These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

i am disappointed in null sec people. (TL:DR talking about local chat.) read first post.

First post
Author
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1521 - 2012-11-26 14:27:09 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
And you think this'll make nullsec bustle with life, do you?

I don't expect anything to make nullsec bustle with life.

But I do know, if you force a limit on activities by tilting the game with free intel the way it is now, it will slowly stagnate.

Then people will show up on the forums over it. And yes, while you will always find the occasional odd thread or request, these will become persistent.
They will reflect how more and more players have become aware that they understand this level of gameplay, and are ready to move onto the next level.

Like a child does when they ask for the training wheels / stabilizers to be removed from their bicycle.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1522 - 2012-11-26 14:30:25 UTC
So you don't expect anything to make nullsec bustle with life, so might as well support the one making nullsec bustle the least with life?

Okay, whatever. Knock yourself out.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1523 - 2012-11-26 14:44:26 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
So you don't expect anything to make nullsec bustle with life, so might as well support the one making nullsec bustle the least with life?

Okay, whatever. Knock yourself out.

Not at all! Lol

Null sec has this free intel, which outright blocks anything requiring a potential target to have no strategic free warning.
You have to think of a strategy, and instead of them needing to plan a defense or coordinate, they just watch local.
Local is the answer to every strategy targeting ships that can be moved on short notice. This happens to be most of them.

There is no guess work about system population.
Outside of meta gaming, you know and can react to anyone you see in the local chat list. Meta gaming covers the so-called AFK cloaking set and the docked up crowd.

Local Chat is a slow poison, draining the overall will to fight by limiting it the way it does to either blobbing or dumb luck finding someone AFK.
Keko Khaan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1524 - 2012-11-26 15:15:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Keko Khaan
Mirima Thurander wrote:
LOCAL chat.

Some want it removed. It most like it for its ease of Intel gathering.

And now to the main point.

Edit 11-18-12

Local chat as it works now in null ruin's any strategy besides afk a system for weeks or hot drop.


At the time of this edit there's 61 pages of arguing over where local should be fixed or not
So I will point you to a dev post from 2011 saying YES local needs fixed 2011 dev post and thread. now you have it from the Devs local IS broken.

Below this is my idea for a fair system for fixing local that dose not leave 200 man gangs to roam freely about your space.

EDIT 10-24-12. I looked at your complaints and have a fair plan.



OK i looked at the biggest complain of the null sec people and have come up with a fair deal.

1 change local to WH stile.
2 add a readout of the number of players in system to the UI.

With this change u can still track large fleets as u can now and small gangs can now sneak around and harass people. Now u have a reason to have home defense fleets and gate camps like u all ready do.

This idea allows u to do everything u can do now will local. But instantly know of that guy that jumped in system if friend or foe.

If thats not a fair enough deal for u them your just a carebear living in null that likes your local.


No No No. Dont remove local ever. Maybe just remove d-scan or some other minor thing to make these crazy ppl happy.. Oh wait...

Or then just buy probing ship and you can find yourself a nice wh without local. Problem solved and everyone happy.. Yay..
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1525 - 2012-11-26 15:26:46 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
So you don't expect anything to make nullsec bustle with life, so might as well support the one making nullsec bustle the least with life?

Okay, whatever. Knock yourself out.

Not at all! Lol

Go ahead, then, knock yourself out. I'll be here calling you a complete muppet when you come back whining about how there's even less to do in nullsec than before local is removed.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1526 - 2012-11-26 15:32:26 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
So you don't expect anything to make nullsec bustle with life, so might as well support the one making nullsec bustle the least with life?

Okay, whatever. Knock yourself out.

Not at all! Lol

Go ahead, then, knock yourself out. I'll be here calling you a complete muppet when you come back whining about how there's even less to do in nullsec than before local is removed.

If you are actually correct, which in my mind would defy logic, then I will be happy to admit it.

Local has forced all competitive conflicts into very specific lanes. I feel unleashing this will benefit the game.
Keko Khaan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1527 - 2012-11-26 15:42:16 UTC
Mirima Thurander wrote:
nulls Broken, locals ONE of the problems, you fix local at the same time you fix all the other problems with null.

like before CCP knows local needs to go, for other play stiles besides BLOB, HOTDROP, and AFK CLOAK to become part of eve.







Nope null is not broken. And theres nothing wrong with local. There is also other playstyles that you mentioned.

So all is good no changes needed. That is all..


Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1528 - 2012-11-26 15:51:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Lord Zim
Nikk Narrel wrote:
If you are actually correct, which in my mind would defy logic, then I will be happy to admit it.

I've no idea what kind of logic you're using here, but at this point I honestly can't be arsed to try to deduce what it is either.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
Local has forced all competitive conflicts into very specific lanes. I feel unleashing this will benefit the game.

Fixing null implies making the non-combat sides of null not suck bags of dicks, not aggravate the suckiness of living in nullsec. But if it'll shut "hurr remove local it will make nullsec awesome" proponents up once and for all, then whatever, remove local. It's not like CCP isn't well-known for making sketchy design choices. Dominion sov system, moongoo rebalance, PI introduction, hilariously abrupt removal of drone droppings, wardec system, mining barges and, soon, crimewatch 2.0 and killrights. Might as well remove local from the entire game, too, just to put the cherry on the cake.

I mean, what could possibly go wrong.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1529 - 2012-11-26 20:34:05 UTC
Now that I have a real cap ship, and will have at least JDC4 by new years, I kind of like the idea of no-local.

20% of the Eve population is simply too much. Now that I'm rich, I'd rather nullsec be a play ground for the 1% that can afford to throw around cap ships, blops bridges and cloaky-nullified T3's. The rest of you peasants can die in a fire, or claw your eyes out from the boredom once you killed off all your fellow peasants.
Crimeo Khamsi
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1530 - 2012-11-26 20:43:24 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
And you think this'll make nullsec bustle with life, do you?

No, I don't care if it "bustles with life." I don't see why that should even be our goal.

Our goal should be to have risk, skill, and reward as evenly matched as possible with one another. Currently, that is not the case, because null sec has the highest rewarding resources, and does NOT have the highest risks to go along with them.

The proposed change is designed to balance risk and reward. If it does so, then it won't matter how many people leave or enter null sec as a result. The game will still be better off.


For instance, it might be the case that without local, very few alliances can maintain any stable empires in null sec, and people only hang out there 1/3 as often. But if there are resources there that are NEEDED to build ships and things, people will always still go there anyway, and take huge risks in doing so, in exchange for the largest rewards in the game. This would be just fine in my book. I don't give a lick of care if people spend most of their physical time in high or low sec, as long as they always have to seriously risk their asses (or very cleverly prepare) in order to make any really serious profit.
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1531 - 2012-11-26 20:54:44 UTC
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
And you think this'll make nullsec bustle with life, do you?

No, I don't care if it "bustles with life." I don't see why that should even be our goal.

Our goal should be to have risk, skill, and reward as evenly matched as possible with one another. Currently, that is not the case, because null sec has the highest rewarding resources, and does NOT have the highest risks to go along with them.

The proposed change is designed to balance risk and reward. If it does so, then it won't matter how many people leave or enter null sec as a result. The game will still be better off.


For instance, it might be the case that without local, very few alliances can maintain any stable empires in null sec, and people only hang out there 1/3 as often. But if there are resources there that are NEEDED to build ships and things, people will always still go there anyway, and take huge risks in doing so, in exchange for the largest rewards in the game. This would be just fine in my book. I don't give a lick of care if people spend most of their physical time in high or low sec, as long as they always have to seriously risk their asses (or very cleverly prepare) in order to make any really serious profit.




Exactly. Nullsec should only be a viable area for the extremely wealthy. Those that can afford to jump over the waste lands like Donald Trump helicoptering over the hoi polloi.

The rest of you guys can go run L4s or climb in a wormhole, as nullsec should only be used by established powers and their cap ship blobs. All the folks currently running around and losing ratting sub-caps don't even deserve to be here, and I'd rather local goes away so I don't even have to acknowledge their existence or respond to pleas for help.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1532 - 2012-11-26 21:06:01 UTC
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
No, I don't care if it "bustles with life." I don't see why that should even be our goal.

I didn't think you would. I'll bet the concept of having a nullsec which does bustle with life actually being a buff to roaming gangs is inconceivable to you, since it would mean more risk for you. It would mean there'd actually be an incentive for the people who live there to actually react to incursions by hostile gangs.

Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
Our goal should be to have risk, skill, and reward as evenly matched as possible with one another. Currently, that is not the case, because null sec has the highest rewarding resources, and does NOT have the highest risks to go along with them.

Oh really? Tell me about these "highest rewarding resources", and tell me about how dependent these resources are of local.

If you're going to even consider talking about moongoo, let me just cut you off before you start: moongoo has nothing to do with local. none. nada. zip. zilch. nope. nuh uh.

Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
The proposed change is designed to balance risk and reward. If it does so, then it won't matter how many people leave or enter null sec as a result. The game will still be better off.

The proposed change of the OP is to remove local and make no other changes. You've handwaved something about making something "super rare and super awesome", which would make nullsec superawesome.

Problem is, it doesn't. There are escalations now which yield officer mods, and we're still looking at less than 1% of the population of deklein actually using it on a day to day basis, outside of fleet fights.

Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
For instance, it might be the case that without local, very few alliances can maintain any stable empires in null sec, and people only hang out there 1/3 as often. But if there are resources there that are NEEDED to build ships and things, people will always still go there anyway, and take huge risks in doing so, in exchange for the largest rewards in the game. This would be just fine in my book. I don't give a lick of care if people spend most of their physical time in high or low sec, as long as they always have to seriously risk their asses (or very cleverly prepare) in order to make any really serious profit.

Local has absolutely nothing to do with an alliance "maintaining a stable empire in nullsec". I'll bet there's probably less than 100 people in total doing anything in the entire deklein region which involves "being in a vulnerable position for hours at a time", out of more than 10000 characters, i.e. less than 1% of the population which owns that space, and that's excluding all the other members of the CFC which I think has some access to rat there.

All that'd happen with no local is that this number would go down even further. The general impact on the space itself will be negligible, in fact it could probably be argued it would be beneficial to just remove some of the upgrades from a lot of the systems, and as such spend even less isk on the isk sinks which is the sov system.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Signal11th
#1533 - 2012-11-26 21:16:13 UTC
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Now that I have a real cap ship, and will have at least JDC4 by new years, I kind of like the idea of no-local.

20% of the Eve population is simply too much. Now that I'm rich, I'd rather nullsec be a play ground for the 1% that can afford to throw around cap ships, blops bridges and cloaky-nullified T3's. The rest of you peasants can die in a fire, or claw your eyes out from the boredom once you killed off all your fellow peasants.



You really should ask Zim for posting advice.

Arguing against local against the people who benefit most from it is never going to be easy! Throw off the chains of oppression Goonlets!!

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1534 - 2012-11-26 21:18:18 UTC
Those who rat in deklein now are the 1% already.

I guess that's not good enough, it looks like some thinks it should be the 0.1%.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1535 - 2012-11-26 21:18:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Shepard Wong Ogeko
Lord Zim wrote:

All that'd happen with no local is that this number would go down even further. The general impact on the space itself will be negligible, in fact it could probably be argued it would be beneficial to just remove some of the upgrades from a lot of the systems, and as such spend even less isk on the isk sinks which is the sov system.


Why stop there. Not only would we not have to waste isk on those upgrades, we wouldn't need to upgrade any stations either. After all, they just need to be a place I can cyno my cap ships to so I can dock up. They don't need to refine or build anything.

We could probably just drop sov on any system without a strategic value too. Not like any one could actually claim sov there. We would just drop on anyone that tried to put down some SBUs.

Give us delayed local, let us drop sov and upgrades so we can bring back super cap subsidies.
Crimeo Khamsi
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1536 - 2012-11-26 21:29:54 UTC
Quote:

Oh really? Tell me about these "highest rewarding resources", and tell me about how dependent these resources are of local.

If you're going to even consider talking about moongoo, let me just cut you off before you start: moongoo has nothing to do with local. none. nada. zip. zilch. nope. nuh uh.

I agree that there aren't many such resources currently (a couple or ore types is about it, IIRC?). But that doesn't have to remain the case.

At the same time as local is removed, CCP could also, for example, introduce two new planet types. Ones that ONLY show up in null sec, and that provide the PI resources necessary to construct the last remaining types of commodities that are currently still NPC-provided only.

Ice belts could also easily be removed gradually from high/low sec, and put entirely (or at least in MUCH higher proportions) in null sec.

Rare ores + ice + remaining PI resources not accounted for yet = Enough, probably, to encourage a lot of risk taking to visit and stick around in null sec, no matter how dangerous it gets (the more dangerous, the higher the profits for those goods, and the more the reward, automatically). And a lot of people actually being in vulnerable positions a lot more often. If not, then add even more special resources to tweak (e.g. better rat drops, etc. Lots of possible options exist that would not invalidate or screw up people's existing investments)

^More or less addresses your other paragraphs in that same post, too.


Quote:
Exactly. Nullsec should only be a viable area for the extremely wealthy. Those that can afford to jump over the waste lands like Donald Trump helicoptering over the hoi polloi.

The rest of you guys can go run L4s or climb in a wormhole, as nullsec should only be used by established powers and their cap ship blobs. All the folks currently running around and losing ratting sub-caps don't even deserve to be here, and I'd rather local goes away so I don't even have to acknowledge their existence or respond to pleas for help.

Who exactly are these hypothetical people jumping over? If nobody but the super rich go to nullsec, then there wouldn't be anybody to avoid by using jump drives, and thus there wouldn't be any need to use jump drives... Your argument is self-contradicting. The only reason for people to act that way would be if low and null sec were already heavily populated by the "hoi paloi" and thus, by definition, not restricted to the rich...
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1537 - 2012-11-26 21:48:28 UTC
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:

Who exactly are these hypothetical people jumping over? If nobody but the super rich go to nullsec, then there wouldn't be anybody to avoid by using jump drives, and thus there wouldn't be any need to use jump drives... Your argument is self-contradicting. The only reason for people to act that way would be if low and null sec were already heavily populated by the "hoi paloi" and thus, by definition, not restricted to the rich...



Oh, there will always be new people who will hear the siren song of how awesome it is to sneak around nullsec, and this will no doubt produce an endless stream of stealth bombers lurking into our space looking for something to ambush. It will be covops cloaked ships unknowingly passing each other by, and the sov holders really aren't going to care because these bums aren't any sort of real threat.

And we will continue to jump around nullsec because it is just plain faster than going through the gates, and we can't take our cap ships through gates any way.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#1538 - 2012-11-26 21:50:31 UTC
Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
I agree that there aren't many such resources currently (a couple or ore types is about it, IIRC?).

Ah yes, let's make it so they have to combine the most mindnumbingly boring activity (mining) with another mindnumbingly boring activity (spam dscan/glare at dscan), and for excitement lets add the occasional unforeseen explosion as cloaked ships just suddenly pop up and blow them up and bugger off, which leads to yet another boring activity, reshipping and going back out and doing it all over again. Wooooooooooooo.

Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
At the same time as local is removed, CCP could also, for example, introduce two new planet types. Ones that ONLY show up in null sec, and that provide the PI resources necessary to construct the last remaining types of commodities that are currently still NPC-provided only.

Ah, yes, PI. So once a week I'd be vulnerable for 5 seconds per POCO I had to unload.

My goodness, that'll solve all the nullsec woes. Foo diggity.

Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
Ice belts could also easily be removed gradually from high/low sec, and put entirely (or at least in MUCH higher proportions) in null sec.

So take my paragraph on normal mining, and increase the emphasis on boring by about a factor of 1000.

Woo. YES! This definitely makes me want to move my iskmaking alt to null, so I can be endlessly farmed by cloaked gangs.

(no, it doesn't.)

Crimeo Khamsi wrote:
Rare ores + ice + remaining PI resources not accounted for yet = Enough, probably, to encourage a lot of risk taking to visit and stick around in null sec, no matter how dangerous it gets (the more dangerous, the higher the profits for those goods, and the more the reward, automatically). And a lot of people actually being in vulnerable positions a lot more often. If not, then add even more special resources to tweak (e.g. better rat drops, etc. Lots of possible options exist that would not invalidate or screw up people's existing investments)

^More or less addresses your other paragraphs in that same post, too.

Except it doesn't even get close to fixing the main problem with null, which is that there's not enough people living there. Not "it's not dangerous enough" or "hurr local means perfect intel" or "durr local protects bots" or whatever bullshit you people'll come up with to try to get CCP into making null a ganker's paradise, it's just plain and simple "there's not enough people living there".

Not that I expect you'll consider this line of thought, since more people would mean more risk for you.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1539 - 2012-11-26 22:14:34 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Except it doesn't even get close to fixing the main problem with null, which is that there's not enough people living there. Not "it's not dangerous enough" or "hurr local means perfect intel" or "durr local protects bots" or whatever bullshit you people'll come up with to try to get CCP into making null a ganker's paradise, it's just plain and simple "there's not enough people living there".

Not that I expect you'll consider this line of thought, since more people would mean more risk for you.

Actually, and here I go off topic a moment, in the past I was often told to learn from the experiences of others.

If you want to increase the population in Null sec, simply duplicate the conditions that exist where an example of high population exists.

The problem is the NBSI paradigm itself. It is anti-social, and drives away "unwanted' pilots.

This could be solved by shifting to NRDS, but you need to create an environment where this attitude is rewarded.

High Sec does this, but at the cost of war decs. And we all know NPC corps avoid this.

So, why don't we suggest a self regulating standings system?
As soon as your alliance has SOV over a system, they become entered as a standings item for this.
Put simply, anyone who is outside your alliance, and attacks someone IN your alliance, they drop on the color bar scale to you.
Light red, red, whatever makes sense.
Pretty soon, you know who you should be shooting, they will sort themselves out.

People can still override this and change standings manually, if they see a need.
Crimeo Khamsi
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1540 - 2012-11-26 22:16:53 UTC
Quote:
Not that I expect you'll consider this line of thought, since more people would mean more risk for you.

Actually more people in null sec would mean less risk for me, since I never spend any time in null sec. If they left null, then all those highly capable pvpers and such would be entering where I hang out instead...

As to all of the mining stuff:

Cloaked ships can't just pop up and alpha you if you have, say, a logi escort, or are working in a team of miners. Or if you have a bubble, or decloaking jetcans positioned strategically nearby, or blah blah. Nor can they wear you down more slowly, if you have your own battle-ready ships nearby, too.

You seem to be suggesting that the only way to possibly mine is to go out solo in an undefended barge and just cross your fingers... That seems like actually a pretty dumb way to mine, in a world where intel doesn't come for free, and where the ores you are mining are worth quite a lot more (and thus attract even MORE theft)