Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Danton Marcellus
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 04:56:00 -
[31]
So what if alliances got it harder? There's nothing to support them carving out empires exceeding that of established states by camping a few bottlenecks.
Think a little and stop blindly worshipping power, thank you.
Convert Stations
|
Darken Two
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 06:22:00 -
[32]
Danton can you please talk sense or not talk at all. We arent discussing politics on this thread, but game mechanics.
If you have nothing to say then dont post rubbish.
Ps. You are an established anti alliance forum troll and I dont have a problem with that. But please keep your paranoic views on the appropriate threads.
Why dont you just DIE DIE DIE !!!!
|
Mr nStuff
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 07:05:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Malvada this forum is FOR ideas, sweetie. why don't you come up with some of your own instead of calling the ideas of other players "dumb", k?
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=75992
Still a dumb idea though.
5 R&D Agents, 10months, Zero BPO Offers.. Onboard navigational [Planetary Avoidance] computer.
My account will be suspended at the end of the current play period. Expires on 19. September 2004 |
Xelios
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 09:10:00 -
[34]
No thanks, if anything we need the local to display more information about people in the system. Ie what corp they're in, their status toward you, that kind of thing.
Local is fine now. 0.0 is a huge place and it's very easy for someone to hide in it. People still have to physically travel to the system you're in to see who it is that's there, and even then you'd be extremely lucky to catch that person. I don't see any reason to get rid of the local chat.
|
StiZum Hilidii
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 11:02:00 -
[35]
totally agree remove local
^carebear mass dude above me says that we need it to check info on them if they are hostile...heres an idea get some balls warp to the gate and have a look see ...if they are orange or red run like the wind if they aint take your chances and realise
your in 0.0 and no one can hear you scream STAN
FACTA NON VERBA |
Darken Two
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 12:28:00 -
[36]
I agree with Xelios, totally dumb idea. I dont even wanna imagine how Im gonna hunt someone down if I cant see whos in system. Removing local would be more carebear than not removing it. All in all just another idea couched as pretty words so people can mine in low sec without being caught and also to help people who wanna avoid combat that much more. If you go to low sec you get seen and you get shot so people should just deal withit already instead of whining.
Why dont you just DIE DIE DIE !!!!
|
StiZum Hilidii
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 13:44:00 -
[37]
im not saying remove the map and the dots for me its like this remove local and keep map blobs or keep local and remove map blobs
STAN
FACTA NON VERBA |
Darken Two
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 14:04:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Darken Two on 26/04/2004 14:07:09 K stizum think about it this way.
lets say I **** you off ingame and you wanna hunt my ass down. And lets say you know I hang around a certain system in lets say tribute or pure blind. What happens next .
You have the option of turning up at the system but no way of knowing if I was there. Supossing by some miracle we find out we are both in the same system and I decide to bolt how are you ever going to find me cos each system is gonna ahve 1-6 jumpgates. Makes it a lot more frustrating and combat would be too easily avoided.
And lets face it the map is often bugged. Yea it can show blobs but when it comes to showing 1-3players it is often inaccurate in its updating.
I forsee a hellish future without local.
Ps. removing map blobs dont seem like a bad idea at all. Makes combat more likely.
Why dont you just DIE DIE DIE !!!!
|
Imhotep Wade
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 15:48:00 -
[39]
I think this gives us another opportunity for specialization.
Noone is seen in local unless;
a. they talk in corp or local, and shows name, icon and all. b. or hunter has detection module which can see all of local
if you are detected by a detection module, you should receive warning from security services in high sec systems. low sec systems give no warning of detection.
Also, high sec systems announce jump events to all. Lower sec systems do not announce jump events.
This gives the advantage to the one most prepared for clandestine activity.
|
Maximo Prime
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 16:18:00 -
[40]
Make system monopolies illegal!!
|
|
YuuKnow
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 17:28:00 -
[41]
Edited by: YuuKnow on 01/05/2004 04:17:23 Edited by: YuuKnow on 26/04/2004 18:22:04
Edited, changed my mind
|
Shimatu
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 18:49:00 -
[42]
i think removing local is a stupid idea tbh, for the reasons outlines above. also, people seem to think that defending alliance space is easy to do. it isnt. without sentry guns or anything, its a full time job just to look after an area as it is now. And if everyone wants to get all technical about "well, in real life you wouldnt have to transmit who you were", this isnt real life.
oh, to the previous poster, yes they did have a way to get you: they could have a) not only had 2 ships vs 9, and b)had the gate camper jump through after you, and scramble one of you before you escaped.
as a side note, i cant wait for the warp-to-ship frigs and mobile warp disruptor things :)
3-I's T2 sales can be found HERE
|
Malvada
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 19:53:00 -
[43]
playing without Local in 0.0 would just mean having to actually SCAN the system you're in to detect other pilots. i also think that scanning for a ship shouldn't just reveal the type of ship and the ship's name. people can change a ship name at the drop of a hat. the info should include the corp ticker (or none at all in the case of a freelancer) just like the one you see next to their name when you see them in space. this way, you'd know whether it was an enemy or not hanging out in that belt over there.
likewise, your prey would also have to be actively scanning the system like a paranoid freak to detect YOU. the limit of the range scanner (found by typing 1 and then zeros until the field is full, and then clicking Scan) is the same on all ships, so if you can see them, they can see you.
the prey could also have set up proximity sensors that warn them when a ship comes through the gate they've anchored one near.
the possibilities are endless, but it all comes down to one thing: make the game more fun. right now, tactical fleet movements in 0.0 are impossible. everyone knows you're coming and just boogies on out. everyone has what is effectively the ultimate spy network of information absolutely for free, with no effort.
whining about how hard it is to patrol your space, Alliances? how about not trying to grab up quite so MUCH space then? is there a problem with occupying less space, and just actively patroling your new, smaller borders? when you don't have the manpower to patrol your territory, you reduce your territory. seems simple enough.
i think there should be more Alliances out in 0.0, more corps, a denser player population. i think they should lay claim to small, intensely patrolled areas, and the vast spaces inbetween would be no-man's land, free for all to mine and hunt and pirate in, with Alliance territories being small islands of security that members of that Alliance can breath a little easier in.
the Alliances like to make fun of all the "sad little carebears" hiding in Empire space, but what it really comes down to is that there is no where to go in 0.0 that these pilots aren't afraid of being singled out and hunted down by an Alliance patrol and killed merely for "daring" to set foot in their territory! what hope do these pilots have if you can see them coming? if you KNOW they're there?!
now, it's not to say that suddenly being blind on the map and Local wouldn't be supplemented with hardware and skills. i think players should have to work and pay for their surveilance, not just have it completely for free by default as a result of the game design. Alliances should have to set up sensor buoys, which can in turn be destroyed by those that discover them and don't wish to be seen.
please tell me that some of you ney-sayers out there can see how this would make the game more fun, introduce more strategy into the game. you claim you want more pvp, but aren't willing to welcome a change that would effectively bring more players out into 0.0 to fight with...
Viceroy > so whats the problem? the hlynsiman > a former corp member of mine stole some money of me and i need it back Viceroy > did you earn the money by commiting terrorist acts? the hlynsiman > no by mining Viceroy > terrorist mining? |
YuuKnow
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 21:22:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Shimatu
oh, to the previous poster, yes they did have a way to get you: they could have a) not only had 2 ships vs 9, and b)had the gate camper jump through after you, and scramble one of you before you escaped.
Naw, they wouldn't have touched us even if they had 20 bs. As far and jumping through and warp scrambling us, we all had 2 WCS apiece and had instajumps lined up all the way back to empire.
|
Kaylana Syi
|
Posted - 2004.04.26 21:57:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 26/04/2004 21:59:06 Edited by: Kaylana Syi on 26/04/2004 21:58:37
Originally by: Ithildin
1. Alliances, those several players who really keep the game going and developing, will have an insanely difficult time patroling their space. - Already it's harder than some people think. It's not just look at map
At some point you have to ask yourself... do these alliances have the right to call it THEIR space. With Local in or out, Alliances cannot keep a section of space for 23 hours straight. Depending on how much patience and forethought on one's part... a solo pilot can set up shop to do major damage to any alliance. So... If I claim a part of space and defend it from alliances... is it MINE? I am not talking about what m0o does... I am talking real deal, hardcore chaos. Its hard for them to do it now... you just don't hear about it on the forums except through people asking "what if" and asking for feedback. So lets all keep this thread polite.
My vote : it doesn't matter pvp needs to be fixed first. -------------------- The Nest
|
JGR Guinevere
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 00:34:00 -
[46]
I think you all are missing one detail about seeing who is in local. They got there by using the jump gate. The gate always knows who is and isnt in the system. Its only logical to assume your ship is or could be in contact with the gates all the times.
Besides who truely wins if the local channel is removed. Certainly not the newer or inexperienced player. And just because someone has 12 months in game doenst mean they are experienced. The only winners of this would be the pirates. It would be just one more tool for them to used for ganking.
It has gotten to the point where gate camping is not as easy as it once was nor as fun. Players have wised up and found ways to circumvent these blockades and even push the gate campers out of systems. Now the pirates want to complain that pvp has diminished. To fix it they want to again make it more difficult for the less agressive players to explore the universe. Removing the local channel and map functions would certainly do just that.
I believe those features put the pirate and non-pirate on a level playing field and should remain at least in some form. Without them we would spend all our time mashing the paranoia button (scan button) every 10 seconds. I dont know about you but more clicking is just more clicking. I really dont see the need to wear out my mouse any faster. There has to be a better solution than removing these features. Or mabey a compromise is in order.
Mabey for not being able to see every ship movement in the entire universe we get to jump into a system at the gate and not 15km-20km from it. Mabey for the lack of showing up in local channels frigs and elite frigs can only install 1 mwd. There has to be a balance of some kind. You cant make pvp unescapable. Not every player wants to pvp non stop all the time. If it becomes impossible for these players to to enter 0.0 space, without at least a small amount of confidence, they will dislike it and not play any longer. This of course means less money in CCP pockets. Eve is not just a PVP playground. If it was they would call it UnREAL Tournament:Galaxy Arena.
|
Darken Two
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 00:49:00 -
[47]
I love it how the previous poster has just generalised the eve community as pirate and non pirate.
Essentially meanining that anyone with a gun is a pirate and anyone without is not.
Removing local would be bad for anyone wanting PvP. Removing map blobs would benefit anyone wanting PvP.
As for alliances they are a part of the game and as such were meant to be. No amount of screamining on the forums is going to change that.
I love it when some people just rant on about things without actually sparing a moment to think.
Why dont you just DIE DIE DIE !!!!
|
YuuKnow
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 02:24:00 -
[48]
Edited by: YuuKnow on 01/05/2004 04:17:48 edit, changed my mind
|
illuminati
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 06:17:00 -
[49]
I requested "warp to" 7 months ago, still not in
1 Chasing and hunting people in this game sucks 2 Local channel makes it suck a bit less 3 Miner-griefers now want something to mine-grief more easily and after that, they can run and hide more easily thus making a military might even more worthless b running and hiding even more bulletproof c hunting people in this game suck even more
This is a min0r-grief0r-only idea, not good for chatting, not good for alliance tactics and warfare, not good for deepspace action at all, except same-old hit-n-run.
Furthermore, jesus christ, shorten the posts people!
|
Etoile Chercheur
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 08:19:00 -
[50]
Originally by: illuminati I requested "warp to" 7 months ago, still not in
1 Chasing and hunting people in this game sucks 2 Local channel makes it suck a bit less 3 Miner-griefers now want something to mine-grief more easily and after that, they can run and hide more easily thus making a military might even more worthless b running and hiding even more bulletproof c hunting people in this game suck even more
This is a min0r-grief0r-only idea, not good for chatting, not good for alliance tactics and warfare, not good for deepspace action at all, except same-old hit-n-run.
Furthermore, jesus christ, shorten the posts people!
how do you figure it's only good for griefers? with Local as is, everyone knows who's in the system. with Local nerfed a bit not to show everyone in the system involuntarily, pirates and pkers would have to scan the system, search every belt, all just to find someone to mess with. how is this easier? seems to be a bit harder than checking the Local channel to see if there are any potential targets... the absence of a chatters list in Local would work both ways. sure, pirates could hide. but so can you. a huge plus would be that pirates would no longer know to instantly warp and dock the moment some retribution comes their way!
and as for it not being good for deep-space tactics, would you care to qualify your statement with some explanation of just what you mean? as it stands, alliance fleet movements are POINTLESS. any time you move a huge fleet into the system, the enemy instantly knows you're there! suprise attacks are impossible.
