These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Are the days of Local really numbered?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#221 - 2013-12-09 08:16:14 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
How would ganking become "super easy" if I can't see if I even have any targets in system?

You can use dscan. If you cloak, however, they can't. They have no way of knowing you're there, and you have all the time in the world to investigate the system and see if anybody's there. Of course, the reality of it is there won't be anyone there, or anywhere else for that matter.


Rat aligned.

Yeah, I'm sure that'll help when a bomber will be able to decloak, lock, and point faster than I can react.
Just to add to this. A cloaker can also bump you out of alignment before they show up on your overview. Meaning you are no longer aligned while they lock and point you.

Overall the whole idea of this change confounds me. Basically they want to add effort for no reason. It won't be any more fun having to hammer a d-scan button, or keep more alts on or anything. It will just be more work for less gain. I really don;t understand why they want to waste their time on things like this when they could be fixing things like, oh I don't know, the incredibly useless permission systems currently used by a POS?

Seems like a massive waste of time to make a few cloakers happy, while causing everyone to have to put in more effort for nowt.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#222 - 2013-12-09 08:23:52 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
You could easily get away with knowing how many people are in system and what status they have towards you.

I'd be PERFECTLY happy with just this.

And as far as cloaks go: if there's someone cloaked in system, I need to know at least that. I don't need to know who it is, or standings, etc. I think that if there's any way to avoid showing up in local, it should be on specialized ships that aren't able to fit offensive modules.
The thing is, this would change nothing. What cloak gankers are whining about is that by they time they get their crappy scout ships into the system, people have safed up, and they have no unarmed targets to shoot. I mean they could use an interceptor, but cloaks are "cool". It's like if you put a ninja in a game, all the school kids want to be a ninja and want the ninja to be the best.

From my point of view, local is fine as is, but if it were to change the only change I'd make is having everyone (not just cloakers) not show up on local until after they break gate cloak. Once you've broken gate cloak, I see no reason that you would not show up on IFF (which is essentially what local is).

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Zol Interbottom
Blimp Requisition Services
#223 - 2013-12-09 08:24:26 UTC
Solution, keep local in high-sec/empire in general, make it have a minute or so before you show up in low-sec and make it a thing you can buy in null.

"If you're quitting for the 3rd time you clearly ain't quitting" - Chribba
Prince Kobol
#224 - 2013-12-09 08:27:46 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:


From my point of view, local is fine as is, but if it were to change the only change I'd make is having everyone (not just cloakers) not show up on local until after they break gate cloak. Once you've broken gate cloak, I see no reason that you would not show up on IFF (which is essentially what local is).


This is the only change I would be happy with.

However like said before, I presume that local is a core mechanic within Eve and as CCP have proven a number of times, they do not like to change core mechanics.

Also on the long list of things game mechanics that need to be fixed, I would put local somewhere near the bottom.

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#225 - 2013-12-09 08:35:16 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Considering:

Malcanis wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
This discussion will get a little more entertaining in a few weeks time.

I eagerly await the news.


I don't think you do.


Some sort of local nerf is on the way. Of course, I look forward to hearing about changes regardless of what they are. If it's a stupid idea (and given his response it may well be) then we'll have time to suggest changes to it before it goes live.

Completely removing local without replacing it would be incredibly stupid - only trolls actually say that it's a good idea.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#226 - 2013-12-09 09:04:04 UTC
Also only trolls defend local without giving any reasons.

Local is obviously not relevant to PVE or PVP, but maybe for shitposting and ASCII.

.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#227 - 2013-12-09 09:21:03 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
...From my point of view, local is fine as is, but if it were to change the only change I'd make is having everyone (not just cloakers) not show up on local until after they break gate cloak. Once you've broken gate cloak, I see no reason that you would not show up on IFF (which is essentially what local is).

But with all things being equal and most mechanics in Eve having some sort of dark side, wouldn't that approach necessitate the introduction of a passive module that suppresses the onboard IFF equipment?
That is, more of a wormie behaviour (hidden until deliberate action) only with the addition of the required module.

Either way, I sincerely doubt any changes will be as inconsequential as 'hidden only under gate cloak' as it does not address the issue that a local change is needed to solve, namely: unlimited and effortless accurate intel at all times.

One could keep it simple and do a worm-K hybrid, having new entries show in local list as ????? and change it as information is gathered .. directional scan or probes would change ????? to "ship type/name" and eyes-on would change it further to include pilot name with ship type/name in hover text.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#228 - 2013-12-09 09:39:20 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Roime wrote:
Also only trolls defend local without giving any reasons.

Local is obviously not relevant to PVE or PVP, but maybe for shitposting and ASCII.

Just because you didn't read the reasons doesn't mean they weren't given, several times, in this thread and in threads previous. Now if you actually have an argument to put forth, we'd like to hear it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#229 - 2013-12-09 09:53:16 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Roime wrote:
Also only trolls defend local without giving any reasons.

Local is obviously not relevant to PVE or PVP, but maybe for shitposting and ASCII.

Just because you didn't read the reasons doesn't mean they weren't given, several times, in this thread and in threads previous. Now if you actually have an argument to put forth, we'd like to hear it.


Just because you typed something on the forums doesn't mean that any reasons were given

Now if you actually have an argument for keeping local, we'd like to hear it.

.
Wyrmlimion
Doomheim
#230 - 2013-12-09 10:07:57 UTC
Remove it from everywhere but empire space, it would add a layer of terror to playing in Null sec cause now unless you use sensors your blind!
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#231 - 2013-12-09 10:07:58 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
You could easily get away with knowing how many people are in system and what status they have towards you.

I'd be PERFECTLY happy with just this.

what about awoxers? what about false-blues?

I guess proposed system will be heavens for all those "wulf covered by sheep skin".

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Garia666
CyberShield Inc
HYDRA RELOADED
#232 - 2013-12-09 10:11:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Garia666
just make an small active radar screen

which shows

1. Activly scanning number of ships in the system. ( ships in space ( with players in ship ) not cloacked )
2. Activly scanning cloak signatures ( so when a ships cloak or decloak you see an number ( mabe spiltted in last minute, last 5 minutes last 30 minutes)
3. Mabe an active warning when local spike`s visual and or audio

i think this would make an start for removing local.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#233 - 2013-12-09 10:17:01 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Roime wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Roime wrote:
Also only trolls defend local without giving any reasons.

Local is obviously not relevant to PVE or PVP, but maybe for shitposting and ASCII.

Just because you didn't read the reasons doesn't mean they weren't given, several times, in this thread and in threads previous. Now if you actually have an argument to put forth, we'd like to hear it.


Just because you typed something on the forums doesn't mean that any reasons were given

Now if you actually have an argument for keeping local, we'd like to hear it.

So you didn't feel like reading. That's too bad for you then. Guess we won't include you in the discussion.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#234 - 2013-12-09 10:19:33 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
March rabbit wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
You could easily get away with knowing how many people are in system and what status they have towards you.

I'd be PERFECTLY happy with just this.

what about awoxers? what about false-blues?

I guess proposed system will be heavens for all those "wulf covered by sheep skin".

Corporations are responsible for reimbursing losses caused by any awoxers they let in. I'm not terribly worried about that. With reimbursement there are no (or not many) tears, consequently a good portion of the motivation to awox is taken away.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
March rabbit
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#235 - 2013-12-09 10:39:16 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
March rabbit wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
You could easily get away with knowing how many people are in system and what status they have towards you.

I'd be PERFECTLY happy with just this.

what about awoxers? what about false-blues?

I guess proposed system will be heavens for all those "wulf covered by sheep skin".

Corporations are responsible for reimbursing losses caused by any awoxers they let in. I'm not terribly worried about that. With reimbursement there are no (or not many) tears, consequently a good portion of the motivation to awox is taken away.

reimbursing is good for victim but not for corporation which pays it. You can awox people by killing their ships. Or you can awox by killing friendly ships and make your targets pay for friendly losses.

Anyway: counters will help awoxers.

The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#236 - 2013-12-09 10:44:30 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Roime wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Roime wrote:
Also only trolls defend local without giving any reasons.

Local is obviously not relevant to PVE or PVP, but maybe for shitposting and ASCII.

Just because you didn't read the reasons doesn't mean they weren't given, several times, in this thread and in threads previous. Now if you actually have an argument to put forth, we'd like to hear it.


Just because you typed something on the forums doesn't mean that any reasons were given

Now if you actually have an argument for keeping local, we'd like to hear it.

So you didn't feel like reading. That's too bad for you then. Guess we won't include you in the discussion.


Yes I read, no arguments have been presented

FYI "I want to rat in perfect safety in nullsec becausebecause" isn't an argument

.
Marcus Avon
New Eden Fedo Lovers Society
#237 - 2013-12-09 11:18:32 UTC
What if it were possible to remove yourself from Local - switch off your transponder or something - but doing so was illegal and flagged you as a suspect when in overview range of other ships? Might be interesting.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#238 - 2013-12-09 12:19:18 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
...From my point of view, local is fine as is, but if it were to change the only change I'd make is having everyone (not just cloakers) not show up on local until after they break gate cloak. Once you've broken gate cloak, I see no reason that you would not show up on IFF (which is essentially what local is).

But with all things being equal and most mechanics in Eve having some sort of dark side, wouldn't that approach necessitate the introduction of a passive module that suppresses the onboard IFF equipment?
That is, more of a wormie behaviour (hidden until deliberate action) only with the addition of the required module.

Either way, I sincerely doubt any changes will be as inconsequential as 'hidden only under gate cloak' as it does not address the issue that a local change is needed to solve, namely: unlimited and effortless accurate intel at all times.

One could keep it simple and do a worm-K hybrid, having new entries show in local list as ????? and change it as information is gathered .. directional scan or probes would change ????? to "ship type/name" and eyes-on would change it further to include pilot name with ship type/name in hover text.
But how is "effortless intel" an issue. What reason is there to change it other than some irrational hate of it being "free". Many things in the game are free. Contact watchlists, viewing sov indexes, map statistics. Hell, even probes are now able to be launched in a predetermined pattern and launch all 8 at the same time. Compare that to years ago when you had to fly between safes, manually placing them.

I don't subscribe to this idea that a mechanic being automatic makes it a bad thing. I'm for changes which make EVE more fun, and I just don't think replacing local = fun. Most people will find it a pain in the ass. It's going to be near impossible to balance during testing and the end result is likely to be that cloakers get to more easily gank while everyone else has a new chore added for no gain.

To me, it just seems like a change to satisfy some hatred of local, rather than being something to improve the game. There are several hundred things I think could be improved which would improve overall game experience, and this is not one of them.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#239 - 2013-12-09 12:21:00 UTC
Roime wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Roime wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Roime wrote:
Also only trolls defend local without giving any reasons.

Local is obviously not relevant to PVE or PVP, but maybe for shitposting and ASCII.

Just because you didn't read the reasons doesn't mean they weren't given, several times, in this thread and in threads previous. Now if you actually have an argument to put forth, we'd like to hear it.


Just because you typed something on the forums doesn't mean that any reasons were given

Now if you actually have an argument for keeping local, we'd like to hear it.

So you didn't feel like reading. That's too bad for you then. Guess we won't include you in the discussion.


Yes I read, no arguments have been presented

FYI "I want to rat in perfect safety in nullsec becausebecause" isn't an argument


Strawman isn't an argument either. Well, it is, but it's a fallacious one.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#240 - 2013-12-09 12:24:06 UTC
Strawman about a strawman must be the most irrelevant argument possible.

I see that you can't produce a single reason why local chat should be preserved as it is.

.