These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Are the days of Local really numbered?

First post First post
Author
Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#181 - 2013-12-08 14:20:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Benny Ohu
Marlona Sky wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Also make the api lie

API does not lie. It tells you what should be in the silo, not what is in the silo. But please, spin on. Blink

CCP Tuxford wrote:
The API will lie about the content. Sorry thought that was clear.
lie: 'intentionally false'
Marlona Sky wrote:
Tauranon wrote:
it also makes it difficult to undock, because you have no method of knowing whats on the undock, other than already having eyes cloaked out there. Not even the foggiest guess. again welcome to 2 account city.

I know you are going for the Appeal to Fear fallacy thing, but players can undock, look to see what is on grid and then redock if they don't like it. All magically done with one account.

It's not a fallacy. Taura's arguing that the idea would make living in null very tedious. That specific argument ('you have no method of safely determining what's on the undock alone') is built on the premise that you can be caught undocking. And EVE has had kickout stations in the past, I don't know how many exist now.

Even an argument on a premise later found false is a valid argument. An argument that may invoke fear is not therefore invalid.
Cyber SGB
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#182 - 2013-12-08 14:25:40 UTC
Mr Epeen wrote:
I play combat flight sims.

Some guy sets up a war with 'full real' settings and we all log in.

This is what happens. You are given a general outline such as there are a bunch of IL2s doing a rocket run on a certain airfield. So you all take off and open your handy dandy map. The map that is an actual map, by the way. No red or blue icons of little planes flying around. No icons showing where you are and where you need to go. Just a map to compare with the landscape you see outside the cockpit.

While your squadron is forming up you send out a few fast planes to scout. If they are good, then they find and call out some little black dots in the distance. Again, no blue or red boxes around them. Are they friendlies coming to help or are they the enemy you are looking for? Only one way to find out and that's to go have a closer look. ( this is why scouts tend to have such short lives)

He gets close and calls out friend or foe as well as how many and what type of planes they are as well as any support fighters that might be overhead.

He tells you where he thinks he is on the map and you head over to do battle. If your squad leader can read a map, you end up in a nice furball. And you'd better be a good shot because you have no targeting assist or rotating turrets. Still no icons. You often get on a plane's six and realize after emptying a magazine at them that they were one of your mates. Oops!

TLDR: No local + no icons = a whole lot of fun.

I know the above scenario will never happen in this game, but let me have my Christmas fantasy.

Mr Epeen Cool


Sounds awesome, me wants to play it now. What is it, my precious?

I write Kindle books. Visit my author page. http://amazon.com/author/sgbynum

Saladin
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#183 - 2013-12-08 15:07:41 UTC
I consider local to be inextricably linked to the map statistic tools. You know, the ones that show you npc kills per hour, number of people in system, number of jumps per hour, True sec, number of belts, cynosural fields active...all that stuff. If we remove local, lets remove all the intelligence tools. Hell with map statistics you dont even need to be logged into EvE, just browse Dotlan!
Amber Kurvora
#184 - 2013-12-08 15:18:28 UTC
Meh, it wouldn't bother me if local vanished. It'd just be like the good ol' days of living in W-space again.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#185 - 2013-12-08 16:38:37 UTC
I imagine if they removed local, there would be a massive sub drop (not just from ragequitters, but from multiboxers. Multiboxing would be considerable harder to safely manage in non-empire), followed by a mass monument shooting, followed by a reshuffle of CCP employees.
Had local never been introduced, simply not introducing it would be easy, but removing it will cause a hell of a lot more rage than the "fun" it would produce.

Simply put: Why would people want to do more to receive less intel?
The only people that would gain from this are solo gankers that want to pad their KBs with easy kills. for everyone else it would be a completely pointless time/effort/isk sink (depending on how they chose to implement a new system).

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#186 - 2013-12-08 17:11:45 UTC
Batelle wrote:
instant local and isntant dscan will be replaced by an delayed local chat and an auto-updating d-scan that places results on your sensor overlay. It will be awesome.


I would rather have this: A DScan that automatically updates (and the ability to select "quick ranges" that you preset), and a Local that you have to "query" in Empire space (like scanning - there would be possibly a low-tier skill to reduce query time) in order to get a list of pilots in system. When chatting, you appear in Local - but only for a minute or two.

NullSec? Remove it. You want intel - then scout.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#187 - 2013-12-08 17:18:34 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
NullSec? Remove it. You want intel - then scout.
Oh yeah, you're a genius.
Make nullsec a massive pain in the ass right? Make null players suffer, cos you feel they somehow deserve to turn eve into a career just to play?
You could say goodbye to sub numbers though.
If they did that I'd instantly drop 6 accounts. I'm already gonna hold of on subbing them until some concrete info comes though on what's changing. And I certainly won;t be the only one.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#188 - 2013-12-08 18:19:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Xuixien
Lucas Kell wrote:
Make nullsec a massive pain in the ass right? Make null players suffer, cos you feel they somehow deserve to turn eve into a career just to play?


Only people who can't adapt will suffer.

Lucas Kell wrote:

You could say goodbye to sub numbers though.


Yeah yeah yeah, bro. Sure thing. EVE Online is the only MMO which sees a growth in subs year after year. I think there was only one time subs were less than the year previous - and most of those subs were recovered.

Lucas Kell wrote:
If they did that I'd instantly drop 6 accounts.


Uh-huh.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Ned Black
Driders
#189 - 2013-12-08 18:35:17 UTC
I am all for removing local... have been living in WH space for over a year so no local is not that scary any more.

To me this would suffice

People in your corp shows up instantly and have a nice green tag on them
Friendy people show up instantly but have no color tag for 60 seconds
Neutral people show up instantly but have no color tag... period.
Unfriendly people show up instantly but have no color tag for 60 seconds

People showing up by means of wormholes and black ops are not displayed in local at all for 30 seconds since they arrive by means that disconnect them from the gate network. After they reconnect they have the same 60 second identification time as anyone else.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#190 - 2013-12-08 18:44:32 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Make nullsec a massive pain in the ass right? Make null players suffer, cos you feel they somehow deserve to turn eve into a career just to play?


Only people who can't adapt will suffer.
... Right. So those adapting wouldn't suddenly need to put in more time, effort or isk? I don;t think you understand, so let me put it plainly. Why should nullsec have to do more than anyone else just to have the same intel? Why should nullsec have to have players dedicated to providing scouting intel? Why should playing a GAME for null players be any more of a career than you.

Xuixien wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
You could say goodbye to sub numbers though.
Yeah yeah yeah, bro. Sure thing. EVE Online is the only MMO which sees a growth in subs year after year. I think there was only one time subs were less than the year previous - and most of those subs were recovered.
LOL. Yeah because at no point in time has CCP ever had to back out of a decision, fire a huge amount of it's staff and completely restructure it's internal processes because they made change which players didn't like, right?
And like I say most of it would be multiboxers. You realise people run like 20 man fleets right? that would be considerably more difficult to do with no local, so they would have no reason to run those accounts.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#191 - 2013-12-08 18:47:02 UTC
Ned Black wrote:
I am all for removing local... have been living in WH space for over a year so no local is not that scary any more.

To me this would suffice

People in your corp shows up instantly and have a nice green tag on them
Friendy people show up instantly but have no color tag for 60 seconds
Neutral people show up instantly but have no color tag... period.
Unfriendly people show up instantly but have no color tag for 60 seconds

People showing up by means of wormholes and black ops are not displayed in local at all for 30 seconds since they arrive by means that disconnect them from the gate network. After they reconnect they have the same 60 second identification time as anyone else.
WH is considerably different. WH space has no cynos, has mass limits and you are able to collapse all of the ways in and out of your space. You generally don't tend to get 4000 man WH fights either.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#192 - 2013-12-08 18:47:05 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Why should nullsec have to do more than anyone else just to have the same intel? Why should nullsec have to have players dedicated to providing scouting intel? Why should playing a GAME for null players be any more of a career than you.


More rewards = more risk/effort.

Deal with it. Bear

Lucas Kell wrote:

And like I say most of it would be multiboxers.


Confirming that a few thousand dollars lost from the few aspies who multibox 20 man fleets would cripple CCP financially.

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Benny Ohu
Chaotic Tranquility
#193 - 2013-12-08 18:52:18 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
... Right. So those adapting wouldn't suddenly need to put in more time, effort or isk? I don;t think you understand, so let me put it plainly. Why should nullsec have to do more than anyone else just to have the same intel? Why should nullsec have to have players dedicated to providing scouting intel? Why should playing a GAME for null players be any more of a career than you.

fortunately ccp does recognise that making the game horrible to play isn't a good design goal, even if insane forumers don't
Mocam
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#194 - 2013-12-08 18:54:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Mocam
Lucas Kell wrote:
Xuixien wrote:
NullSec? Remove it. You want intel - then scout.
Oh yeah, you're a genius.
Make nullsec a massive pain in the ass right? Make null players suffer, cos you feel they somehow deserve to turn eve into a career just to play?
You could say goodbye to sub numbers though.
If they did that I'd instantly drop 6 accounts. I'm already gonna hold of on subbing them until some concrete info comes though on what's changing. And I certainly won;t be the only one.


Honestly, I've held the same opinion on this for years now:

Remove it from *ALL* space but replace its function with tools and/or a mix of skills.

Get rid of "in this space, you use local for intel, that space you use ..." - bullshit. That's a chat channel so put it back to *BEING* a chat channel and not an intel tool. It's friggn ******** how it's core use is for intel and not for chatting.

All removal would do, without replacements based upon existing skills/items, is shut down operations there until such skills or fittings were obtained. We don't need highsec flood filled with more players who would prefer running elsewhere but where such operating would be "stupid" without an intel tool.

The differences between k-space and in wormholes - you can't right-click to set a destination to a wormhole but you can to any system in k-space. You can't collapse the entrance to an k-space system but you can with a wormhole. So on and so forth. The lack of an intel tool in w-space is as much a boon as a bane there but not in k-space.

Only an idiot would try and earn in k-space where you can be hunted with all the metrics you can find via the map without an intel tool. We don't show on the map how much ore & ice is mined but we do show how many ships are popped - be those PC or NPC targets. That is too much info to not have the ability to see when someone enters a system.

Now as to how much intel is granted... That can be debated (such as only "someone" entered vs friend, netural or foe) and such but not removal without some info being put forth.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#195 - 2013-12-08 19:02:45 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Why should nullsec have to do more than anyone else just to have the same intel? Why should nullsec have to have players dedicated to providing scouting intel? Why should playing a GAME for null players be any more of a career than you.


More rewards = more risk/effort.

Deal with it. Bear

Lucas Kell wrote:

And like I say most of it would be multiboxers.


Confirming that a few thousand dollars lost from the few aspies who multibox 20 man fleets would cripple CCP financially.
lol, see you can't even come up with a counterpoint. You just want to come along spouting off nonsense like you're someone important. Tell me this genius. Besides making ganking super easy what would be the point of the change? It's a pointless change to add a bunch of tedious work for no reason.

as for "more rewards". What rewards? I assume from this you have no ******* idea what you are talking about and have never been to null. Null is barely comparable to high sec in terms of rewards and at considerably more risk. It's an absolute joke loevel of reward compared to incursion running. Not to mention that sov null (which is what you hate) means paying billions in bills and constantly maintaining structures. But that's not enough right?

Now go back to your bridge

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#196 - 2013-12-08 19:17:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Xuixien
Lucas Kell wrote:
lol, see you can't even come up with a counterpoint.


I don't so much have to come up with a "counterpoint" (lol, forum bushido?) so much as just point out that the "points" you're making are, at best, invalid, and at worse, ridiculous.

Lucas Kell wrote:
Besides making ganking super easy


How would ganking become "super easy" if I can't see if I even have any targets in system?

Lucas Kell wrote:
tedious work


Like what?

Lucas Kell wrote:
Null is barely comparable to high sec in terms of rewards and at considerably more risk.


Then why do you live there?

Lucas Kell wrote:
sov null (which is what you hate)


Who says I hate SOV?

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#197 - 2013-12-08 19:24:21 UTC
local, never forget. RIP

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#198 - 2013-12-08 19:31:39 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
How would ganking become "super easy" if I can't see if I even have any targets in system?
Cloakers would still be able to d-scan targets. The targets just wouldn't know they are being hunted until it's way too late.

Xuixien wrote:
Like what?
Well I'll quote you on this one since you seem too have forgotten already: "NullSec? Remove it. You want intel - then scout."
So scouting, that would be the tedious part.

Xuixien wrote:
Then why do you live there?
Good people to hang out with. I actually make most of my income on high sec alts. I do some null trading and the rest of my null is PvP. There's simply no point in taking on the additional risk in null PVE/mining when you can easily earn more multiboxing in high sec with pure safety.

Xuixien wrote:
Who says I hate SOV?
It's pretty obvious you don't like sov holding alliances buddy.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Xuixien
Solar Winds Security Solutions
#199 - 2013-12-08 19:36:26 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
]Cloakers would still be able to d-scan targets.


Targets that they don't know are there until they scout the system.

Lucas Kell wrote:

So scouting, that would be the tedious part.


Your alliance doesn't have intel channels?

Lucas Kell wrote:
I actually make most of my income on high sec alts.


So then why are you whining?

Lucas Kell wrote:
It's pretty obvious you don't like sov holding alliances buddy.


Explain, from step one, how it's "obvious that I don't like SOV holding alliances."

Epic Space Cat, Horsegirl, Philanthropist

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#200 - 2013-12-08 19:46:16 UTC
Xuixien wrote:
Targets that they don't know are there until they scout the system.
Right... kinda like now...
Or do you have some magic way of seeing the local list before you actually arrive?

Xuixien wrote:
Your alliance doesn't have intel channels?
Sigh... of course, but you are not talking about basic intel are you? You are talking about actively scouting. That's considerably more work. Like to scout a system with 2 gates, you need a watcher on each gate for gate flashes, plus someone to scout any wormholes into the system, and constant d-scan for people logging on and covert cynos.

Xuixien wrote:
So then why are you whining?
I'm not whining. I'm simply stating that your knee-jerk reaction that null should get NO intel at all is stupid and biased.

Xuixien wrote:
Explain, from step one, how it's "obvious that I don't like SOV holding alliances."
You want to give sov holding alliances a considerably harsher time by removing intel entirely from them.

Honestly though mate, I can;t be bothered to keep back and forthing with a troll. I've said why your idea is stupid, others can read that and judge themselves. I'm done with you.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.