Player Features and Ideas Discussion

just the same nerf local idea without reasoning or proposal of better active intel gathering tools (yes, directional scanner in its current form suck, it works but suck anyway)

We are defining the loopholes in the gate tech, on the concept they are responsible for local's intel properties.

So, since local doesn't report people not logged in, and logging in does not necessarily involve gates, people who are logging in would not be displayed either?

If someone gated into a system normally, only to be bridged or jump to another system, do they continue to be listed in that last system they entered by gate?

You run into a consistency issue if you give people a free pass to not appear in local, and have it expire when they log out.

You basically tell them don't use the no local pass unless they can remain online.

Now, on another note: Let's say you have sov in a null system. You have a station in a null system too.
People logging into that station that are members of the sov alliance are unlikely to want to be displayed in local for hostiles to observe.

I would suggest perhaps a private version of local, where non alliance had no access beyond fully delayed.
Your rules for being visible applied otherwise.

This is a surprisingly decent idea. The login/logout thing needs a little consideration (personally, I'm not opposed to "don't log in in station, don't show up").

nullsec might do to have the "private local" no matter where they are --> i.e. the sov holders "control" the gates insofar as they're not reporting their movements. This only applies to the sov-holding alliance members, so coalition members (or other blues) will always show up when hitting a gate.

As it heavily discriminates in favor of advanced pilots who have access to the techniques to avoid stargates, I am against it.

I think we're coming at it from two different angles ...

What I meant was that if alliance A owns some space, _ONLY_ members of alliance A get the "benefits" of "current local". Coalition members, other blues, etc do not ... and cannot be granted those benefits.

I really like this idea. Although I believe it needs to be fleshed out a little more to really integrate with the lore, and limit its use.

I would say logging in be treated the same as coming in through a gate. We don't want players logging out and back in all the time to remove them selves from local. If you got a cloaky spy in system, if they came in through a wormhole or jump bridge they do not show in local. But once they log out and back in they are in local. The same with stations/outposts. if you are docked you are known to the system. you are shown in local.

As far as players in a sov alliance in there own sov space opting out of local I do not agree. While it is true you own the space and the station and would not want to give invaders free intel, you do not own the stargate. If players could build stargates then maybe, but the stargate was already there, installed by CONCORD? or who ever. It is tied to the interstellar beacons that control local chat. I would say stations and outposts would also be connected to the beacons as a requirement of anchoring them. They show on the overview they must be connected to the system beacon.

So who would this leave as being able to not show in local?

Anyone coming into system through a wormhole or Covert ops cyno such as a black ops ship or anyone using a black ops bridge. I would say at a minimum these ships would be exempt from local until they perform an action that would inform the beacon of there presence.

There are three other ways of getting into a system without using a stargate. A capital ship jumping to a cyno, A ship traveling through a Titan bridge, or a ship traveling through a jump bridge at a POS.

The question is, do these also qualify for delayed local? What would work with the lore?

I would say any ship entering through a means of connecting to a normal cyno would show in local. When a normal cyno is lit it shows on everyone's overview. The "system" knows it is there. How does the beacon/system know it is there? I would say when the cyno is lit it connects to the local beacon to determine its exact coordinates for the broadcast transmissions. Covert ops cynos use newer technology which does not require a connection to the local beacon to operate. This is why a regular cyno shows up in the system overview and a covert ops cyno does not. This would also explain why cynos can not be used in W-space as there is no beacon to connect to. Although this could open up the possibility of using covert ops Cyno's in W-Space. No caps but black ops would work if the systems were close enough together.

If a normal cyno was not considered to be connected to the system beacon than any ship entering that way would not show in local. meaning all capital ships, and all ships using a Titan bridge. It could be seen as a good thing to have the presence of capital pilots not advertised in local. This could be up for debate, but I believe it would be too overpowered. This would give alliances with Titan support a huge advantage.

Then there is the Jump bridge POS module. This is much like a stargate but is controlled by the alliance,and requires sov upgrades to be used. Do Ships using this benefit from delayed local? I would say this could be justified thru lore either way. POSes do not show on the overview, so are they connected to the system beacon or not? It could be argued that anything that requires anchoring requires a connection the the system beacon. But then how are POSes anchored in W-space? Perhaps that is why it requires the ihub upgrade. This could generate the needed system beacon connection the jump bridge needs. Although this could be justified thru lore the other way that a sov alliance controlled jump bridge does not give that free intel to all players in local space like a station or stargate does, i believe the amount of traffic many jump bridges see would make this OP.

So even if this delayed local was limited to ships entering through wormholes and covert ops cynos it does open up a lot of possibilities. true black ops with no warning, sneak attacks, unknown spys, and I am sure many other ways this could be used. In some ways it would make space more dangerous. Covert ops would truly be secret ops, you would not know they are there until they strike. I think this is how it should be.

Perhaps to balance it out it could be combined with a method of detecting and scanning down cloaked ships. Scanning is being revamped in the Odyssey expansion, and I expect to see this issue addressed as many players have asked for a way to find cloaked ships. Balancing this with the ability for covert ops and black ops ships to not appear in local would be a great addition. it would address the issues of AFK cloakers, and increase the effectiveness of stealth ops at the same time. You never know 100% if someone is watching you. But if you believe there is you will have the means to hunt them down.

I am not trying to highjack this idea, but looking at it with an open mind I see many benefits and possible problems. But I truly believe this would be a positive improvement and would love to see it in game. feel free to flame my ideas, but being able to justify it through lore could help with getting CCP to consider it. Including all methods of entering a system other than stargates it would be OP and far to many would challenge it for it to get implemented. But restricting it to covert ops cynos and wormholes I really think it could work and has a good chance of making it into the game. if it works well it could always be expanded on later.

Stopped reading right there.