Fine, that’s a risk they take and opportunity for others.
Those terms are acceptable.
Handing the power to specific ships, is worse than a storm dissruption for all.
Not even force recon ships have that power, but they are invisible to d-scan, which is acceptable as that’s a game feature.
As I said, random blackout regions will just result in no ships in those parts of space, while in other parts of space people can still rely on local as they can now. So the first part means that your idea does not what it intends to do and the second part means that in other parts of space your solution does nothing at all.
I’m open for new suggestions, but I have told you why your idea is bad: it accomplishes the wrong result (no people in space) where it has effect and accomplishes nothing in all the other parts of space outside the metaliminal storms, parts of space that my suggestion would affect all.
And instead of bringing counterarguments to my reasons as to why your idea is bad, you repeat your suggestion and tell me how my suggestion ‘is worse’, with as only argument that my suggestion gives legitimacy to local chat as gameplay feature.
Local chat, even if it not may have been intended as such by CCP, is a gameplay feature for anyone playing in low, null and high sec. Everyone I know has local chat as a long separate chat window to show who else is in local with them, and this is suggested to any new player to do as first thing when they go outside high sec.
You yourself are also suggesting options that solidify local chat as gameplay feature by adding it to the list of gameplay features that metaliminal storms can affect.
Face it, most players - including you - regard local chat as a gameplay feature, which undermines the only argument you gave against my suggestion.
The result of blackout, which is that people stop being in space, is not acceptable to me.
But if you want to bring black out back in any form, you’re free to ask for that and I’ll happily go in discussion with you. In your own thread.
You don’t get to choose who responds to your threads just because they offer an opinion not to your liking on the topic you’re discussing. My points are very relevent to the topic.
I would not have made this thread if it were not to find people with other opinions. I like hearing other opinions.
However, if you have an opinion about something irrelevant to this thread (like you did when you were asking about the removal of CSM or were suggesting to bring black out back), I ask you to keep it out of this thread and make your own threads so that we can discuss that topic in it’s own thread.
Another alternative is to remove local completely and just have regular channels, or just a constellation/region channel.
Local is not used for anything useful anyway except 1. spam, and, 2. mistaken for d-scan. Since it’s been hosted on AWS it’s also now 3. unreliable and effectively out of action when it’s down.
Give players the option of not connecting to local chat channel and have no chat windows if they want (and of course not show up in them and also won’t see who is in them either).
Having ships and modules to hide from a chat channel is the silliest idea I have ever read so far on Eve. The idea is so silly one needs pages to try to make it not appear silly. It’s like Monty Python in space.
suggesting a module was a jab at ccp’s change to nullification… see the smiley ? 
you call others risk - averse for docking when you enter local . anyone in a pve ship would be foolish not to . you’re not looking for fights , you’re looking for easy kills on ships not equipped to pvp . because the quickest way to get a fight in null is to appear in someone’s local . and the most risk - averse method of avoiding pvp while being able to hunt ratters and miners , is not to be in local chat . this may not be you true motive , but it fits with your suggestion , and other players absolutely would use it in this manner .
Jabs and sarcasm are hard to pull off on a forum where much more extreme opinions about the game are regularly written in all seriousess. Smiley or not.
I guess I missed that you meant it as jab.
Hunting is most definitely my motive for these changes. The intention of this change is to add an alternative tool to hunt, a method that isn’t meant to be better, just different to the existing methods of hunting.
We have fast interceptor scouts, cloaky bombers, d-scan immune recons, hics for very heavy tackle…
There are many ways to defend yourself and likewise there are many ways to deal with such defences, one at a time. With emphasis on one at a time, as it would be unbalanced if a ship could be fast, cloaky, d-scan immune with high defences, no targeting delay after cloaking and not show up in local.
I do believe that every strategy needs a possible counter strategy in this sandbox, and that if someone heavily relies on one form of defence only, you should be able to pick a ship that can deal with that specific form of defence well (but is bad in other aspects).
Local-immune electronic frigates would be such a tool, to deal with players who only rely on local chat as their defence.
The electronic attack frigates are slower than interceptors, more easily spotted than bombers, have less firepower in solo combat than most combat ships in the game and have rather low defences.
With these downsides, these ships would make a nice alternative way of hunting, one that is generally worse than the existing alternatives, but would make a nice tool to catch players who rely on local chat only.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.