We've heard this before. Every Fanfest, every final weekend of the Alliance Tournament, CCP Soundwave trots out the idea of removing local as an intel source, similar to how local works for wormhole space. He's been doing this for at least two years, maybe longer, but CCP has made not a single move in this direction.
Rhavas recently made a post, his 100th, about how to remove local as intel, and what additional components would need to be added to put intel gathering into the player's domain. It's a good post. He goes into a lot of detail. A crap tonne of new modules, new mechanics. The kit and kaboodle, plus some.
For my 500th post, I talk about how I think CCP can get rid of local. I approach this differently than Rhavas, though. I like to look for solutions within the game, by utilizing what already exists, and assuming that modifications to those existing frameworks would be less time intensive for CCP. (That may not be the case, but only CCP knows how modifiable and extensible their systems are.)
Local as Intel
Local chat would behave in lowsec and nullsec as it does in wormhole space. You do not appear, until you speak.(Some alternative ideas: low/null local still lists total number of people in system, without showing exactly who. Or remove local altogether in favour of immediate-updated constellation chat.)
In highsec, local would continue to act as is. Call it the CONCORD rule, if you need a roleplay reason for this. CONCORD is all knowing and that information is available to everyone in highsec. It is the benefit and downside to living in highsec. You know everyone who in system with you, and everyone in system knows you're there.
The Directional Scanner
With intel gone, we need a new source of discovering intel. I propose a large extension to directional scanning functionality.First, allow us to create multiple d-scanning tabs. (CCP can limit this to five, as they do with the overview, if they wish.)
Second, each tab would have its own filter and scanning distance properties, similar to the overview tab filters, but the directional scanner is no longer tied to the active overview tab.
Third, the directional scanner would have to include all-new data fields. Character name. Character affiliation. Standings icons (similar to the icon column on the overview.) These new fields wouldn't be available all the time, but in certain situations (see Active and Passive Pinging below.)
These filters can be imported and exported, so that alliances can create pre-made filters for their members.
Skill: Directional Scanning
A new skill called Directional Scanning would be available, under the Electronics section. It should be an 8x skill (the best scouts should require an investment in time.)Anyone can d-scan without the Directional Scanning skill, but their scans are limited to passive pinging only (see below), and a maximum distance of 10AU.
Every rank of Directional Scanning increases the maximum scanning range by 5AU. So, someone with Directional Scanning V could scan up to 35AU distance. This, of course, means that CCP would need to find a solution to the 232 km d-scan limitation, something I'm sure they're capable of accomplishing.
Active and Passive Pinging
If you do not have Directional Scanning trained, you are limited to only passive directional scanning.Passive scanning allows you to scan without notifying any players that you are scanning. The information you receive is reduced, limited to ship name and type (the current functionality of d-scanning.)
Active scanning notifies players that they've been scanned (perhaps an active scanning icon appears above their HUD for six seconds, and maybe there's a muted audio alert as well.) Active scanning gives an increased amount of information, ship name and type, as well as character name, character affiliation, and the standings icon. Potentially it could give information related to current crimewatch status (suspect flagging, etc.)
Every directional scanning tab has two buttons. One for passive scan and another for active scan. (Of course, the active scan button is unavailable to people who have Directional Scanning untrained.)
Active scanning does not always notify a player that they are being scanned. If the scanned player has a Directional Scanning skill at a lower rank than the player scanning, then they do not receive the active ping notification.
Thoughts?
That's about it for the idea. Granted, it is far simpler than Rhavas' idea, but perhaps it's more attractive to CCP due to it using existing game components, and having a lower development cost. It can certainly be extended and expanded upon in simple ways to solve any weaknesses that might crop up.As always, interested in reading your thoughts.
Also see the follow-up post: More Local.
I tend to like any idea that is about local removal. Yours, a solid and simple idea, but brace yourself, you will be flamed flamed by "Local Lovers".
