These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
The Apostle
Doomheim
#341 - 2011-10-13 02:27:58 UTC
Rhinanna wrote:
As for the 'well he probably doesn't have a fleet on call', how are you meant to know this?

You actually reminded me (in fairness to the topic) of a counter we did manage to employ against HD's.

We had a frequent HD Rapier cloaky coming into our system. He'd sit for days and do nothing and then spring a HD at random - and at different TZ's. Very hard to predict, drove us nuts.

One day, casually buzzing around scouting for a roam, I found 4 of his mates in an NPC system. I asked for fleet to stay out of system I was in, I contacted alliance and identified our friendly Rapier as being in our home system AFK.

I warped to each NPC station and managed to find one undocking. I picked up their approximate warp direction and found the POS where the SB's formed up for the drops. It was a very lucky stroke...

We had their staging POS and were able to pick when a HD was about to occur - ironically, by camping the system with a rotating cloaky scout... Albeit, not AFK.

Cloaky Rapier stopped coming after awhile. He was denied any kills.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Probebly Afk Cloaking
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#342 - 2011-10-13 03:14:48 UTC
Working as intended.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#343 - 2011-10-13 04:37:29 UTC
Dear Rhinanna and friends, this thread is so bad its going to take me two posts to cover all of your ingorance and cowardice.

So Lets Get Started Shall We?

Rhinanna wrote:

So if I point a gun at your head, it won't bother you? After all, technically its not a threat till I pull the trigger. I am however fairly sure that you wouldn't be happy about the situation!


Actually pointing a gun at someone period is assault, and it is indeed a threat, unless you are law enforcement or military it is also illegal. I've reported you for making physical threats.

Rhinanna wrote:
All the arguments FOR afk cloaking involve the defenders having to put in a massive amount of effort compared to the AFK cloaker's none.

How do you know how much effort they're putting into being in that system, maybe he's making 1000 bookmarks for everything in system, you don't really know he's afk simply because he's not talking to you, so for all you know ever player you've ever thought was AFK could have been quite busy, you can't PROVE otherwise.

Rhinanna wrote:
None of the arguments for afk cloaking address the fact it makes PLAYERS in null-sec (not alliances) earn less money than they would running L4s in empire or incursions. This makes null-sec worthless to anyone except the top alliance people who are receiving moon-goo income.


Lvl 4's are for scrubs, people that want to make money go to wormholes and do incursions.

Yea, wormholes, remember when you said back in the first few pages that if people had to click constantly they'd quit eve?

Guess what they do in wormholes? And the wormhole population is actually growing, not shrinking.

Rhinanna wrote:
Also note that SBs in particular have no targetting delay on de-cloak AND have a decent sensor res. One can easily drop cloak, point you and pop a cyno in under 2 seconds. As meantioned before, there is no defence except having a fleet on-grid with you the whole time!


Stealthbombers also have no tank at all, if your botting program was any good, or you weren't afk yourself, you'd just turn your guns on the offending stealth bomber and watch him go up in smoke.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#344 - 2011-10-13 04:38:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
And so on ....

Rhinanna wrote:
Is every player in null meant to have knowledge of every cap fleet within jump range at all times? I don't think so!


And yes actually, its called intel channels, one poor guy might get took but then it should be all over your intel channels that a hostile hot drop gang is in the area. At that point you would be organizing the trap to take them out of your space.

But you won't do that, it requires that you not be running a bot.

Rhinanna wrote:
At the end of the day, having a cloaked ship in system, AFK or not, is a massive threat to anyone in the system. The only difference between them been AFK and not been AFK really is the effort been put in. I've no problem with cloakies been able to disrupt systems, that is their job (or one of them), the problem is they can do it EFFORTLESSLY and in COMPLETE SAFETY.


Effortlessly? I've sat perfectly still watching a tower for 6 hours before, not moving once, at my computer the whole time waiting for a Nyx to log in who logged 10km outside the shields.

That takes effort, and in the end it paid off with a dead nyx. I'm already sitting still for 6 hours, I don't feel like moving, the target I needed to watch was a tower, I shouldn't have to warp off and back because you want to bot in freedom.

Rhinanna wrote:
would do wonders here without stopping the true purpose of cloaks, bypassing gate camps and harassment.


Wait what? Why do you get to dictate what the "true purpose" of a cloak is?

As far as I know, the true purpose of a cloak is to not be seen, sounds like its working.

Endeavour Starfleet wrote:


Yet we need to try to stay on topic as much as we can. If we can focus on providing real solutions to the issue of being able to cloak risk free while not paying attention to the client. We can avoid massive nerf bat swings that can seriously affect cloaking as a whole.


The insults and bs arent going to help your cause. It will just end up with the forum mods taking action.

I refer you to the forum TOS. Follow it.

Keep this on topic.


Yea, you've pretty much spent the entire thread threatening action on people, yet oddly enough, the Mods, who are terribly fierce and usually take action nearly instantly have let the thread progress unfettered.

Let me tell you why:

You posted this in General Discussion, and you are attempting to illicit a discussion about a game change.

Oddly enough, there is a section specifically for that call "Features and Ideas Discussions". You'll find it below General Discussion quite a ways.

You cannot force somebody to stay on topic here because oddly enough, this is General Discussion, where we generally discuss things.



Now we're going to have grown up talk for a minute, this may be hard for you and apostle and the other douche bag that keeps acting like this is an issue.

The thing you are complaining about has been named a Valid Tactic by CCP themselves, at many a Fanfest over the years, its called Resource Denial.

There are many tools at your disposal to deal with such a things, but all of those tools are player oriented, CCP likes to let the players themselves deal with the problems with the mechanics already in game without limiting them in some arbitrary way.

I'm sorry that many things that CCP has planned don't meet your approval, like the change thats coming to local. It gives too much information too fast and leaves too little risk for the 0.0 dweller, as per CCP's own words, on multiple occasions.

They fully intend to change it, and have stated so MANY times before this. Yes it will come with some scanner improvements, no you won't be Wormhole Blind, but you will get less information about a given system than you get now.

This is not an issue, you are making it one, certain things you simply must accept.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

HellGate fr
#345 - 2011-10-13 04:40:11 UTC
But will it blend ?
Endeavour Starfleet
#346 - 2011-10-13 04:46:35 UTC
Grath there is a level of discussion possible but when people try to deliberately go off topic, Troll, or do other things because they can't deal with the fact that we are discussing ways to remove the incentive to walk away from the computer while cloaked which is central part of their free ganks.

My plan of using probes to find a random point for a decloak will remove the incentive while allowing active cloakers to continue their activities.

Some want to discuss it.

Some want to share other ideas.

Some just want to troll, flame and violate the forum TOS because they know Winter 2011 is one of the most likely times that this issue will be addressed. And that is what the report post flag is for.
The Apostle
Doomheim
#347 - 2011-10-13 04:51:29 UTC  |  Edited by: The Apostle
Grath Telkin wrote:
bla bla bla

So 2 pages later does that mean you like AFK cloakies or not? Twisted

Though, I must ask, was Resource Denial "approved at the Fanfests" before or after the Sanctum nerf?

And is it written somewhere? I wasn't at the "Fanfest" and have not been able to locate relevant linky.

BTW:
Quote:
There are many tools at your disposal to deal with such a things

How? AFK cloaky is in bed asleep. Can I wake him and taunt him to reveal himself or should I ask nicely?

Just askin'....

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#348 - 2011-10-13 04:55:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Grath there is a level of discussion possible but when people try to deliberately go off topic, Troll, or do other things because they can't deal with the fact that we are discussing ways to remove the incentive to walk away from the computer while cloaked which is central part of their free ganks.

My plan of using probes to find a random point for a decloak will remove the incentive while allowing active cloakers to continue their activities.

Some want to discuss it.

Some want to share other ideas.

Some just want to troll, flame and violate the forum TOS because they know Winter 2011 is one of the most likely times that this issue will be addressed. And that is what the report post flag is for.


Let me help you in big letters, to make it easy:




THIS IS THE WRONG SECTION OF THE FORUMS TO DISCUSS GAME CHANGE IDEAS.


WE HAVE ANOTHER SECTION FOR THAT.


The Apostle wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
bla bla bla


Though, I must ask, was Resource Denial "approved at the Fanfests" before or after the Sanctum nerf?

And is it written somewhere? I wasn't at the "Fanfest" and have not been able to locate relevant linky.
.


You should google the fanfest round table discussions and the Dev panel discussions where the crowd gets face time with the developers and open question and answer sessions are held.

It would probably clear up a lot of misconceptions about the game that both of you have.

Basically they've flat out said this is not something they see as a problem, its a viable game tactic.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

The Apostle
Doomheim
#349 - 2011-10-13 04:59:33 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Grath there is a level of discussion possible but when people try to deliberately go off topic, Troll, or do other things because they can't deal with the fact that we are discussing ways to remove the incentive to walk away from the computer while cloaked which is central part of their free ganks.

My plan of using probes to find a random point for a decloak will remove the incentive while allowing active cloakers to continue their activities.

Some want to discuss it.

Some want to share other ideas.

Some just want to troll, flame and violate the forum TOS because they know Winter 2011 is one of the most likely times that this issue will be addressed. And that is what the report post flag is for.


Let me help you in big letters, to make it easy:




THIS IS THE WRONG SECTION OF THE FORUMS TO DISCUSS GAME CHANGE IDEAS.


WE HAVE ANOTHER SECTION FOR THAT.

Oh my. PL has spoken. It is as it should be.

Oh btw again?

Did CCP approve overpowered "titans", "scaps", "unscannable tengus", "2 x JB's in every system", "logoffski" ad infinitum

Lemme guess. Many of THOSE changes - approved by CCP - have been BUFFED/NERFED once an issue was discussed and beaten to death in whatever topic it's supposed to be under.

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#350 - 2011-10-13 05:04:03 UTC
The Apostle wrote:

Oh my. PL has spoken. It is as it should be.

Oh btw again?

Did CCP approve overpowered "titans", "scaps", "unscannable tengus", "2 x JB's in every system", "logoffski" ad infinitum

Lemme guess. Many of THOSE changes - approved by CCP - have been BUFFED/NERFED once an issue was discussed and beaten to death in whatever topic it's supposed to be under.



Right, so it doesn't matter who says it to you, you refuse to see any side but your own and anything outside that is obviously false, even so far as to ignore the people who actually make the game.


Did you notice how few people are supporting the 4 of you mainly defending this in 12+ pages of posting?


TWELVE pages, and its just you 4, ignoring every fact presented to you, including dev comments and actual counters, and you still don't see that you could possibly be making a mountain out of a molehill?

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

The Apostle
Doomheim
#351 - 2011-10-13 05:11:46 UTC  |  Edited by: The Apostle
Grath Telkin wrote:
The Apostle wrote:

Oh my. PL has spoken. It is as it should be.

Oh btw again?

Did CCP approve overpowered "titans", "scaps", "unscannable tengus", "2 x JB's in every system", "logoffski" ad infinitum

Lemme guess. Many of THOSE changes - approved by CCP - have been BUFFED/NERFED once an issue was discussed and beaten to death in whatever topic it's supposed to be under.


Right, so it doesn't matter who says it to you, you refuse to see any side but your own and anything outside that is obviously false, even so far as to ignore the people who actually make the game.

Did you notice how few people are supporting the 4 of you mainly defending this in 12+ pages of posting?

TWELVE pages, and its just you 4, ignoring every fact presented to you, including dev comments and actual counters, and you still don't see that you could possibly be making a mountain out of a molehill?

I'm talking about your directive on "where" this thread should be. Wasn't aware you were a mod. Just sayin'.

And I noticed you did not answer a single question.

Because CCP ruled once that something is " a valid tactic" does not make it valid if it proves to have become an issue SINCE - for example - the Sanctum nerf. For every change made in game there may be an undesired effect - including I might add, any removal of the ability to go to sleep at the wheel.

That is why it is being discussed. It's not how about you win/you lose... We've already "lost" because it IS a current and allowed tactic. Thus we have no more to lose by discussing it. YOU on the other hand have everything to lose if we're supplying a valid argument worth taking further.

Hence - your angst.

Psst.... If you removed the trolls, it's probably about 4/4......

EDIT: And I missed the blue/red flags on this topic? CCP devs have spoken? Previously maybe. On this thread, no. I did ask for linky's if ya got 'em

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#352 - 2011-10-13 05:32:05 UTC
The Apostle wrote:

I'm talking about your directive on "where" this thread should be. