open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked Nullsec design goals feedback: Intel
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7

Author Topic

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.08.19 15:00:00 - [121]
 

Edited by: Mag''s on 19/08/2011 15:06:19
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
I guess maybe we're just coming at this from very different angles.
It's more than that, you're missing the whole picture and Local cannot be simply overlooked in that way. It's to big for that and far from being a small part.

Cailais
Amarr
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
Talocan United
Posted - 2011.08.19 15:36:00 - [122]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
I guess maybe we're just coming at this from very different angles. From my point of view, local and the whole "who's in this system with me right now" thing are a pretty small part of the overall picture as it pertains to "Intel".


It's a small element - but its the start of a process.

"Intelligence" is actually the analysis of information - i.e its a product of a process. The elements of that process are various of course (in EVEs context it might be market trades, forum posts, Corporate websites, rumour, killboards and so forth).

The first question is; does 'local' provide to immediate a source of very accurate information with comparatively little effort?

The second question; is that part of the process 'fun'? Is there a gameplay element to it? Does there need to be?

And the final question; does 'local' denigrate or devalue other means of gathering information? Such as the scanner, or probes, or searching killboards?

I'd question is if EVE needs to provide "intelligence" tools (i.e methods of collating and analysis) or whether that should be the domain of player and 3rd party effort (API??). Or does it need to re-factor how it provides and displays raw information such as scan probe results, local, universe map data (kills in system) and how transferable that raw data is from player to player.

I think most players are looking at you focusing on the later rather than the former.

C.

James Duar
Merch Industrial
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.08.19 17:46:00 - [123]
 

Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
I guess maybe we're just coming at this from very different angles. From my point of view, local and the whole "who's in this system with me right now" thing are a pretty small part of the overall picture as it pertains to "Intel".


It's a small element - but its the start of a process.


I disagree. Local is basically surrogating for a much more sophisticated intelligence/sensor system at the moment.

How the wider intel system works has *everything* to do with any future changes to the behavior or function of Local because things like "removing it" entail removing 99% of routine intelligence gathering in EVE.

Jaigar
Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe
Transmission Lost
Posted - 2011.08.19 19:07:00 - [124]
 

First off I will say that I'm a wormhole dweller with a little bit of null sec experience. I also mash d-scan (prolly 100-200 times an hour when active) even when pos spinng out of habbit.

First off, I will say that Delayed local isnt the way to go. Like those before have stated, WH space is different from null, and we need to remember that. The general feeling I'm getting from this thread wants simular goals to what CCP is pushing; we just need a good method.

I'm thinking of a new UI interface, simular to the sovereignity window, but streamlined enough to keep open. This interface would be the Intelligence window, and you can set options to share certain types of information.

Information gathering would occur with different levels of commitment. Those who own the space would get some slight advantage to defensive intel gathering, but not to the point of instant-local like now. Those who are roaming through should be able to collect enough intel to know if anyone has been in the area, just not who or exactly where (think gate jumps). Everyone would have access to these gate jump numbers, but they are delayed 15 minutes, and they still don't tell you if someone is in system.

One consequence of this is more frigate roaming parties; They can cover more systems faster and find people easier. Since flying a frigate is not skill intensive, its in no way prohibitive.

Bear with me now, those I stated above those who own sovereignity in the system, they would get a tick every 5,10,arbitrary number to show how many pilots (and names) are in that system. Now, with this new Intelligence window, you can set standings to automaticly share this intel. So if I'm set blue to the alliance who owns the system I'm ratting in, they can give me the intel their system gathers automaticly. This could also be manipulated via roles, etc.

Now the idea I'm most proud of is a new battlefield idea: The Communications Hub. What the communications hub would do is allow 1 player every (arbitrary) minutes to hack the CONCORD communication system and give the same level intel as the sovereignity-owned people get but constellation wide. So there becomes a new strategic point in system control and that is these hubs. And just like stated above, this information is automaticly shared with anyone the hacker chooses.

So this would give mobility a higher priority; crusier fleet and battlecrusier fleets gain additional viablity by being harder to track than the typical battleship roam. Advance scouting parties (IE interceptors) become even more important; You could fit a couple frigates and do a quick recon of the entire constellation by hauling ass to these hubs.

This is just a rough sketch though. Might through Cyno information in there somewhere, you never know.

