Player Features and Ideas Discussion

No. What I want is at least a CHANCE of killing something.Not having your location being broadcasted by local and intel-channels without any player action (I do not count writing in chat as an action) and everyone being docked up before you get even 1 jump away.

You asking for cloak-nerfs due to them being able to disrupt your perfect intel. I want there to be less certainties. Less certain safety, less certain kills.

That is the problem sparring with baltec1 will do, it will make more reasonable posters think that I am some sort of PvE in total peace when if you look through my killboard you will find taht when my corp was active we were hunting mission runners in Stain. But that is the direction of attack used by baltec1.

I think cyno's give too much advantage to older players in well established, well funded and well equipped alliances, making it a drag for people who want to be in space doing stuff as compared to people who don't care because they have all the stuff they need so they play WOT's while waiting for someone to do something. Their fun is the execution style blop drop and a clean kill, but the person on the receiving end of it is kinda meh, he gets camped for weeks and then he goes out takes a risk and perfect execution with no chance to fight back. Great game play and now that a lot of players have BLOP's it gets a bit silly. Where is the meaningful conflict, it is just kill farming.

And as I have done counter drops, and log off traps on BLOP's and seen just how risk averse they are when there is a sniff of something I have to say I find it a terrible bore, I would rather watch paint dry. And this type of play is what makes a lot of people not bother with 0.0. I am not coming at this from a noob who has not done this, I have killed a lot of campers.

Eve is often played by people across different time zones and people are not always playing in a TZ with the ability to get a fleet to counter that drop, it is easy to say get in fleet etc., but it is not always possible to counter and that means many people are left with a camper which they cannot deal with and if this is a blanket camping action they are rather stuck.

You say that not having local works against the attacking fleet, well not totally, head over to the map and look at the data you have on systems usage, people in system and in station. etc., remove that too otherwise the attacker has all the cards, he knows where to go so people ratting in a rubbish system to avoid being picked up might as well not bother playing in 0.0 without local.

As for your opinion on fuel and OA's I have to say that OA for local is the best way to go about this and should only affect sov 0.0 and these people own the space so it is perfectly logical for them and part of the cost of owning space. As I have owned space in the past I have no issue with this.

Lets try pointing out something to you, you say that people need to be organised and active working together and when they do using local intel with people active in each system, able to use counter cyno's and everything else that is bad. I have been in major alliances that did that, however they could only do this for later EU to mid US TZ, the rest of the time the intel from local was very poor and when I was most active it was certainly nothing to rely on with huge glaring gaps, which meant we did not have that security. You talk about a perfect intel setup which takes work, including people watching gates to report what the enemy are in.

The nerfs for cloaks is what other people have asked for because of AFK camping, but not me, my preferred option is another OA which flags people who have been AFK for longer than an hour, and as soon as they do anything with that client the flag is removed. This will enable people over time to make a call on the risk which due to skill injectors and removal of watch lists is now very difficult indeed. There has to be something to balance off against the loss of knowing that the new toon in local has not yet trained up covert cyno's, or that because of that he has a kill history which helps in working out what when and how, leading on to the watch list.

I have suggested a module on the ship to cause local to be delayed that has an impact on fitting, because there has to be a cost to it.

I get the impression that you have never really lived in 0.0 and been next door to people like NCDOT. the CFC and PL or people like the Stain Russians.

You keep jumping between your ideas when it suits you. You see your points through one point of view without considering the implications for other types of gameplay.




It is quite true unfortunately. Any change you do to benefit the "small guy" is going to be exploitable by the larger groups, unless you specifically plan for it.

To Dracvlad

To be fair to Baltec1, I make m y own opinion what people are saying on their posts, not on other peoples opinions on their posts if you get me.

Doesn't mean I am right mind you as it can be easy to misinterpret people sometimes.

The issue this game has, like many other games of this age, is what ever changes you make, it will inevitable favour the older and more established players in someway.

I was one of those players. My last six months before I quit the only ever time I logged on was when a call came out on WhatsApp that a fleet was forming.

