These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

Assembly Hall

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

Local chat and cloaking... a Three Point Plan

Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2011-12-31 20:33:00 UTC
I know I know more than you think I think I know.

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

RIP Vile Rat

Plus 10 NV
#62 - 2011-12-31 21:13:30 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Cearain wrote:

The biggest difference is the no local so you have no way to tell what sort of numbers you may be up against. Going into a place with no local for pvp is just begging to get blobbed. But if wormholes had local many more people would go there for pvp.

Please. If wormholes had local PvP would be decimated. It would be impossible to plan any types of ops covertly. People would dock up at the first sign of a stranger. It would suck the life out of wormholes altogether. It would become as safe as high sec sadly.

Fortunately nothing that stupid would ever happen.

Wormholes have so little pvp as it is, if they were completey removed it wouldn't "decimate pvp."

People who pvp know that when local is full of a targets friendlys, if they attack that target they will get blobbed. So not allot of pvp happens in those systems unless people are dumb or new. When you see very few in local or about your numbers you know you have a good chance of a good fight. So lots of fights happen that way. Thats why you see so much pvp in low sec and null sec compared to wormholes.

When you have no local you are just asking to get ganked. And indeed the number of ganks versus gfs from wormholes far outstips those numbers in null or low sec. That is why allot of pvpers don't go into wormholes.

I never said allot people go into wormholes because there is no local. I am saying the opposite many people don't go into wormholes because it has no local. There are plenty of good reasons to go into wormholes. You can make more isk as a carebear than pretty much anywhere in game. You are relatvively safe since there is relatively little pvp there. Many of the people in wormholes have very little pvp experience so it should supply kills. You can do industry etc. Given the amont of isk ccp throws at wormholes you would think about 35% of the player base would be there.

But its not. The biggest difference between wormholes and every other area of space is no local. Yes wormholes can close and move but that is not that big of a deal because you can tell when it is about to collapse. The biggest problem for pvpers is when you go in and attack someone its a complete crap shoot as to whether you are going to get blobbed. Its like flipping a coin who will get blobbed you or the other guy. IMO coin flipping isn't really a fun game.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve

M Lamia
All Web Investigations
#63 - 2012-01-03 13:27:36 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
L Salander wrote:
because it counters itself by making the pilot incapable of actually doing anything.

Except it doesn't prevent them from running around and choosing juicy targets, which is a fairly nice advantage to have.

Pro-tip: Merely being able to see a target isn't in and of itself a massive or unfair advantage. However, being able to prevent people even looking at you via mechanics that make cloaking a pointless, ineffective part of the game IS a "fairly nice advantage" - to players who already have a lot of options and advantages in their "avoid pvp at all costs ;_;" arsenal
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#64 - 2012-01-03 14:19:43 UTC
I didn't say that being able to run around and choose a juicy target a "massive or unfair advantage", I said "fairly nice advantage". If you remove cloaks from local, cloaking becomes a "massive or unfair advantage", and adding probes to that mix would still not take it all the way back to a "fairly nice advantage", but at least it wouldn't be as massive a cockstab just to shoot some rats as just the "no cloaked ships in local" idea is.

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

RIP Vile Rat