ReplyDeleteI even think the local removal is one of the "Jesus" features that CCP has in mind in case shit hits the fan, I mean if subscriptions drop significantly.
could scan up to 35AU distance
ReplyDeleteNope. D-scan has to remain limited to around 15 AU, so that w-spacers have some hope of hiding in most systems, either when entering through a wormhole or decloaking to launch probes.
The directional scanner isn't only used for hunting people. It is used to help keep people safe. Making it more broadly stronger makes people safer.
^This.
DeleteThat said, I think that low sec should have a system beacon instead of local that tells you whom is in system. If its a pocket... too bad. We already see gateguns in low sec, this sort of intel should be found here too.
In addition to this, having a 'ping' notification that pointedly puts newer players at a disadvantage in the primary 'soft' skill of pvp(Moreso in WH than in low or nullsec), seems would make this game significantly less fun for newer solo pvp players, but paticularly low sec pirates.
To help even things out they should also allow you to light covop cyno in worm hole space
DeleteHow about NO!
DeleteNullsec dwellers should not have easy access when people are removing their farming colonies from w-space. Not a single W-space dwelling alliance have numbers to counter null alliances.
My biggest issue with the removal of local is that it would in my opinion make life in null and lowsec harder for the people that are trying to make a living there by actually USING the space. (as opposed to waiting for tech handouts or highsec missioning and stuff like that)
ReplyDeleteThis should be addressed before removing this layer of security, otherwise the removal of local will probably result in even more folks doing their iskmaking in highsec.
Yeah, its almost like Poetic's trying to force everyone out of nullsec.
DeleteI agree with the above poster, Ya Huei. At the moment you only see people use the space when they know the system is empty, and know that nearby systems are empty, AKA intel channels. If you remove local, the power swings in favour of roaming raiders, which is good in the sense that power blocks have to dedicate players and resources observing entries into their territory, but worry miners and ratters to a higher degree. This could be solved by further increasing the isl gain of null. I believe this will bring new life to null, through small corporations and alliances being able to slip through the cracks and make profit under the noses of the power blocks.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is this...
ReplyDeleteImagine you are a miner, or a belt ratter in nullsec. Anyone out there making a living. You're 100% alert. 100% alert. Not AFK, not even semi afk, you are 100% alert.
You're dead.
You have no chance of saving yourself.
The only thing you can do is go mine or rat (mission run) in high sec. In low or null you are dead and there is nothing you can do about it.
Maybe, but there's no balance at the moment either, cause you are safe 100% of the time if you are not AFK the hunter have 0% chance of catching you sucking on poor rocks.
DeleteReward meet Risk.
DeleteBest ores highest risk. Best rats, highest risk.
As a note, we live this life in WH space for years for lower rewards.
Time to harden up, null seccers, and fly in true null sec
I have lived in high, low, null and wh's. Why do WH'ers weigh in on taking down the local in a space they dont fly in? I will gladly give the null sec local away to make wh'ers happy if you agree to cyno lighting in ur space. My AFK cloaky would love nothing more than to camp your hole just to cyno in some fun while u rat.
DeleteI wouldn't say hunters have a 0% chance. I was mining in a null system. There was a WH open in a neighbor system. Small fleet came through, we all docked up. Unknown to us, they scanned out all the grav sites and left. We waiting an hour before going back to mining. The raiders sent a Sabre through the WH, directly to our system and right into the grav site to drop a bubble on our mining fleet. It was so fast, the bubble was up before alliance intel reported a hostile in the next system. Smart hunters find a way...
DeleteI do agree that reward should meet risk. But there is such a thing as too much risk. Make nullsec like a kinda like a WH with no local, yet still WITH cloaky cynos, and watch it empty out. You can hope that will increase small gang fights, but anyone dealing with nullsec knows that already empty systems and constellations will become empty regions. But the talk of making nullsec like w-space is one-sided. You want to take away local from nullsec without giving w-space the gift of cynos. I could live without local in nullsec and just use dscan IF you also remove the ability for a cloaked ship to appear and drop a HIC on my fleet. You see, in w-space, there is no single ship that can appear out of nowhere and trap your whole fleet. Make w-space cynoable and THEN see if WHers are as tough as they think.
For good or for ill, it would pretty much nerf tracking enemy fleets or gangs via nullsec intel channels. Close encounters would be the only way to identify hostiles.
ReplyDeleteIn w-space we mostly try hide our numbers/fleet comp from the enemy and everybody who is out there for pew fun, that leads leads to most epic fights and best time ever had in EvE.
DeleteAlways knowing what you will face tend to lead to massive blue balling, especially in null sec...
"Close encounters would be the only way to identify hostiles."
DeleteI tend to think that's a good thing. Having lived in null for almost a year, local + intel channels make it WAAAYYY too easy to avoid hostiles, either by docking up, safe + cloak, logging, whatever.
Then again, I've never argued with a removed or "WH-mode" local, just a delayed one, to give fast nano gangs the chance to slip in potentially undetected, provided they can cross systems in <3 mins, after which point they appear in local -- then again, sword cuts both ways, the small gang won't see the people currently in local until after 3 mins elapse. So you only really have enough time to jump in, warp, jump out, or you'll show up to everyone.
Of course, having pickets or regular patrols of your own, or even just putting a cloaky char on a gate grid would give you the intel you seek immediately, and likewise would make good bubble placement and use near "border" systems a "best practice" to keep people in systems long enough for them to show up in local.
You say you like solutions that use already existing mechanics yet you completely ignored scan probes.
ReplyDeleteI live in a WH and in null. Wormhole dwellers already have to deal with making a living without local and have developed procedures to maximize early hostile detection. Not everyone uses those procedures (for various reasons, good and bad), but that's the risk and reward bit.
ReplyDeleteI would have no problem with local being removed completely from nullsec (i.e. turned into the equivalent of wormhole local). Yeah, it is nerve-wracking the first few times you're out in space not knowing if you're going to be jumped or not, but you get used to it. Hell, you even start getting lazy after a while to the point where you don't even worry about it :)
Who knows, it might even make it easier to get more people in to nullsec. How many players of the CFC/HBC would be willing to do standing patrols 24/7? Certainly not enough to control the space they now own. I could see alliances consolidating the amount of space they own so that they can keep tabs on what's going on - sentries sitting on gates/using d-scan regularly, etc. Just like the wormhole folks already do :)
I want cyno's in wh's. Worm Hole livers have too much security with the ability to keep their systems isolated. Give me a cyno and watch your POS'es burn!
Deletewh mass limitations are a big part of the fun in wh's
DeleteYou are welcome to try and invade on the same terms as we live inside wh.
Learn logistics, cyno in all the shit is no art, its just we have more isk and people and stomp you.
There's only one problem with that, and that is that CCP has stated w-space is located beyond jump range of normal space. You'd have to completely reset the concept of w-space in order to make cynos work there.
DeleteOn the plus side, it would mean being able to jump clone in and out without having to worry about scanning down entrances, no one would have to worry about getting trapped in a hole any longer due to the entrance collapsing, and the worries about what size of ship can get into which hole would be gone, too. Of course, that would mean w-space folks could hold sov and gain bounties on sleepers, plus have access to markets, etc.
Be careful what you wish for.
As I stated, I live in null and w-space. I know very well the kind of impact this would have on nullsec and I'd be happy for it. It would make my life in null a lot harder. It might even mean the death of my alliance. So be it. The point is, removing local for nullsec makes sense, both as game design and from a lore point of view.
Nullsec isn't supposed to be an arguable safer version of highsec.
To address another issue, for those that don't like the removing the chat feature, all the proposals I've seen are merely to make low and null local like w-space local. You can still chat if you want to.
Auto-refresh (30 secs? Reduced via skill?) on scan would be a nice addition if local gets removed. As it stands right now, the scan button gets more mouse presses than any other thing in game.
ReplyDeleteWhy am I paying for a TCU? A TCU links your system to Concord. NullSec is lawless, but there's still a Concord link. Why am I paying Sov Bills? Just for a bonus to my Tower's fuel consumption really?
ReplyDeleteWormholes are unknown space, you can't anchor TCU's IHUBS, None of that. It's a different aspect of the Game.
Hmmm...perhaps there could be an anchorable scanning sov structure that could warn people of local changes in their home space.
ReplyDeleteImho there's a opportunity in removing Local. IF you physically inhabit a system/pocket/constellation you would, naturally, have a better understanding of who and what are there. You can find multiple RP reasons for this.
ReplyDeleteLet's say Fweddit decides to claim DAL as their own. The system is flipped and they work their way to Lvl V. This is their base. It's natural that they can deploy satellites/drones/beacons, whatever, would be able to track movement of ships. These beacons could be set-up near gates in Lvl V systems (or null sec equiv). They can be destroyed by cloaky hackers with good scanning skills (insert Mission Impossible theme music here) and a small explosive device that would have to be set on the beacon by said hacker.
Once out of beacon range (anywhere betw 2 - 15 AU) the interloper would disappear off local scan.
The hinging thing here is that the system has to be occupied, around the clock by the same alliance/corp. This would have to hold true for all systems. If there isn't a station in system, then you can't put up the beacons as the beacons themselves wouldn't have the support they need to operate in empty space.
This would accomplish much of what we all want. We don't, necessarily, want complete security but if we have taken the time and trouble to physically move to a system we want some benefit from that. It also allows the alliance/corp miners some sense of security for as long as they keep their eyes on local. If they don't stay on their toes then they are at fault, but they are, otherwise, as safe as they are going to get without an armed escort at all times.
Lore wise local is a registration with the local authorities, right? So why not just let whoever holds SOV decide if they want local to be on or off?
ReplyDeleteIt seems to be the best way for people to get what they want. Some people think nullsec will die if it becomes like WH, some WH people just laugh, but then WH people probably will be worried if the feel of the game that they're used to now are changed by a new uber-scanner.
IMO the existence of "local" as we now know it should depend upon the upgraded status of the system. For instance - there could be an orbital beacon similar to a poco somewhere in system. In high sec this beacon would be installed and maintained by concord. In lowsec and null, the beacon would have to be installed and maintained (fueled) by the residents. Ofc such a beacon could be destroyed rendering local out of commission for periods of time.
ReplyDeletethats the biggest pile of crap i've read in quite a while on your blog! local, the only possibility for eve players to directly interact with each other while being in the same system and not in the same (private, corp, whatever) chat channel, being stripped of this feature? look at other mmorpgs, NO GAME out there without a 'local' variant to chat with each other! sure, in eve being in local means being in the system so it's also a form of information. but if you and others don't like the idea of others seeing you in local, DON'T FLY IN THAT SYSTEM. it's really that simple.
ReplyDeleteas for that d-scan skill idea, why not buff dscan out of it's current state without adding any skill reqs to scan effectively? that's just another idea to drive away noobs. oh i forgot, why don't you move to WH space at all? any thought of that?
I don't know what local channels you reside in, but I submit that the content most players see day-to-day in Local consists mostly of 'gf's, epeen waving, and general shitting up of the channel. Meaningful content? Little, if any.
DeleteBesides, if you read more closely, the proposal isn't to eliminate it ("being stripped of this feature" as you put it), but to not appear in the channel until you speak. BIG difference.
Well, I was kinda disappointed with the Local window. I was mainly playing Combat flight simulation games as a fighter-bomber role or SEAD(attacking enemy anti-air facility prior to friendly bombers ingress to the target area.) These roles can be simplified to intel fight against enemy SAM radar officers(AI though). But if they have a Local chat channel which can detect your presence on sight, nothing like low alt high speed(often as low as a few tens of feet running .9 Mach range) or flying an expensive stealth fighter obsolete.
ReplyDeleteAlso, my best space sim experience is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zErRIQKV7Q8
Would anything like this be possible with current local chat system? doh... I thought EvE would be more 'realistic'...
So the new d-scan will either be like "local channel", or like another "overview" right? everyone will keep it open for all the time. Guess a better GUI is needed
ReplyDeleteat that point we would have come full circle - overview started out as a more powerful replacement for the old auto-scanner.
DeleteIf they did this I'd like a bit more depth. How about anchorable items that do an active ping every few seconds that you see when you're in the same system. This would let a player place a few items at gates to gather intel on the system as a whole. However, cloakies can make it between the pings and still hide and enemies can destroy the objects to hide further incursions.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing I'd like to see is a change to how angle is handled. If we're limiting our scanners to a very small amount of space they should be able to scan much more quickly than the entirety of space.
If it's based on the *volume* scanned a 5 degree cone corresponds to roughly 1/500th of a sphere. So scanning a 5 degree cone gives you instantaneous information (1/10th second) while a 360 degree sweep takes 50 seconds.
But, that starts going in the direction of more work and I'd rather see a simple solution as you've outlined implemented more quickly than something needlessly complex.
Im all for removing local from Nullsec. Once that's done though Wormholes will have to be fixed to compensate, preferably by removing POSs and static wormhholes. That way we can go back to wormholes being about exploration instead of colonization.
ReplyDeleteI would love to see the death of Local as an intel source.
ReplyDeleteIt would make botting, zero risk farming, and general null sec life harder.
That means the big null alliances would lose a lot of members and small scale PVP would become MUCH more fun and active. Both those things are great, but as time goes by I see EVE moving towards Mega Alliances and Mega Lag Blob Battles.
But if this did happen I would be very happy.
It sounds like you're thinking about dscan as something like RL submarine warfare, with active (sonar) and passive (hydrophone) detection. What you're missing though is that sonar doesn't just let the enemy know they've been pinged, it also tells them exactly where YOU are. In EVE, this would mean an active scan would need to place you on someone else's dscan as soon as you find them, whether they're "actively" looking for you or not. If it were like submarine detection, a passive scan would be like the dscan we have now, whereas an active scan would give a warpable location in BOTH directions.
ReplyDeleteWhat I'm really not crazy about is the idea of dscan being attached to skills. It's just a penalty to newbros, where you have to train some skill to 5 or face a severe handicap. Veteran players already have an advantage because dscanning well is an actual skill that takes practice. If you hobble new players with an 8x skill while they learn the mechanic, even fewer will bother coming out to low/null at all, or will wait forever until they're "ready."
I some some sonar ideas ... but it certainly does not have to replicate real-life sonar in any way.
DeleteCould be kind of cool though... more accurate intel comes at the cost of giving away your own location
DeleteHell, EVE already uses submarine "flight" dynamics, why not "sonar" too?
DeleteThat and I want to hear an FC telling their scout in a shlurred Shcots brooog: "Give me a ping, Vasili. One. Ping. Only." ;-)
I think that will kill all small scale and solo pvp from lowsec.
ReplyDeletecan you explain what actually is good thing about removong local, what you chasing?
I don't suggest it is good or bad. It is something CCP keeps talking about, so I laid out a possible route for it to happen.
DeleteI'm sure there are downsides. The nullsec people have some good points. Overall, people will adapt.
I once saw an idea for changing "local" from something system-specific to something constellation-specific. You'll know if someone is in the area, but not definitely if someone is in the same system unless you stay vigilant with d-scan. Good for hunters, still helps deep-null farmers, lets low-seccers have an idea how hot things are, and maintains a distinction from w-space.
ReplyDeleteAlso, unexplained in the OP is whether the active-ping proposal would reveal cloaked ships and/or their player identity. There is a big difference between knowing who is in your system and knowing what they are flying.
I was pretty skeptical of your previous posts about removing local, but the active/passive and skill-based D-scan modifications are very intriguing.
ReplyDeleteThe active/passive d-scanning idea opens up a world of depth to hunting for targets. Good stuff here.
I don't like the idea of making scanning based on an in-game skill:
ReplyDeleteCurrently scouting depends exclusively on player skill which makes it a viable choice for talented rookies - grab a slasher and be useful within your first week,
train for a Stiletto and you are set for your first few months.
Scouting teaches many extremely important pvp skills (dscan, tracking mechanics, ...) and allows a 5-6m SP player to be invaluable to any gang he joins (which in turn allows him to get into corporations that would usually be closed to newish players).
A 8x skill which would be crucial to scanning (slightly above 2m SP to get it to level V) would put scouting entirely back into the hands of the >50m SP crowd and remove one of the (already) extremely very few areas in pvp where a new player can really shine.
IMO it is very important that new players have a fast track into pvp available to them (and currently I'd consider "Slasher -> Stiletto -> Hound -> Sabre" such a fast track) - otherwise those who could actually be good at EVE will only sneer at the SP gap and leave.
Removing Local in 0 sounds ok to me. Why not. Let the people actually scout for real.
ReplyDeleteYou should fly around to know whos theres. More people in space, more stuff to shoot.
Sitting in station and watching local and know everything, i dont think thats how it should be.
As for the new dscan and that stuff? nah, i dont like the idea that it adds even more hurdles and training time. Basicly for stuff that is already there. You can do a passive scan, dscan, you get all information you need, just not the name or alliance.
The active ping as you name it is also there, its called combat probes.
While not giving you names, it gives ship type and location. And its is good because it also can be countered. You see combats if you watch your dscan. If you are lazy you dont get a notification and you can be hunted.
I think the balance of security would also change with your idea. I think it would also mean people would dock up even more.
Dont take away player skill and make it a character in game skill.
Just removing local and keep all things as they are would open up more opportunities for pvp, random encounters and being able to let lower skilled players do more.
Everyone seems to forget that local chat is an essential feature of MMOs. Without it, the initial interaction between strangers does not take place. Without interaction, you don't get large corps, alliances and coalitions - you'd just have small gangs of RL friends and solo players. EVE Online would have floundered long ago.
ReplyDeleteRemoving local entirely will never happen, because it would pretty much mean new player stagnation and a slow death for the game. Removing local from select areas, aka WH space, has already proven this fact. Only established players & groups spend much time in WH space - new players are rare, and new groups of players don't spawn there.
If CCP were to remove local from low/null sec only, the same lack-of-interaction endemic to WH space would occur there. The net result would be even more new players staying in high sec, less players venturing into low sec, and limited influx of new players to null sec, except as members of already existing coalitions. In other words, not good.
Or perhaps people would actually use Constellation chat. This would be a VERY neat addition if you know who was "nearby" but not necessarily in system.
DeleteLocal should be changed to work based on player-selectable criteria. This would reduce its viability as an intel tool, yet still allow it to be used for the necessary MMO interaction.
ReplyDeleteFor example, each player can select whether to be announced by location (solar system, constellation, region), system sec status (high, low, null), red/blue standing (alliance, corp), etc.
So, if I have "solar system" checked, then I show up in local to everyone in the same solar system. If I don't check "solar system", I don't show up. If I check "constellation", I show up to everyone in the same constellation - allowing me to still participate in local chat, but without pinpointing my location to a specific solar system. If I also check "high sec", and leave the other system sec status boxes unchecked, then I'd only appear in local for players in the same high-sec constellation - in null and low, I would not show up in local at all.
The default, ofc, would be set to behave just as local does now.
Similarly, I'd suggest the same sort of changes to the Overview and in-space ids. You should not be able to automatically tell who is flying what ship, unless the player chooses to announce this fact. Since CCP does not currently allow us to customize our ships, I don't see how you'd be able to tell who owns what ship by merely looking at it or unless they are using some sort of IFF system - which you'd probably turn off in hostile space, if you are sneaking around. The Overview and in-space ids should only tell you what kind of ship it is.
In high sec, ofc, Concord can insist that IFF be turned on all of the time. This makes things easier for new players. In low/null, the IFF should be able to be set specifically to broadcast or not broadcast, per the same criteria I proposed to be used for local.
To identify a specific non-broadcasting ship, on the same grid, it would just need to be targeted and locked. This is simple enough and doesn't require yet another module or skill or tedious scanning.
I wrote my idea on changing local. I don't know if it would fly, but I was just what i had on my mind.
ReplyDeletehttp://spacekeeping.blogspot.com/