I’m sure this was already submitted to death or asked to death but oddly enough a quick search gave me some local chat suggestions but not like mine. Its rather the whole removal of the local chat.
Anyways, what I suggested is a simple filter for local chat. I would like to remove the positive standings or all the standings of my choosing from local chat. I’m pretty sure this would be a quick coding compared to what others are asking.
How many times are you in null sec or low sec and you got hundreds or just 30 positive dudes in local chat. Wouldn’t be nice to remove all of the blue (since you know they wont shoot you…I guess lol) and if a neutral comes in, it would be more faster to detect than scrolling up and down and probably miss a few seconds.
You all know how a few seconds can save your life especially scanning local chat in nullsec. To me it makes sense. Hell give it a sound notification if a neut appears in local chat.
Local chat is an intel tool. People use it to report to an intel channel. That makes your argument pointless. Its only safe when you pay attention to the local chat of course. If theres too much in local, its just annoying, not harder nor difficult
Like I said to Daichi_Yamato, only if you pay attention to local chat. I’ve seen a lot of kills when plenty of blue in a system. Doesn’t mean theres a lot of people that its safer. Same applies to high-sec. Doesnt mean you’re in high-sec that your safe.
Let’s not kid ourselves: local is the intel tool in EVE. To claim otherwise is just wildly naive. It’s literally the first thing anybody joining a null sec groups is taught how to use, and for good reason.
You may not like it - and a lot of people don’t - but that’s definitely what it is.
It’s STILL not intended as an intel tool. So even though people use it as such, doesn’t mean it should be furthered as one, and there is no reason to do so either. It just makes space safer and leads to less content.
I don’t find much use in intentions. How things actually turn out, that’s what counts. And the fact is, local has been an intel tool since day one.
I don’t agree with this, to be honest. All local does is dictate the current tactics used by krabbers and hunters alike. Changing local would only force a change to those tactics, and I find it far easier to re-balance the risk/reward in favor of krabbing when people are suggesting changes to it.
Most people suggesting the removal (or delaying) of local seem to be operating under the assumption that krabbers will just carry on without taking the change into account. I find that very short-sighted.
I’d be willing to bet that removing local would just mean krabbing would consolidate under big alliance super umbrellas, and anybody wanting to hunt them would have to deal with that to get any content. At least now there’s a chance you will catch them off guard in some random null-sec area. Without local they would never be that complacent.
Changing things for the sake of changing it, without considering the likely consequences, isn’t exactly a great plan tho.
The change the OP is suggesting would be inconsequential for like 99.9% of the player base. It would have little to no effect on the big picture. - In fact I’d probably argue against it as a waste of dev resources more than anything else.
If you’re talking about the removal of local, the consequences have been thoroughly considered and debated.
But this thread isn’t about that. It’s about someone who wants to make it even easier to spot and avoid hostiles. Even asking for a sound notification so he knows to alt tab back to his afk ratter when a neutral enters system.
The rationale is provided so don’t lie. And ccp have acknowledged the idea of nerfing local and reworking how intel could be gathered. Even directly encouraging players to come forth with ideas for it. Observatory arrays have been hinted at changing ways we gather intel including being a requirement for a more fallable local.
We all know it’d be a big change and not to be taken lightly. Whether thats still on the cards or not is up to ccp. But the comparison between buffing local as the op wants and nerfing local so we can make a less shitty intel tool couldn’t be farther apart.
One is not going to happen because it promotes aversion and crappy gameplay. The other is widely considered an attractive option although a huge load of work and a massive culture shock.
Really? Every time I try to discuss it with people all I get are vague assurances that it will work and little else. (Not counting the inevitable carebare insults and whatnot.)
All I see when I consider EVE without local is a massive concentration of ratters/miners in a handful of pockets, each with scouts on all entrances and packed full of titans and supers for protection. The rest of nullsec vacant and completely lifeless.
I’ve yet to see any logic that would explain why ratters/miners would keep doing their thing unprotected, when their ability to evade threats has been removed. It’s unsustainable/unprofitable. Even the most daft of them would see that fairly quickly and move where the profit is.
Low sec exist’s where people run site’s and watch D-scan when people enter local they stay in their site and are just more alert. To say the rest of null space will be lifeless is not logical, it will be less full sure because 90% of nul is risk averse carebear’s that want the best incomes the game can offer with 0 risk such is null-sec at the moment.
Maybe a better balancing mechanic could be to lower nullsec income and increase lowsec income, where there is a lot more traffic and people are not afraid of travelers moving through their space.
Add campaign: Leave high-sec and join our null-sec alliance, its just as safe as highsec and you can make more income Use our logistics’s and jump bridge network to completely avoid that dangerous area between null and high.