open All Channels
seplocked Assembly Hall
blankseplocked [Proposal] remove local in 0.0 and/or in low sec
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Casiella Truza
Ecliptic Rift

Posted - 2009.09.21 23:30:00 - [31]
 

Great idea as long as (a) constellation chat replaces it, and (b) directional scanner is beefed up.

Djana Libra
Caldari
Fallen Angel's
White Noise.
Posted - 2009.09.22 07:08:00 - [32]
 

Remove it everywhere or dont remove it at all.
Or at least change it to managed mode in empire.
This will make wardecs more interesting

Anah Karah
Drama Llamas
Posted - 2009.09.23 16:54:00 - [33]
 

no

Dav Varan
Posted - 2009.09.23 17:00:00 - [34]
 

WS > more dangerous than > 0.0 > more dangerous than > low-sec > more dangerous than High-sec.

I think things are better the way they are.

removing local from 0 and null would hand to much power to cloaky recons.

Going to the belts to mine/rat would be tantumount to suicide without local.

Saerynn
Lost Intentions
Posted - 2009.09.23 20:54:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: ShadowMaster
With the changes in Dominion remove local from 0.0 by default. Then when an alliance controls a system make it an upgrade, deploy something in system, gain access to the sensors from the stargates since you will apparently be paying for their upkeep anyways. If no one controls a system, no local, if some one does then they are the defender and can consider it an advantage.


I'd support something like this, but I'd expand it to include: ships entering a system by means other than a gate (WH, covert bridge) don't appear in local.

Yahrr
The Tuskers
Posted - 2009.09.24 19:56:00 - [36]
 

I think it's funny to see all the people crying carebear tears here. Both piwates and real bears keep crying about their low/null-sec going kaput. And all of them direct the starters and supporters of this topic towards the wormholes. You know where this idea started? Yup, down in the unknown.

Even more funny is that in the wormholes you actually see both pirates and carebears, all doing their thing. And there, people are not running around like headless chickens, but are making coordinated moves together with friends.
In the current low-sec people aren't even looking at their overview or scanner. They trust the info that local gives them: 2 scary pirates, 1 macro and 3 carebears in system... Only then they start scanning to link ship types to the names.

I would like to see local chat removed indeed. It would make the game more fun, more interesting and definitely more scary. Whether a system is empty or not, you should fly through it with the same caution. That Raven you have on scan... You should not know if it's a pirate or a carebear until you're right next to it!

Btw, the fact that a remove-local topic gets created almost every week says enough i think...

Dirty Wizard
Posted - 2009.09.24 21:32:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: Dirty Wizard on 24/09/2009 21:37:37
How many of these fail threads will you people create before you get the hint? Local isn't going to be removed from low and null sec. Get used to it.

Originally by: Yahrr

Btw, the fact that a remove-local topic gets created almost every week says enough i think...
Me and my corp could just as easily go out with alts and create daily threads that demand elves and magic be introduced into EvE. Rolling Eyes

Would that make the argument valid? Does that mean it's what the general playerbase in EvE wants?

The frequency of threads about one topic doesn't mean it's right.

Foolish Kate
Posted - 2009.09.25 08:39:00 - [38]
 

Carebear> What, you mean that I won't be able to afk mine whilst at work, and I'll have to stop leading a solitary hermit-like existence in an inherently social game in order to organise a proper mining op with gate scouts?!? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

Supporting making (low/null)sec local like W-Space local. CCP had planned to do this anyway, and they backtracked, presumably because like all other crazy people the taste of carebear tears is something other than sweet nectar to them. Looking at the scanner thread though (50+ pages and thousands of supports and no meaningful response from the CSM other than to use probes... wtf) I have a horrible suspicion that only the interests of carebears are represented atm - which given the certainty (I hope) that the CSM are not all carebears, makes me a sad panda Sad

In any case, the CSM should be telling CCP to get of their bums and implement a feature they were talking about a year ago.

Argonis Valentio
Valentio Industries
Posted - 2009.09.25 11:11:00 - [39]
 

Not supported, why?

In anticipation of Dominion, major alliances are already retreating from their space to conserve costs. Costs?

If you read the dev blogs one of the differences in the new expansion should be the introduction of a new sov ownership system, one in which YOU the player pay for all the benefits associated with a system. That includes the stargates that other players use! This means that the more stargates, the more you pay but not only that, resources will increase in systems where you pay for additional extras!

What's this mean? Massively reduce your empire to say 30-50 people per system (including alts etc, time zones of the players) where as most of space currently is only populated by either; no one but with moon mining, 3-5 people with moon mining or the exception of 20-50 people in the system. Removing local from 0.0 is simply not worth looking at until after this new expansion...period.

Simeon Whiteheaven
Posted - 2009.09.25 14:37:00 - [40]
 

No, local channel should stay as it is now.

xxxTRUSTxxx
Posted - 2009.09.25 16:22:00 - [41]
 

well the way i see it is as follows.

removing local would not be the threat a lot of pilots have stated in this thread.
what would it really do if local was gone ?

1: we'd have to use the ships onboard scanner. (it's not as nerfed as some of you make out)

2: we'd have to use scouts.

3: covert op ships are finaly truly covert.

4: system wide scanning with probes would become the norm.

5: fleets/squads would have to improve teamwork and communications.

6: security patrols would be a must.

7: no more smack talk.

i really don't see what the problem would be, shouldn't all fleets/squads be doing 1,2,4,5 & 6 anyway ?

oh yea, i forgot to take into account the lazy pilots who want it all handed to them on a plate.

change is a good thing, specialy if it improves gameplay like i believe removing local would.

supported.

Lubomir Penev
Dark Nexxus
S I L E N T.
Posted - 2009.09.25 17:11:00 - [42]
 

Originally by: Gaelan Lionhardt

Heavily benefits pirates and negatively affects everyone else.



Yeah nothing like entering a system, seeing 30 ships on scan, and locating them all one by one empty at a POS... Hugely benefiting pirates here...

Mynxee
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2009.09.26 01:33:00 - [43]
 

Originally by: Casiella Truza
Great idea as long as (a) constellation chat replaces it, and (b) directional scanner is beefed up.


This. Local as is in high sec is fine. I can think of all kinds of logical reasons in the context of New Eden why it might exist and be maintained as a service there. No Local in null sec and delayed in low sec (like in wormholes) would be ideal. Having spent some time in wormholes, I LIKE the idea of having to use tools and skill to find out who else is there.

Also, without all those server hits to populate Local chat data, maybe it would offset scanner hits by enough to give us our old d-scanner functionality back.

Kalissa
Sacred Templars
RED.OverLord
Posted - 2009.09.26 09:53:00 - [44]
 

Local in 0.0 needs to be changed yes, but it doesnt need to be removed. The main problem with local atm is it's used as the ultimate early warning system. I've done a hell of a lot of roaming in my time and I've seen it happen time and time again that the very MOMENT someone comes in local that people mining and ratting go cloaky cloaky or more often run to the pos in the system.

Local does have a purpose, as someone said before if your system is under attack you need to know the numbers against you, but at the time time local should not be a tool for people to avoid the risks of 0.0.

I'd say a fair compromise would be so lets say put a 60 second or so delay on local. Anyone who's ratting or NPC'ing who's doing it right and checking their scanner won't have a problem, but anyone who uses local to avoid the inherant dangers 0.0 is supposed to have will learn that surviving in 0.0 should take more than just looking at local and running to a pos the moment a neutral comes in the system.

Hun Jakuza
We Are So Troubled Everyone Runs Screaming
Posted - 2009.09.26 11:05:00 - [45]
 

No thx.
Or make scaneable cloaked ships too and end of 23/7 cloak if end of 23/7 intel too.

Mikayla Grey
Gallente
Posted - 2009.09.26 11:57:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: Mikayla Grey on 26/09/2009 11:58:06
No thanks. Would make cloaked ships incredibly overpowered and make ratting/mining a lot more boring. Go to wormholes if you want no local.

High sec does not need this buff.

Maxsim Goratiev
Gallente
Imperial Tau Syndicate
POD-SQUAD
Posted - 2009.09.26 12:08:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Argonis Valentio
Not supported, why?

In anticipation of Dominion, major alliances are already retreating from their space to conserve costs. Costs?

If you read the dev blogs one of the differences in the new expansion should be the introduction of a new sov ownership system, one in which YOU the player pay for all the benefits associated with a system. That includes the stargates that other players use! This means that the more stargates, the more you pay but not only that, resources will increase in systems where you pay for additional extras!

What's this mean? Massively reduce your empire to say 30-50 people per system (including alts etc, time zones of the players) where as most of space currently is only populated by either; no one but with moon mining, 3-5 people with moon mining or the exception of 20-50 people in the system. Removing local from 0.0 is simply not worth looking at until after this new expansion...period.

i agree

QwaarJet
Gallente
hirr
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2009.09.26 22:30:00 - [48]
 

Not supported at all. I'm getting rather tired of this issue being brought up tbh.

Nefal Tiris
Caldari
Posted - 2009.09.26 22:48:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: Nefal Tiris on 26/09/2009 22:55:43
i do support this idea, ive been thinking about it myself, ive been trying out piracy, and ive really been discouraged and frustrated when jumping in to a lowsec, watching system being emptyed a few seconds later cause ive been spotted in local, it just frustrating,

if you ask me, the eve universe is just waaaay too secure, the extend of concord is just bizarre


Pages: 1 [2]

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