such as a scanner with the same ~14 AU range that automatically refreshes every so often.. maybe the refresh delay could be different with different ship types?
I'll admit, I didn't read every post on here, I just skimmed through, but I noticed people saying that a scanner doesn't let you know if someone is hostile to you or not. Well, whoever said this is flat wrong. You can set your scanner to only show reds, or reds and neutrals, so this is definitely a feasible idea.
I think the direction that CCP is taking with this proposed change is great, it gives organized gangs a leg-up over traditional (bleh) blob warfare. This is a signature.
Signed, Person whose signature this is. |
Bruce Deorum
Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 00:03:00 -
[305]
Ι sometime myself suggested something likethat.
Kill Local as it is, let it work in a way that reports feedback through scanner (automatically , without having to spam scan all time).
Much more realistic. You can see only in limited range and only ship type. Each ship types scanner has different range, perhaps there is a skill involved. Recons get another usefull role. You cant see pilot name (how would you see pilot in normal circumstances) Perhaps a FOF system tells you if he is red or blue, and something last (it needs some thought) inform in case of gate activation.
Gives a true element of surprise, As it should be in 0.0 regions. More action to be involved. I rat myselft a lot but i dont worry about ratters. They'll think of something
|
Christari Zuborov
Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 01:53:00 -
[306]
Originally by: Vengal Seyhan
Originally by: Christari Zuborov I'm all for removing local - would make 0.0 much more fun.
When I heard this I posted that if implemented, it would solidly gain my vote of confidence that they haven't gone completely soft on us hard core players. This game is where we came many years ago for the sole reason that it's supposed to be the deadliest game out there.
There needs to be a real reason to go to cheaper fitted ships, and this would be a good reason to fly them. Don't undock what you can't afford to lose.
We need more blood in the water.
In contrast, I think that CCPs survival as a company, and hence survival of the game we all play, relies upon them attracting as wide and stable a userbase as possible.
'Hardcore' is niche; a bit like the top chain predator. For every wolf there are 100 bison, or elk. For every lion there are 100 wildebeest. Also: right now there's something of a drought on - it's called a global recession. People are going to be considering what they do with their hard-earned, and might not stump for as many eve accounts (you know, the people who run 6 accounts).
To maintain viability, and attract more casual players, rather than relying on a specialised group of PvPer, I think Eve probably needs to get less hardcore.
BTW : I'm one of those multiple accounts, but I have the luxury of not having to pay for them, because I farm ISK... That'll get harder to do as people find it harder to justify selling GTCs, and the prices go up.
HiSec is that way ----------------->
People like you don't understand that us 'hard core' players live for something more tactical, live for something more scary, and live for something more challenging. Hard core is niche, and by giving us a system that relies upon the inhabitants using their brains, means more like-minded subscribers.
Carebears have their carebear land, they've seen to that, unfortunately they've carried all of us players that DIDN'T ever want that WITH THEM. Give us back the land of unknown, uncaring, crawl and scratch your way out of trouble because you've landed in the pit of hell.
0.0 - Intel is what you make of it. Click scan every 3 seconds for all I care. Post guards on gates to make sure people aren't coming to take your honey - fine. If you're out there with your arse hanging in the wind, well, too bad for you. Boost the rewards for playing here to at least five times above the next tier, you're playing with all the realism options on, and you deserve it baby!
LowSec - Intel is a hybrid of 0.0 and HiSec, gives you some info and doesn't give you some info. Maybe tells you how many are in system automatically, but doesn't tell you who anyone is unless they speak. Rewards here are significantly boosted. You're taking real risk and deserve real reward, 0.0'ish rewards.
HiSec - Intell is done as is now. Rewards should be less than they are now - it's already too easy. This is the land where you teeth your skills, but can't make anything in comparison to those who risk themselves. Industry needs to be significantly nerfed, mining should be based on 'this is how it's done' rather than have macro'ers becoming moguls of industry, or GTC buyers cornering markets with their surplus of real cash. HiSec should have a graduated tax scheme, the greater the transfer of item worth, or isk, the greater the taxes. New players won't have much cash, older players are going to start losing it. EvE is a loving Universe, and you're paying your part to help the newbies in ISK! You've surrounded yourselves with the loving arms of Concorde, but it should now cost you greatly. HiSec should be, "Congratulations, you're the biggest kid in kindergarten" You want money? You need to risk it...
|
Trit
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 03:12:00 -
[307]
This is so stupid it is beyond words. Fo all the obvious reasons but for several others.
Your in a freighter jumping jump bridge to jump bridge to fuel the POS's that are needed to maintain sov and even tho you have a scout you have no idea if there is a giant blob of nano*****s and cloaking butholes waiting to take you out.
All that you would ensure is that it would take a very large group of players to move the simplest stuff around that it would make this game very boring.
I would have to wait for hours for everyone to assemble and everyone would have to spend their online time escorting ships. This game would get to time consuming to achomplish even the smallest task. I know that CCP wants to make the game team oriented but this is way too far.
Have you even contemplated the ripple effect of this beyond the miners?????
As Moostang said on page 1 this would be an E.L.E. for me and my 5 accounts
This idea is rubbish.
The only people that this will help are the ones that are so totally useless as pirates that they cannot scan and intercept a ship floating in a belt. They need their hands held to make even a simple kill as it is never mind what advantage this would give them.
Everyone who mines in 0.0 know the risks and know that they have to be constantly vigilant to ensure survival. I hate it when SE comes around so much so that if they are reported 10 jumps out I immediately dock up because they are completely leathal with the scanner etc.
So why CCP would you want to help out the lazy and make them better then they are.
I don't pay to play this game to constantly die, as a industrialist I need to have a fighting chance to survive.
|
Adm Tecumseh
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 04:47:00 -
[308]
This idea will radically change the way 0.0 is played.
If I had confidence in ccp to make changes that are actually balanced I would be more inclined to say "maybe this is ok"
My immediate response was ffs they ****ing up the game again but with a little thought I can see some cool challenges.
1) Have local only show friendlies based on standings.
2) Since a gate has to fire to get into a system make it a tone or a blinky on screen to ensure that you know the gate has fired.
3) Have local time delayed so that after five minutes the person becomes "visible" in local chat
4) completely implement the Sov system. By this I mean gate guns, standings based Star Gates. Sov 4 systems should be completely scannable even for cloaked ships.
5) get rid of belts so that they have to be found. That way the wannabe pirate would also have to scan them out. (keep in mind the 5 minute timer)
6) add missions to Starbases based on standings to the NPC's ie: if the corp that owns the station has the highest standing to Caldari Navy then add agents to the Starbase that reflect the corp standings. (this would encourage people to remain in 0.0, if standings got high enough you may even find yourself with a quality level 4 agent in your starbase. This would encourage team play)
7) Make rorqual EW immune so that it becomes a more viable platform for deepspace mining. ( no one I know of uses rorqual in 0.0 for anything relating to mining, not saying no one does but no one I know of.)
8) Make Rorqual compress ore more then it does so that it would work in conjunction with the new black-ops transport ships. Or give Rorqual the ability to refine rather then compress. ( the bpo's for compression could be changed to bpo's for refine etc)
9) Make all cloaking ships use fuel, Non covert should be at a rate of like 50 LO per hour while covert ships should use it at a rate of 5 LO per hour. ( possibly increased or decreased based upon cloaknig skills etc.) Also consider a cloak start up fee of 5 LO for non covert and 1 LO for a covert ops ship. This would allow people to get around 0.0 efectively but not allow them to camp for weeks undetectable.
10) reserved for any future idea's that I may come up with.
|
Christari Zuborov
Amarr Ore Mongers Black Hand.
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 06:59:00 -
[309]
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
1) Have local only show friendlies based on standings.
Nope, no macro possibilities here. Whether it's a friendly, nuetral, or hostile - it should be treated the same.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
2) Since a gate has to fire to get into a system make it a tone or a blinky on screen to ensure that you know the gate has fired.
Nope, no macro possibilities here. Whether it's a friendly, nuetral, or hostile - it should be treated the same.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
3) Have local time delayed so that after five minutes the person becomes "visible" in local chat
Agreed.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
4) completely implement the Sov system. By this I mean gate guns, standings based Star Gates. Sov 4 systems should be completely scannable even for cloaked ships.
If you own more than you can protect, then there shouldn't be a mechanic that protects it.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
5) get rid of belts so that they have to be found. That way the wannabe pirate would also have to scan them out. (keep in mind the 5 minute timer)
There's no need to scan for the belt, if you can scan for the ship.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
6) add missions to Starbases based on standings to the NPC's ie: if the corp that owns the station has the highest standing to Caldari Navy then add agents to the Starbase that reflect the corp standings. (this would encourage people to remain in 0.0, if standings got high enough you may even find yourself with a quality level 4 agent in your starbase. This would encourage team play)
Starbases? You are BoB right? People will be 'encouraged' to stay in 0.0 based on the whether they want to play at higher risk for higher reward.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
7) Make rorqual EW immune so that it becomes a more viable platform for deepspace mining. ( no one I know of uses rorqual in 0.0 for anything relating to mining, not saying no one does but no one I know of.)
Nope... No reason to. Rorquals have a great use - guard it. This isn't about how you got into BoB to use a dual account for compression while mining with your alt. This would be about team play, making sure that you use your resources in good manner. Keep in mind that it would be the same across the board.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
8) Make Rorqual compress ore more then it does so that it would work in conjunction with the new black-ops transport ships. Or give Rorqual the ability to refine rather then compress. ( the bpo's for compression could be changed to bpo's for refine etc)
No reason to... If you plan accordingly, the rorq can compress all kinds of ore in batches. You don't need to compress every 10 minutes, mine a ton, compress a ton and guard your stuff while you're at it.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
9) Make all cloaking ships use fuel, Non covert should be at a rate of like 50 LO per hour while covert ships should use it at a rate of 5 LO per hour. ( possibly increased or decreased based upon cloaknig skills etc.) Also consider a cloak start up fee of 5 LO for non covert and 1 LO for a covert ops ship. This would allow people to get around 0.0 efectively but not allow them to camp for weeks undetectable.
Agreed, at a much higher rate.
Originally by: Adm Tecumseh
10) reserved for any future idea's that I may come up with.
Good thing there's a reply button!
|
Adm Tecumseh
Destructive Influence Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 10:03:00 -
[310]
Originally by: Christari Zuborov
A whole variety of anti bob comments in the game development forum.
If your so upset that you were turned away, try crying on coad. This area is reserved to try and make the game better
If you have anything useful to suggest you can try suggesting it here.
|
|
Sebea
Bottomfeeders Science and Research
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 20:23:00 -
[311]
So, out of all the tears here, nobody has answered any of the driving questions behind this:
How is it balanced that you warp and cloak, warp to a POS, or warp and log off THE VERY SECOND YOU SEE A NEW LOCAL CONTACT?
I mean, honestly, unless your not actually at your computer, there's literally 0 risk involved in ratting right now.
Whats the point in roaming an enemies space right now? To fight his giant defense blob? What if you just want to put a dent in its members wallets? What, logging off is supposed to be good enough?
I think we have an entire nerf coming (speed) cause half you whiney S.O.B's were ****ed you couldn't actually kill the nano ships, so you can take that argument and stick it up your a**.
Anybody right now defending local as a needed tool for safety in 0.0, or calling it balanced, is either personally deluded, or lying to support their own agenda.
Right now, its totally skewed in favor of the ratter, and the hunter has a one in a million chance of catching someone.
YOU chose to come out to 0.0, YOU chose to make your money by ratting, YOU knew that 0.0 meant the chance of loss, and yet YOU are all now whining about the fact that your free isk making venture may finally have some drawbacks.
So, if you want to keep local, how would you propose that 0.0 roaming be made more viable, without the frustration that is every target you see logs off, cloaks, posses up, ect normally before you've even loaded grid from your initial jump in?
Also, LOL at all the guys threatening to quit because they take out local. Screw you buddy, everybody was O.K. when its time to nerf Nano ships, which actually effected a whole play style, and now you expect me to care when your threatening to quit about something that helps PVP in this game, I don't think so, free up some server space, delete your account.
Oh, and keep your stuff, I don't want it, mine is better.
|
vallhalla
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 20:54:00 -
[312]
Isk farmers and careberas where whining against nano roaming gangs. Now CCP is nerfing it. Removing local is a nice strike back.
At least one good move from CCP. Good job.
|
Virgo I'Platonicus
Ex Eventus Corpi
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 21:31:00 -
[313]
The best change ever!!! Should go for low sec as well!
V. <3 |
BadMessage
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 22:03:00 -
[314]
Thoughts from an 10 month "rookie".
IMO, this would be a terrible change. If PVP'ers are going to chase and gank, at least they should have to use covert ops and recon scanners.
But, if it is going to happen... is there a futures trading market for high-grade ore?? The price of this stuff will increase dramatically after the 0.0 miners are more vulnerable.
|
Adaris
Instigators Incorperated
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 22:08:00 -
[315]
Edited by: Adaris on 01/11/2008 22:09:26 I HATE this idea. Thats why I want to see it added to TQ. We should mix things up again. Anyone remember when local across the cluster died after an Eve Voice patch? It was chaos. The universe was dark, grim and scary. It was wonderful - coming from a carebear with teeth's point of view.
We should at least give it a trial on SiSi.
Edit:
However, I do think that the current mechanics of the onboard scanner and its ui should be redone before making this change live. I'd be happy with the ability to remove allied ships from the scanner like you can on overview. *******
I speak on behalf of every corporation. |
Tappits
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 23:55:00 -
[316]
If these changes go ahead the only thing i will be doing in 0.0 is fleet fights all other accounts will be moved/closed. its just not worth the risk with no local ---------------------------------------------- Pro BOB????? I fail At forums |
Sebea
Bottomfeeders Science and Research
|
Posted - 2008.11.02 00:03:00 -
[317]
Originally by: BadMessage Thoughts from an 10 month "rookie".
IMO, this would be a terrible change. If PVP'ers are going to chase and gank, at least they should have to use covert ops and recon scanners.
How would the bold bit help us at all?
Seriously, think about it before you answer.
There is NOTHING, repeat NOTHING you can do to kill an active player AT HIS KEYBOARD in 0.0 space, who is ratting or mining.
As soon as he sees you in local, anywhere from 10-20 seconds BEFORE you yourself can even see the system, the ratter or miner in question is already in warp to a safe spot, POS, or just plain logging off. If they go to a SS, they simply cloak.
Taking away cloaks on ships that aren't designed to cloak, or adding fuel costs to cloaks...wait for it...WILL NOT HELP.
Ratter, warps to ss, cloaks, see's new "cloakship scanners" on scan, or waits just a few minutes, and LOGS OFF, same problem, different work around, roamers are still screwed, and ratters are still invincible.
Originally by: BadMessage But, if it is going to happen... is there a futures trading market for high-grade ore?? The price of this stuff will increase dramatically after the 0.0 miners are more vulnerable.
No, not till they remove those particular minerals as drops from high sec mission loot refining.
You would be amazed at the amount of minerals that a level 4 mission can generate, and the time that it takes you to get it.
Really, they could kill 2 birds with one stone here, to help balance the different between high sec lvl 4's and 0.0, and make it worth more to be in 0.0 at the same time by doing that, but that's a whole different topic.
|
Cpt Branko
Surge.
|
Posted - 2008.11.02 00:17:00 -
[318]
Originally by: Sebea
Taking away cloaks on ships that aren't designed to cloak, or adding fuel costs to cloaks...wait for it...WILL NOT HELP.
On the other hand, making rats tackle will, problem solved without breaking everything else.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint |
Draahk Chimera
Caldari Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.02 17:11:00 -
[319]
If they go through with the local delay I terminate my accounts. That easy. It takes about 4 hours in the belts to make enough isk for a t2 fitted rigged hac for pvp. Pvp then lasts maybe 1 hour. So even though I consider myself a pvper. A vet of many many wars by now. 4/5 of my time is spent carebearing in the belts. If I cannot see a hostile ganker in local (and face it scanner wont help because every ganker including myself would insta train recon 5) I will die and loose ratting hacs and/or bs probably 3-4 times more often then I can make money to replace them. People who do not quit will simply move their alts to empire lvl4 mission hubs so there will be no targets anyway and .0 will be depopulated as people either quit or move their alts. The only people in .0 will be the cloaked roaming recon gangs and the cloaked recon defence gangs. Who will never see eachother and thus probably never engage.
|
Imhothar Xarodit
Minmatar Wolverine Solutions
|
Posted - 2008.11.02 18:08:00 -
[320]
Edited by: Imhothar Xarodit on 02/11/2008 18:09:14
Originally by: CCP Casqade 1. Put local in delayed mode on Singularity for testing purposes. 2. Get feedback on what issues arises, pros and cons. 3. Build and improve tools to balance the issues, pros and cons, based on the feedback. 4. Put the new tools on Singularity for testing purposes. 5. Get feedback on issues, pros and cons. 6. See point 3. 7. Weigh the old system against the new system - See what we learned and how we can continue.
Honestly, this won't work on Sisi, because on the test server there is no risk. Nobody is concerned about territorial warfare, combat is only based on mutual agreement and losing ships does not hurt. You'd have to mimik the "real" circumstances of TQ for several days, if not weeks. So if people on the test server say the change is OK, you cannot expect it to work on TQ as the environment is totally different there. I also doubt that there are many people mining/ratting on Sisi. This is holds true nomatter what kind of replacing system you want to test.
|
|
Yggdrassil
Amarrian Missionaires
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 01:51:00 -
[321]
Really divided on how to look at the local thingy.
If implemented - some tools has to go: 1. Rats killed last hour/24 hours. 2. Jumps last xxx hours.
If delayed mode, as in you become visible after x minutes in system, you got to STAY in system x minutes to see who's already there.
The biggest issue I see isn't actually the roaming gangs getting a lot of free kills - as long as the tools mentioned up there is changed too. The NIGHTMARE will be moving your transports/freighters anywhere. Hostile (moving) cloaking gatecamps will own supply runs unless you bring a big size fleet to protect it.
Guessing some tools would have to be implemented to be able to scout for cloaked camps. Perhaps giving one of the recon ships the ability to fit a new dedicated probe launcher that is able to detect cloaked, piloted ships, with a rather fast scan time (2 mins perhaps. Not pin-pointing, but just seeing if there are some, and not 100% accurate. 10-15% chance per ship perhaps (not sig based) - so you would be reasonable safe vs a camp of 10-15 ppl. This would make scouting for hostile viable, while the odds of finding the lone ratter is pretty low using this method. POSSIBLY "nerfed" by forcing a local message about that a probe has been launched.
