Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Katryn Black
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 02:38:00 -
[1]
I have a few views on the proposed Local nerf. I have only been playing for a few months now and i see some major problems with just nerfing Local(as I'm sure most of you do). CCP wants to take away the most useful tool, it only seems fair to me that they give us some new ones.
My Ideas for ingame changes to relieve the burden of the lack of local:
1) Ship scanners - Change: As the angle narrows, the range increases.(at 360- 14AU at 180- 28AU at 90 - 56AU ...or ne ) Reasoning- Anyone ever run into a bubble camp? The way I see it the local nerf is to the advantage of larger gang groups and and gate campers. The single ship or smaller group trying to make their way from point A to point B is going to be flying, literally blind, into all kinds of trouble. If the gate doesn't have a warp point w/in 14AU your sol on ne kind of intel unless your in a Cov Opps ship. If the purpose is balance I believe this is a good compromise.
2) Ship scanner - Change: Ability to "see" fields(force fields, disrupter bubbles etc-yes interdictor bubbles too) Reasoning: It takes the inability to see the # of people in system and gives you a slight advantage as far as choices when encountering a camp. It will not I think be an overwhelming advantage, it will however force an alteration of bubble strategy.
3) Ship Scanner/Probes - Change: Ability to scan out cloaked ships. Reasoning: You don't scan anything at the gate except a lone Arazu, u get there get webbed bumped and 15 SB's uncloak and pound u. I am not suggesting the ability to scan out a cloaked target w/any accuracy, or even get ship types, just the presence of a cloaking field w/10% location accuracy. It would make cloak afkers slightly less safe, but would be a great boon to those warping into a cloak camp.(don't chew me out too much on this one, i'm on the fence w/this idea too) Those are just a few ideas just looking for some feedback.
|
SPQRMocton
Minmatar Calmarr Technologies
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 02:44:00 -
[2]
bookmarks and a covert Fly reckless and take chances..............it's more fun |
Khemul Zula
Amarr Black Plague.
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 02:45:00 -
[3]
This is going to go down in flames do to suggestion #3. Before that you had a chance of surviving.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Did I really need certificates to tell me I lack Basic Core Competency? |
Gonada
Priory Of The Lemon Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 02:46:00 -
[4]
1. its a boost not a nerf.
2. everything you need is allready in the game if you rrain scanners, and OMFGWTF now youll have to.
Please, jump into traffic
|
Plim
Gallente Oursulaert Technology Institute
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 02:56:00 -
[5]
I agree with part three in the event of people being removed from local.
We can only base tactics on the information available to us, so there should be some way to figure out that there are recons in local. Otherwise EVE turns more into a game of chance.
A dev said pretty much the same thing somewhere.
---- Failing to understand your crazy epicycles since 2003. |
Khemul Zula
Amarr Black Plague.
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 02:59:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Plim I agree with part three in the event of people being removed from local.
We can only base tactics on the information available to us, so there should be some way to figure out that there are recons in local. Otherwise EVE turns more into a game of chance.
A dev said pretty much the same thing somewhere.
Yes. Recons should not be able to go undetected through enemy territory! That is not what they are meant for!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Did I really need certificates to tell me I lack Basic Core Competency? |
Frug
Repo Industries
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 03:12:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Khemul Zula Yes. Recons should not be able to go undetected through enemy territory! That is not what they are meant for!
Oh, suddenly only recons can fit cloaks? When did that happen? Why wasn't I informed?
- - - - - - - - - Do not use dotted lines - - - - - - - If you think I'm awesome, say BOOO BOOO!! - Ductoris Neat look what I found - Kreul Hey, my marbles |
An Anarchyyt
Gallente Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 03:15:00 -
[8]
Did not read.
Originally by: CCP Wrangler Second, a gentile is a non jewish person
|
Katryn Black
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 03:20:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Katryn Black on 27/11/2008 03:20:35
Originally by: An Anarchyyt Did not read.
Good for you!
What about the 1st idea? whats the prob with more range on a narrow beam? personally I think it just makes sense.
|
Plim
Gallente Oursulaert Technology Institute
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 03:23:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Khemul Zula
Originally by: Plim I agree with part three in the event of people being removed from local.
We can only base tactics on the information available to us, so there should be some way to figure out that there are recons in local. Otherwise EVE turns more into a game of chance.
A dev said pretty much the same thing somewhere.
Yes. Recons should not be able to go undetected through enemy territory! That is not what they are meant for!
Recons tend to carry out a combat role and not a reconnaissance one, so my reasoning stands. I'm not implying that people should be able to get completely accurate information on any recons in your system, i'm just saying that it should be possible in someway to know that there are potential enemies there, otherwise development of appropriate tactics is precluded and it turns into a game of chance.
I'm sure though that these issues will be dealt with by CCP. It was explicitly stated by a dev that it would not be a simple matter of removing local, instead the current system would have a replacement. Presumebly one which takes away the ability to know immediately the number of people in local, but still gives the player mechanisms to find out what is there.
