Delay Local

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Dracvlad

So putting someone on a gate is actually something that smart people do

I said the same net intel result.
If the player was afk ratting, neither Local nor eyes on the gate will save him.
That the guy was pointed is not something Local intel reports, and in this case, neither did the guy that pointed him, nor the pointed VNI player.

The target got wrecked cos he afk ratted, not because of any aspect of Local intel.

Frankly, you might want to send the hunter thanks for eliminating a filthy afk ratter in your system. He did you a service at his own cost.

@Dracvlad

Bigger groups continue to operate with people in local because they have a super umbrella, they cyno jam etc.

As I said, bigger corps already benefit more from Local intel.

@Dracvlad

The application of a local delay makes no real difference to them but it does to small groups.

We will have to wait and see MER and player sourced data.
It is normal that bigger corps will always leverage any change better than smaller ones.

What matters here, is whether the magnitude of that difference has increased post this accidental change.

@Dracvlad

solo players

Solo are solo.
Game mechanics cant be centered on them.
In every case, a solo player has only themselves to rely on.
Almost always, such a hostile solo player interloper has no intention of surviving or getting out.
They go in and do as much damage as they can before they are caught and popped.

[Ag3nt_Jita]

Stop this “risk averse” talking lol. Being risk averse is not a stupid thing and every player is risk averse.

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Ag3nt_Jita

Being risk averse is not a stupid thing

Agreed.

@Ag3nt_Jita

every player is risk averse.

Not true.

[Ag3nt_Jita]

@Salvos_Rhoska

Not true.

Yes sorry not 100% of the playerbase, but i cant really imagine a smart player risking something very expensive for very little gain.

[Salvos_Rhoska]

I agree that a sensible/rational player, on average, is risk averse.
But some players just want to watch EVE burn
EVE would be boring without them.

[Teckos_Pech]

@Ag3nt_Jita

Yes sorry not 100% of the playerbase, but i cant really imagine a smart player risking something very expensive for very little gain.

Those who are not risk averse are either risk seeking or risk neutral. These are actually quite unusual in people, especially risk seeking. A player who is risk seeking will take risks that a risk averse player will see as unnecessary, to put it mildly.

Freighter pilots who are carrying 6 billion ISK in cargo value are playing as if they are risk seeking. My guess is that they are not risk seeking, but are risk averse and have made a very bad mistake.

So yes, there could be some players who are truly risk seeking…this is a very, very rare thing. And it is probably good if they confine their risk taking to EVE as doing so IRL will likely destroy not just their lives but the lives of those around them like friends and family.

@Salvos_Rhoska

But some players just want to watch EVE burn

This does not make them risk seeking. A risk averse player can want to do this too.

@Salvos_Rhoska

EVE would be boring without them.

Risk seekers are rare and they usually end up ruining their lives. Think of somebody who is a compulsive gambler.

If you adhere to the basic rule of “don’t fly what you can’t afford to lose (replace)” then you are risk averse. A risk seeker would always undock and take a fight even if they have 2 ISK in their wallet an no insurance.

[Loki_Orkund]

@Salvos_Rhoska

What shocks me about the elements of the proposal, is that CCP even tentatively explored so many forms of intel disruption.

Most agree that 0.0 has too much intel. So if these ideas could be used to disrupt that intel, it could make PvP much more interesting.

My instinct is to scrap Local because it’s an OP scanner masquerading as a social network…

[Salvos_Rhoska]

@Loki_Orkund

Most agree that 0.0 has too much intel. So if these ideas could be used to disrupt that intel, it could make PvP much more interesting.

The intel disruption options in the proposal would likely benefit only the defender (ie: system holder with the Observation Array in place). I think it unlikely they can extend their effects into enemy systems. (Except map scrambling, but that applies only to the system the Array is in, presumably).

Its unclear if they will effect both friend and foe.
I expect they will not negatively effect friends.
Seems counter-productive for an Observation Array to, for example, disrupt both friend and foes d-scan. Then you have just blinded your own guys as much as the enemy.

---

Whether intel benefits defenders or aggressors more is one of the “Great Debates” of EVE.

My view (and that of military philosophy overall) is that aggressors need more of it, in order to overcome an enemy on their own turf, than the defenders need intel on the aggressing force. The defender already has the benefit of knowing what goes on there, and what they are capable of there at any given moment.

IE: Consider the difference between an attacker engaging into enemy territory, when they know nothing about it, as compared to the intel advantage of the defenders there that know just about everything about it, and has contingencies in place.

---

Standard military rule of thumb for a frontal assault on a prepared enemy position, is at least 3 times more force than the defender has.

This is for a number reasons:
-To have sufficient force to quickly overcome the defenders, with minimal losses.
-To have sufficient force left afterwards to hold the position before more defenders deploy (and hopefully arrive piece-meal)
-To hold the position long enough for your own re-reinforcements to arrive.
-Or to break through, complete mission, and get out as fast as possible, with overwhelming force.

If you attempt to engage enemy on their own turf with less force than enemy has at hand, you need even more intel to know how/when to strike, and with what, to accomplish the objective (and inversely want the enemy to have as little intel as possible on you, so as to anticipate your attack).

---

Signals Officer Salvos reporting in.
Comms and intel (especially frontline) are my field:

---

PS:
Accepting/considering Corp invites if someone wants to add a military trained comms/intel officer/player to their org.

I’m getting bored of merely forum warfare/solo ops, and would like to participate in larger/complex intel ops with others. Doesnt have to be on this character. I can provide consultation on an alt or directly. I’m far more interested in content, than isk/renumeration. I think my record here speaks for itself as to my aptitude. Rated/trained to command a platoon.

I’m uniquely unburdened by pre-existing loyalties/affiliations.
Contact me ingame with offers, if interested.
Grab me now, before your enemies do.

[Solecist_Project]

Excuse me, but I need to post here for forum dominance.

I’m only allowed out for this one day, so I gotta make the best of it!

[Marcus_Luttrell_Khan]

@Salvos_Rhoska

Standard military rule of thumb for a frontal assault on a prepared enemy position, is at least 3 times more force than the defender has.

That is Western doctrine, do not generalize it to all things.

@Salvos_Rhoska

Whether intel benefits defenders or aggressors more is one of the “Great Debates” of EVE.

This is arbitrary. The question, really, is the quantity vs. reliability concept. You can have all the intel in the world, but if the enemy has the golden nugget, you’re ■■■■■■.

@Salvos_Rhoska

Signals Officer Salvos reporting in.

WHAT THE ■■■■ IS THAT ON YOUR FACE, SOLDIER.

@Salvos_Rhoska

Accepting/considering Corp invites if someone wants to add a military trained comms/intel officer/player to their org.

No one wants the Supreme Forum Armchair General in their corp. Go make yourself useful in the game rather than on your browser.

I’m also in the MI field. If you think that makes you special, you’re mistaken. Grow up.

[Loki_Orkund]

The intel disruption options in the proposal would likely benefit only the defender (ie: system holder with the Observation Array in place)

Maybe 0.0 gates could be hacked to suppress gate flash. Like you say though, it’s lopsided arena.

@Marcus_Luttrell_Khan Your hostile feelings should probably be kept to yourself.

[Obsidian_Hawk]

posting in a thread #125967 about changes to local…

[Teckos_Pech]

@Loki_Orkund

Maybe 0.0 gates could be hacked to suppress gate flash.

I think hacking an OA would be awesome, especially in the face of a network option for the OA.

Also, what if the OA is small and you can only find one via probes? Then hostiles might drop an OA in your space and you might not know unless you d-scan and then probe.

Hopefully CCP is looking at these kinds of options and that is why the OA is not going to be in game for some time…they want to shake up the meta and hopefully make for some really interesting game play.

[Nasar_Vyron]

Repurpose the scan inhibitor to remove you from local - once the OA is implemented maybe?
Drop one, and cyno people within it’s range. Could be interesting.

[Teckos_Pech]

Yeah, something like that. Or if the OA has a network type feature…if you successfully hack it you can appear blue or don’t show in local. If you fail, then it has some pretty strong negative consequences too. Like your ship’s systems shut down for N minutes and you are stuck there and it sends out a warning to the owners of the OA…IDK, just some ideas.

[Nasar_Vyron]

Ya, I mentioned something similar in this thread way up near the beginning. Not my first post, the second one lol

To sum it up, I said something like giving people the ability to hack the OA and put local on loop for a short time. Successful hacks give no warning, but a failed one will alert the network. I don’t agree with the altering of standings since that actually does create a bit of an issue outside of the simple hunter/prey mechanics, but I can see why that looks appealing.

[Teckos_Pech]

I like that too…a loop for a period of time is awesome. The havoc one could cause warms my bitter vet heart.

And if I die to the same mechanic…well played! Hopefully I can return the favor someday.

[Loki_Orkund]

@Teckos_Pech

I think hacking an OA would be awesome, especially in the face of a network option for the OA.

2 main problems with this:

1. OA is the opposite of making nullbear space as dangerous as it’s supposed to be.
2. OA is going to spot you before you can hack it.

Also, it’s a suggestion from 2015 that seems to have been dropped years ago.

[Nasar_Vyron]

It hasn’t been dropped. I literally need to do no more than to point out that it’s still on their roadmap.

1. The OA isn’t being implemented to make null space inherently more dangerous. If this is what you were ever expecting you were fooling only yourself. From what little we do know, which isn’t much, that it’s being added to inject an exploitable structure for both the defender and any attacking/invading/roaming group to the static mechanics that currently exist.

2. If they go through with what many of us hope they do with this structure that won’t be entirely true. While they may see the first person to enter a system, that first person may be able to hack the system and prevent the larger gang behind them from being detected. If you think this is somehow going to make the structures worthless I would like to direct your attention to the ESS. I’ve listened in on comms as people flew into systems solo and have been able to sit at them for the whole 5 minutes to steal the contents without contest in systems of 50+ because the people were too afraid or couldn’t be bothered to stop them. Somehow I doubt this attitude will change much, and with such effects as looping local or spoofing the intel network their laziness will be met with destruction of assets.

[Teckos_Pech]

1. I am fine with people deploying destructable structures to make their space safer…so long as those structures which can be destroyed or even hacked…are you know able to be destroyed/hacked.

2. Again, that is you projecting what you think you know about the structure. Maybe it will…maybe it won’t. But if in the end it shows you as blue and people have to go back through logs to see where you went from non-blue to blue I’m fine with it.

@Nasar_Vyron

While they may see the first person to enter a system, that first person may be able to hack the system and prevent the larger gang behind them from being detected.

Indeed. Suppose the hacker can insert a list of people to be seen as blue? Sure the hacker is now not going to be able to move around unseen, but that may have benefits. The hacker moves in a direction counter to the rest of the gang. Hmmm…could be interesting.