These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Grow some extremely durable genitalia.

First post First post
Author
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#81 - 2012-05-21 19:12:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Alara IonStorm wrote:

This is not a thread about AFK Cloaking it is a thread about removing Local. As in you can move cloak fleets into Sanctums and Belts and 1 Volley people with no effort and no real chance of a defense.

That is my problem with removing local. Cloaks become a 99% Victory button against solo Null Sec PvE.


Working as intended. Whats the opposite? You never die to a fleet because you are told where they are each and every time you participate in an activity. Its garbage gameplay.
Alara IonStorm
#82 - 2012-05-21 19:18:09 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Alara IonStorm wrote:

This is not a thread about AFK Cloaking it is a thread about removing Local. As in you can move cloak fleets into Sanctums and Belts and 1 Volley people with no effort and no real chance of a defense.

That is my problem with removing local. Cloaks become a 99% Victory button against solo Null Sec PvE.

Working as intended. Whats the opposite? You never die to a fleet because you are told where they are each and every time you participate in an activity. Its garbage gameplay.

Compared to you always die it is way better then the opposite and it would be garbage gameplay.

I am not saying don't remove local, I am saying make a counter to cloaks.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#83 - 2012-05-21 19:20:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Alara IonStorm wrote:

Compared to you always die it is way better then the opposite and it would be garbage gameplay.

I am not saying don't remove local, I am saying make a counter to cloaks.


I'm not against that. But the counter would be there already. Sure there would be ambushes, thats good gameplay, but you wouldn't be visible in local. So the cloaker would have to be as patient as you were at determining whether an area was safe or not.

The 5 cloaker ambush at an anom would also risk having a 10 cloaker ambush reveal right near them.
Alara IonStorm
#84 - 2012-05-21 19:23:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Caliph Muhammed wrote:

I'm not against that. But the counter would be there already. Sure there would be ambushes, thats good gameplay, but you wouldn't be visible in local. So the cloaker would have to be as patient as you were at determining whether an area was safe or not.

No they wouldn't really. Just warp to 2 or three points in the system and run a D-Scan then check the Sanctums, Havens and Belts. Can be done in three-five minutes.

Next Systems 0 threat to getting detected. At least with Local you know 8 or 9 guys are in the area. Without it you are chum with 0 chance of rescue and they warp off home free.

Making Cloak Ships appear on the D-Scan with an unknown ship tag is at least a start in a localess environment.
Asuri Kinnes
Perkone
Caldari State
#85 - 2012-05-21 19:25:00 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
If no real improvement comes i'll vote with my wallet.

Not soon enough.

Apparently OP knows jack about wormholes. You have access to markets every day - and solo play is perfectly feasible - just takes a tiny bit of effort.

Bob is the god of Wormholes.

That's all you need to know.

Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#86 - 2012-05-21 19:26:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:

I'm not against that. But the counter would be there already. Sure there would be ambushes, thats good gameplay, but you wouldn't be visible in local. So the cloaker would have to be as patient as you were at determining whether an area was safe or not.

No they wouldn't really. Just warp to 2 or three points in the system and run a D-Scan then check the Sanctums, Havens and Belts. Can be done in three-five minutes.

Next Systems 0 threat to getting detected. At least with Local you know 8 or 9 guys are in the area. Without it you are chum with 0 chance of rescue and they warp off home free.

Making Cloak Ships appear on the D-Scan with an unknown ship tag is at least a start in a localess environment.


No it wouldnt. It would mean completely negating the purpose of removing local to begin with. The bear wants safety in essence. A way to determine whether anyone is there whatsoever so they can avoid the danger completely. That's what needs fixing. Guarenteed safety. It needs to go. A destroyer that can perhaps track a cloaked object with reasonably bad efficiency, not impossible, but not auto, thats acceptable. And with limits to its range. Not system wide but able to patrol a portion of a belt or similiar. Click a dscan and know whether the system is safe or not, no.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#87 - 2012-05-21 19:29:55 UTC
Asuri Kinnes wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
If no real improvement comes i'll vote with my wallet.

Not soon enough.

Apparently OP knows jack about wormholes. You have access to markets every day - and solo play is perfectly feasible - just takes a tiny bit of effort.


Not without logistics. If it were that great and oh so easy everyone would be there but their not and it isn't. Thanks for your opinion though.
Alara IonStorm
#88 - 2012-05-21 19:32:06 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:

No it wouldnt. It would mean completely negating the purpose of removing local to begin with. The bear wants safety in essence. A way to determine whether anyone is there whatsoever so they can avoid the danger completely. That's what needs fixing. Guarenteed safety. It needs to go.

But you can not replace it with guaranteed destruction. Besides the fact that you are supposed to secure that space for a semblance of safety you can not make it impossible to defend yourself or escape or PvE down their will empty out and you need that to fund your personal / corp warfleet and help pay for sov.

I would rather have what we have now then no local and no change to Cov Ops.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#89 - 2012-05-21 19:33:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:

No it wouldnt. It would mean completely negating the purpose of removing local to begin with. The bear wants safety in essence. A way to determine whether anyone is there whatsoever so they can avoid the danger completely. That's what needs fixing. Guarenteed safety. It needs to go.

But you can not replace it with guaranteed destruction. Besides the fact that you are supposed to secure that space for a semblance of safety you can not make it impossible to defend yourself or escape or PvE down their will empty out and you need that to fund your personal / corp warfleet and help pay for sov.

I would rather have what we have now then no local and no change to Cov Ops.


Guarenteed safety is guarenteed when you know something is out there. Guarenteed destruction is a farce. There may not be anything there, hence no guarenteed destruction, and whats there you may be able to kill. Again no guarenteed destruction.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#90 - 2012-05-21 19:35:09 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Guarenteed destruction is a farce. There may not be anything there, hence no guarentee, and whats there you may be able to kill. Again no guarenteed destruction.

As long as you aren't evading CONCORD.

Come to think of it, CONCORD should shout in local when they blow someone up.

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 ?

Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#91 - 2012-05-21 19:38:35 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Guarenteed destruction is a farce. There may not be anything there, hence no guarentee, and whats there you may be able to kill. Again no guarenteed destruction.

As long as you aren't evading CONCORD.

Come to think of it, CONCORD should shout in local when they blow someone up.


Fair point, that is a form of guarenteed destruction.
Alara IonStorm
#92 - 2012-05-21 19:39:35 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Alara IonStorm wrote:

I would rather have what we have now then no local and no change to Cov Ops.


Guarenteed safety is guarenteed when you know something is out there. Guarenteed destruction is a farce. There may not be anything there, hence no guarenteed destruction, and whats there you may be able to kill. Again no guarenteed destruction.

Sure not completely but Horseshoes and Hand Grenades are enough.

You are not guaranteed a kill but you can pop most Sanctum and belt ratting Battleships before help in D-Scan Range can arrive.

Simple fact is that this would be a disaster compared to a current system most people are relatively happy with.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#93 - 2012-05-21 19:43:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Alara IonStorm wrote:

I would rather have what we have now then no local and no change to Cov Ops.


Guarenteed safety is guarenteed when you know something is out there. Guarenteed destruction is a farce. There may not be anything there, hence no guarenteed destruction, and whats there you may be able to kill. Again no guarenteed destruction.

Sure not completely but Horseshoes and Hand Grenades are enough.

You are not guaranteed a kill but you can pop most Sanctum and belt ratting Battleships before help in D-Scan Range can arrive.

Simple fact is that this would be a disaster compared to a current system most people are relatively happy with.


People aren't happy with the current system. Im here posting why i'm not. You are, hence you're here giving counter opinion. You aren't representing the majority and I won't claim to do so either. The particular ship type or its purpose in being there is irrelevant to the core gameplay of EVE needing a change to make it more compelling. Currently in EVE not a single soul should die unless they choose to. That's not hardcore. Thats inane.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#94 - 2012-05-23 02:48:40 UTC
Bump for discussion and because a gui doesn't make camping any less tedious of an activity in a "hardcore" game. Click , shift click, bah. All trivial sh!t when at the core of the game stealth is an impossibility and death is completely voluntary.
Merovee
Gorthaur Legion
Imperium Mordor
#95 - 2012-05-23 03:39:53 UTC
hi-sec should remain the same.
low-sec, show corpies , allies and blues when you jump into a system and anyone who jumps in after you.
nul-sec, show corpies , allies and blues when you jump into a system.

Empire, the next new world order.

Flakey Foont
#96 - 2012-05-23 03:40:32 UTC
Maybe next time!
Dawn Flare
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2012-05-23 06:02:58 UTC
Just noticed this is my in-game log....

05:32:54 svc::gameui notice I am now AFK after being idle for 601 seconds.
05:35:11 svc::gameui notice I am no longer AFK after being idle for 736 seconds.

Client already knows you are afk, and as a conscious choice does nothing with the info Pirate
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#98 - 2012-05-25 07:21:19 UTC
Another boring day of EVE. Doesn't appear many are logged on after releasing a new expansion. I don't think its d3 either. I think its because the game is getting tired and the expansions are mediocre. This last one gave us new missile graphics and a fail corp mercy button. I know its free but you should pay us for sticking around in game so you can keep up the appearance x-thousand of players are playing. In reality most of them are afk in station.

Phill Esteen
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2012-05-25 07:34:48 UTC
this thread isn't really about local, is it?

maybe you and Karn should consider marital counselling

– postum faex est – 

never forget

Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#100 - 2012-05-25 07:59:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Phill Esteen wrote:
this thread isn't really about local, is it?

maybe you and Karn should consider marital counselling


Karn is irrelevant to the purpose. Killing him won't shut him up, its in his genetic makeup to talk crap while anonymous. He does on the forums what he hasn't been able to do in life. That being said local makes every single attempt at engagement a nauseating campfest. My corp wardecs for sport and local makes the process inane. Especially when the game is "hardcore pvp". Its fraudulent, honestly. It's anything but.

Each kill on my killboard over the last few months came from painstaking amounts of tedium. Unnecessary camping that is purely do to a braindead implementation of local chat. I want it changed as do many people in EVE. It is strangling the life out of the game.