These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

'Local' is a problem? Why is that? (further study on AFK cloaking subject)

First post
Author
Alyssa Yotosala
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#21 - 2013-06-16 20:48:04 UTC
After reading the "against" comments, I still fail to see what is wrong with Local.

Their response can best be described as "Local is teh ebil because some players dont like conflict, and I dont agree with their playstyle, so CCP should listen to what I say and change a perfectly fine game mechanic because some people dont play EVE the way I want them to play EvE"



Domanique Altares
Rifterlings
#22 - 2013-06-16 20:57:37 UTC
Alyssa Yotosala wrote:
After reading the "against" comments, I still fail to see what is wrong with Local.

Their response can best be described as "Local is teh ebil because some players dont like conflict, and I dont agree with their playstyle, so CCP should listen to what I say and change a perfectly fine game mechanic because some people dont play EVE the way I want them to play EvE"





Actually, local is also the devil because some people like conflict. When I jump into a system, I get ready made list of who is there waiting to be possibly attacked. I don't have to hunt around to do anything to get the number and names of potential targets.
bbb2020
Carebears with Attitude
#23 - 2013-06-16 20:59:57 UTC
Would it be in everybody's,- or nobody's interest if CCP made a test case in one constellation or region of space - let say the Drone Region (do anybody live there after the nerf?) or maybe in another null region of Space, where the alliance holding the constellation has agread to be the test subjekt.

It will give us all a chance to find out how "Eve Online without local" works and CCP a change to find out if they can code a working solution, in case it actually works in enhancing the gameplay.

That is, implemente it in small steps instead of - as a global patch.
I don't think anybody, inkl. CCP, knows how a null without local would effect the hole of Eve Online and that is why we don't see it implemented.

Well lets find out so we can stop those stupid forum threads.
Raneru
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#24 - 2013-06-16 21:14:55 UTC
If there is "nothing" wrong with local then perhaps we could make changes to NPCs so that they all warp scramble in nullsec Blink
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#25 - 2013-06-17 05:58:41 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
one could argue that the source of the problem is the gameplay expectation generated by NBSI diplomacy... compare it to NRDS, the CVA space wizards expect to have their day ruined by a neutral in local, and they plan accordingly. any other SOV bear? they just had their day ruined.

No, most of us just move and don't cry about it.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#26 - 2013-06-17 06:06:37 UTC
The problem with local is that roughly 90% of people in nullsec pos/dock up if there are more than 3 other people in local.
Basically it's free intel which causes people to avoid fights and makes it easy for them to do so.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#27 - 2013-06-17 06:37:00 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Jack Miton wrote:
The problem with local is that roughly 90% of people in nullsec pos/dock up if there are more than 3 other people in local.
Basically it's free intel which causes people to avoid fights and makes it easy for them to do so.

And? Removing that intel would be a tremendously bad idea because then it would be impossible to rat without falling prey to cloaky hot droppers all the time.

And no, in ratting systems we tend to dock up if someone we don't know shows up in local. It's pragmatic. Do you seriously expect us to come fight you in our ratting ships? I'm sure you'd love that, but be honest here. You just want easy prey.

If you were to show up in, say, a staging or home system then we'd be more likely to come out and kill you, but most people generally don't keep PVP ships in a ratting system.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)

Kraal Utrecht
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2013-06-17 07:47:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Kraal Utrecht
So generally we came to conclusion it is avoidance of conflict that is root of... bitchin.

I am still willing to defend my theorized justification to Local list as a list of connected users to Star-systems navigation computers, databases etc. as it in my model works similar to gps or internet.

So what would you say if you had a way to hack Star-systems protocols, that would render you or you fleet or wing or squad invisible to Local list until you would leave that particular Star-system, you would reveal yourself or do something that would run self diagnostic routine in systems that would bring you back (like hostile action against other ships/facilities that are normally connected to Star-system)?

I have a particular idea that could fit game without any changes to game like AFK-mode I proposed in other topic. Just would like to know if that kind of solution would be sufficient for most at least to get their name off the list (temporary).

*proposed idea would include hisec*
Mark Androcius
#29 - 2013-06-17 07:56:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Mark Androcius
It's a conflict of interest.

Basically, the people who don't want anything to change are:
The ones who want to influence others by doing nothing, afk cloakers trying to disturb null local, in order to disrupt income streams and cause a corp failure in the long run ( that is at least the intention )

The people who want local gone are:
The ones who like to sneak up on people and get an easy kill.
if you don't show up in local, you can just get in with your bomber, find a target, set yourself up nicely and PLOW!!, if you're any good at it that is.


The people who want cloaking to become an active thing are:
Null sec industrialists ( not many of those...... yet ) who don't dare taking their expensive defenseless mining barges out, because of a very likely threat.
Null sec ratters, who don't dare take their expensive ratting ships out, cause even if they are well fitted, that cloaky could be a hot-dropper.




CCP has one of the toughest jobs in the world i think.
Keeping this game "balanced" is pretty much impossible, yet to keep their player-base interested and playing, it at least needs some balance.
If they give gankers more tools to kill than they give "carebears" tools to save themselves, they wil lose subscriptions.
If they give "carebears" more tools to save themselves than they give gankers tools to kill them, they wil lose subscriptions.

PS Veel plezier met eve
Toshiro Ozuwara
Perkone
#30 - 2013-06-17 08:08:08 UTC
If we didn't have local, people would just use cloaky alts on gates and logged into stations to update in game intel channels. Every major Sov group has an intel map that tracks intel channel reports automagically.

It didn't take long to locate the tracking beacon, deep inside the quarters for sleepin' They thought they could get away Not today, it's not the way that this kid plays

Haramir Haleths
Nutella Bande
#31 - 2013-06-17 12:05:28 UTC
The Local is a problem ....
but just in Jita

Have a nice day
Stonecrusher Mortlock
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2013-06-17 12:24:37 UTC
Here i was fueling up the remove local train.

But it looks like every ones slowly starting to under stand the problem of the listing EVERYONE INSTANTLY.


Instant is the problem, as well as the showing up while cloaked.
Tikktokk Tokkzikk
V0LTA
OnlyFleets.
#33 - 2013-06-17 12:27:00 UTC
I think we should have three locals:
System wide local: emtpy everywhere but highsec.
Constellation wide local: empty in nullsec and w-space.
Region wide local: empty in w-space.
(With "empty" I mean behaving like local in w-space)

This would give people a general idea of what's around them without knowing exactly where everyone are.
Tiven loves Tansien
Doomheim
#34 - 2013-06-17 12:28:07 UTC
Most comprehensive study ever.

I didn't even read it.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#35 - 2013-06-17 12:29:58 UTC
Dont remove local







Remove KillBoards


Then people wouldnt be such pussies about dying

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Rordan D'Kherr
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2013-06-17 12:45:31 UTC
If local was really a problem, it wouldn't exist anymore.

Don't be scared, because being afk is not a crime.

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#37 - 2013-06-17 13:06:05 UTC
There are two issues. One is local, the other is the nullbear.

Local, I feel, provides too much intel for too little (ie zero) effort. You know someone has entered your system before they've even finished jumping the gate. You know exactly how many people are in your system and can tell exactly when they come and go. This intel is extremely powerful in low population null sec space, and I feel it hinders solo/small gang pvp in null, as it allows people - both carebears and pvpers alike - intel far too quickly regarding potential threats.

The other problem is nullbears. These aren't your regular nullsec player, they're the bear ones. They want to know, with absolute certainty, when they are safe, and when they are threatened. They want the unknown variables removed entirely. They are bad EVE players and bad people in general. They use a variety of underhanded tactics to spread their malignant views and desires, such as attempting to pretend this is an issue with "AFK" players. AFK players are irrelevant entities, but on the surface "CCP get rid of AFK players" isn't as laughably invalid as "CCP get rid of uncertainty and risk"
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#38 - 2013-06-17 13:13:26 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Jack Miton wrote:
The problem with local is that roughly 90% of people in nullsec pos/dock up if there are more than 3 other people in local.
Basically it's free intel which causes people to avoid fights and makes it easy for them to do so.

And? Removing that intel would be a tremendously bad idea because then it would be impossible to rat without falling prey to cloaky hot droppers all the time.

And no, in ratting systems we tend to dock up if someone we don't know shows up in local. It's pragmatic. Do you seriously expect us to come fight you in our ratting ships? I'm sure you'd love that, but be honest here. You just want easy prey.

If you were to show up in, say, a staging or home system then we'd be more likely to come out and kill you, but most people generally don't keep PVP ships in a ratting system.


Impossible to PVE without local? Well how the hell have I been earning isk in wormholes the last two years?

Anyway, very few want the complete removal of local intel, most want it to simply be less overpowered than it is, and maybe require a bit of effort. If we were to "turn down" local a bit so it's not quite as instant and infallible, then we could turn up/create some extra means of gathering intel
Bl4ck Ph03n1x
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#39 - 2013-06-17 13:18:07 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Jack Miton wrote:

Removing that intel would be a tremendously bad idea because then it would be impossible to rat without falling prey to cloaky hot droppers all the time.


Remove Local, balance cloaky accordingly, balance cyno accordingly.
To CCP: Balance FIRST, THEN remove local. Stop doing things in the wrong order.
Is that THAT hard?

Don't feed the trolls.

James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#40 - 2013-06-17 14:59:15 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Jack Miton wrote:
The problem with local is that roughly 90% of people in nullsec pos/dock up if there are more than 3 other people in local.
Basically it's free intel which causes people to avoid fights and makes it easy for them to do so.

And? Removing that intel would be a tremendously bad idea because then it would be impossible to rat without falling prey to cloaky hot droppers all the time.

And no, in ratting systems we tend to dock up if someone we don't know shows up in local. It's pragmatic. Do you seriously expect us to come fight you in our ratting ships? I'm sure you'd love that, but be honest here. You just want easy prey.

If you were to show up in, say, a staging or home system then we'd be more likely to come out and kill you, but most people generally don't keep PVP ships in a ratting system.


Impossible to PVE without local? Well how the hell have I been earning isk in wormholes the last two years?

Oh let's see, how about the part you're conveniently ignoring where I said "cloaky hot dropper"? Or the fact that most PVE in wormholes is done in either cosmic sigs, or in groups? Or the fact that optimal setups for doing wormhole PVE are much closer to PVP setups than other types of PVE (except incursions). Or probably the most important fact, that WH PVE is vastly more lucrative than ratting is in nullsec, which allows you to assign people to do mundane things like watching all of the wormholes in the system and searching for new ones that open up so you know exactly who's in the system pretty much all the time.

Anybody that wants to kill you in WH space has to contend with either bringing cloaky ships which are generally rather terrible for this kind of thing (bombers are too fragile, as are recons, and cloaky T3s are mostly pretty bad) or bringing ships that don't cloak at all and therefore show up on dscan, so you can just get out anyway with advance warning.

Anyone that wants to kill you in nullsec can just have a fleet sitting on a titan or bridging blops, fly a lone bomber or recon into your system, warp cloaked onto the unsuspecting ratter, decloak, point, light cyno, and kill him.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)