Certainly without such mechanisms it would be extremely difficult to NPC, or much else in 0.0 without a large amount of backup on hand. I don't see more encouragement of blobbing as a good thing.
---- Failing to understand your crazy epicycles since 2003. |
|
Katryn Black
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 03:27:00 -
[11]
Well said Plim!
|
Plim
Gallente Oursulaert Technology Institute
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 03:43:00 -
[12]
Originally by: Katryn Black Well said Plim!
Thankyou, I think this is a valid topic of debate. Any changes to the game which could decrease the role of planning and tactics and increase that of chance can be worrying ones.
It would do people well not to simply take some argumentitive position of polarisation on this issue, because it's one which could have some very broad effects and effect different groups in different ways.
Zulupark's reponse when asked about delayed local:
"Yes, we'd replace the intel gathering tools somehow."
As I said, I don't think it will be simple matter delayed local, or removing local, other changes will come with it. However any discussion is speculative until we know exactly what they have planned.
---- Failing to understand your crazy epicycles since 2003. |
Plim
Gallente Oursulaert Technology Institute
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 03:53:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Frug
Originally by: Khemul Zula Yes. Recons should not be able to go undetected through enemy territory! That is not what they are meant for!
Oh, suddenly only recons can fit cloaks? When did that happen? Why wasn't I informed?
This also raises a good point. If local was removed without a way to figure out that there are cloaked pilots in local, an entire fleet could be brought into a system and sat at a safe spot with cloaks on.
The implications of that are obvious.
---- Failing to understand your crazy epicycles since 2003. |
Khemul Zula
Amarr Black Plague.
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 04:11:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Khemul Zula on 27/11/2008 04:12:25 CCP has already stated that if they nerf local chat that they'd just hide names of people who haven't posted. People for some reason keep getting the idea that CCP will just simply erase local entirely. You'll still know there are people, you just won't know who they are. Changing cloaks in any way (whether it's telling you if the ship is there or allowing you to scan it down) would make this change entirely useless. Argueing that CCP should implement an idea they've already stated they'd implement is just silly and a waste of forum space.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Did I really need certificates to tell me I lack Basic Core Competency? |
Plim
Gallente Oursulaert Technology Institute
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 04:43:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Khemul Zula Edited by: Khemul Zula on 27/11/2008 04:12:25 CCP has already stated that if they nerf local chat that they'd just hide names of people who haven't posted. People for some reason keep getting the idea that CCP will just simply erase local entirely. You'll still know there are people, you just won't know who they are. Changing cloaks in any way (whether it's telling you if the ship is there or allowing you to scan it down) would make this change entirely useless. Argueing that CCP should implement an idea they've already stated they'd implement is just silly and a waste of forum space.
Where was this said?
---- Failing to understand your crazy epicycles since 2003. |
Khemul Zula
Amarr Black Plague.
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 05:04:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Plim
Originally by: Khemul Zula Edited by: Khemul Zula on 27/11/2008 04:12:25 CCP has already stated that if they nerf local chat that they'd just hide names of people who haven't posted. People for some reason keep getting the idea that CCP will just simply erase local entirely. You'll still know there are people, you just won't know who they are. Changing cloaks in any way (whether it's telling you if the ship is there or allowing you to scan it down) would make this change entirely useless. Argueing that CCP should implement an idea they've already stated they'd implement is just silly and a waste of forum space.
Where was this said?
Pieced together from what Zulupark has said.
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.
Quote: 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.
Quote: Local removal and cloakers: I covered this earlier, both the cloaking aspect and the removing local aspect.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Did I really need certificates to tell me I lack Basic Core Competency? |
Plim
Gallente Oursulaert Technology Institute
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 05:37:00 -
[17]
I have already read those. What he says is essentially what I was saying earlier, that the intel mechanics would be replaced with something else. Although it is not exactly as you put it, because you wont nescessarily know if there are people there if they are cloaked, which is the issue I was discussing.
He does not imply that you would be able to figure out if there are people in system if they are cloaked, using the new mechanics. The potential effects of which I elaborated on earlier. It is open to speculation.
---- Failing to understand your crazy epicycles since 2003. |
Sergeant Spot
Black Eclipse Corp Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 05:41:00 -
[18]
So long as the replacement scanning tool involves LESS tedium
for miners/ratters at a belt
to realize there is a threat,
even from login traps from cloaked ship,
than the tedium for the attackers to fly to a belt,
then we are ok.
Roaming gangs DO need a boost, but there are much better ways to do it.
Play nice while you butcher each other.
|
Khemul Zula
Amarr Black Plague.
|
Posted - 2008.11.27 05:45:00 -
[19]
Quote: Local removal and cloakers: I covered this earlier, both the cloaking aspect and the removing local aspect.
This was in response to a question about cloakers becoming too powerfull when local is nerfed. Basically he is saying it'll be part of the intel-gathering system. From there it would be speculation, but there are not a whole lot of ways to include cloakers in that intel without making them scannable. Basically the only way to do it without major game changes would be to tell how many people are in the system.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Did I really need certificates to tell me I lack Basic Core Competency? |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |