These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

A possible solution to AFK cloaky alts

First post
Author
Signal11th
#141 - 2011-10-12 13:51:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Signal11th
Renan Ruivo wrote:
AFK cloakers can prevent anomalies from despawning, therefore eliminating high-level anomalies entirely, from systems just by being there AFK. I know. I do it.

So the argument that AFK cloakers cannot do anything while AFK is a false one.



Very true and this should be fixed although it's only one site per cloaky, should be fixed but still doesn't stop the entire system sites appearing.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!

Rico Rage
#142 - 2011-10-12 13:53:12 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Rico Rage wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Rico Rage wrote:
What about a new type of probes, that allows you to scan down cloaked ships?
It immediately raises the question: why is that needed?


They need something to replace what nature failed to dangle between their legs.


Why the teenage angst at a constructive post? I fail to see where I started a thread, or even whined about the cloaky issues. I merely offered a solution to the issue many players identify in EVE. Can you tell us, in your perhaps limited interwebz vocabulary, why the idea is bad?

Fail troll.


Page 6, scroll up about halfway.

I'll explain once again, with my limited vocabulary, a few reasons why nerfing cloaking is indeed a bad idea. First of all, by doing so you're affecting something near and dear to me personally, wormhole life. By nerfing cloaking you're nerfing the ability of people to actually remain discreet in systems where there simply is no local. You're creating free intel for those unlucky, unfortunate or incapable of gathering it themselves. Wormholes are the last frontiers in Eve, any nerfs that simplify that or render it more "null-like" are simply an abomination to the spirit of the holes themselves.

You see, my cowardly little friend, life in wormholes is about constantly knowing that at any moment someone is about to drop out of cloak and make your life very interesting for a few minutes. You can take the best precautions available, you can roll every hole when you log in, you can have a person maintain a skynet of combats keeping a constant scan for new holes or ships, but there's always that risk that you missed something or someone. They're there, they see you and they're calculating whether they have time to jump your drake running that combat site, or to pop that covetor you're mining with at the grav they scanned while you were offline. You know what? People in wormholes don't spend thier days wasting away within the bubble of their pos whining on the forums that things are too dangerous. Not that I've seen... anyone else?

So that's the skinny of it. Null sec is supposed to be dangerous, not a carebear flowerbed of pansies and unicorns. If you want to risk running the sanctums, you need to take the appropriate precautions to do so. If there's a suspected afk cloaker, take the precautions against the "worst case scenario" as best as you can. Maybe your maximum dps PVE sanctum fit isn't really idea in this situation and you need a tweak or three "just in case". Maybe you need a friend or three along, someone on your side whose cloaked for example and ready to raise hell on any ship that attempts to decloak and interfere. Or maybe, as the "failed troll" post indicates, maybe you just need balls. Balls enough to get out there and do it anyhow, accepting the risk vs reward factor and having at it.

Regardless, you need to accept that living in null is inherent with risks. You can accept the risks and profit, or you can stay docked, whine on the forums and be forever seen as, well, a nutless coward.

Edit: As far as "why the angst"? If you hadn't noticed, it's who I am. Lol



1) I'm far from cowardly, you would find, if you actually knew anything about me.

2) I am well aware of wormhole life and its mechanics.

3) I always assume I will lose any ship I undock, even in high sec.

4) The reason I play the game is PvP. EVE PVE is beyond mind-numbingly boring

5) You should stop making unbased assumptions about forum posters, and rather than try to unsuccessfully attack the people posting the ideas, attack the idea.

6) Save the long winded wormhole mechanics explanation from your POV for a wiki, or someone who gives a damn about it. I already know game mechanics.
Vertisce Soritenshi
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#143 - 2011-10-12 13:54:01 UTC
Sniped117 wrote:
in the best interest of my alliance im posting on an alt.


Stopped right there. If you can't post something without feeling emberrassed and concerned for your alliance then don't post at all.

Bounties for all! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2279821#post2279821

Varesk
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#144 - 2011-10-12 13:54:05 UTC
Sniped117 wrote:
[quote=Gogurt]ITT: sensitive miner succumbs to space delirium, due to AFK person



that and PVE

cloaking ships need a counter its been way too long[/quote


Because one cloaking ship can do so much damage to an alliance. There are counters to everything and there is one in game for afk cloakers.

Are you in c02?
dethleffs
Immortalis Inc.
Shadow Cartel
#145 - 2011-10-12 13:54:47 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Let's keep this topic about the issue of AFK cloaking and keep the wormhole or NPC region stuff out of it. That dives into far many off topic discussions.



why keep those topics out of the discussion? they are valid points by tippia, ingvar and signal.
Endeavour Starfleet
#146 - 2011-10-12 13:55:12 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
To provide risk to AFK cloaking.
…which, once again, shifts the question down the line: why is that needed?


How do you propose to add risk to sitting in a POS? Or sitting in a station?[/quote]

There is already risk. Bring your fleet to take down the POS or capture the station system. Not impossible.

Not playing 20 questions.
Endeavour Starfleet
#147 - 2011-10-12 13:58:41 UTC
Vertisce Soritenshi wrote:
Sniped117 wrote:
in the best interest of my alliance im posting on an alt.


Stopped right there. If you can't post something without feeling emberrassed and concerned for your alliance then don't post at all.


Considering the risk of his corp system "Gaining" an AFK cloaker as "Punishment" for speaking out about it. I think posting as an alt is a good precaution.

A good idea is a good idea despite if is an alt or main. Now can we keep on topic please?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#148 - 2011-10-12 14:00:28 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
There is already risk. Bring your fleet to take down the POS or capture the station system. Not impossible.
…you mean those things that you immediately see coming and therefore can escape? Yeeeeah… no. By that token, there is already risk in AFK cloaking by the mere fact that you're AFK and can't react to any threats that might appear.
Quote:
Not playing 20 questions.
It's not 20 questions — it's trying to figure out what the problem with AFK cloaking is and why it needs to be solved.

So far, none of the issues have had anything to do with that, but rather with completely different things. The best “solution” to AFK cloaking remains to fix local.
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#149 - 2011-10-12 14:01:43 UTC
What bugs me about AFK cloakers is that i know they are there but i cannot find them to kill them.. i want to kill them! Boils my blood when theres a troll laughing at me and i cannot smack it in the kisser. I admit that removing local as we know it will help mitigate this.

Still have a problem with anomaly denial though... it is like i said it is. CCP cannot fix that, so they say its an "accepted tactic".

Broken Science i tell you...

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.

Endeavour Starfleet
#150 - 2011-10-12 14:03:06 UTC
Rico Rage wrote:



1) I'm far from cowardly, you would find, if you actually knew anything about me.

2) I am well aware of wormhole life and its mechanics.

3) I always assume I will lose any ship I undock, even in high sec.

4) The reason I play the game is PvP. EVE PVE is beyond mind-numbingly boring

5) You should stop making unbased assumptions about forum posters, and rather than try to unsuccessfully attack the people posting the ideas, attack the idea.

6) Save the long winded wormhole mechanics explanation from your POV for a wiki, or someone who gives a damn about it. I already know game mechanics.


We do need to stop comparing nullsec to WH space. (Tho AFK cloaking can lead to free ganks even in WHs) That is off topic completely.

As Rico noted. We know about WH space. So WH mechanics are not relevant. What is relevant is discussing ways to remove the incentive to go AFK while cloaked in a hostile system.
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#151 - 2011-10-12 14:03:14 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
There is already risk. Bring your fleet to take down the POS or capture the station system. Not impossible.
…you mean those things that you immediately see coming and therefore can escape? Yeeeeah… no. By that token, there is already risk in AFK cloaking by the mere fact that you're AFK and can't react to any threats that might appear.
Quote:
Not playing 20 questions.
It's not 20 questions — it's trying to figure out what the problem with AFK cloaking is and why it needs to be solved.

So far, none of the issues have had anything to do with that, but rather with completely different things. The best “solution” to AFK cloaking remains to fix local.


Anomaly denial

Not a problem with AFK cloaking per se.. but you can still do that while being AFK and perfectly safe.

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.

Signal11th
#152 - 2011-10-12 14:03:33 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
What bugs me about AFK cloakers is that i know they are there but i cannot find them to kill them.. i want to kill them! Boils my blood when theres a troll laughing at me and i cannot smack it in the kisser. I admit that removing local as we know it will help mitigate this.

Still have a problem with anomaly denial though... it is like i said it is. CCP cannot fix that, so they say its an "accepted tactic".

Broken Science i tell you...



I think one of the CSM is going to bring that up again can't remember which one maybe viper.

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#153 - 2011-10-12 14:04:49 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Still have a problem with anomaly denial though... it is like i said it is. CCP cannot fix that, so they say its an "accepted tactic".
Do it mission-style (albeit with much more demanding time requirements)? I.e.: can't finish it within X hour from activation? Sucks to be you — the pirates escaped *despawn*
Endeavour Starfleet
#154 - 2011-10-12 14:05:56 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
What bugs me about AFK cloakers is that i know they are there but i cannot find them to kill them.. i want to kill them! Boils my blood when theres a troll laughing at me and i cannot smack it in the kisser. I admit that removing local as we know it will help mitigate this.

Still have a problem with anomaly denial though... it is like i said it is. CCP cannot fix that, so they say its an "accepted tactic".

Broken Science i tell you...


Removing local will not stop AFK cloaking. That has already been talked about. We need to discuss removing the incentive to go away from the keyboard while cloaked in a hostile system.

My idea will give you the ability to uncloak the AFK cloaker then use normal probes to locate and destroy the ship. This will protect active cloakers while removing the incentive to go away from the PC.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#155 - 2011-10-12 14:06:50 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Ingvar, My suggestion will not seriously affect active cloakers. If you are actively cloaked in a wormhole you will receive warning and are able to warp off to change the random point and prevent the decloak for say 10-15 mins to be fair?

What would affect you is CCP saying "Lets just fix this now" and swinging some massive cloak nerf bat. We dont want that


But this affects active cloakers greatly in wormholes! You screw things up like this with your "massive cloak nerf bat". The problem regarding this auto-decloak in holes is that you take away the ambush. You can connect to a static, scan down the sites that need scanning, warp to one cloaked and simply wait. (Yes, you learn patience in the hole.) You may have to wait hours for the ambush to spring, it may never happen. However, being forced to warp all over the place while you're trying to wait is simply foolish and a poorly thought out response to a non-issue. Keep in mind, in a hole you may choose to afk at the ambush point for those hours, flipping over to an alt for example and doing other activities while you wait. You may want to take a bio, get some lunch, run to the store, then come back and see if the prey is in the trap. It could be hours, it could be minutes, it could be never. But, the fact remains that you're ill-though concept would destroy a perfectly viable and acceptible paradigm of wormhole existance, nerfing the inherent dangers in the systems.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#156 - 2011-10-12 14:08:29 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Removing local will not stop AFK cloaking.
Yes it will.

The malicious cloaker can no longer scare people into shutting down their activities just by his mere presence, because his mere presence is unknown to them. At the other side of the fence, the scared people no longer have anything to be scared about, so there is no reason for them to shut down their activities.
Quote:
That has already been talked about. We need to discuss removing the incentive to go away from the keyboard while cloaked in a hostile system.
…which is exactly what removing local does. See above.
Doddy
Excidium.
#157 - 2011-10-12 14:13:28 UTC
Bait cloaky, kill hot droppers, bait cloaky, kill hot droppers, bait cloaky, kill hot droppers.

No more cloakys.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#158 - 2011-10-12 14:13:40 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
What bugs me about AFK cloakers is that i know they are there but i cannot find them to kill them.. i want to kill them! Boils my blood when theres a troll laughing at me and i cannot smack it in the kisser. I admit that removing local as we know it will help mitigate this.

Still have a problem with anomaly denial though... it is like i said it is. CCP cannot fix that, so they say its an "accepted tactic".

Broken Science i tell you...


Removing local will not stop AFK cloaking. That has already been talked about. We need to discuss removing the incentive to go away from the keyboard while cloaked in a hostile system.

My idea will give you the ability to uncloak the AFK cloaker then use normal probes to locate and destroy the ship. This will protect active cloakers while removing the incentive to go away from the PC.


Page six, I gave a potential solution to this mythical problem, yet the cloak-nerfing crowd seems to be ignoring it.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.

Endeavour Starfleet
#159 - 2011-10-12 14:14:35 UTC
The AFK cloaker will be able to get in and even if someone watches him come in he will be able to remain cloaked and then as usual come in for the hotdrop with no warning from Dscan.. Hell why am I even discussing this again? Removing local is of want of free ganks that ought to be obvious. Instead of discussing silly solutions that wreck nullsec such as removing local we need to discuss ways to remove the incentive to go AFK while cloaked while not ruining active cloaking operations.
Endeavour Starfleet
#160 - 2011-10-12 14:16:47 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Ingvar, My suggestion will not seriously affect active cloakers. If you are actively cloaked in a wormhole you will receive warning and are able to warp off to change the random point and prevent the decloak for say 10-15 mins to be fair?

What would affect you is CCP saying "Lets just fix this now" and swinging some massive cloak nerf bat. We dont want that


But this affects active cloakers greatly in wormholes! You screw things up like this with your "massive cloak nerf bat". The problem regarding this auto-decloak in holes is that you take away the ambush. You can connect to a static, scan down the sites that need scanning, warp to one cloaked and simply wait. (Yes, you learn patience in the hole.) You may have to wait hours for the ambush to spring, it may never happen. However, being forced to warp all over the place while you're trying to wait is simply foolish and a poorly thought out response to a non-issue. Keep in mind, in a hole you may choose to afk at the ambush point for those hours, flipping over to an alt for example and doing other activities while you wait. You may want to take a bio, get some lunch, run to the store, then come back and see if the prey is in the trap. It could be hours, it could be minutes, it could be never. But, the fact remains that you're ill-though concept would destroy a perfectly viable and acceptible paradigm of wormhole existance, nerfing the inherent dangers in the systems.


Removing the incentive to go AFK while cloaked is my goal. If AFK cloaking was the very center of your PVP then sorry but that is exactly what I want removed. That is not active cloaking that is AFK cloaking.

It is not a massive nerf bat to cloaking. Its a massive nerf to AFK cloaking and activities such as yourself.