EVE Search - To the local nerf complainers, I give you:

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

To the local nerf complainers, I give you:

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Gone'Postal Minmatar Rage of Inferno	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:00:00 - [31] Originally by: Last Wolf They can completely remove local for all I care, with one conditions. GIVE STATIONS A FREAKING WINDOW SO I CAN LOOK OUTSIDE! Thank you LMFAO! Glass hasn't been invented in eve yet! Boost SISI VOTE NOW!
Escrava Isaura	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:02:00 - [32] Originally by: Fulber Originally by: Fulber They'll all be logged on their Motsu alts. Guess you missed this bit. Have fun scanning empty 0.0 systems. not if high-sec reward is rebalanced (i mean nerfed to hell)
Fulber	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:03:00 - [33] Originally by: Escrava Isaura not if high-sec reward is rebalanced (i mean nerfed to hell) And annoy CCP's largest demographic?
Shadowsword COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:03:00 - [34] Edited by: Shadowsword on 27/10/2008 18:03:32 OP, maybe you should think 2 minutes about your own arguments, you'd understand how much nonsense they are. So you're proposing for 2 people or more to team up to rat, one or more scouting one or several gates, one or more ratting. Fine. Now, tell me, how much fun is the player(s) staring at the gate going to have? You know Eve is a game, and games are supposed to bring fun, right? Then, income will be split among the players. Fine. Now, how much does that mean, per player? I'll give you in hint, it's going to be about the same as high-sec mining. So what is the point of ratting in 0.0 in the first place? ------------------------------------------
Ruciza Minmatar The Feminists	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:09:00 - [35] Not to speak of that there will be something similarly automatic that will replace local. Something that better simulates the true lonely nature of space, where you need equipment and skills to find something, and not a global identification broadcast like it is now.
Fulber	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:10:00 - [36] Just remove local, everywhere, and leave the scanner as it is. You've still got your overview, what more do you want?
Escrava Isaura	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:12:00 - [37] Originally by: Fulber Originally by: Escrava Isaura not if high-sec reward is rebalanced (i mean nerfed to hell) And annoy CCP's largest demographic? that's Subjective, what do you mean? the true and proud carebears? or the uber PvPers that need to have an high-sec alt to make them money? Just give the true and proud carebears enough money to make them buy their ammo and from time to time exchange some LP for that shiny faction module to put in their raven. Also give them more and interesting content in the missions they have to run, make their playtime more enjoyable. To the uber PvPer's alts??? Adapt
Clair Bear Coalition of Nations Free Trade Zone.	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:21:00 - [38] Originally by: Shadowsword Now, tell me, how much fun is the player(s) staring at the gate going to have? Gates won't work because of logonski. Every ratter (or miner) will need a Falcon with them in the belt for best effect. Of course, the roaming gang will then have to include a Falcon-jamming falcon. Which means the defenders will need a falcon-jamming-jamming falcon. This could get silly fast.
Chr0nosX Ore Mongers Black Hand.	Posted - 2008.10.27 18:22:00 - [39] Edited by: Chr0nosX on 27/10/2008 18:24:56 This is a nerf to ratting in 0.0 which means less targets in 0.0 and more people running lvl 4s in hisec if this goes through lvl 4s need to be nerfed into oblivion or a boost to 0.0 ratting
Malka Badi'a Suffoco Noctis	Posted - 2008.10.27 19:10:00 - [40] Edited by: Malka Badi''a on 27/10/2008 19:10:17 A lot of interesting replies, and some valid(and not so valid) counterpoints to my own. We'll see where CCP takes it, of course. A lot of different playstyles to balance against, but I've trusted CCP for a very long time. I'm sure they'll work out some sort of benefit to removing local. Can't remember who said "ship should automatically detect others in scan range", but I like that. This of course begs the question: Who the hell authorized a ID signature for my ships? Especially in 0.0, I should be able to rip that out and ride as anon. Quote: Gates won't work because of logonski. Every ratter (or miner) will need a Falcon with them in the belt for best effect. Of course, the roaming gang will then have to include a Falcon-jamming falcon. Which means the defenders will need a falcon-jamming-jamming falcon. This could get silly fast. It's falcons, all the way down. ---------
Straight Chillen Gallente Solar Wind	Posted - 2008.10.27 19:26:00 - [41] Please, Never Post again 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
Escrava Isaura	Posted - 2008.10.27 19:37:00 - [42] A way to balance the problem with cloakers and logonskis would be: Make the logonski a bannable tactic, i mean it's alot easier for CCP to this as opposed to the logoffski problem. Make the covert ops and force recons have a bigger timer until they can lock someone ( 6 sec. at the moment, it had to be twice at least), they would still be good to make slings but the ratter would still see the tackler coming on scanner. Also it would make the Falcon a little more balanced . Oh yeah the Pilgrim would definetelly need the range bonus after this one. This would also give a reason to use the combat recon ships over the force recons other then price and a little more dps. And to the ones saying that it would kill the force recons, i dont agree, they would still do their job, with a little delay for sure but at least they wouldnt break the game (everyone would fear a cloaker and never do anything at belts)
Roxanna Kell Caldari Provisions	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:10:00 - [43] The idea of no local is good, but ccp wants more players not make the few ones that prefer logic happy.
Polly Prissypantz Dingleberry Appreciation Society	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:18:00 - [44] The only fallacy I see in the OP's post is that of the OP ignoring any notion of actual fun or entertainment. Next time I run a 4 hour mining op I'm volunteering you to sit on the gate and let me know if any hostiles enter local. I suggest Minesweeper or Solitaire to be useful distractions while you get your fix of non-stop Eve excitement. If you do a good job I might promote you to be the dude that spams 360 scan every 2 seconds. I hope you have a robust index finger. And I suspect this to be a far-too common scene on regular roaming ops: "So lead scout, is there anyone in the next system." "Ah, I'm not sure. I've got a Myrmidon, Armageddon, 3 Ravens, a Badger II, 5 Shuttles, an Archon and a couple of Hulks on scan. Oh yeah, I'm also scanning about 10 control towers." "Oh jeez. OK, narrow down where all the ships are and then see if they're in line with any control towers. No, actually, Fk it, everyone just jump in and spam the belts." Yeah, sounds like hours of fun. Knowing instantly if there's someone in a system or not reduces a HUGE amount of tedium that would otherwise be necessary if you didn't know whether there's someone there to try and scan down or not. And lets face it, Eve already has far more tedium than necessary. St, I'm getting the urge to spend the next 8 hours anchoring a large POS just talking about all this tedium.
Rom springer Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:18:00 - [45] Originally by: Roxanna Kell The idea of no local is good, but ccp wants more players not make the few ones that prefer logic happy. come again???
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:41:00 - [46] Originally by: Misanth All valid points. But you assume the attackers are more than one, and that the defender is alone. Having scouts at gates will kill off the element of surprise (assuming the roamers don't use black ops, which is pretty hard to "roam" around in in itself and need multiple ships already btw..). It's not a simple solution, then it would've been done a long time ago. The key is to sort the current scanning system as well (from a intel-gathering tool perspective) - and possibly cloaked scouting at gates too - when this change comes through. That's exactly what was mentioned by Zulupark. Local will be replaced by another intelligence gathering tool. Ta-da, your post was pointless. Valid points, but only half the story and thus missed alot of important information. and? Those othe options are exaclty why local must go! Because stealth attacks must be possible! THis will be the first EVER great move agaisnt blob . Its simply military theory, there are basically 3 ways of a smaller force engage a larger force and win. 1-Superior technology and skills or capabilities. Not possible in game sicne almsot every group has players capable of flying any ship. The single exception might be titans in game 2-Be ablwee to stay out of the engagement envelope of the enemy, be that trough range or speed. That is what is beign nerfed because was overused. 3-Be stealthy and deny enemy knowledge about your movments so you can strike them when they are less prepared. THis is impossible because of local as of now. Without those 3 chances there is only 1 way to win. To BLOB. So allowign the 3rd option to get into game this will work a LOT against blobing.
SSgt Sniper Gallente MAIDS	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:41:00 - [47] Originally by: Polly Prissypantz The only fallacy I see in the OP's post is that of the OP ignoring any notion of actual fun or entertainment. Next time I run a 4 hour mining op I'm volunteering you to sit on the gate and let me know if any hostiles enter local. I suggest Minesweeper or Solitaire to be useful distractions while you get your fix of non-stop Eve excitement. If you do a good job I might promote you to be the dude that spams 360 scan every 2 seconds. I hope you have a robust index finger. And I suspect this to be a far-too common scene on regular roaming ops: "So lead scout, is there anyone in the next system." "Ah, I'm not sure. I've got a Myrmidon, Armageddon, 3 Ravens, a Badger II, 5 Shuttles, an Archon and a couple of Hulks on scan. Oh yeah, I'm also scanning about 10 control towers." "Oh jeez. OK, narrow down where all the ships are and then see if they're in line with any control towers. No, actually, Fk it, everyone just jump in and spam the belts." Yeah, sounds like hours of fun. Knowing instantly if there's someone in a system or not reduces a HUGE amount of tedium that would otherwise be necessary if you didn't know whether there's someone there to try and scan down or not. And lets face it, Eve already has far more tedium than necessary. St, I'm getting the urge to spend the next 8 hours anchoring a large POS just talking about all this tedium. qft
Malka Badi'a Suffoco Noctis	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:46:00 - [48] Originally by: Polly Prissypantz The only fallacy I see in the OP's post is that of the OP ignoring any notion of actual fun or entertainment. Next time I run a 4 hour mining op I'm volunteering you to sit on the gate and let me know if any hostiles enter local. I suggest Minesweeper or Solitaire to be useful distractions while you get your fix of non-stop Eve excitement. If you do a good job I might promote you to be the dude that spams 360 scan every 2 seconds. I hope you have a robust index finger. And I suspect this to be a far-too common scene on regular roaming ops: "So lead scout, is there anyone in the next system." "Ah, I'm not sure. I've got a Myrmidon, Armageddon, 3 Ravens, a Badger II, 5 Shuttles, an Archon and a couple of Hulks on scan. Oh yeah, I'm also scanning about 10 control towers." "Oh jeez. OK, narrow down where all the ships are and then see if they're in line with any control towers. No, actually, Fk it, everyone just jump in and spam the belts." Yeah, sounds like hours of fun. Knowing instantly if there's someone in a system or not reduces a HUGE amount of tedium that would otherwise be necessary if you didn't know whether there's someone there to try and scan down or not. And lets face it, Eve already has far more tedium than necessary. St, I'm getting the urge to spend the next 8 hours anchoring a large POS just talking about all this tedium. Honestly that entire example is based around not using the game mechanics already avaliable to you. You shouldn't have to wonder if there is a few locals or not in the first place. While delayed, "Show Pilots" in the last 30 minutes is a wonderful way for random hunting gangs to determine where they need to spend time and resources hunting around. Use the gate activations statistics too. If map is reporting low activity, both through gate jumps and active in-space pilots, then there's no reason to take your fleet over there. Plan ahead with something that only takes a few seconds, and you'll find a lot more targets than random system hopping.
Ruciza Minmatar The Feminists	Posted - 2008.10.27 20:56:00 - [49] Edited by: Ruciza on 27/10/2008 20:56:27 "Command to lead scout, what is the situation?" "Lead scout to command, system is quiet... ... too quiet." That alone should convince you that local must go.
Miss Marketing University of Caille	Posted - 2008.10.27 21:10:00 - [50] Screw the arguements for and against - lets talk the end result: A decrease in people in space doing things outside of the station in 0.0 thus increasing mission running in highsec and decreasing kills in 0.0. Yeah nerfing nanos and taking local away will be the end of pvp in 0.0 that isn't POS/SOV related.
Malka Badi'a Suffoco Noctis	Posted - 2008.10.27 21:16:00 - [51] Edited by: Malka Badi''a on 27/10/2008 21:16:19 Originally by: Miss Marketing Screw the arguements for and against - lets talk the end result: A decrease in people in space doing things outside of the station in 0.0 thus increasing mission running in highsec and decreasing kills in 0.0. Yeah nerfing nanos and taking local away will be the end of pvp in 0.0 that isn't POS/SOV related. I'm all for that. Why? The old-school mindset of 0.0 is gone. It's relatively easy now and rather lucrative, having lost a good chunk of it's "B.B.B.B.B..B..BUT IT'S 0.0!!!" scare. People have become lazy, careless, and they've begun to treat it like a magical land of ISK and warfare. It's time for a shakedown. People will go back to being on edge, to scanning all the time, to using the map's statistics to plan routes and traps. It won't be a luxuary fairyland unless you have the mindset and time to earn it. I'm all for that. I'm willing to put in that extra effort to survive, to adapt. I'm willing to fly with some corpmates and even spend 2-3 hours as a scout/defender, because it's what allows us to survive. I don't think I'm alone on that, either. ---------
Tappits Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2008.10.27 21:33:00 - [52] Originally by: Malka Badi'a Because honestly it applies to anyone in 0.0. Miners, pirates, fleets. You really shouldn't be mining solo in 0.0, nor should you be rat hunting solo. thay day i have to have a 5 man gang to warp to a belt and kill an NCP will be the day i quit these changes will be the death of the game, the only people that are likeing these changes are... 1: people that dont rat,mine,mission blar blar blar in 0.0 2: people that have not realy looked at it from all angles just the angle of been able to kill some one without them even knowing your there. 3: alts of 1's 4: alts of 2's 5: any one?
Lustralis	Posted - 2008.10.27 21:35:00 - [53] I've read arguments like these for literally 5 years on the forums and the basic facts never change, although the OP's almost always think they're some kind of genius with a totally new angle. You can't nerf local without removing static content. The reason for this is fairly basic, so even the OP should be able to understand it: you, the attacker, know where those exploiting static content are, or are very likely to be. Secondly, without passive intel gathering (such as local now provides), you effectively force the defender to commit possibly large resources (or at least man-power) towards what is basically a tedious and uninteresting activity: constant scouting and scanning. Even this may not be enough however, because of log-on traps and covert ops. Thirdly, without at least the simple comfort blanket of being able to make your escape, those involved in passive activities (like mining for instance) will be less inclined to waste their time and isk doing it. Certainly nobody wants to sit and guard a mining op all night every time they log-in. You're going to end up with absurdly expensive industrial activity in 0.0, resulting in a lot more of it going on in high-sec. If you want only the hardcore in 0.0, with their safe empire alts for earning, then removing local is probably a good idea. Otherwise without providing local substitutes (deployable early warning systems), you're only going to succeed in effectively ejecting a large percentage of the risk averse player-base (the majority of players) from non-safe space. If you do provide passive deployables, then everyone will use them. You might as well charge a fee for local!
Rosur Infestation. R.U.R.	Posted - 2008.10.27 22:02:00 - [54] How about make local 2mins or so deleyed as that will be normaly enough time to find somone in a belt but you cant just hide in the system undected. Also you could make it so whatever alliance has sov gets local as it is now and any other allaince/corps have a deleyed mode. Though i dont think being in local and not talking should stop u showing up in local.
