Automation of d-scan (turn it on or off like a module and it reactivates ever X number of seconds). Pretty much a requirement in my mind to do any nerfing to local.
Not LIKE a module, but actually as an active HS module.
See my post above.
I donāt agree with that.
Some form of basic āsensor readingā needs to be available for all ships. And it shouldnāt be āon commandāā¦ it should be relatively automatic.
Iāve sat for hours in FW plexes mashing d-scan to see if a ship in local is actually incoming. Not because Iām going to runā¦ but rather so I can be ready for the start of a fight.
Just make it automatic. There doesnāt need to be a fitting cost.
Automatic at what range/frequency?
Hunters would not benefit from ithat.
They have to direct it to ascertain where potential targets are.
Same controls as now for range. Just add a checkbox to have it repeat every 10 seconds (or 15 or 5 or whatever interval makes senseā¦ maybe make it adjustable) without button mashing.
Itās not changing the gameplay at allā¦ itās simply making something that people do with a click or keyboard shortcut anyway become something they can turn on or off and not have to click repeatedly. If you make me use up a fitting slotā¦ nobody will use it. Iāve been hitting āVā foreverā¦ Iāll keep doing it if I have to sacrifice tank or speed or damage to get it. But Iād rather not have to do it because it makes absolutely no sense to have to click it over and over.
Current dscan mechanics sucks, but making it automatic would put big stress on the server. Btw being manual is safer. Imagine that situation when you are in a wormhole, spamming dscan and you spot a cloaky ship appearing on scan. Now if it was automatic, the scanner would show it and on the next scan in lets say 5 seconds he would not be shown because he is already cloaked and on the way to kill you. If you donāt pay attention to dscan for only 5 secs, you can be dead.
An auto-refresh D-scan would mandate the elimination of Local.
Itās definitely worth considering, not least for the simplification of the UI.
Normal D scan use would be incorporated into the Overview. Iād suggest targets beyond 4000km not be identifiable ie would show Ship 11.9 au. Nor could you warp to them.
Thereās a case for simultaneously nerfing the actual D scan so that identifying distant ships is harder. Big ships would be more easily identified. Directionality would be required to boost identification power (or range?).
You could also solve the cloaking problem at the same time.
Cloaked ships would appear on overview at 20km, not identified, not selectable. Youād need to use D scan to approach them with any accuracy. If cloaking is nerfed, gate camps would have to be nerfed in some way.
Cynos should probably appear at any range.
All of this will obviously upset the PvP balance. Tuning of the balance could be done with alterations to things like range on the new Overview, range of Overview identification, power of the new D scan etc.
Hopefully, it becomes easier for skilful gankers, but harder for bad ones who rely on cloak etc.
1 Like
Just for lols remove local and D-scan. Probe or go homeā¦
Hell, remove combat probes too. The overview as well.
You want to see someone? Move your camera around in space and look. Hardcore EVE.
Thread is about delaying Local intel.
Not removing it, combat probes or overview.
ISK has never been a good balance point. Complaining about the cost is about the weakest argument one can put forward. As for not being able to protect themā¦why are such groups in NS to begin with. Either protect your stuff/space or you group up with others so you can or go back to HS.
2 Likes
We changed the topic because the idea was stupid.
1 Like
But there is a reasonable point in that anything that makes intel āless freeā tends to create a result where those with more of whatever the ācostā is (time/isk/common sense/whatever) do better than those with less.
Making intel more expensive will probably lead to an expansion of the blue donut in null. We may be okay with thatā¦ but you do have to recognize that probably outcome.
Please back up why you think this rather than just spouting nonsense. Why do you think this? Is 10b isk a lot to your alliance? If it is, Iād seriously question what made your group think they were ready to make a move into null space. If itās a question of defense, then the same question applies. You are a small fish venturing into an ocean of sharks, there was always going to be a risk. You either accept it and proceed with caution, or you keep the Fā out of deep waters.
When a system can only have 1 of these and they would likely be as hard to destroy as any other citadel where is the benefit to the larger alliance? Their costs scales with the number of systems they own just as much as a smaller alliance. They will hopefully be able to be spoofed by a hacker scout, which actually benefits a smaller alliance who is more likely to have people living in all the systems they own to catch and stop them. Not to mention these will likely come with added bells and whistles meaning large and small alliances alike will very likely benefit equally from them. Such as scrambling or delaying map data for hunters.
That a larger group does better in many instances should not be shocking or even seen as ābadā. EVE is an open and classless system where players are free to pursue a variety of strategies. Each strategy comes with benefits and costs. The idea that a small group should not incur the costs of being small strikes me as just being silly. We should not be trying to force equal outcomes on the game as it will most likely nullify the notions of choices and those choices, once made, having consequences.
Ughhhā¦this concept again. I really wish people would stop using it. NS goes through periods of quiescence and turmoil. The notion of a āblue donutā is just lazy and sloppy thinking. āOh noes, the blue donut will get worse. 
ā As if invoking the phrase āblue donutā some how lend legitimacy to the argument. Note that local is considerably better than any observatory array. And yet we have observed these periods of quiescence and turmoilā¦why should something less effective and destructable lead to less turmoil?
1 Like
If you donāt like the term, thatās fine. It probably wasnāt the correct term for what I was talking about anyway.
Insteadā¦ read it as: āConsolidation of null-sec groups into a small number of large power-blocks.ā
Local in null allows you to see people in local pop up as they enter. A relatively small intelligence network can give warning from multiple systems away.
If you take local away, delay it significantly, whateverā¦ you create a situation where you need more bodies to get timely intelligence. With 50 pilots in system, one is much more likely to actually see an incoming red than with 5 in system. This pushes the risk averse into joining or renting from a large group (Legacy/Imperium/PanFamā¦ maybe 1 other). The ability of smaller entities to remain independent of these groups diminishes without the ability to have their isk generation operations āget safeā. Larger entities can wrap their isk generation areas with an outer āprotective zoneā of pvp corporation system so dropping their (or their renters) rorq fleets and krabs is difficult. Smaller, more open groups (like Provibloc was), donāt have a protected areaā¦ so their Krabs and mining fleets were always vulnerable with just one jump. Same goes with other smaller groups who donāt/canāt control enough space to get a buffer.
There seems to be an assumption that carebears will just do the same stuff with more risk. A much more reasonable explanation is youāll see something like what happened with half of Proviblockā¦ where the alliances joined the larger coalitions and moved to protected space.
Will the large power blocks have conflict? Of course. But that sort of conflict will really have very little impact from changes in local one way or the other. It will ebb and flow as it always does. Local will take away soft targets in easy to access space. Theyāll all be locked away behind defense fleet umbrellas in hard to access spaceā¦ if the end result is more of the ācarebearā corps and alliances being under the large coalition umbrellas. Thereās a reason why people hunted in Providence a year ago rather than Delve. Better targets were in Delveā¦ but they were much harder to hit than Providence targets were. The type of null targets people were used to having in Providence simply wonāt exist if some form of free protective intel isnāt available.
Not sure I see the āblue donutā problem here. And these outcomes rather depend on how the observatory array works as well. IIRC there was some possibility of there being a network effect.
lol everyone travels nullified cloaky and expensive assets are cynoād inā¦give me a break.
Actually nullified only, I seem to be an exception as I stick with nullified cloaky for my two mains but 3 out of the 4 are interceptor fiendsā¦ But then again you know smart bombing Battleships, tell you what, have a look at the people in 9K0E-A even interceptors and cloaky nullified stuff are not safeā¦
People cynoed stuff in for years, in any case recent changes to the citadels have made it more dangerous as Fraternity found out today, 30 second delay anyoneā¦
of course nothing is 100% safeā¦it Eveā¦ffs