Newt Rondanse
Posted - 2011.08.19 21:45:00 - [125]
 

Originally by: James Duar
Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
I guess maybe we're just coming at this from very different angles. From my point of view, local and the whole "who's in this system with me right now" thing are a pretty small part of the overall picture as it pertains to "Intel".


It's a small element - but its the start of a process.


I disagree. Local is basically surrogating for a much more sophisticated intelligence/sensor system at the moment.

How the wider intel system works has *everything* to do with any future changes to the behavior or function of Local because things like "removing it" entail removing 99% of routine intelligence gathering in EVE.

If you want to communicate you need to register with the communications network.

The behaviour of local reflects that.

If you are in a place without a communications network (like a WH) different rules apply, but where there are jump gates the local channel should behave exactly as it does.

Merkurielle
Iso Tribe
Posted - 2011.08.19 23:14:00 - [126]
 

Though much of this already takes place in the metagame, I'd like to see more gameplay that supports counterintelligence activity.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.08.19 23:45:00 - [127]
 

Edited by: Tippia on 19/08/2011 23:53:01
Originally by: Newt Rondanse
If you want to communicate you need to register with the communications network.
And if you don't?
Quote:
If you are in a place without a communications network (like a WH) different rules apply, but where there are jump gates the local channel should behave exactly as it does.
Why? Why does it need to provide complete, instant, and accurate information about anyone and everyone in the same system as you?

Here's the thing: there is no need for a local channel. None. Its communication function is already covered by a myriad of other tools, so that bit can happen anyway. Instead of being a necessary communications tool, it has become a de facto intel tool, with a redundant and rarely used communication channel stapled on top of it, and all of that for no good or useful reason. That intel tool must go, and there is no need for the communications functionality that is left behind because it is already covered by all the other, better configured, tools that do the exact same thing.
Originally by: Merkurielle
Though much of this already takes place in the metagame, I'd like to see more gameplay that supports counterintelligence activity.
Yup. Right now, the only actual gameplay that does that is AFK cloaking, and all because the very foundation of in-game intel rests on this uncounterable intel tool that is local. Neutral

Newt Rondanse
Posted - 2011.08.20 02:16:00 - [128]
 

Originally by: Tippia
Edited by: Tippia on 19/08/2011 23:53:01
Originally by: Newt Rondanse
If you want to communicate you need to register with the communications network.
And if you don't?


Your messages don't get relayed. What's the range on an EVE superluminal radio set (ship portable)?
Originally by: Tippia

Quote:
If you are in a place without a communications network (like a WH) different rules apply, but where there are jump gates the local channel should behave exactly as it does.
Why? Why does it need to provide complete, instant, and accurate information about anyone and everyone in the same system as you?

Here's the thing: there is no need for a local channel. None. Its communication function is already covered by a myriad of other tools, so that bit can happen anyway. Instead of being a necessary communications tool, it has become a de facto intel tool, with a redundant and rarely used communication channel stapled on top of it, and all of that for no good or useful reason. That intel tool must go, and there is no need for the communications functionality that is left behind because it is already covered by all the other, better configured, tools that do the exact same thing.


What other in-game channel is there for immediate communication with the people in your LOCAL area that you don't have a prior relationship with?

There isn't one.

Therefore the local channel is necessary.
It doesn't need to tell you everyone who's there, but the relays are programmed such that that is how it behaves. Take it up with Ma Bell if you don't like it.
Originally by: Tippia

Originally by: Merkurielle
Though much of this already takes place in the metagame, I'd like to see more gameplay that supports counterintelligence activity.
Yup. Right now, the only actual gameplay that does that is AFK cloaking, and all because the very foundation of in-game intel rests on this uncounterable intel tool that is local. Neutral

You don't need a cloaking device even, as was pointed out by someone else. All you need is a really fast ship.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.08.20 02:29:00 - [129]
 

Originally by: Newt Rondanse
Your messages don't get relayed. What's the range on an EVE superluminal radio set (ship portable)?
You misunderstood: what if you don't want to communicate? How do I go about "not registering with the communications network"? You can't. Local doesn't allow you to.
Quote:
What other in-game channel is there for immediate communication with the people in your LOCAL area that you don't have a prior relationship with?
RClick→Start Conversation.
Constellation chat.
Quote:
Therefore the local channel is necessary.
Why do you need to communicate with them and why aren't the above required? It is redundant and provides far more functionality than it should while also, paradoxically, being far too restrictive in what you can do with it.

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2011.08.20 03:45:00 - [130]
 

The only way to improve intel i think is by making it based more so on player concentrations, the implementation of more defensive structures, and more offensive abilities with offensive structures.