So yeah, I was an older player with a wallet that enabled me to lose ships and go meh. No change will ever effect me or other players in that position.

What changes that need to happen is to allow smaller groups an opportunity to fight on their terms without being detected 10 jumps away.

Will removing or adding a delay help bigger groups, yes, but if it also helps smaller groups then its a change for the good.

Ask yourself this, do you really think that the large null sec entitles really want the removal of local or a delay, of course they don't. They would much prefer it stay as it is.

The benefit is much more in favour of smaller groups who operate out of NPC Null or low sec.

You talk about risk adverse players, to be honest what ever changes you make, they will always be risk averse , that is their nature and they will always complain about any changes unless it makes space safer for them.

I really don't care about risk averse players, its their problem and I believe they are by and large in the minority. I believe, righty or wrongly, that most Eve players enjoy conflict and what more opportunities to fight, not less.

I say that removing local can be both an advantage and disadvantage its to us, the players to make the most of it,, and yeah, I hate how much information is made available by the API. I am one of the few people who would celebrate if CCP removed some information made available by the API or at the least put some kind of delay, like 48 hours.

Christ I would travel to Iceland and give each and everyone of them a hug if they made changes to the API so it didn't give some much information.

The QA, that is something we will always disagree on I am afraid. Having taken part of disgusting number of structure bashing, I detest it with a passion.

Eve has enough structures and soon we wont be able to move for them. Urgh..

Kobol
The AFK component of afk cloaky camping is devastating to activity. So must be targetted for removal.

Small gangs can roam in a no local environment. That environment is called wormhole space. It is easily accessible to small gang roams from all sectors of space. There is no call to remove local to cater to small gangs (and lots of reasons not to remove local if activity is a criteria). Issues making no local small gang roams in wormhole space are best adressed at thet source.

With that said. Local is a poor way to provide API based information. Better systems are available as third party applications. Breaking up alliance/coalition monopolies on ranged real time information is important. As is reliance on 3rd party applications (anyone should in principle be able to play EvE effectively using only ingame assets. In principle). A favour a audio cue system triggered by gate passage myself (the new system should have loopholes clever players can exploit if willing to put in the time and effort).

It would be nice if we did not try and turn null-sec into wormhole space. That experiment worked poorly the first time and needs to be fixed. The way to fix that ecosystem is not by forcibly moving null sec into it and hope inertia will keep people from moving to lowsec.

Individual players and small groups need effective access to real time information in null sec. Those that dont like it can play in wormholes.

No need to apologise, it is actually good to debate with someone who is reasonable, which is often an issue on this subject.

I have played as that small guy, and we did not like to AFK cloaky camp, we would actively hunt, we wanted more people in space doing stuff and sitting around AFK cloaky camping was not going to help us..

I repeat what I said above, NCDOT. PL would rather have it as it is now because many of them do that, the only time I lost against cloaky campers was against NCDOT. It is only the change in sov to the ADM that made them actually do PVE in their systems as those alliances and they only do it as the ADM, their main income generation is from alts outside of those alliances.

Structures and bringing back space for people to make errors with and so on is better than it is now, AFK cloaky camping reduces people in 0.0 and I know that because I have seen so many people give up on 0.0 and then the game itself.

Let's follow your logic. I've seen people give up on the game because they could be ganked in HS. That means ganking shouldn't be allowed anywhere, right?

If someone wants to live in null and isn't in fleet, on comms with a standing defense fleet ready to counter an attacker 24/7, they have no business living in null. That's the real problem here.

We should agree to disagree, and it has been interesting to hear another perception and I would also like to thank you for not getting personal. It is a difficult subject because we all have different perceptions about what will work best and where the problem lies and to be honest what the problem really is!

My view would be to try different things and see how it develops, for example I would like to see the OA local develop and play around with delay and different ways to do it even though I am a bit wary of making it so people who do everything right still get caught.

o7

So you want to work with sweeping generalisations, feel free.

The problem is that there are pro's and cons to everything, differing levels of advantages, etc. I just find it a simple retort that people just throw out because they can't answer the point made. It is just like calling something silly without explaining why! Cough cough Teckos...