In 0.0 I believe this would have a positive effect by spreading people a lot more around. An overhaul of the true-sec thingy is long overdue though. Systems with -0.0 to -0.7 or so seriously need some rat love. Buff them regarding npc rats while still keeping (most) of the very very best spawns in the lowest truesec systems. Ore don't really need to be touched - just spread some love for those who don't wanna do those boring mining ops.
Possibly, you also would want to look at probing times. Skilled players are able to probe really really fast - which might need balancing vs no-local "tool". Currently, especially with the changes of large guns/drones vs small size ships, you would pretty often be unable to kill off the scambling frigs even if you pick up on the hostile gangs as soon as they come in if their prober is good. (Tipping the balance too far towards the prober: If you pick up the incoming hostiles really fast, you SHOULD be pretty sure that you're able to get out safely). Another (boring) option would possibly be to have all NPC scramblers doing their scrambling within smartbomb range and making smartbombs only affect "legal" targets (war targets, blinking red targets + npc).
_______________________________ __ __ l l_l l l _ AVE A NICE l__l l__l ___ l ' . l D i l.___, 'AY
_______________________________
Yggdrassil |
Vigaz
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 11:24:00 -
[322]
I think local can be removed, but only with a buff to the actual scanner system.
Just an idea, new Local:
1) only real-time number of people present into the system. 2) 5 mins delay to appear into the æLocalÆ with details (unless chatting before 5 mins).
Also new Overview:
1) merge old overview and scanner window into new real-time tool (without update button) to show ships in grid and in scanner range (14au). 2) provide standing (red/blue/neut) and pilot name also for ships in scanner range but not in grid. 3) do not provide information for covert ships (SB/covertop recons BO) not in grid but in scan range only.
òeasy to detect blobs, numbers in local are still present. òsolo Ninja/rattin still viable. number of ppl present in local will provide the essential information to understand if is time to kill npcs or to hide/run. òa small boost to cloakable ships and to small gang.
|
Total Disaster
Caldari The Zett Family
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 11:33:00 -
[323]
the only essential info in local chat is - how many neutrals are in system - how many friendlies as in system (good standings) - how many reds are in system (bad standings)
so, take a tiny amount of the HUD and put 3 numbers on it. a red number for enemies in system a blue number for friendlies in system a white number for neutrals in system
no need for a total number... keeps the brain fit
|
SirDanceAlot
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 14:02:00 -
[324]
Remove local, give new scanner that scans depending on fleet size and signature, nerf cloaks on non spec ships.
|
Rhaegor Stormborn
Omega Fleet Enterprises Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 14:17:00 -
[325]
I have waited a long time for the removal of local as an intelligence tool. I'd go with making the current scanner more advanced. One thing the new scanner would/should do is indicate wether the ship in question has positive, neutral, or negative standings to your alliance or corporation.
|
Seph Res
Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 15:53:00 -
[326]
ok first of all i have to say i wasnt reading 11 pages of text in this thread, only the op, and if this idea was already mentioned im sry for it, i give it a try anyways:
if there will be a delayed local chat in 0.0 there should be some more info available with the ships scanner:
my idea would be some kind of proximity scanner, a movable small window showing for example a sphere or some 2d circles at 5 10 15 au that scans all the time, not exactly the shiptype that would be too much info, but just the detection of a ship within your standard scanrange, lets say a small dot and approximate direction of the object
so as soon a ship enters the scanrange you have a visualization that someone is near you no matter if friend or foe, you miners or ratters still have a small chance to leave the belt, mostly would be too late anyways
|
Vegetable Goodsoup
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 16:01:00 -
[327]
I am all for the changes if CCP brings the rewards of low-sec and 0.0 in line with the risk.Basicly they raised the risk while not giving any incentive to actualy stay in 0.0.
Alot of people would think like this:Why should I risk my 100mil BS ratting or my hulk in 0.0 when I can happily stay in empire and make 10% less isk but wont have the risk of loosing anything.
|
M'etal
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 16:15:00 -
[328]
Cant wait that this happens.
All noobs will be wtf
|
Dikanal
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 16:29:00 -
[329]
A nerf to local will ruin roaming gang pvp.
Local nerf gain, catch more ratters woohoo! \o/
Local nerf loss, roaming gangs wasting time having to thoroughly search systems perhaps even having to probe them to find out no ones in there instead of just seeing if there is a potential target or not and I can see alliances leaving lots of ships in POS to fudge up directional scanners.