Create alliance controlled turrets at star gates and outposts. you can anchor a gun at a POS, but you cant an outpost or star gate like in high and low sec... something is missing here. Not only will this allow a defending alliance control their space easier but it will allow other alliance to scout out what kind of deffensive structures they have and properly formulate an attack for it.

Create remote defense points. - they're not POS's but bunkers. dockable structure with a little more HP than POS's but no timers. they can provide certain bonuses for defending alliances and as i stated in the small holding forum are used in the stead of outposts by starting alliances. (read my post in that forum for more details) but for defense 4 can be placed in systems with no outpost. they provide repairs for ships docked, hold a limited cargo and ships, and of course are completely destroyable.

When upgrading a system allow for defensive upgrades. - this of course takes away from the ability to further advance industrial or peaceful upgrades to a system but that is the trade off. upgrades allowing the bunkers, cyno jamming, small bonuses for friendly units and most importantly, NPC's to help defend your space. They would only be present around stations and gates but can provide not only a good source of targets for marauding gangs but help local defenders keep space safe, which is important for economic growth. also allow an upgrade for possibly jamming cloaking devices around structures, out to a certain range. that way afk cloakers will only be useful for on the spot Intel gathering rather than harassment.

these are just a few ideas i have but i think they would improve the ability to gather Intel, because there there would actually be something to gather Intel on besides who is in what system.

Spy 21
Caldari
Lonetrek Exploration and Salvage
Posted - 2011.08.20 04:30:00 - [131]
 

I just like the idea of making local delayed and having the game publicly announce all gate activations within the system. IE a popup and a blurb in local that states "Gate Activation at XYZ00 Gate"...

Doesn't say anything else, inbound or outbound etc.

For deeper intel on a system comings and goings, there would need to be ships posted at the gates or any variation of the some of the other tools already suggested here.

Cynos already announce their presence in the overview, covert cynos are, well, covert.

Improve and add scanning tools to compensate for the loss of instant intel on exactly who is in the system at any given time.

The public announcement that someone just used a gate also sort of mitigates some of the arguments folks have made that wormhole space is different because it doesn't have gates... although I always figured the gates were just called wormholes and happened to be temporary.

Just a few thoughts anyway... for whatever they are worth.

Thanks.


Nieero
Posted - 2011.08.20 13:26:00 - [132]
 

Edited by: Nieero on 20/08/2011 13:29:40
Edited by: Nieero on 20/08/2011 13:28:10
Guys, don't get into detail. Greyscale is not reading such posts. Delayed local, no local, or how to design a tool to substitute locals functionality does not actually matter right now.

First we need to convey that gathering raw information (thx Cailais) is a crucial part regarding 0.0 design.
A top down approach won't work here. You cannot design new high level intel tools when there is an overpowered and therefore flawed mechanic to supply the needed information in place already.

Originally by: Newt Rondanse
---In Game Explanation--- Simply put, whenever you go to a system with communication network access you have to register onto the communication network or none of your communication channels work.
You can justify everything by making up game lore. It's not the players job to conceal bad game design, though.

edit for clarity

Caldari Citizen20090217
Posted - 2011.08.20 13:58:00 - [133]
 

Edited by: Caldari Citizen20090217 on 20/08/2011 14:01:30
edit: added bit about scanners
Originally by: Newt Rondanse
---In Game Explanation--- Simply put, whenever you go to a system with communication network access you have to register onto the communication network or none of your communication channels work.


*rips out transponder and leaves it in a can 2 systems back*

If this is the lore I want to be able to hack my ships electronics and make myself blue to the locals/appear as someone else/not appear at all/appear as more than 1 guy etc.

If they don't nerf local the ability to spoof it would be the next best thing. Deployables that appear on dscan/local as ships/players, ship mods that make your inty appear as a bs to dscan, name spoofing etc would all be fun obfuscation of the current perfect intel.

To counter this I'd also like a (shootable) deployable that I can anchor at gates that will collect names/shiptypes of all who enter/leave, giving a local-like but imperfect list (wh, covert cyno etc will not be on the list, if the ship got into system without being on the grid that the scanner is on it does not show up).

Lolion Reglo
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2011.08.20 16:40:00 - [134]
 

now i think we are getting into the idea of information warfare with the name gather, hacking to look blue but not be on the list kind of deal. Its a great idea. that and being able to choose in null sec to not register with the local channel is also in Empyrean Age book. when the salvage ship after collecting the amarrian purposefully leaves its communications off to not be detected. so its a logical idea. what we can say is the down side to this is that you lose all chat channel communications if you go offline like that. and i think having information hubs that can be hacked to gather Intel on alliance compositions and or making yourself or others appear as a "false blue" gets me excitedTwisted Evil

AmarrettoDiAmarr
Posted - 2011.08.20 20:03:00 - [135]
 

Is everyone happy with the d-scan?

People resist change so I doubt it could be addressed, but I have never really understood - or at least liked - this game mechanic. Someone moving to 0.0 needs to spam it a thousand times over a long day of EVE. Seriously? I have my mortgage deducted so I don't have to write a check once a month. Personally, I am not excited to pay for the privilege. I can't see how the d-scans help server performance. I do not see how spamming d-scan is interesting gameplay. TBH, I do not see how repetivively spamming scan is much more sophisticated than spamming "mine veldspar from 1.0 asteroid."

Zanzerschreck
Posted - 2011.08.20 22:43:00 - [136]
 

I believe that a good way to balance the blind local idea could be to

  • have the region chat channel (moderate delay) delayed from time of entry into region


  • Have the constellation channel delayed (small)


  • and local be delayed (smaller)


with these types of delays, one could accomplish an objective if it is planned

this being effective in hi and low sec via faction standings

and null sec via sov upgrades

simple solution ( i apologize if its already been proposed, there is alot to read here)

Reachok
Amarr
Wrecking Shots
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.08.21 00:23:00 - [137]
 

Edited by: Reachok on 21/08/2011 18:59:06
Okay. Lets say CCP kills local in low sec and null sec. I'd like to see the map then returned to near immediate mode. You can then see groups of people moving, but would not know who. To prevent spammage and server stress, maybe make it only refresh every 30 seconds or so. This also becomes a strategic planner and roaming target finder.

Next, create an anchor-able intel probe. It works on the same mechanics as an anchored cargo container (30 days no visit it goes pop) but requires a small amount of fuel say every week, two weeks, etc. It's scannable, killable but doesn't require a large ship to set up or take down. It can be set up to broadcast friendlies, non-friendlies but not specific character names. Maybe even ship types. The broadcasts could be sent to the map, or to a new interface.

No, I didn't read the whole thread, so if this was proposed before, my bad. Very Happy

Lady Zarrina
Posted - 2011.08.21 18:44:00 - [138]
 

While we are talking about maps, here are a few suggestions that would help everywhere (even null-sec)

1) Allow the star map to be narrowed down by region, constellation, number of jumps, and route.
2) Allow up to the second display of information (statistics) for the systems in the star map if you have the proper "scanning item" in the system.

X Gallentius
Quantum Cats Syndicate
Posted - 2011.08.21 21:01:00 - [139]
 

Edited by: X Gallentius on 21/08/2011 21:01:35
Suggestion: Automated DSCAN to replace local for "instant" intel:

DSCAN - for pods and ships - is automatically updated at a given rate. The rate is determined by the "nominal volume" scanned. (I assume these are calculated continuously anyways, so there's no loss is information).

360 deg/14AU would take twice as long as 180 deg/14 AU. (volume cut in half)
360 deg/14AU would take twice as long as 360 deg/7 AU (volume is actually cut in eight, but most systems are fairly flat and it just doesn't seem like a multiplier of 8 would be feasible).





Grady Eltoren
Minmatar
Aviation Professionals for EVE
Posted - 2011.08.22 08:07:00 - [140]
 

Originally by: X Gallentius
Edited by: X Gallentius on 21/08/2011 21:01:35
Suggestion: Automated DSCAN to replace local for "instant" intel:

DSCAN - for pods and ships - is automatically updated at a given rate. The rate is determined by the "nominal volume" scanned. (I assume these are calculated continuously anyways, so there's no loss is information).

360 deg/14AU would take twice as long as 180 deg/14 AU. (volume cut in half)
360 deg/14AU would take twice as long as 360 deg/7 AU (volume is actually cut in eight, but most systems are fairly flat and it just doesn't seem like a multiplier of 8 would be feasible).





This in theory is the best solution I think. Let the user chose an automated DSCAN to replace local (in SOV 0.0--- I still think maybe local should exist in NPC 0.0 if you read my earlier posts).

Good idea though - the times may need tweaking but the logic is sound sir. Combine this with the ability for SOV 0.0 to establish their own local through structure upgrades and the inability to DSCAN while cloaked (maybe - needs tweaking) and I am sold.

my .o2

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.22 11:06:00 - [141]
 

Originally by: Nieero
Edited by: Nieero on 19/08/2011 14:01:23
Originally by: Razin
Whatís very important here is to build on solid foundation so that later the whole system does not need to be brought down to finally make that one fix thatís been in the plans for years. The foundation is the basic tools you give players to collect intel (because collection is gameplay, not the spreadsheets to keep the data). Local is such a tool, and one that makes the job of gathering intel trivial, as well as making any kind of possible game additions/improvements on this subject worthless. This is the problem that needs to be the focus of this effort.

this is as true as this:
Originally by: Greyscale
Local and cloaking and scanning and so on are important, and they're one of the most visible elements particularly to non-specialist pilots, they're still a fairly small piece of the puzzle in absolute terms, and so long as whatever system is doing that job "works", it doesn't matter all that much what it is as far as the rest of the puzzle is concerned.

is false!

Local chat has influence on every other aspect of life in nullsec!
It has inpact on every other topic discussed here. From Smallholding to largescale pvp and back to mining.
It IS intel gathering - and intel is the game. Don't put this issue aside considering it irrelevant!


Edit for clarification:

"The system that is doing the job" is not working. A chat channel as an ingame tool for intel gathering? Instantly and without any effort? That's fundamentally flawed game design.

Regarding your analogy Greyscale - even if they're only covering a small part of the puzzle in absolute terms: You've got the false pieces in the corners of the puzzle you're trying to solve...


Originally by: Mag's
Edited by: Mag''s on 19/08/2011 15:06:19
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
I guess maybe we're just coming at this from very different angles.
It's more than that, you're missing the whole picture and Local cannot be simply overlooked in that way. It's to big for that and far from being a small part.


Originally by: Cailais
Originally by: CCP Greyscale
I guess maybe we're just coming at this from very different angles. From my point of view, local and the whole "who's in this system with me right now" thing are a pretty small part of the overall picture as it pertains to "Intel".


It's a small element - but its the start of a process.

"Intelligence" is actually the analysis of information - i.e its a product of a process. The elements of that process are various of course (in EVEs context it might be market trades, forum posts, Corporate websites, rumour, killboards and so forth).

The first question is; does 'local' provide to immediate a source of very accurate information with comparatively little effort?

The second question; is that part of the process 'fun'? Is there a gameplay element to it? Does there need to be?

And the final question; does 'local' denigrate or devalue other means of gathering information? Such as the scanner, or probes, or searching killboards?

I'd question is if EVE needs to provide "intelligence" tools (i.e methods of collating and analysis) or whether that should be the domain of player and 3rd party effort (API??). Or does it need to re-factor how it provides and displays raw information such as scan probe results, local, universe map data (kills in system) and how transferable that raw data is from player to player.

I think most players are looking at you focusing on the later rather than the former.

C.



You guys all saw the post where I said we'd likely deal with local before addressing the rest of this stuff, right?

Daedalus Arcova
Gallente
Havoc Violence and Chaos
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2011.08.22 11:50:00 - [142]
 

Edited by: Daedalus Arcova on 22/08/2011 11:50:21
I just posted a new thread about the use of contact watchlists as a 'free' intel tool, which impacts heavily on capital ship warfare. It's very relevant to this thread.

Thread

The short version: the watchlist gives too much information on enemy supercapitals, and means capital pilots can avoid engagements too easily. Change it so that a player must agree to be added to another player's watchlist.

Mag's
the united
Negative Ten.
Posted - 2011.08.22 11:57:00 - [143]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
You guys all saw the post where I said we'd likely deal with local before addressing the rest of this stuff, right?
Yes, but likely doesn't tell us what that change will be and if you will indeed do it.
We just don't see it as a small part, of this discussion as you seem too. That was the point I guess we wanted to get home.

I do want to wish you good luck though. Cool

Nieero
Posted - 2011.08.22 13:34:00 - [144]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
You guys all saw the post where I said we'd likely deal with local before addressing the rest of this stuff, right?


I fail at reading comprehension Confused sorry... now it all makes sense!

Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron
Legion of xXDEATHXx
Posted - 2011.08.22 14:38:00 - [145]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale

You guys all saw the post where I said we'd likely deal with local before addressing the rest of this stuff, right?

Thing is most of us here had more or less the same impression from your previous post on this subject, that being that you werenít too concerned with local as an immediate problem that stands in the way of your 0.0 intel plans. Even in this clarification you donít say you will deal with local, but only that youíd likely deal with it. I think you can see why you are getting this kind of reaction.

As Magís says above, players consider immediate local a much larger issue than you seem to, the one that has absolute influence on intel collection. Anything that happens to intel after collection is secondary, and should probably be the function of the tool that replaces the current local anyway.

Additionally, strategic intel analysis and sharing is currently done by web-based player-made tools, and arguably this is the best way to do it since you canít have that kind of customizability in-game.

CCP Greyscale

Posted - 2011.08.22 17:00:00 - [146]
 

Originally by: Razin
Originally by: CCP Greyscale

You guys all saw the post where I said we'd likely deal with local before addressing the rest of this stuff, right?

Thing is most of us here had more or less the same impression from your previous post on this subject, that being that you werenít too concerned with local as an immediate problem that stands in the way of your 0.0 intel plans. Even in this clarification you donít say you will deal with local, but only that youíd likely deal with it. I think you can see why you are getting this kind of reaction.

As Magís says above, players consider immediate local a much larger issue than you seem to, the one that has absolute influence on intel collection. Anything that happens to intel after collection is secondary, and should probably be the function of the tool that replaces the current local anyway.

Additionally, strategic intel analysis and sharing is currently done by web-based player-made tools, and arguably this is the best way to do it since you canít have that kind of customizability in-game.



What we're trying to do right now is develop a long-term roadmap, and the reason we're talking to players a lot is that we want to be sure you're all on board with what we're planning. The reason I'm not worried about local in this context is that it's a no-brainer that we need to do something, and "doing something about local" is assumed to have the support of the community provided it's something good. What we're more concerned about right now is what our next step should be after that, because we don't want "change local" to be the only thing about intel on our long-term plan.

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:30:00 - [147]
 

Edited by: Bloodpetal on 22/08/2011 17:39:14
I've been holding back on my thoughts on this because it really is a lot to consider.



I'd say that the role of "intelligence" should be to make EVE seem even bigger rather than smaller.


The modification to the Local channel would be a big step towards that, and I know it's been beaten to a mashed sausage of a dead horse. So where to go after that?

I'm going to focus on the more down to earth ideas I have first, and then bring in the mega-game changing ub3r intel tools that I know may never come to pass...


As a fleet commander who regularly takes out small gangs, I'd say the biggest tools I wish I could use are the following ::

Improved Broadcast system::

The system works great, but it could use some refinement in terms of what you are broadcasting. Let's start with the idea that we expand the buttons and what kind of information they can send and how often I see them used, and how that can be improved on.


BROADCAST BUTTONS

Has Spotted An Enemy, Almost Never Used

  • The issue with this one is it doesn't in any way give enough information to determine what that means. You have to relay it over voice or chat anyways, so broadcasting that means nothing at all. This needs to give a better granularity of detail, or frankly just replace it. The following is an appropriate way to give a contact report ::


Quote:
The more formal form for a Contact Report answers the following questions
Who is sending the report?
Where are the enemy?
What is their estimated strength, type and armament.
What appears to be their intentions and/or direction of travel.
What are you doing about them? What are your recommendations?


Anything short of giving at least a good portion of that information makes that button really less functional. I know it CAN be resolved, but giving a tool for broadcasting this information is ideal for a scout.

Needs Armor, MUST HAVE for Logistics
Needs Shield, ''
Needs Capacitor, ''


All three of thise are excellent and crucial. I would like to say they can be improved in one way, to report the % of damage they have on the relevant shield/armor/capacitor. This would also satisfy people's desire for "more on watch list". Adding 2 digits to the broadcast can't be that much more data to send through the broadcast system. (1-99% = 99 numbers). ALTERNATELY< to designate an URGENCY for the feature. Need armor Critical. Also for capacitor, I'd say there should be a way to broadcast that you are "full" or "had enough", because most people use the "IN POSITION" for this, instead of actually using IN POSITION to broadcast being IN POSITION... we'll address that in a moment.


In Position At, Rarely Used

Normally used for calling for a full capacitor to let logistics know to cease cap transfer and resume their spider.

The reason it's rarely used is because in the middle of a fight you rarely need to broadcast this. Now, it does come in handy when you tell someone to go somewhere and they land there, but normally some kind of voice comm relays this. The other issue is that it tends to clutter the other more important broadcasts as they come up. This comes to addressing the actual interface for the broadcast history...


Needs Back Up, Almost Never Used

This comes back down to the Enemy Spotted situation. Not enough information. Backup against what? Fleet isn't going to just warp to back up someone - they need to know more information.

A call for back up really should be in the form of a SITREP or Situation Report :

Quote:
The form of the SITREP may be remembered by using the term E.F.A.R.


Enemy Forces (What is their status? What are they doing?)

Friendly Forces (What is your status? What are you doing? Do you have a visual on any other friendlies?)

Administrative Needs (Do you require anything i.e. medical, ammo, other?)

Recommendations (Do you have any tactical suggestions for the SL's consideration?)


Continued...

Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
Posted - 2011.08.22 17:52:00 - [148]
 


In this situation, the "Recommendation" is really the, "PLEASE COME SAVE MY ASS" portion of the Back up request.


So, if I was caught at a belt and my fleet wasn't aware and I needed assistance, this is what my report would ACTUALLY say :

"Bloodpetal, i'm scrammed at belt, I have 3 Battlecruisers here, my tank is holding fine - requesting back up to blow these bastards up."

At which point the FC makes the call or not. And that is what he needs to make use of that "Requesting Back Up Button", otherwise it's really not going to be able to replace what is necessary with a voice comm anyways.



Requests That the Fleet Hold Position, Almost Never Used

It's useful, but a reason WHY would be handy. "I fell behind", "My mom walked in". Inevitably, if I saw this come up as an FC I'd ask the dude, "What's the hold up?".


Is At Location, Rarely Used

Useful, but is under the "In Position" category of issues.


BROADCAST ACTIONS ::

This is for all the warp, align, target, right click menu actions


I think these are all great, my biggest issue with them is that as an FC< going through the right click menu REPEATEDLY is really a drag and makes it really unnatural to give orders like this. Some kind of alternate method of broadcasting these needs to be handed out to be really less of a pain in the ass.

The Broadcast Cynosural Field is really useful too, but I really don't understand why it has to be only available through shortcut to be obvious (most people don't check right clicking on themselves to broadcast, I think you can get to it from there after you've popped cyno).



Alright.


WISHLIST :

Now to the wishlist


You guys did a really great thing with the filtering on the broadcast, really. Much much less of a pain in the ass and look 15 different places thing.


My issue is it still gets cluttered with broadcasts of different types. I know you can now right click and filter out specific TYPES of broadcasts, but it feels like you should see the different broadcasts in other parts of your interface as well.

For example, let's say that my FC is giving me align and warp orders - the overview gets a little icon, and the space object gets a little icon, but it's still really not quite there in communicating with the fleet, and also you can't know who the order came from. I'd like to see a solution that puts these kinds of "fly orders" in a separate but obvious part of the interface, perhaps right on the space interface itself in words.

The main point is that, "Command Broadcasts" Need to be separate from "Logistics Broadcasts" and those should be separate from "Report Broadcasts".

And really, if you could make those different reports each be going only to people that really need them in the fleet, you'd be saving a lot on redundant data being sent to a ton of people that don't need it.

Everyone can send out the broadcast, but let's say that only Logistics sign up tot he Logistics broadcast "Channel" - now, only they need to see that information. HOwever, they are also receiving "Command Broadcasts" and those should always be obvious to them even through the spam of logistics requests comind down the pipe - so they subscribe to that, but the interface either sets those orders in a separate place on the interface, or highlights them separately or always "keeps them at the top" for 30 seconds of the history while other logistics filters below.

Meanwhile, Scout, Location and Backup Reports can go to another channel and people that want to see those can subscribe to them.


Also, very often lately on a fleet you end up with people typing WWW as a warp in point, or AAA as the anchor, or JJJ for the cyno, or whatever they need to do.

I recommend allowing the FC to have a part of the fleet interface dedicated to assigning "roles" to people, they would be highlighted in a list, or such.


That way people can be identified without having to repeatedly do the www if someone missses it in chat

Continued...


Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:33:00 - [149]
 

Edited by: Bloodpetal on 22/08/2011 18:35:18


Now, there's a few ways to do this...

Either replace the broadcasts that rarely get used because they are insufficient, or improve the amount of data getting passed through.



Some people have mentioned passing on directional scanning reports - that's interesting, but I'm sure the amount of data that now goes to xyz people is going to become unnecessarily too much. Also, the ability to pass that data on with pertinent information - for example, sure there are 10 battlecruisers on scan, but only 5 of those are the enemy, 2 are at a POS (and I know that as the scout), and 3 are friendly.

The FC doesn't need all that junk.


My proposition would be to improve the broadcasts by adding a "Reports" Tab - the tab would allow for reports to be created quickly and easily with a few clicks, if possible to be plausible in a high stress situation. No drop down menus, no right clicking.

Just a quick and ugly mock up...
Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.


The data there would be given in some fashion to the FC. Any report is going to HAVE To be followed with some voice communication, but at least this is a more functional way of doing it.


COMPRESSED WISHLIST ::


  • More granular broadcasts

  • Categorize Broadcasts

  • Create Subscribed channels for broadcast categories

  • Create a Reports Broadcast that can be tagged with data

  • Improve Interface for receiving different categories of broadcast

  • Improve interface for command broadcasts






Alright, now to the crazy ideas.


This stuff, by its nature, and I know this even more so than anything else will most likely not make, but let's dream.



Imagine that you can bring up the current F11 window (sidepane Map), except now it is full of awesome 3D awesome-win sauce map using the carbon UI.


This sidepane map will now be called the tactical map because it lets you operate while in space and allows you to view and manipulate tactical data across multiple systems beyond the "here and now" solar system.

This side pane window will still have some semblance to the current one, with the universe, constellation etc being broken down, but now you can manipulate them in both 3d and 2d, and you can start to tag those systems with data.

So, let's say that you get a report from your scout using the broadcast reports already discussed, the tac map would light up RED to indicate that the system has a report, you click on the report, and up comes a report from that scout. This can accumulate in different places and you can see multiple reports in adjacent systems with a glance.

At that point, you start to give instructions via broadcast to your individual squads using the tactical map and are able to tell one unit to move to X system, and the others to move to Y system.

You can also see the overlay of the "Field of battle" and see where you have members and how many you have there. SO, you see in system X you now have 10 guys, but the scout report is saying there are 30 guys, so you tell them to move out, and so on.

The fleet composition window already dumps this info into the FCs hands, but rarely does it get used very often, and the delay should be lower for the Tactical map.

Now, this would not only go on the solar system level but also on the constellation level... maybe you have guys in an adjacent constellation, and really the level can get to the whole galaxy scale - yo ucan see that in X region you have 100 guys (you dont need to see the constellations on the galaxy scale map) - and then on that region you can see that you have 50 in constellation Q and 50 in constellation P and then in Constellation P you can see exactly which numbers are in which system.

That tactical map would be very very nice, and a great way to interact and keep it simple too and stay watching your "space.".

Out of characters again.

Good luck. :)

Surando
Posted - 2011.08.22 18:59:00 - [150]
 

Originally by: CCP Greyscale
Originally by: Razin
Originally by: CCP Greyscale

You guys all saw the post where I said we'd likely deal with local before addressing the rest of this stuff, right?

Thing is most of us here had more or less the same impression from your previous post on this subject, that being that you werenít too concerned with local as an immediate problem that stands in the way of your 0.0 intel plans. Even in this clarification you donít say you will deal with local, but only that youíd likely deal with it. I think you can see why you are getting this kind of reaction.

As Magís says above, players consider immediate local a much larger issue than you seem to, the one that has absolute influence on intel collection. Anything that happens to intel after collection is secondary, and should probably be the function of the tool that replaces the current local anyway.

Additionally, strategic intel analysis and sharing is currently done by web-based player-made tools, and arguably this is the best way to do it since you canít have that kind of customizability in-game.



What we're trying to do right now is develop a long-term roadmap, and the reason we're talking to players a lot is that we want to be sure you're all on board with what we're planning. The reason I'm not worried about local in this context is that it's a no-brainer that we need to do something, and "doing something about local" is assumed to have the support of the community provided it's something good. What we're more concerned about right now is what our next step should be after that, because we don't want "change local" to be the only thing about intel on our long-term plan.


if you do something about local, i absolve you of your $70 monocle, until you make ships available for $... i jest, but at least step 1 is clear, great job listening to the posters

a huge part of changing the intel system is making sure that ship attributes matter i9n terms of intellience, as of right now other than the ability to cloak and being nimble, there is no ship attribute that matters for gathering intelligence, which compared to how deep is in other areas, is down right silly. so step 2... revamp the scanner


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only