Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I grabbed this, as it was not context sensitive.

It is short sighted, and assumes that active players all use direct frontal assault, and have no grasp of tactics beyond having more ships winning.

Your pretending to see no value in counter intelligence tactics is a farce, and you really need to admit you just want easy PvE in null.

It's nothing like poker. In poker you don;t have some people simply not being there's, but appearing to be the same as everyone else. The bluffs is around the cards you are playing, not about whether or not you are there to play them. With the SOE ships, there are going to be a myriad of possibilities for covops cloakers to be in. If you can;t use that to bluff, and have to rely on AFK players (which you can provide no evidence is having the bluffing effect of causing kills) then you are doing it wrong.

Well I think removing local would be removing a huge amount of options for play, while removing AFK cloaking gives null players more options for location, while only stopping people who are NOT playing.
If you just want to shut down some null systems permanently, then why not petition for that instead. I'd back an idea to shrink null down by a few regions.

HOW DO I DESIRE THAT?!?!?!?!
MY PVE ASSETS ARE NOT AT RISK.
It's like you don't read a damn word. I literally could not give a **** if you want to AFK cloak me all day long, I have plenty of places to go, and even if the whole of null is camped, I have a full high sec fleet. The fact STILL REMAINS that there is a portion of systems in null out of use for no ******* reason. That's moronic. Either close it properly, or take away the mechanic for people to shut it with zero effort.

See what I mean though, about you misquoting and misrepresenting people? Further proof that you are unable to flesh out your idea to a workable state, so instead attack my reasoning.

Please read the thread. I can only assume you haven't bothered, or you have a memory loss problem.
REMOVING LOCAL WOULD BREAK TOO MANY OTHER MECHANICS.
So there's no point discussing it, since you can;t come up with a coherent, workable, balanced solution for local intel. Not to mention that this thread is NOT ABOUT LOCAL, it's about AFK CLOAKING, NOTHING MORE.

Let's face it though, you don't give a **** about ideas, you are just here to troll everyone who disagrees with you. It's clear there are a lot more people on the remove AFK cloak side, which is why there's only been ~4 characters campaigning for your side, with countless others wanting it removed (as highlighted by you in your MASSIVE list of threads asking for it's removal). This threatens you, so you feel the need to repeat the same thing over and over, ignoring what others say in some places and twisting their words in others.

And removing local would do this, obviously, because you declared this to be true.

Repeating that local is a sacred cow over and over does not make it true.
The simple truth is, we just need a viable intel tool, so we don't leave a vacuum behind by removing it.

Something that makes sense, instead of a chat channel.
And seriously, the story explanations are touching, but suggesting we are all cross connected by superior gate technology, when we can't even get our d-scan to auto repeat itself, kinda lop-sided. A back story can be made to explain nearly anything, the notable exception being items with no known history.

What?

Oh never mind
I remember now, your standard response is to tell me I've someone gone against myself, make up some nonsense about how that is the case, and leave us to try to pick through your lack of English. Try again.

Yes, removing local would, BUT IT WOULD BREAK TOO MANY OTHER MECHANICS. Maybe you missed that part somehow?

If you think its should be removed, present a balanced idea for a replacement. Now your same flawed idea over and over.
honestly though, if it's removed as intel, it may as well be removed as a chat channel. Who is going to chat over it knowing it gives them away?

And I'm not saying its a sacred cow, I'm saying you can;t offer a solution in its place, CCP have made it clear its not even remotely a priority to them, and there are a whole heap of threads of people arguing against it. What is the point of simply chucking down "remove local" into other threads to derail them?

A balanced idea for it's replacement.

Ok, by the numbers for this concept:
Point 1: It needs to require effort.
WHY?: So that way you can put in more effort and get better results, not the same flat data handed out to everyone.

Point 2: If it exposes cloaked vessels, becoming aware of them to be hunted must require effort.
WHY?: If you are effortlessly told a stealth ship is present, then giving you the choice as to whether to hunt it, it trivializes cloaking. You can't have the free warning, as well as the hunting tools.

Point 3: You don't want a click fest, it needs to be toggled at least.
WHY?: Local proved that you could be told intel, and have it update automatically. This would drop the amount and type by filtering through your ships hardware and your skills. As a benefit, when you filter results, you can focus them to where it matters to you.

Point 4: Actively gathering intel is a trade off
WHY?: In many ways, your ship must have special hardware, either fitted or inherent to it's hull, to produce above average results. Also, it should be a tactical trade off, in that other ships in range can detect your actions under the right conditions. Broadcasting sensor energy is visible to your own sensors for feedback, others also knowing it is in the area should not be surprising.

Ok, how would you craft the mechanic?
I can easily justify any of the above points, if you like.

Honestly, I can't think of a mechanic that would elegantly fit that criteria without causing a huge imbalance elsewhere.
That's pretty much my issue here. You and Teckos are pushing for a solution which to this date, nobody has been able to suggest an elegant solution. This puts all other discussions around it to a halt. This is why my suggestion is to resolve each of the issues around it first, then tackle it when it is not a requirement.
Solve AFK cloaking, then solve sov mechanics and guerilla warfare. Then look at cloaks in general. Then look at a replacement intel solution which is preferable to local, then at that point, consider how to drop local from the picture.
Trying to tackle it now is like trying to figure out how to take the legs off of a table while the table is full of stuff.

Do you have much experience with fleet battles? With tidi, by the time a fleet from one systems over manages to get into system through the traffic control, that is if they don't hit system cap, your fleet could be in serious trouble.
If an aggressor committed, but the defender had a fleet twice the size sitting in station, the aggressor would not know until too late that they were screwed, while the defender would easily know what they were getting into due to their intel.

Well no, because right now we can see how many people are on each side.
And the cap is just over 4k characters. It's a well known limit.