These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Removing Local is only part of the solution

Author
Ditra Vorthran
Caldari Imports and Exports
#1 - 2012-05-25 05:20:49 UTC
There's been a lot of threads (or were before the Inventory Patch) calling for the removal of Local.

The question whether or not local should or shouldn't be removed isn't the real question. Removing local is merely one facet of a larger problem.

That problem is the balance between Predator and Prey.

Bonuses to the Prey side:
- Local: an instant intel tool that shows who is in the system
- D-scan: easy to use (if annoying) intel tool that is free with every ship you purchase

Bonuses to Predator side:
- Ships: strong, cheap, easy to train, and easy to replace
- cloaking devices: a module that costs no cap, that can be active forever, and effectively halts activity by prudent Prey
- default warp in points at asteroid belts: predators are given free warp to points making searching for prey a near mindless task

Prey are given a *huge* advantage with Local, knowing instantly when a potential hostile enters a system. It makes it virtually certain that if someone arrives in local, that the attentive Prey will escape harm, making it very difficult and frustrating for the Predator to hunt. This also negates some of the benfits of cloaking devices.

On the other hand, Predators also have several advantages. The ability to kill a ship that costs (at the time of this writing) 1600% more than the Preys with a fraction of the training time. Free warp to points so Predators have to do virtually no work in hunting for their prey. Cloaking devices that allow someone to grief for long periods of time with no risk.

(As an aside, I find it amusing that Predators scorn Prey for supposedly wanting to play a game virtually AFK with no risk of harm, then advocate the ability for one person to grief an entire star system for hours if not days at a time...while AFK, at no risk. But I digress.)

Prey is given an enormous initial advantage, but once that advantage is removed, it all shifts to the Predator.

What do you replace local with? What is put in place to create a more balanced system between Predator and Prey? This can be addressed in a few different ways:

1) Remove Local.

2) Change D-scan. Spamming D-scan for 4 hours is not fun.
- Replace it with a mid slot module called 'Active Proximity Scanner' or something. The basic theory is that any ship passing within a certain range (dependant on skill) would give a warning to the pilot. This gives the attentive Prey a chance to escape while not requiring him to constatly spam D-Scan. It also gives a swift Predator a chance to catch said Prey. Or something to that effect.

3) Cloaking devices requrire charges of some sort.
- It would allow covops pilots the ability to stay cloaked for decent periods of time, but not make it overpowered. It would also allow covops to create combat fits, as opposed to something like requiring it to use cap, which would force covops to fit solely for cap regen. It also forces the pilot to choose between combat flexibility vs. stealth operations and harassment (ammo vs. cloak charges), or something in between.

4) Remove default warp to points in asteroid belts
- Make asteroid belts scanable via probes and your system scanner. Both Predator and Prey now have to work for their money.

Obviously the suggestions above are not a be-all, end-all list, nor are the ideas final. This is merely my attempt to answer the balance of Prey vs. Predator if Local were removed.

"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus

Seraph IX Basarab
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#2 - 2012-05-25 05:50:23 UTC
Stop whining about covops, they are fine. "something killed me" is not a reason to complain.
Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#3 - 2012-05-25 06:01:35 UTC
The ONLY defence against cov ops for the prey is local, no "scanner module" would even pick out a cov ops, without local, cov ops take over the game, and your idea would break the game, thanks for coming and back to the drawing board Idea

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  

Alavaria Fera
Imperial Shipment
#4 - 2012-05-25 06:05:49 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
The ONLY defence against cov ops for the prey is local, no "scanner module" would even pick out a cov ops, without local, cov ops take over the game, and your idea would break the game, thanks for coming and back to the drawing board Idea

lol lov2covops I guess.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?

bongsmoke
Visine Red
Care Factor
#5 - 2012-05-25 06:10:14 UTC
Posting in remove local thread 7,453,029

No thanks, move to wormhole for your play style concerning local and just forget about the rest of the nonsense.
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#6 - 2012-05-25 06:11:00 UTC
Agreed. Even making it so expanded probe launchers can only be fitted to Cov-Ops or Cov-Ops T3, would help balance the predator >prey imbalance with removing local.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden

Ditra Vorthran
Caldari Imports and Exports
#7 - 2012-05-25 06:13:39 UTC
Peter Raptor wrote:
The ONLY defence against cov ops for the prey is local, no "scanner module" would even pick out a cov ops, without local, cov ops take over the game, and your idea would break the game, thanks for coming and back to the drawing board Idea


Actually, it would pick out covops, but it would do so at a shorter distance than a ship without a covops ship. The effect could be modified for the relevant skills needed to operate the respective modules.

To illustrate, a non-covops frigate would be detected at 10 AUs while a covops would be detected at 5 AUs all skills being equal. If the Covops pilot had a skill of 4 and the other pilot had a [insert needed skill here] skill of 2, that would get shortened to say 3 AUs. These aren't actual numbers but just to illustrate the point.

An array of different mods/rigs could be created to really fill out a covops vs. counter-covops role, and make things much more interesting than "Hurr...me have cloak...me win..."

Thank you for reminding me about that little loophole...I remember thinking of that as I was writing the post, but it fell through the cracks. :P

"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus

Beef Knuckleback
Pawnstars INC
#8 - 2012-05-25 06:15:05 UTC
Add an implant or module - implant would make the pilot invisible in Local until they speak; module would "cloak" them in local while the module is active (auto-disable if they speak in Local etc).

Make it a high-slot module so all the 1337 PVPers have to choose between stealth and neuts. Or make it a midslot so 1337 PVPers have to choose between stealth and tackle.

The rest of the game is Rock Paper Scissors - Local should be no different.
Ditra Vorthran
Caldari Imports and Exports
#9 - 2012-05-25 06:17:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Ditra Vorthran
Brooks Puuntai wrote:
Agreed. Even making it so expanded probe launchers can only be fitted to Cov-Ops or Cov-Ops T3, would help balance the predator >prey imbalance with removing local.


That was another idea a friend and I had. If you're using probes while cloaked, you're absorbing and emitting radiation in order control those drones. That should (supposedly) be detectable and tracable back to the point of origin.

Not saying that something like that would be easy, mind you, but that's the point. Things should be *hard*, but not impossible.

"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#10 - 2012-05-25 06:23:59 UTC
The underlying question to all of these discussions is: what level of warning is appropriate for a ratter or miner of an incoming hostile? Too low ("just remove local completely") and the effect is to move all moneymaking activity to the safety of highsec, since nobody wants to play a game where their only role is to be a helpless victim over and over. Too high ("Give hulks buit-in WCS, introduce an anti-cloak module"), and the gankers give up in frustration since it becomes impossible to ever catch a target.

Once everyone realises that the solution is somewhere in the middle ground maybe we'll stop getting the same old entrenched positions shouted out in 20 different threads a day (just kidding, that will never happen).

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2012-05-25 06:27:46 UTC
I loath thinking what roams would look like without local.

Soon people would abandon cheap hulls in space and put large numbers of ships inside POS shields and you would spend five minutes per system trying to figure out if any target is nearby.
No more "system is clear" - "jump and warp outgate" or "free burn unless scout says otherwise".

.

Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#12 - 2012-05-25 06:34:51 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
The underlying question to all of these discussions is: what level of warning is appropriate for a ratter or miner of an incoming hostile? Too low ("just remove local completely") and the effect is to move all moneymaking activity to the safety of highsec, since nobody wants to play a game where their only role is to be a helpless victim over and over. Too high ("Give hulks buit-in WCS, introduce an anti-cloak module"), and the gankers give up in frustration since it becomes impossible to ever catch a target.

Once everyone realises that the solution is somewhere in the middle ground maybe we'll stop getting the same old entrenched positions shouted out in 20 different threads a day (just kidding, that will never happen).


Ideally you would want it balanced, or possibly favoring the prey. Since if you remove the prey you will also remove the predator. What would be a good way to gauge reactions and spur ideas is to hold a event for say a week and "turn off" local in NPC null. WH space just isn't a good enough example due to its lack of static beacons/entry points.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden

Peter Raptor
Galactic Hawks
#13 - 2012-05-25 06:36:58 UTC
Ditra Vorthran wrote:
Peter Raptor wrote:
The ONLY defence against cov ops for the prey is local, no "scanner module" would even pick out a cov ops, without local, cov ops take over the game, and your idea would break the game, thanks for coming and back to the drawing board Idea


Actually, it would pick out covops, but it would do so at a shorter distance than a ship without a covops ship. The effect could be modified for the relevant skills needed to operate the respective modules.

To illustrate, a non-covops frigate would be detected at 10 AUs while a covops would be detected at 5 AUs all skills being equal. If the Covops pilot had a skill of 4 and the other pilot had a [insert needed skill here] skill of 2, that would get shortened to say 3 AUs. These aren't actual numbers but just to illustrate the point.

An array of different mods/rigs could be created to really fill out a covops vs. counter-covops role, and make things much more interesting than "Hurr...me have cloak...me win..."

Thank you for reminding me about that little loophole...I remember thinking of that as I was writing the post, but it fell through the cracks. :P



Yeah but then covops is totally useless, its not covops any more, its just "coveops-as-long-as-your-not-within-5AU-of-an-Awesome-Scanner".

Evelopedia; 

The Amarr Empire, is known for its omnipresent religion  †  

Ditra Vorthran
Caldari Imports and Exports
#14 - 2012-05-25 06:43:38 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
The underlying question to all of these discussions is: what level of warning is appropriate for a ratter or miner of an incoming hostile? Too low ("just remove local completely") and the effect is to move all moneymaking activity to the safety of highsec, since nobody wants to play a game where their only role is to be a helpless victim over and over. Too high ("Give hulks buit-in WCS, introduce an anti-cloak module"), and the gankers give up in frustration since it becomes impossible to ever catch a target.

Once everyone realises that the solution is somewhere in the middle ground maybe we'll stop getting the same old entrenched positions shouted out in 20 different threads a day (just kidding, that will never happen).


Exactly. It's about balance, not who should have the "I WIN" button. My ideas aren't perfect, but they represent the best I've seen between the blanket "Remove Local!" crowd and the carebears.

"Miners mine so I don't have to." ~Metal Icarus

Simi Kusoni
HelloKittyFanclub
#15 - 2012-05-25 06:45:35 UTC
Don't remove local, its too ballsy and CCP would never dare do it.

I'd like to see them break local again though, so it gives a list of everyone in local but this list was devalued by random false entries of people not in local. That way with a bit of work, you can find out who is there, and you'd see a new person entering, but some people would grow complacent and ignore it.

[center]"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings"  -MXZF[/center]

malcovas Henderson
THoF
#16 - 2012-05-25 07:34:25 UTC
It is not a question of what removing local fixes, but more of what removing local breaks. Used correctly, local is a very powerful intel source for both hunter and prey.

In Hi sec local is not used by many as an intel source, this is why gankers succeed. On the other hand. In low/null, local is used as the first line of defence for the prey, and the first lndication of whats going on for the hunter. If the hunter is roaming he will still need to locate potential prey, and find better intelligence other than what local is offering. Local will tell him the numbers he is looking for. Empty system... move along.


Station dwellers will be alerted to the arrival of a potential victim, with the local. They still have to work out what they are up against, where and to where. Without local it would make it very hard for a solo hunter to find prey like this. Forcing him to roam or sit a gate hoping someone lands in his bubble that he can kill. This makes he very suceptable to fleets.


Defenders use the local as a means to know when they are safe and when they are potetially not safe. Removing the local will remove that. Forcing Corperations and Alliances to increase their numbers, to be able camp each gate and WH. If they didn't, then Hi sec could be the only option for them.


To me removing Local only benefits the hunter in a cloaky. Removing it breaks more than it fixes. This is why it's a bad idea.



o7
Brooks Puuntai
Solar Nexus.
#17 - 2012-05-25 08:38:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Brooks Puuntai
malcovas Henderson wrote:
It is not a question of what removing local fixes, but more of what removing local breaks. Used correctly, local is a very powerful intel source for both hunter and prey.

In Hi sec local is not used by many as an intel source, this is why gankers succeed. On the other hand. In low/null, local is used as the first line of defence for the prey, and the first lndication of whats going on for the hunter. If the hunter is roaming he will still need to locate potential prey, and find better intelligence other than what local is offering. Local will tell him the numbers he is looking for. Empty system... move along.


Station dwellers will be alerted to the arrival of a potential victim, with the local. They still have to work out what they are up against, where and to where. Without local it would make it very hard for a solo hunter to find prey like this. Forcing him to roam or sit a gate hoping someone lands in his bubble that he can kill. This makes he very suceptable to fleets.


Defenders use the local as a means to know when they are safe and when they are potetially not safe. Removing the local will remove that. Forcing Corperations and Alliances to increase their numbers, to be able camp each gate and WH. If they didn't, then Hi sec could be the only option for them.


To me removing Local only benefits the hunter in a cloaky. Removing it breaks more than it fixes. This is why it's a bad idea.



o7


This is all based off of perception. What you seem to think removing local will break others think it will fix. Lets go through your examples.

High-sec Local:
This is highly used as a intel source for people in wars. A defender can look at a system and see many war targets, which means they will dock up. Risk Aversion =Bad

Station Dwellers:

This goes both ways. Someone in station sees local spike they will either dock up or stay docked. This is again risk aversion. For the hunter the use of alts is highly common already, having a cloaky alt at gates to see who is entering, so really in this situation it only really effects the prey.

Defenders:
Corps/Alliances will already try and increase their numbers irregardless. This is a common human ideology where safety is in numbers. So removing local will not increase or decrease the amount of people corporations try and recruit. It is however used probably more so from the preys aspect on when to engage and when not to. Many time have I seen "Local spike in system X 50+" then "We don't have enough to counter everyone safe up".

This is what many see as a failure of the current local and its ability to provide easy intel that is used to avoid fights. While removing local can cause a reduction in possible fights in certain situations, however in more cases then not it will still improve the possibly of fights.

Make no mistake that a blanket removal of local would be a bad idea for all involved. However removing local while improving on other aspects(directional, probing, sov upgrades, etc) would be needed to balance things out. This is what this thread is about.

CCP's Motto: If it isn't broken, break it. If it is broken, ignore it. Improving NPE / Dynamic New Eden

Zagdul
Virtual Progression
#18 - 2012-05-25 08:42:47 UTC


If you remove local, less people will go to null sec, the people you prey on. Less people will be 'out and about' doing their day to day stuff. PvP will be harder and take longer to find.

It's a dumb idea.




Imagine this:

Formup an 6-10 man roaming gang to go hunting for another 6-10 man roaming gang. Every system you go into, you need to drop probes.

do this... all night, across 30-40 jumps (average roam).

Dual Pane idea: Click!

CCP Please Implement

Tiberius Murderhorne
CONTRATTO
#19 - 2012-05-25 08:46:07 UTC
removing Local gives a massive advantage to older players while crippling newer ones...

just stop it! local is part of eve, if you don't like it get in a hole!

Disclaimer : My posting does not always reflect my Corps views or my allience views.... Infact sometimes it does not even reflect my views!

Andrea Roche
State War Academy
Caldari State
#20 - 2012-05-25 08:52:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Andrea Roche
removing local? Roll
No thanks. I do not want this game to be called "dscan" instead of eve.
Imagine how boring this game would be. I would have had to dscan 4 times already while i typed this piece of text.
EVE would become the laughing stock of all the MMO's.
Local works as intended. Nothing broken in it. So it needs no fixing.
If you want no local, then go to there >> wormhole.

I will vote however to remove your crying tears from the game!Twisted
123Next pageLast page