Say yay for catching ratters \o/ lets make roaming gang pvp a long winded grind.
|
Augeas
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 18:01:00 -
[330]
Originally by: Draahk Chimera If they go through with the local delay I terminate my accounts. That easy. It takes about 4 hours in the belts to make enough isk for a t2 fitted rigged hac for pvp. Pvp then lasts maybe 1 hour.
Risk and danger? In 0.0? Intolerable! Actually, if you're relying on ratting to fund your pvp then you're clearly the kind of masochist that would enjoy getting ganked.
|
|
1Miner Girl
M. Corp Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 01:18:00 -
[331]
What YOU PEOPLE don't seem to understand that there are more than solo ratters doing things in 0.0.
For example, black op ships. It doesn't feel very sneaky or covert when you pop up in local. Secondly, local adds to the blob problems since you can easily see how many they have, you simply get more than that then try and engage. Then that group evades until they get more.
There have been so many changes in this game that people claim to be sky falling, epic failures, and they are always wrong. CCP isn't just going to yank local and leave at that. It will be replaced with a progressive system, probably enabling better intel the deeper you are in your own territory. This will also give more reason for alliances to expand and increase their sov to help see enemies coming.
I am in favor of local being completely removed and a intel based system to replace it through out the entire game. I know people rip on others for saying "its not real". But local is the most unrealistic thing in the game atm from a standpoint that you can't even come up with a fantasy solution to why it exists ------------------------------------------ Iz made a post. |
Nathaniel Hull
Caldari 808 Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 08:29:00 -
[332]
Hey i mise as well repost what i said on the blaster thread.
Honestly it find it laughable that these "game devs" cant just fix the nano ships that they are trying to nerf and instead have to nerf everthing else. I mean they simply must not be able to think outside the box. Frankly devs if you destroy local missiles, mwds, and all tracking speed so that we honestly mise as well fight with frig weapons on all ships. I QUIT...I QUIT...I QUIT.
Ive invested alot of time in EvE and its a shame game devs ruin such a great universe. This is like what SOE did to starwars the combat system is gonna be crap. And without local and weapon nerfs the ability to fight in small groups or alone is dead. BLOBS BLOBS BLOBS hey if there is enough of us something might hit.
Im Canceling my account on impact of patch.
To the devs who thought this was the way to play fornicate yourselves with a sharpe iron stick repeatedly in the rear.
|
Mag's
MASS
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 09:15:00 -
[333]
Originally by: 1Miner Girl What YOU PEOPLE don't seem to understand...........
What I understand is, that in a seemingly simply task of nerfing the nano problem, (of which they created) they have set about swinging the nerf sledgehammer at the WHOLE game. Now with that in mind, I have absolutely no confidence what so ever, in any change they make to local.
And please, lets not try and bring 'realistic' into the argument. It's a game. Last I heard, you play games for fun, not for time consuming chores. Let face it, eve already has plenty of those.
Mag's
Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you. |
Kirtan Loor
Divine Retribution Sons of Tangra
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 11:14:00 -
[334]
This might be.....different.
Do not be afraid of change guys. Instead of that put some suggestions to fix the problems that might arise from this change.
Here is my contribution to this thread:
For High-Sec: Keep local lit up. Local navy should be watching and broadcasting this info.
For Low-Sec: Keep local hidden. Local navies do not care much about what goes in here.
For 0.0: Let local info be connected to Sov. level. For sub lvl3 sov's keep local hidden. In 0.0 this will provide "stealth" for both hunters and victims. For sov. level 3 and above let the sov. owner decide on local window status. |
Crellion
Art of War Exalted.
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 11:48:00 -
[335]
To all of the lame wannabe pvp ers that dont get enough kills with local as it is:
First time you jump into my local and attack that Execuror on the gate for 30 of us to decloak out of thin air I will be laughing at you noobs. This change is the equivalent of loggofski traps being made the norm... ghay pvp just became THE pvp...
Poor eve...
Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim. |
Erim Kaluk
Minmatar Valklear Guard
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 12:06:00 -
[336]
Originally by: Mag's
And please, lets not try and bring 'realistic' into the argument. It's a game. Last I heard, you play games for fun, not for time consuming chores. Let face it, eve already has plenty of those.
This
|
Morris Falter
The Collective Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 12:52:00 -
[337]
Originally by: Crellion To all of the lame wannabe pvp ers that dont get enough kills with local as it is:
First time you jump into my local and attack that Execuror on the gate for 30 of us to decloak out of thin air I will be laughing at you noobs. This change is the equivalent of loggofski traps being made the norm... ghay pvp just became THE pvp...
Poor eve...
Oh god, there's no way to counter this! ITS THE END.
Oh,han..
|
Crellion
Art of War Exalted.
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 12:56:00 -
[338]
Originally by: Morris Falter
Originally by: Crellion To all of the lame wannabe pvp ers that dont get enough kills with local as it is:
First time you jump into my local and attack that Execuror on the gate for 30 of us to decloak out of thin air I will be laughing at you noobs. This change is the equivalent of loggofski traps being made the norm... ghay pvp just became THE pvp...
Poor eve...
Oh god, there's no way to counter this! ITS THE END.
Oh,han..
There are many ways to counter it... like a vast support intelligence network which will simply make the gameeven more blob dependent...its all bad dude...
Arguably my opinions represent to an extent the opinions of my alliance and in particular circumstances give rise to a valid "casus belli" claim. |
Evan Batarr
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 16:32:00 -
[339]
I'm sure all the Titan pilots will be very happy with that change - expect to be DD'ed all the time
|
BiggestT
Caldari Space Oddysey Pupule 'Ohana
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 17:06:00 -
[340]
Originally by: Corp Quas
Originally by: Good Sir Frankly, I beg to differ. Your ship always has an on board scanner. I highly suggest you learn how to use it.
Apparently you dont even know much about the onboard scanner as it has no way to show friend or foe.
Also, having to click the scanner every 2 seconds while i'm already doing 10 other things isnt exactly a balance.
Id personally like it if constellation became the new local. You can stil lsee if reds are about, just not where. EVE history
Missiles post-nerf |
|
Keitaro Baka
Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises Babylon Project
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 17:10:00 -
[341]
It's a bad solution.
As one of those people that started playing in beta I can honestly say this is the first time CCP announced a possible change that will probably see me quit the game.
Yeah yeah my many accounts bla bla bla, that's not the point tho
See the thing is, I don't like how you can never be really stealthie in this game. I don't like how easy it is to gatecamp. I don't like how hard it can be for new people to get into the game. I don't like nano-bundle of twiggs and I don't like blobbing. I hate titans, falcon alts, griefers, macro-ers and all the times my drones got shafted by CCP. I seriously hate the whining about getting people out of highsec into lowsec. Seriously, adapt.
As I live with it, on almost all sides of the fences, I nano my vagas and grief with my bomber/recons, I blob all over the place when I can. Granted I haven't pirated or scammed yet, but hey a guy only has so much time.
Even if it's only in 0.0, local as it is now makes people that do not have sugar daddies at least to an extent able to play in relative security and peace. It also gives you the most time to actually set up a response fleet. To say this solution is a doubleedged sword is an understatement. It might be the best of the bad solutions, but in that case the problem is just not that big.
How often have I gotten invading fleets waiting for a decent response fleet, complaining about it taking too long.. this wil only make it worse, meaning small gang warfare just becomes small scale blob griefing. Fun. The less info you have, the bigger gang you want, meaning more blobbing in general (cos we all know that is what will happen for the bigger alliances).
Will it get more people in 0.0? Perhaps, some regions are easier to get into, some will just have to be permacamped by the retaining alliance. Fun. Solo-ers will get more kills? Maybe, but I'm guessing ratting and mining in 0.0 will be even more blobbed, making it even less fun for the solo recons/ratter hunters.
Leave local as it is. It's not perfect. What in this game is? And this solution will indeed see less industrialism in general in eve (many will just quit or quit supplying pvp-ers), prices will rise for anyone not in completely selfsufficient alliances and blobbers will rules even harder. Fun. Not.
All the stuff above does not necessarily reflect my corp, my alliance or even me.. Drone guide.. |
Elder Langley
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 21:51:00 -
[342]
My thoughts on local:
Is it unrealistic to imagine that the gates broadcast who is coming and going in a system?
Why not make it so those that enter system by obvious means (gates and normal cynos) are broadcasted to everyone currently in the system, but when you enter a system you have no idea who, what or how many are in the system. Also, if you enter the system via covert means (jump bridges, cov-ops cyno) you do not get your presence broadcasted to the system.
This system will benefit the patient and the "owners" of the system. Roaming gangs will need to have good skills with the scanner or a covert way to enter the system.
Any thoughts?
|
Poast Warrior
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 00:18:00 -
[343]
Local is fine the way it is, just leave it alone ffs.
|
Nathaniel Hull
Caldari 808 Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 05:31:00 -
[344]
Remove local, Fine. I'll be stupid too ill just put all kinds of ships all over systems at safe spots so no one will be able to guess at using their scanner. I have the isk and if you wanna keep messing with the game so will I. This nerf is only their for the roving pirates and would make everything from missioning to fleet engagements to mining harder. It promotes gate camps and blobs which are a negative on pvp in the long term.
again hey travel to placid their will be so many ships all over their post patch you will never know where anything is.
|
Keitaro Baka
Babylon Scientific and Industrial Enterprises Babylon Project
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 10:20:00 -
[345]
Originally by: CCP Casqade
Originally by: Gai Servos YOu cannot test something at this scale on sisi.
