These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

showing up on local has to be removed

First post
Author
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#141 - 2013-08-14 13:31:42 UTC
Gel Musana wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Gel Musana wrote:
Local should stay.

Why?


I am ok to remove local chat, but not the overview. I don't want to scan things down. There should be a way to see who of your corp/alliance mates are in the same system or nearby.

But I suspect that removing the local chat will remove some of the fun and will make the game look different... i need to try it to feel comfortable with it.

It is perfectly reasonable to see your own allied green and blue in a list like this, simply because there exists a mutual agreement between all parties.

It is the strangers, for whom no such agreement exists, and either one side or the other has strong self interest in not exposing their presence freely.

Earned intel is an advantage. Free intel for everyone is a daycare for toddlers.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#142 - 2013-08-14 13:34:45 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:
Sometimes being in Local in Null gets people out of their ISK troughs to come looking for you. Not showing up in Local would mean, obviously, you would have to go gank them to get attention...but would any of these carebears undock knowing that they only know about that one dude who ganked their village idiot? That the only way they would know what the raider was flying was to use d-scan or look at the lossmail?

You can see why they wouldn't want Local removed. Its so much easier, and easier to complain about AFK Cloakers, than having to learn skills more hardcore than set Alliance intel channel to flash (and ***** when people discuss their cats in the Intel channel).



Isn't Nullsec supposed to be the space where you can easily find pew? Mean, 30 man gang coming through, go after or ignore? Wormholes without local partially work so well cause no cyno. You come in through the wormholes or you don't, that's a huge difference.

All it would do is most likely get people to run highsec incursions instead of anom-ratting.

No, quite honestly null sec is the place to easily AVOID pew.

No where else in EVE does a chat channel give the opportunity to dock up the moment a neutral or hostile pilot shows up in system.

Frankly, for many of these pilots, it has evolved effectively into consensual PvP only. If they want to avoid you, they can.

All you can do is stick around, and hope one of them gets so frustrated that they make a mistake.
Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#143 - 2013-08-14 13:41:37 UTC
Gel Musana wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Gel Musana wrote:
Local should stay.

Why?


I am ok to remove local chat, but not the overview. I don't want to scan things down. There should be a way to see who of your corp/alliance mates are in the same system or nearby.

But I suspect that removing the local chat will remove some of the fun and will make the game look different... i need to try it to feel comfortable with it.


there is no need to remove local chat completely, you should just not showup there if you don't speak
Orti Dian
Xybercon Laboratories
#144 - 2013-08-14 13:50:34 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
Orti Dian wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
do I tell you how to play it? its called massivlely because of the massive amount of opponents, nothing more

if I prefer playing solo against everybody, and losing, and crying like a girl, thats it

you don't make the rules how this has to be played

Uh, yes... You do...
You are asking for a change to allow you to play YOUR way, while stopping us playing OUR way.
You also do not make the rules on how the game should be played, not matter how special you think you are.


it would not stop you from playing your way at all, you would just need to put a bit more effort into looking at the gates, instead of easy alts at safespots... you people playing in alliances seem to prefer the lacy playstyle... just bringing a bit of challange to you guys, got the feeling you need it

Do you not see how this makes you a hypocrite? You are arguing that we aren't allowed to have our easy way, in our own space, but you want an easy way of traveling into it undetected.

Also, null would get emptier if this change were to be made. Less people would see a reason to be there, as there would be too much risk. I personally would pull all of my mining operations into WH space, as I cant be hot-dropped there and can control the size of the ships that can get to me. High sec incursions would become the lower risk higher profit method of farming isk.

This is a prime example of an idea that you have only considered from your single, narrow viewpoint, and have not considered what the wider consequences of a change like this would be. All you had to do was search the forums for one of the other several hundred threads discussing it.
Galison
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#145 - 2013-08-14 13:59:16 UTC
The issue is harry this wouldn't effect alliances anyways you think it would be that much harder for them to have a cloaky alt or corp member detailed to sit on a gate to provide intel? likely what some or most do anyways not all systems have stations so any intel from them are form alts either posed or cloaked on a gate.

While on paper it sounds like a good idea it would really only hurt smaller groups who don't have a billion people to spread out on gates for intel anyways. No removing local would more of a negative for small group stuff in null then any advantage from it. or I should say any disadvantages to alliances which is what you seem to be after.
Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#146 - 2013-08-14 14:07:36 UTC
Orti Dian wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
Orti Dian wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
do I tell you how to play it? its called massivlely because of the massive amount of opponents, nothing more

if I prefer playing solo against everybody, and losing, and crying like a girl, thats it

you don't make the rules how this has to be played

Uh, yes... You do...
You are asking for a change to allow you to play YOUR way, while stopping us playing OUR way.
You also do not make the rules on how the game should be played, not matter how special you think you are.


it would not stop you from playing your way at all, you would just need to put a bit more effort into looking at the gates, instead of easy alts at safespots... you people playing in alliances seem to prefer the lacy playstyle... just bringing a bit of challange to you guys, got the feeling you need it

Do you not see how this makes you a hypocrite? You are arguing that we aren't allowed to have our easy way, in our own space, but you want an easy way of traveling into it undetected.

Also, null would get emptier if this change were to be made. Less people would see a reason to be there, as there would be too much risk. I personally would pull all of my mining operations into WH space, as I cant be hot-dropped there and can control the size of the ships that can get to me. High sec incursions would become the lower risk higher profit method of farming isk.

This is a prime example of an idea that you have only considered from your single, narrow viewpoint, and have not considered what the wider consequences of a change like this would be. All you had to do was search the forums for one of the other several hundred threads discussing it.


why are there so many threads about this idea? because its my single, narrow, viewpoint right?
Tess La'Coil
Messerschmitt Vertrieb und Logistik
#147 - 2013-08-14 14:07:51 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
[quote=Burl en Daire]it also would be closer to reality, intel channels would need to look at the gates to see if somebody goes through, y


Actually, if it were closer to a spaceship "reality" Sov-Owners would have installed an automated Intel-network that automatically posts "non-blue-standings" ship information from the gates to their intel-network to be distributed to their members.

Seeing as the gates would be owned and maintained by the alliances, they would also be fit with ship scanners.

Oh, and in that light.. Sov-Owners would make the intel system so the owner knows what foe is coming through a gate, but un-authorized individuals would not get access to this intel..

So put into EVE simplified, only if you have sov, you can see local. And have access to the Gate-Bookmarks.
And you can also see the updates on pilots in space in other systems instantly rather than with a delay.

And if you're a roaming dude, you can't see local.. and you have to scan down the gates. Unless you have bookmarks.

That, would make it more "actual sov" like...
Someone once said I was a muppet. If that's so, I'm quite sure the Swedish Chef is my brother. 
Harry Forever
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#148 - 2013-08-14 14:09:33 UTC
Galison wrote:
The issue is harry this wouldn't effect alliances anyways you think it would be that much harder for them to have a cloaky alt or corp member detailed to sit on a gate to provide intel? likely what some or most do anyways not all systems have stations so any intel from them are form alts either posed or cloaked on a gate.

While on paper it sounds like a good idea it would really only hurt smaller groups who don't have a billion people to spread out on gates for intel anyways. No removing local would more of a negative for small group stuff in null then any advantage from it. or I should say any disadvantages to alliances which is what you seem to be after.


they might see me go in, but they would not know if I left when they did not look...

too many words have been posted on this topic, I can feel it, CCP should just switch it for a month and we see how it goes, if alliances ragequit, no problem change it back, sure we need stuff out there to shoot at Cool
Zatar Sharisa
New Eden Heavy Industries Incorporated
#149 - 2013-08-14 14:14:10 UTC
Phaade wrote:
[quote=Zatar Sharisa]I

Your argument that local should remain doesn't really make sense. You can't compare civilian flight traffic today to people flying through space is the most advanced technology ever seen 25,000 years in the future.



But I can. Even if you're in a stealth ship, you're having to go through that Jump Gate. Someone has to throw the controls to allow such. Considering that you're being disassembled and beamed across light years of space, and then reassembled at the other end, they can most certainly tag you with whatever they want in that reassembly. You might be able to go unseen, but you're going to show up as "in system" without any trouble.

Now, that said, this wouldn't apply in the least if you jumped into system without going through a gate. There's where the idea breaks down.

I understand about indecision, but I don't care if I get behind.  People livin' in competition.  All I want is to have my peace of mind.

"Peace of Mind"  --  Boston

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#150 - 2013-08-14 14:14:12 UTC
Orti Dian wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
it would not stop you from playing your way at all, you would just need to put a bit more effort into looking at the gates, instead of easy alts at safespots... you people playing in alliances seem to prefer the lacy playstyle... just bringing a bit of challange to you guys, got the feeling you need it

Do you not see how this makes you a hypocrite? You are arguing that we aren't allowed to have our easy way, in our own space, but you want an easy way of traveling into it undetected.

Also, null would get emptier if this change were to be made. Less people would see a reason to be there, as there would be too much risk. I personally would pull all of my mining operations into WH space, as I cant be hot-dropped there and can control the size of the ships that can get to me. High sec incursions would become the lower risk higher profit method of farming isk.

This is a prime example of an idea that you have only considered from your single, narrow viewpoint, and have not considered what the wider consequences of a change like this would be. All you had to do was search the forums for one of the other several hundred threads discussing it.

I gotta jump in here, and point out a few fallacies of logic just floating through this.

You describe his effort, of entering your space undetected, as being easy.

This is very misleading, as the only easy thing would be for him to be ambushed.

The advantage is strictly limited to those who hold sov, since they can and will create intel channels. These channels do include reports from dedicated observation posts, obviously. But a lot of the reports occur because of chance encounters that took no more effort than simply typing the details into the chat window.

The hostile has no such resource. They have no intel channel for someone else's territory.
If they managed to slip into your channel, they would see only updates on the movements of other hostiles. Quite useless, for the most part.

Yes, they can look at various map resources, and see where mining and ratting DID occur. In the past.
They may even have good information as to where popular mining and ratting can be found in your space.

But without local, they have no CURRENT intel. They are blind, relying on a mental image that they hope is good enough to stumble across a target unprepared for them.

Local is their crutch, telling them who is where, and whether they are still present. All the information they would have significant trouble getting on their own, and that your forces should have already known.

Now, who does local actually help?
Kyt Thrace
Lightspeed Enterprises
Goonswarm Federation
#151 - 2013-08-14 14:16:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyt Thrace
OP lets say that showing up in local in 0.0 space is removed.

These things must happen at same time.

First - Cloaking must use some sort of fuel, like Heavy water, to prevent afk cloaking for 23/7.

Second - Combat probes launch by a neut/red in system immediately shows them in local.

Third - Any aggression by neut/red immediately shows them in local.

Fourth - Any Covert/regular cyno by neut/red immediately shows them in local.

Fifth - Any smack talking, of course, by neut/red immediately shows them in local.

If above were to be implemented, then I could be swayed that it is good to remove local in null.

This would still not be like wormhole space, but would give a difference from highsec/lowsec space.

R.I.P. Vile Rat

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#152 - 2013-08-14 14:18:21 UTC
Tess La'Coil wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
[quote=Burl en Daire]it also would be closer to reality, intel channels would need to look at the gates to see if somebody goes through, y


Actually, if it were closer to a spaceship "reality" Sov-Owners would have installed an automated Intel-network that automatically posts "non-blue-standings" ship information from the gates to their intel-network to be distributed to their members.

Seeing as the gates would be owned and maintained by the alliances, they would also be fit with ship scanners.

Oh, and in that light.. Sov-Owners would make the intel system so the owner knows what foe is coming through a gate, but un-authorized individuals would not get access to this intel..

So put into EVE simplified, only if you have sov, you can see local. And have access to the Gate-Bookmarks.
And you can also see the updates on pilots in space in other systems instantly rather than with a delay.

And if you're a roaming dude, you can't see local.. and you have to scan down the gates. Unless you have bookmarks.

That, would make it more "actual sov" like...

Free intel to the next level.

Go on, kill the risk for your PvE efforts even further...

Now realize the rewards in null are tied to this risk.
Zatar Sharisa
New Eden Heavy Industries Incorporated
#153 - 2013-08-14 14:28:33 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

No, quite honestly null sec is the place to easily AVOID pew.

No where else in EVE does a chat channel give the opportunity to dock up the moment a neutral or hostile pilot shows up in system.

Frankly, for many of these pilots, it has evolved effectively into consensual PvP only. If they want to avoid you, they can.

All you can do is stick around, and hope one of them gets so frustrated that they make a mistake.


And what's wrong with that? At this point you're sounding like all you care about is getting victims out there. No offense, but some of us don't care to play the victim.

I understand about indecision, but I don't care if I get behind.  People livin' in competition.  All I want is to have my peace of mind.

"Peace of Mind"  --  Boston

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#154 - 2013-08-14 14:38:28 UTC
Local is **** in empire low too. Someone can camp a gate and know exactly who is coming. This means any attempt to attack a camp results in them running and blue balls.
The problem with eve is that it is actually possible to be effectively invincible anywhere unless your a ****, partly because you are omnipotent.
The only place local should stay is hisec because of the need to find specific people in a massive crowd.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Kallius Petrovich
Warping Into The Sun
#155 - 2013-08-14 14:40:41 UTC
Orti Dian wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
Orti Dian wrote:
Harry Forever wrote:
do I tell you how to play it? its called massivlely because of the massive amount of opponents, nothing more

if I prefer playing solo against everybody, and losing, and crying like a girl, thats it

you don't make the rules how this has to be played

Uh, yes... You do...
You are asking for a change to allow you to play YOUR way, while stopping us playing OUR way.
You also do not make the rules on how the game should be played, not matter how special you think you are.


it would not stop you from playing your way at all, you would just need to put a bit more effort into looking at the gates, instead of easy alts at safespots... you people playing in alliances seem to prefer the lacy playstyle... just bringing a bit of challange to you guys, got the feeling you need it

Do you not see how this makes you a hypocrite? You are arguing that we aren't allowed to have our easy way, in our own space, but you want an easy way of traveling into it undetected.


I call this fair. OP is indeed trying to push his playstyle.

Quote:

Also, null would get emptier if this change were to be made. Less people would see a reason to be there, as there would be too much risk. I personally would pull all of my mining operations into WH space, as I cant be hot-dropped there and can control the size of the ships that can get to me. High sec incursions would become the lower risk higher profit method of farming isk.

This is a prime example of an idea that you have only considered from your single, narrow viewpoint, and have not considered what the wider consequences of a change like this would be. All you had to do was search the forums for one of the other several hundred threads discussing it.


I think you just accidentally made the most compelling argument I've ever heard in favor of removing local. You clearly feel entitled to your piece of nullsec. You say this would empty nullsec because it would increase risk? For whom? I say no, it would only increase risk for large, complacent alliances. But enterprising explorers such as myself and OP might find it more attractive.

And since you admit that its the only thing letting you hold your space, tell me why are you entitled to that space unless you are able to defend it? Defend this lopsided advantage, now that you have admitted it is an advantage.
Orti Dian
Xybercon Laboratories
#156 - 2013-08-14 14:46:45 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I gotta jump in here, and point out a few fallacies of logic just floating through this.

You describe his effort, of entering your space undetected, as being easy.

This is very misleading, as the only easy thing would be for him to be ambushed.

No, The easy this would be for him to ambush others. He's already in a covops, he can warp cloaked. Gatecamps would be no different from as they are now, but if he warped into a system, with noone on gate, then cloak warped to a safe, he can dscan out a miner, or a ratter, then wait for the best time to strike. This is what he wants. He doesn't want a fair fight, he doesn't want combat. He wants to be able to geain an absolute advantage over easy prey.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
The advantage is strictly limited to those who hold sov, since they can and will create intel channels. These channels do include reports from dedicated observation posts, obviously. But a lot of the reports occur because of chance encounters that took no more effort than simply typing the details into the chat window.

The hostile has no such resource. They have no intel channel for someone else's territory.
If they managed to slip into your channel, they would see only updates on the movements of other hostiles. Quite useless, for the most part.

Yes, they can look at various map resources, and see where mining and ratting DID occur. In the past.
They may even have good information as to where popular mining and ratting can be found in your space.

But without local, they have no CURRENT intel. They are blind, relying on a mental image that they hope is good enough to stumble across a target unprepared for them.

Local is their crutch, telling them who is where, and whether they are still present. All the information they would have significant trouble getting on their own, and that your forces should have already known.

Now, who does local actually help?

Sure the alliances have the advantage of intel channels, but without local it would be far too easy for a single ship to infiltrate deep into sov territory without being spotted, then pop a cyno and drop a whole fleet in. The whole idea of owning the territory is to allow you to control it. The removal of the local channel would make it logistically impossible to do, as you would need to have people actively watching gates all over the place, to try to catch ha glimpse of passes through.

The removal of local from null would cause a lot of the isk making population of null to migrate to less risky ventures. It's only just worth doing anoms and mining in null as it is with the shipping. Removing local, thus allowing blind hotdrops would tip this over the edge. Why do all of this in null when you can grab a wormhole with a high sec static, then camp the entrance with a single fleet, safely mining and collecting sleeper loot inside? Removal of local from null would simply make null just like WH space, except without collapsible gates, with more entrances, further from high sec, and with the ability to cyno. In short it would become one of the dumbest places to live, especially with moon income heavily reduced.
Khergit Deserters
Crom's Angels
#157 - 2013-08-14 14:48:45 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Anyway local is a terrible easy mode mechanic. It makes intel gathering need 0 effort and solo pvp ****. [snipped]

Yeah, a "solo pvp is dead" discussion is a close cousin of this one. Solo pvp isn't quite dead, in null sec at least. But your choice of targets is pretty narrow.
Orti Dian
Xybercon Laboratories
#158 - 2013-08-14 14:53:13 UTC
Kallius Petrovich wrote:
Quote:

Also, null would get emptier if this change were to be made. Less people would see a reason to be there, as there would be too much risk. I personally would pull all of my mining operations into WH space, as I cant be hot-dropped there and can control the size of the ships that can get to me. High sec incursions would become the lower risk higher profit method of farming isk.

This is a prime example of an idea that you have only considered from your single, narrow viewpoint, and have not considered what the wider consequences of a change like this would be. All you had to do was search the forums for one of the other several hundred threads discussing it.


I think you just accidentally made the most compelling argument I've ever heard in favor of removing local. You clearly feel entitled to your piece of nullsec. You say this would empty nullsec because it would increase risk? For whom? I say no, it would only increase risk for large, complacent alliances. But enterprising explorers such as myself and OP might find it more attractive.

And since you admit that its the only thing letting you hold your space, tell me why are you entitled to that space unless you are able to defend it? Defend this lopsided advantage, now that you have admitted it is an advantage.

The OP is not an explorer, he is a single player that wants to be able to kill masses of ships in null space solo. Please read his other threads...
Also, what would you explore? There's nearly nothing in null sec as it is, with the removal of miners and PVE players, you'd only find the moon goo shippers. You might find PvP players during ops.

I'm not saying it's the only thing letting null sec players hold their space. I'm simply saying the reward would not be good enough to stay there vs the cos of sov. It would be too risky to pay billions of isk to stay there, when you could simply take a few wormholes and make nearly the same with less risk, and a shorter trip to high sec. Why the **** would an alliance pay billions of isk to have what would essentially be a hotdroppable wormhole 30 jumps from high sec. You realise sov isn't free right?
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#159 - 2013-08-14 14:54:31 UTC
Khergit Deserters wrote:
Commander Ted wrote:
Anyway local is a terrible easy mode mechanic. It makes intel gathering need 0 effort and solo pvp ****. [snipped]

Yeah, a "solo pvp is dead" discussion is a close cousin of this one. Solo pvp isn't quite dead, in null sec at least. But your choice of targets is pretty narrow.

Going down any nullsec pipe will result in a camp quickly forming for the sole purpose of killing you or everyone being aligned to warp away the moment you enter local.

There arent even any solo pvpers for the solo pvpers to fight!

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Orti Dian
Xybercon Laboratories
#160 - 2013-08-14 14:58:40 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
Galison wrote:
The issue is harry this wouldn't effect alliances anyways you think it would be that much harder for them to have a cloaky alt or corp member detailed to sit on a gate to provide intel? likely what some or most do anyways not all systems have stations so any intel from them are form alts either posed or cloaked on a gate.

While on paper it sounds like a good idea it would really only hurt smaller groups who don't have a billion people to spread out on gates for intel anyways. No removing local would more of a negative for small group stuff in null then any advantage from it. or I should say any disadvantages to alliances which is what you seem to be after.


they might see me go in, but they would not know if I left when they did not look...

too many words have been posted on this topic, I can feel it, CCP should just switch it for a month and we see how it goes, if alliances ragequit, no problem change it back, sure we need stuff out there to shoot at Cool

Yeah... Great idea.
Come on CCP. **** off the biggest news making section of your playerbase, and the section that provides the majority of higher minerals and T2 components, just as a test, then if it doesn't work, home they come running back when you change it back.

I tell you what Harry (and yes i know this will get me blocked). In the same way, why not try hammering a nail into a wall by smashing your eyeballs into it as hard as you can. If it doesn't work, you can then use a hammer.