EVE General Discussion

Feels like I'm not getting my point across well.

All that I'm saying is that by making intel harder to gather (which is what removing local does), you make it so that a group with resources to spend on gathering intel will be hurt less than those who don't have those resources.

Yes, this will make it harder for null sec locals to know what's going on. But the difficulty for small gang/solo interlopers will be even greater.

Local is "free" intel. It's passive. You don't have a to work for it.

All other intel about who's in the system and what they're doing takes resources to gather. Specifically... effort from players. And those with more players will be able to gather that intel easier than those with fewer.

You seem to be focused on the sov-holders. Yes, this will make it harder for them... but it will be easier for them than for small groups and solo players. And in the end if you nerf me a lot and you nerf the other guy a little... you're essentially buffing the other guy.

Yes, I've done it recently in HS. I use a noob ship or a shuttle when I do it. If I lose the ship...well it is just a shuttle or noob ship. I rarely if ever have an issue getting from point A to point B in HS.

This false claim that HS is some sort of blood bath is spread by the mendacious. If you are imprudent in HS yes, you will likely run into trouble sooner or later. But if you are prudent it will be later or never. Everyone whining about HS not being safe are players who were either caught being imprudent and/or don't like putting for the effort.

Or players would adapt to the new environment to make NS as safe as they possible can. As I said, it is not a problem is a part of NS is safe because the residents make it safe or more accurately safer. That is a feature not a bug.

I doubt you'll come around to my view, but I'm willing to bet most here share my view as do the Devs.

First off he did not write that. And as for why the larger, experienced groups might end up in the dominant position is that they have the people, the organization, knowledge and resources to take better advantage of no local relative to other groups while maintaining their own security. Yes, these groups already have these advantages, but the claim is that by removing local you'll be enhancing these advantages not weakening them. Basically, you could very well be giving the larger groups a relative buff....do they really need that?

Look, I am no fan of local, but if it is going to be removed, we need some in game method of establishing an intel network.

Remove Local from Player Sov.

Players will adapt.

Removing Local creates far more dynamics than its current existence restricts.

Local is a systemic, artificial mechanic that impairs spontaneous order and emergence.

Without Local, intel becomes a factor of player action, thus increasing dynamics, and "spontaneous order and emergence", to use your words.

HS is safer but compared to low I would say that Null is safer. In Low you simply don't find the well defended areas that you have in null. Maybe you can remove the local in Null and add a counter. So you have info that someone is in your system but no info about who he is until you found him. After that he would be in local until he leaves the system.

1) Player Sov, specifically, because it is player owned. Where players own the space and can develop it, they should also be responsible for gathering their own intel.

2) Removal of Local ID from all sectors, would increase dynamics there as well. I actually would be ok with that.
If no one has Local ID, it ceases to be an issue for anyone.

---

BUT.
In the sector mechanics cascade, it is only Player Sov where the existence of Local ID is an outstanding "perk" that doesn't make sense.

This is made apparent by comparison to NPC Sov:
-Player Sov can be owned, developed, and has the same combat mechanics as NPC Sov, which cannot be owned or developed. Yet, irrationally, Player Sov additionally also has Local ID for free intel as well.

Thus it is specifically in the unique mechanics of Player Sov, where players can own/develop space, where Local ID is out of place.

It is also uniquely the sector where Local ID has the most pronounced dampening effect on dynamics.
Instead of players, in their owned space, generating their own intel, they dont need to cos Local ID does it largely for them.

---

3) As to d-scan issues, I agree the repeated clicking is just poor design and not doing any of our carpal tunnels any good. However, j-space is currently existing just fine without Local ID, so a precedent exists. This does not invalidate or block the proposal to remove Local ID from Player Sov.

4) As to cloaking, there is a lot to discuss there. But is secondary to the Local ID issue. Without Local ID in Player Sov, everyone would benefit/suffer equally from the potential of cloaked ships. The extent they can leverage that due to assets ofc will have an impact, but the fact remains that removing Local ID from Player Sov in principle is just as harmful/beneficial to everyone there. Equity is retained.

TLDR:
-It is exactly uniquely in Player Sov, where systems can be owned and developed, that free Local ID intel is the greatest systemic dampener on dynamics, and is most irrational.
-Player Sov, as player owned, should be responsible for its own intel. How they do that, is up to them.
-A game-wide removal of Local ID is a valid option, to promote dynamics everywhere, and removes the issue from the table.
-D-scan and Cloaking issues are secondary, and do not obstruct the above. They apply to everyone, equally.

I'm not sure what you mean by "dynamics".

Earlier you were saying that having local gave an advantage to sov holders over interlopers. I've argued that doesn't feel like it's true and you've stopped trying to push that point so I'm thinking you might agree with me.

I don't think getting rid of local is bad necessarily... but it is a change that hurts the interlopers more than it hurts the locals... because locals will have an easier time setting up alternative intel gathering. If by "dynamics" you mean it will cause more pvp fights... you're probably right. But in general the locals will have better intel (since they'll have the intelligence infrastructure set up while interlopers will no longer have local for an easy intel option). The locals will likely be the ones who more often dictate if pvp happens... and they'll generally do that when the odds are in their favor in the conflict.

I'm not against the idea of not having local... I just think you're very mistaken if you think it will be more of a hindrance on locals as compared to visitors.

By dynamics I mean increased surface area for interaction, cause and effect, from multiple angles, by multiple means.

Local ID gives locals a far greater advantage, than it does you as an interloper.
They have assets/organization onsite/nearby, and can simply hide when you show up.

If Local ID is removed from Player Sov, they will have to invest far more heavily into accruing their own intel.
You may perceive that as being disadvantageous to you if they start patrolling their space with more concerted effort, whereas now you show up in a cloaky ship they run and hide. But it means they are investing in generating their own intel with effort.

I understand your concern, but the solution is adaptation. That you, as a solo cloaky interloper into Player Sov, which is naturally defended and organized, might suffer some disadvantage compared to now, is part of the price. Its their space which they have fought for, conquered, defended and developed. Obviously you as a solo interloper are at a disadvantage.

If they dont bother with intel/security effort post-removal of Local ID, you will be as safe as now in Player Sov.
Before they automatically knew you are there. After, they wont know you are there unless they take effort to ascertain your presence.

Per my proposal, you can also instead operate in NPC NS, where Local ID would continue to operate, where players cannot own the space, and which frankly is safer even now for your purposes and certainly after removal of Local ID from Player Sov. It may not be as lucrative for some activities, but the risk is less.

Frankly, you have been enjoying the flip side of the Player Sov Local ID coin. Local ID provides advantage to both aggressor and defender. When it is removed, you, and they, will have to engage in more dynamic behavior to maintain safety.

So... you do understand that this puts the interlopers at MORE of a disadvantage than locals.

"Its their space which they have fought for, conquered, defended and developed. Obviously you as a solo interloper are at a disadvantage."

But you also say this: "Local ID gives locals a far greater advantage, than it does you as an interloper."

Do you see how the argument you're making is confusing? If Local ID gives locals a far greater advantage... removing it should make it easier for me as an interloper. But you also concede that it actually puts me at more of a disadvantage.

Both of those can't be true.

"If they dont bother with intel/security effort post-removal of Local ID, you will be as safe as now in Player Sov.
Before they automatically knew you are there. After, they wont know you are there unless they take effort to ascertain your presence."

The issue is the interloper has a very easy counter to locals knowing they are present... the cloak.

The only realistic way to find someone who is cloaked... is to wait until they are uncloaked. Local with a cloak equipped gives the interloper the same protection locals have with stations... the ability to become virtually 100% safe when someone dangerous enters the system.

Without local... yes you can still cloak. But you have much more trouble finding out if you NEED to or if it's safe to run a site or rat. Locals will have intel channels set up and people scouting for intruders. Right now we're essentially on even footing with local... I can cloak when I see them... they can station up when they see me. Without local the problem is they will be much more likely to spot me before I spot them... 20 pairs of eyes looking instead of just one.

Removing local is a buff to the group with numbers in system... which nine times out of ten is the local corps (unless a big gang comes for a fight). Eve generally benefits the side with bigger numbers a ton already. I'm not sure we really need more changes that help the big guys crush the little guys.

If it happens, I'll adapt. I just feel like you have the wrong idea about the impact. While it will make the large population alliance locals a little less secure, it will make small number interlopers a lot less secure. While it might create more PvP... it will undoubtedly have many more cases where large local gangs kill small number outsiders than the reverse.