I believe you can, for the expressed purpose of finding what out what or at least getting a rough idea of what would be lacking if local was put in delayed mode. Why don't you think so? And what do you suggest instead?
I'm not Gai, but I'll answer those questions from my point of view:
80% Of the players that test somewhat regularly on SiSi are more able, serious and mature than 20% of the able, serious and mature players on TQ. 90% Of all testing on SiSi is done in and around FD-M, obviously because of the rules, but this means there is no normal travel like there would be on TQ.
Heck, when testing FW the devs regularly just threw whole gangs from one system to the other even when we had 800 people online, simply because the scale of a full region was too big for normal travel.
What does this local (and casual gaming experience) nerf actually impact?
It starts most obviously with the casual ratter/miner in 0.0. Possibly someone who just got home from wrk, only has an hour to play, or maybe his op started before he got home. Off to make a bit of iskies for a nice pewpew ship for the next one then. Since local doesn't provide instant intel anymore, he would have to check if anyone has seen enemies around, spam his scan button, keep aligned all the time and hope he doesn't get jumped by a cloak blob.
The alliance that holds this region needs to keep scouts out 23/7 to try and at least spot the enemy as they move in to kill a pos/gang/ratter/whatever at every accesspoint to the region. These scouts have to be active all the time. Fun job. Hopefully there will be some sov related intel option, obviously this won't help the smaller corps and casual gamers, but who cares. Even if such an option will exist it will probably be role related, so you need to have people with that role online all the time, providing intel for the rest of your group. Everybody will need to know all the systems, constellations and pathways by heart to actually use that intel. Chatter on sec channels will increase loads, making for a more chaotic experience.
The larger the blob you can get in without people noticing, the more potential for damage you can inflict. Whole battleship fleets can move through enemy space easy, especially if the enemy can't have enough scouts/intel people online all the time. Playing becomes more of a chore, especially for the casual gamer. How do you intend to actually test these scenarios? On a test server, tell people to mine/rat as if they are deep within their own space.. C'mon, eveybody will know they will be jumped and exactly by whom. There is no element of surprise when testing like this, hence any information you try to get from a test like this will be inaccurate exactly on the point you are testing for.
How can you test any type of alliance warfare on SiSi without using a TQDBclone where you guys don't remove all the sov and posses.. which we do to actually make sure sisi will not be used as a tool to spy on the enemy.. Just give some alliance a region and tell the rest to attack it? Again, where is the actual surprise, the politics, the tactics? No way to test that in a way you get useful and truthful information.
There is no way to test this in a correct and useful way. Your only choice is to just dump it on TQ after some ridiculously subjective tests on sisi, by people who will try and rig all the tests to make sure their side of the nerf will be picked (this happens all the time, but with balancing it's a lot easier to poke through). Then, after people get outraged, you simply either de-nerf or make even more nerfs/changes, making the game even easier for the big alliances who have all the isk and manpower they need.
My apologies for using this post to blatently state my opinions again :)
All the stuff above does not necessarily reflect my corp, my alliance or even me.. Drone guide.. |
M'etal
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 11:00:00 -
[346]
Edited by: M''etal on 05/11/2008 11:00:20 OMG
We got WAY TO MANY wow players here.
gtfo all you carebears.... omfg.....
WoW that way happy carebeaering.
|
Mag's
MASS
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 12:09:00 -
[347]
Edited by: Mag''s on 05/11/2008 12:10:36
Originally by: M'etal Edited by: M''etal on 05/11/2008 11:00:20 OMG
We got WAY TO MANY wow players here.
gtfo all you carebears.... omfg.....
WoW that way happy carebeaering.
You're so leet, can I have what you're taking and/or drinking please.
Mag's
Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you. |
M'etal
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 12:11:00 -
[348]
Quote:
You're so leet, can I have what you're taking and/or drinking please.
You dont have such thing in your country ;).
|
Mag's
MASS
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 12:13:00 -
[349]
Originally by: M'etal
Quote:
You're so leet, can I have what you're taking and/or drinking please.
You dont have such thing in your country ;).
Mag's
Originally by: Avernus One of these days, the realization that MASS is no longer significant will catch up with you. |
eliminator2
Gallente Heretic Army Heretic Nation
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 12:38:00 -
[350]
i don't no i like the idea of local change but i don't this is to drastik of a change tbh
|
|
|
CCP Casqade
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 13:10:00 -
[351]
This thread has been derailed and people are flaming, repeating themselves and trolling.
Those of you who have good and constructive feedback on changes to local, please post a thread here: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=channel&channelID=3523
I'm now locking this thread.
Originally by: Zulupark 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.
Source
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 .. 12 :: [one page] |