Malka Badi'a Suffoco Noctis	Posted - 2008.10.27 22:02:00 - [55] Originally by: Lustralis I've read arguments like these for literally 5 years on the forums and the basic facts never change, although the OP's almost always think they're some kind of genius with a totally new angle. You can't nerf local without removing static content. The reason for this is fairly basic, so even the OP should be able to understand it: you, the attacker, know where those exploiting static content are, or are very likely to be. Secondly, without passive intel gathering (such as local now provides), you effectively force the defender to commit possibly large resources (or at least man-power) towards what is basically a tedious and uninteresting activity: constant scouting and scanning. Even this may not be enough however, because of log-on traps and covert ops. Thirdly, without at least the simple comfort blanket of being able to make your escape, those involved in passive activities (like mining for instance) will be less inclined to waste their time and isk doing it. Certainly nobody wants to sit and guard a mining op all night every time they log-in. You're going to end up with absurdly expensive industrial activity in 0.0, resulting in a lot more of it going on in high-sec. If you want only the hardcore in 0.0, with their safe empire alts for earning, then removing local is probably a good idea. Otherwise without providing local substitutes (deployable early warning systems), you're only going to succeed in effectively ejecting a large percentage of the risk averse player-base (the majority of players) from non-safe space. If you do provide passive deployables, then everyone will use them. You might as well charge a fee for local! Excellent first point. Static locations like belts/planets still pose a direct problem for defenders. I don't know how I managed to not consider that. What do you propose to balance this, then? Aside from the complete static removal of all belts, stations, etc. (which I would ADORE) ---------
Wet Ferret	Posted - 2008.10.27 22:36:00 - [56] Originally by: Escrava Isaura Originally by: Fulber Originally by: Fulber They'll all be logged on their Motsu alts. Guess you missed this bit. Have fun scanning empty 0.0 systems. not if high-sec reward is rebalanced (i mean nerfed to hell) Oh right, this bit again. "Let's make life in 0.0 completely suck and try to force people out there by making life in Empire even worse". A brilliant plan... not. But, yeah. These forums seriously need some indicator that the post has ended and the sig has started.
Lord Windu Imperiosus Tutela	Posted - 2008.10.27 22:42:00 - [57] I like to post in red aswell. But sometimes I like pink and yellow. As for the OP, this local change will not happen for a good while yet, thus there will be many changes to it closer to the time. If you believe you have an idea that is great put it where it belongs, which would be features and ideas discussion, or named something similar. Green is also a nice colour. Sig coming Soon&trade
Malka Badi'a Suffoco Noctis	Posted - 2008.10.27 22:49:00 - [58] Originally by: Lord Windu I like to post in red aswell. But sometimes I like pink and yellow. As for the OP, this local change will not happen for a good while yet, thus there will be many changes to it closer to the time. If you believe you have an idea that is great put it where it belongs, which would be features and ideas discussion, or named something similar. Green is also a nice colour. hehe, clever. I generally use alternating colors to make specific points and red seems to be readable regardless of the black or ship-grey that the forums offers as backgrounds. And I could have put it in a different forum, but I like to stir the pot. Even if my initial ideas are shot to hell I'm more than willing to reconsider, adapt, and continue the discussion. And so far, it's gone pretty well and I've learned a few new points of thought. I'm hoping it does the same for others. ---------
Jmanis Catharg Caldari Deep Core Mining Inc.	Posted - 2008.10.27 23:01:00 - [59] Edited by: Jmanis Catharg on 27/10/2008 23:06:11 Personally, I think this is a big boost to black ops ships, and has actually rekindled my interest in the game now :) (edit: if it stays like this) Besides, you can always check "pilots active in the last 30 minutes in this system" if you roll with the knowledge that everyone is an enemy --- Originally by: CCP Mitnal I went to the forums for special powers and all I got was a dancing padlock and a banhammer.
Lustralis	Posted - 2008.10.27 23:21:00 - [60] Originally by: Malka Badi'a What do you propose to balance this, then? Aside from the complete static removal of all belts, stations, etc. (which I would ADORE) Well CCP are already thinking about making all content dynamic, i.e. asteroid belts, complexes and so on (found via. exploration), but the argument extends basically to absurdity, with stations, moon mining, etc., all of which point to some level of static player activity. You're basically like sheep in a field, constantly being stalked by packs of dogs, only someone has removed one of your eyes (apologies in advance for the idiotic metaphor). It's only a matter of time before the one-eyed sheep walks himself into the pen (high-sec).

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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