Midshipman Etoile Chercheur - Logistics Division (M&T) | Hadean Drive Yards
|
|
Torvus Jay
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 08:27:00 -
[51]
Quote: This is a min0r-grief0r-only idea, not good for chatting, not good for alliance tactics and warfare, not good for deepspace action at all, except same-old hit-n-run.
you mean watch pilots in space as the 2 blobs approach eachother stop and begin talking smack until everyone get bored and logs off.
Yeah we better keep that great tactical part of the game. ______________
Aim careful, and look the devil in the eye. |
Darken Two
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 10:11:00 -
[52]
There are both benefits in removing local for certain tactics but a lot of disadvantages for a majority of others.
I could elaborate but this thread is getting way too long already.
Local is necessary. Map blobs on the other hand are a problem.
Without local alliances and also anyone chasing anyone else will have an insanely hard time doing so. And lets face it it will make miners very very nervous and people will just quit mining in low sec.
ok Im done lack of sleep is making my brain turn to mush.
Why dont you just DIE DIE DIE !!!!
|
Malvada
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 10:29:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Darken Two There are both benefits in removing local for certain tactics but a lot of disadvantages for a majority of others.
I could elaborate but this thread is getting way too long already.
Local is necessary. Map blobs on the other hand are a problem.
Without local alliances and also anyone chasing anyone else will have an insanely hard time doing so. And lets face it it will make miners very very nervous and people will just quit mining in low sec.
i would think that miners would be braver about heading out into 0.0, seeing as how they'd be much harder to find...
Quote: ok Im done lack of sleep is making my brain turn to mush.
your brain's always that way. i can tell by your posts.
(i couldn't resist. you left yourself wide open for that one.)
Viceroy > so whats the problem? the hlynsiman > a former corp member of mine stole some money of me and i need it back Viceroy > did you earn the money by commiting terrorist acts? the hlynsiman > no by mining Viceroy > terrorist mining? |
illuminati
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 11:11:00 -
[54]
Quote: i would think that miners would be braver about heading out into 0.0, seeing as how they'd be much harder to find...
Yeah, I wonder where you can find a miner in space, tough one!
Quote: pirates would no longer know to instantly warp and dock the moment some retribution comes their way!
Yeah, 40 "unknown signatures" entering system wouldnt be much of a hint.
Quote: you mean watch pilots in space as the 2 blobs approach eachother stop and begin talking smack until everyone get bored and logs off.
You solve that by removing "pilots in space" from map which, imo, is a MUST in 0.0 but you present it like this "no-local" would fix that? No local would not solve that problem, ever.
Quote: as it stands, alliance fleet movements are POINTLESS
Yeah, so? Would there be alot more point to them if there was no local? The problem is "warp to within x km" which is DIRELY needed but local again, isnt related to that at all.
|
Darken Two
|
Posted - 2004.04.27 11:18:00 -
[55]
Malvada Im pretty sure anyone with nothing constructive to say like yourself should not make judgements on my intellect.
You dont know me so dont presume I'll take your jibes as a joke.
I will now try to explain why local is necessary through a series of scenarios. Listen if you care, **** off if you dont.
Taking a pirates perspective and supposing I were in g roup with other combat ships and I jumped into a system with a few ppl. Now if the local didnt exist or even if it did Id still attack becos I can. This can also be applied to alliance fleets that are invading territory.
Taking a miners perspective, if I were in 0.0 and mining outside of my own alliance territory, I would be instantly suspicious if new people turned up in a systema nd I had no way of identifying them. This would mean I would safespot everytime I saw someone enter the system. It might be ok for a short period of time but in teh long run its just nerve wracking and Id prolly go mine in 0.5 systems.
For the alliance patrol people. If I was an alliance member patrolling my alliances territory and couldnt identify people in a system or for that matter chase intruders it would make it much more tedious than it already is.
Not to mention difficulties for bounty hunters, explorers etc.
Im done. Listed below are a number of standard responses I have seen so far if you are planning to post one of them dont bother:
1) Darken Two you're a coward 2) Darken Two you're a pirate 3) Darken Two you're an Alliance ***** 4) Darken Two you're a griefer 5) Darken Two you're a brainless moron 6) Darken Two you're a spammer 7) Darken Two you smell like old ppl
Thank you all and have a good day.
Why dont you just DIE DIE DIE !!!!
|
Schizophrenia
|
Posted - 2004.04.28 13:55:00 -
[56]
Edited by: Schizophrenia on 28/04/2004 13:56:11
Originally by: YuuKnow
However, iirc, other changes are in the works that could also possibly remedy this one-sideness. Mobile warp distruptors could potentially counter instajumps, and elite frigates that can warp to safespots may represent a counter to safespots. If these are already in the works, and if they work correctly, they may be the solution and getting rid of local may be unecessary.
hmmmmm, I have to agree. If the "warp-to" and/or warp distruptors work then this "not-having-local" thing would be uneccesary. It would still make gameplay a lot funner though.
|
Alberto
|
Posted - 2004.04.28 16:30:00 -
[57]
Remove Local! ****ing off society one dumba$$ at a time |
JGR Guinevere
|
Posted - 2004.04.28 20:22:00 -
[58]
Darken Two Quote: I love it how the previous poster has just generalised the eve community as pirate and non pirate.
Your right there are many rolls in EVE however, for the sake of arguement, there are really only 2 types of players. The pirate and the non-pirate. If your a pirate stand up and be proud. If your a non-pirate do the same but your either on or the other. There is no middle ground there. You could say that some of the pirate hunters are indeed pirates because they are griefing the pirates in a way. I would say pvp'er and non-pvp'er but that would be silly as no matter how you want to play the game you will be involved in pvp eventually in one manner or another. So we are all pvp'ing.
Malvada Quote: would think that miners would be braver about heading out into 0.0, seeing as how they'd be much harder to find...
I dont believe this to be a true statement. This puts alot of extra work on the miners end to insure he is in a safe area. Where as the pirate has the advantage of just popping in for a quick gank. Reguardless of weather or not the pirate knows there is anyone in the system or not it is far easier for the pirate to scan around doing their pirating than it is for a miner to do the same and mine at the same time.
Anyway, this thread is at least half pointless anyway. Local channel is not going anywhere because the developers know the headache it will cause then and the unbalance it will cause for the players. The map blob is another issue and I agree that something should probably change. However, if I were an agressive force and I knew that a big blob would show up on a map I would come up with a tatic to work around that.
1) Move fewer ships at a time and more slowly in areas that it will show up. 2) Not everyone takes the same route. 3) Move ships a day or three before. 4) Prepair stations for supply lines close to the front lines. 4) Disguise the attack by purposely making distraction blobs while doing the previous 4. 5) Posably even hire out a corp to run around in shuttles to blob up the map on purpose.
Just means you cant wage war all the way across the galaxy on a moments notice. A well planned raid will always be the most effective.
|
Megan Ryder
|
Posted - 2004.04.29 12:17:00 -
[59]
i've not been into 0.0 space yet, i'm still a youngster evewise, but to me it sound like a really good idea.
I'm also sure that any objections plp have could be countered by new and interesting skills and items like Warp Signature Analysis for tracking peeps in space. Also, i'm not sure about the covert frigs specs, but isn't that partly their intent?
Megan
|
Mr nStuff
|
Posted - 2004.04.29 18:32:00 -
[60]
I don't know why you guys bother going on about this stupid idea.
1) CCP will never remove local chat. (so why bother with this) 2) It doesn't help pirates anymore than it hurts them. 3) It doesn't help carebears anymore than it hurts them.
It helps no one, in no way..
The only thing to result from such a stupid fantasy of an idea would be the loss of communication. It would create a more anti-social environment.
PS. Don't private message me in-game. It's annoying.
5 R&D Agents, 10months, Zero BPO Offers.. Onboard navigational [Planetary Avoidance] computer.
My account will be suspended at the end of the current play period. Expires on 19. September 2004 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |