These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What would happen if Null Sec had no Local?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#21 - 2012-08-13 02:08:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Kuehnelt wrote:
Russell Casey wrote:
People ... actually learn to use D-scans

Cloaked ships do not show up on the directional scanner.

^____^

Cloaky gank time, eh.
Russell Casey wrote:
Or what's left of the PvE out there would die while the number of null alts farming in empire would shoot through the roof. Nullsec would be a lot like lowsec at that point, with players saying, "yeah, in the old days people would do plexes, rat, and mine here."

Hmm, mission accomplished then.

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 ?
Lilianna Star
Vagrant Empress
#22 - 2012-08-13 02:08:48 UTC
Regan Rotineque wrote:
Well for one we would not have any more threads pondering this dead horse......

Instead we would have threads asking to put local back.....

~R~


The funny thing is that if the way local works as a detection method was added after the Trinity expansion then people would call everyone who likes it a carebear.

To be honest, I hate the way local works. Oh, it HAS notably saved my bacon. But at the same time, this goes a way towards preventing PvP and limiting certain tactics from being used.
James 315
Experimental Fun Times Corp RELOADED
CODE.
#23 - 2012-08-13 02:12:31 UTC
Local's always kinda gone both ways. On the one hand, it alerts carebears to threats; on the other hand, it helps threats find and/or ambush carebears. Probably leans toward helping carebears/bots, but I'm too used to having local to know what to do without it. Smile

MinerBumping.com
Toshiroma McDiesel
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#24 - 2012-08-13 02:12:56 UTC
Amber Coldheart wrote:
For starters, it would likely make everyone a LOT more paranoid :)



You have no idea how much fun being paranoid all the time can be Pirate

(yes, I am serious)

I"m not really the Evil One, I'm just his answering service.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#25 - 2012-08-13 02:12:57 UTC
One day some random miner or L4 mission runner will be able to stand up and say:

CCP's 0.0 dream is over.

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 ?
Suqq Madiq
#26 - 2012-08-13 02:15:32 UTC
Andski wrote:
yeah uh nobody can say with a straight face that there is any significant risk involved in hisec incursion running


Well, you did say "risk-free" which is a far cry from "any significant risk" which is a lot more accurate but still not quite true. For various and oft-times self-imposed reasons (Logi DCs, incompetent FC, wild Blackbirds appear, EVE University sponsored fleet), highsec incursion runners manage to put themselves at significant risk every time they undock. The numbers don't lie. The risks they take may not be proportional to the income they earn but it's hardly "risk-free". Blink
Russell Casey
Doomheim
#27 - 2012-08-13 02:17:43 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
One day some random miner or L4 mission runner will be able to stand up and say:

CCP's 0.0 dream is over.


Haven't they been saying that for years? Or do you mean a random miner/L4 runner who's not a null alt?
Abel Merkabah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#28 - 2012-08-13 02:18:36 UTC
I have to imagine the players would adapt and develop tactics to both protect themselves and take advantage of it. Scouting would be more involved that is for sure. Ambushes would be more common.

I really need to try W-Space sometime because it seems very interesting.

People focus on the threats and how local cannot be used defensively, but the reverse is true, roaming gangs would not be able to know from local if anyone is in system; so offensively local would not work too. I think after a period of time, it would balance would be established with new tactics and business goes on as usual.

Oh yeah, barring gate camps, moving through systems would be safer IMO, no one sees you enter and until you are probed or scanned, no one knows you are there. I think bouncing off of celestials before approaching a gate would be much more common.

James315 for CSM 8!
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#29 - 2012-08-13 02:21:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Russell Casey wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
One day some random miner or L4 mission runner will be able to stand up and say:

CCP's 0.0 dream is over.

Haven't they been saying that for years? Or do you mean a random miner/L4 runner who's not a null alt?

Yeah, well most of null is generally empty, except for the renters, I believe. And most stuff is JFed in, and a good bit of moneymaking is injected into wallets by CONCORD.

So it's sort of already very far from the CCP vision.

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 ?
Abel Merkabah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#30 - 2012-08-13 02:27:11 UTC
Oh yeah, and if it forces people to start bouncing off celestials before approachIng gates more often, campers will start camping them, forcing travelers to bounce off something sooner. It could very well encourage combat through out more of the system instead of being focused on the gates, even for intercepting normal travelers.

Correct me if I've made some incorrect assumptions in my posts.

James315 for CSM 8!
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#31 - 2012-08-13 02:28:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
Suqq Madiq wrote:
Well, you did say "risk-free" which is a far cry from "any significant risk" which is a lot more accurate but still not quite true. For various and oft-times self-imposed reasons (Logi DCs, incompetent FC, wild Blackbirds appear, EVE University sponsored fleet), highsec incursion runners manage to put themselves at significant risk every time they undock. The numbers don't lie. The risks they take may not be proportional to the income they earn but it's hardly "risk-free". Blink


oh man, those incursion runners are hard, they have to put up with such adversity as logi DCs, dumb FCs and *gasp* suicide blackbirds

on the other hand, nullsec anom runners have to put up with such insignificant risks like getting hotdropped, finding themselves in a bubble on a station and getting blown up by the first thing that sneezes at them

oh and since you're talking about things like logi disconnects (lol) i'll just add awoxers to that list

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Amber Coldheart
Doomheim
#32 - 2012-08-13 02:30:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Amber Coldheart
Toshiroma McDiesel wrote:
You have no idea how much fun being paranoid all the time can be Pirate

(yes, I am serious)




hehe, i can imagine :D
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#33 - 2012-08-13 02:44:02 UTC
Abel Merkabah wrote:
Oh yeah, and if it forces people to start bouncing off celestials before approachIng gates more often, campers will start camping them, forcing travelers to bounce off something sooner. It could very well encourage combat through out more of the system instead of being focused on the gates, even for intercepting normal travelers.

Correct me if I've made some incorrect assumptions in my posts.

There's a LOT of celestials the campers would have to camp.

Especially if you bounced off a friendly POS, that would be a pain to camp at.

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 ?
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#34 - 2012-08-13 02:45:55 UTC
Suqq Madiq wrote:
Andski wrote:
Nullsecers would simply move PvE alts to hisec to run incursions (which are risk-free and provide similar levels of income to nullsec.) Nothing else would change, short of nullsec being largely quiet when nobody is forming up for a big timer.


"Risk- free"? Shocked

Were you able to keep a straight face when you typed that? I shouldn't need to remind you that EVE has risk involved every time you hit the undock button.


lol
Abel Merkabah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#35 - 2012-08-13 02:51:33 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Abel Merkabah wrote:
Oh yeah, and if it forces people to start bouncing off celestials before approachIng gates more often, campers will start camping them, forcing travelers to bounce off something sooner. It could very well encourage combat through out more of the system instead of being focused on the gates, even for intercepting normal travelers.

Correct me if I've made some incorrect assumptions in my posts.

There's a LOT of celestials the campers would have to camp.

Especially if you bounced off a friendly POS, that would be a pain to camp at.


Ah yes the pos; did not think of that. But the celestials would have to be in scan range, some systems would be pain, some would not. The friendly pos bounce does seem to complicate that though. Although that would encourage the camping crew to wipe out the poses near the gates they camp.

Good point though. I guess all I can say is it would be interesting to see how the player base would react, not sure if it would be good or bad.

James315 for CSM 8!
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#36 - 2012-08-13 02:54:16 UTC
i would j izz in my pants :)
WH people would have an absolute field day and love CCP forever.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#37 - 2012-08-13 02:55:57 UTC
Abel Merkabah wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Abel Merkabah wrote:
Oh yeah, and if it forces people to start bouncing off celestials before approachIng gates more often, campers will start camping them, forcing travelers to bounce off something sooner. It could very well encourage combat through out more of the system instead of being focused on the gates, even for intercepting normal travelers.

Correct me if I've made some incorrect assumptions in my posts.

There's a LOT of celestials the campers would have to camp.

Especially if you bounced off a friendly POS, that would be a pain to camp at.


Ah yes the pos; did not think of that. But the celestials would have to be in scan range, some systems would be pain, some would not. The friendly pos bounce does seem to complicate that though. Although that would encourage the camping crew to wipe out the poses near the gates they camp.

Good point though. I guess all I can say is it would be interesting to see how the player base would react, not sure if it would be good or bad.

Yes, if you don't have good perches bookmarked it might be troublesome.

Still, there are "ways" to get around that, even if the gate has no celestials nearby.
Jack Miton wrote:
i would j izz in my pants :)
WH people would have an absolute field day and love CCP forever.

Yes, it would make their WH experience that much richer !

...

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 ?
Abel Merkabah
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#38 - 2012-08-13 03:00:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Abel Merkabah
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Abel Merkabah wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Abel Merkabah wrote:
Oh yeah, and if it forces people to start bouncing off celestials before approachIng gates more often, campers will start camping them, forcing travelers to bounce off something sooner. It could very well encourage combat through out more of the system instead of being focused on the gates, even for intercepting normal travelers.

Correct me if I've made some incorrect assumptions in my posts.

There's a LOT of celestials the campers would have to camp.

Especially if you bounced off a friendly POS, that would be a pain to camp at.


Ah yes the pos; did not think of that. But the celestials would have to be in scan range, some systems would be pain, some would not. The friendly pos bounce does seem to complicate that though. Although that would encourage the camping crew to wipe out the poses near the gates they camp.

Good point though. I guess all I can say is it would be interesting to see how the player base would react, not sure if it would be good or bad.

Yes, if you don't have good perches bookmarked it might be troublesome.

Still, there are "ways" to get around that, even if the gate has no celestials nearby.
Jack Miton wrote:
i would j izz in my pants :)
WH people would have an absolute field day and love CCP forever.

Yes, it would make their WH experience that much richer !

...


I'm sure there are, off grid tacticals at the gate come to mind...hmmm...guess my idea wasn't so solid.

Edit or cap draining before warp so you come up short by a few AU...guess gates will be where it's at even if no local...

James315 for CSM 8!
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#39 - 2012-08-13 03:03:29 UTC
Regan Rotineque wrote:
Well for one we would not have any more threads pondering this dead horse......

Instead we would have threads asking to put local back.....

~R~


From the people who asked to have it removed and then suddenly realized that nullsec has... jump bridges, cyno ships, cyno beacons - oh. Not quite the same as wormhole space. Yah go ahead and remove local. We'll be waiting for you at the choke point, when you make your way home after failing to find anyone except a couple ships on d-scan that - disappeared.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#40 - 2012-08-13 03:07:17 UTC
"we should remove local from nullsec so it will be JUST like wormholes"

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar