Need more real space in lowsec and 00

Communications Center General Discussion
41

You are confusing Local intel, with Local chat, again.

Local intel refers to the list of players in the system (or its absence).

Local chat is the chat channel itself, and settings on that.

That CCP called the non-autoupdating list in chat “Delayed” mode is just a choice of term. No actual “delay” occurs, in any shape or form.

A sector with Local chat in “Immediate mode”, provides Local intel. (HS/lS/NS)
A sector with Local chat in “Delayed mode” does not provide Local intel. (WH)

As you explained, we know Local intel (Immediate mode) in HS/LS/NS is associated with the gates.

As I explained, this is supported by the lack of Local intel (Delayed mode) in WHs, as having no gates.

Actual communication in either mode, is identical and instantly reports the transmission to the Local channel, for all there to see, along with the senders name.

To clarify, when removing Local intel is discussed, it refers in this nomenclature, to changing Player NS Local chat from “Immediate mode” to “Delayed mode”.

To further clarify, when someone mentions applying a delay to Local intel, it refers to applying a delay to the “Immediate mode” updating its list, not to the “Delayed mode”

To clarify even further, it is proposing to add a third chat memberlist mode, which only populates/depopulates the list on a (sector specific) delay from arrival and departure in the system.

42

Nope. You’re trying to separate things that are exactly the same thing. CCP Karkur says it directly in the linked devblog:

The channel header/tab will display the number of EVE players for channels in immediate mode (since Local Chat is an important intelligence tool), …

They are one and the same thing. Local chat is always in immediate mode, as it is an important intelligence tool.

For the rest, it still doesn’t change the answer to your question of why. That is exactly the same as I wrote above.

Do whatever mental gymnastics and semantic rubbish you want. You are just simply wrong (as is so common).

43

Notice the mention of “Local is an important intelligence tool”.
This is what is referred to colloquially as “Local intel”.

This thread is discussing to either:

  1. Change Local chat in X sector from “Immediate mode” to “Delayed mode”

or

  1. Apply a third “mode”, in which X sector operates as in “Immediate Mode” except that the updating of the list per arrival/departure is delayed for Y seconds.
44

Salvos entering “turbo mode”…
Why this guy don’t become meme yet, or some sort of “Salvos law”? “Every discussion you make will spawn Salvos at some point, where he will show us all how bad he is with game mechanics”.

1 Like
45

My summation above is accurate.

Informed by Scipio’s CCP link from 2012, I am using more specific terminology now, to avoid further misunderstandings.

46

posting in a stealth nerf local thread.

but but but if we nerf local more people will pvp and do other things.

Marxist ideology. sounds great but than you forget the human factor.

47

Nothing stealthy about it.
Its pretty clear this is a nerf Local thread.

Yes, that’s the general idea.

Local intel is a Marxist idea. Shared, free and automatic.
Its restricting the human factor of competition.

48

Local intel (or Immediate mode chat) means any aggressor that transits to the system is immediately identified, before he even enters the system, allowing ample time for the targets to run for cover.

Its the equivalent of a predator entering a section of forest, and all prey there immediately getting an automatic, free update that a hunter is arriving.

Obviously this severally impairs the capacity of the predator to initiate non-consensual PvP.

Though the predator too benefits from Local intel (Immediate mode chat) to know there are others in system, they have no idea where they are, and have to d-scan/probe/recon to ascertain that, which requires time the prey does not need to simply initiate warp to safe as soon as the predator shows up in Local intel (Immediate mode).

49

Any delay to local would buff cloaky t3s big time. If local is delayed, ccp have to nerf targeting after unloaking or covops subsystem

50

My answer is cloaked ships should no longer be d-scan immune.

Infact, imo, they never should have been, so I would welcome that change hands down, regardless of whether Local intel is changed or not.

There are d-scan immune ships now. Cloaked ships should not be one of them.

This also goes a long way towards addressing afk cloaky camping, albeit without immediate recourse to aggress the cloaked ship.

Function of cloak is to make you untargettable, not undetectable.

51

I can imagine this working, too bad our opinions are irrelevant.

1 Like
52

The breakdown is (I think):

High-sec: 1090 systems
Low-sec: 817 systems
Null: 3294 systems
Wormhole: 2600 systems
Inaccessible: 230 systems

Seems like there’s plenty of wormhole space for you to get your fix in. without making other space like wormhole space.

53

Also, my bet is that if you get podded there is need for brain burner to send data to new clone.

Just my guess…

54

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.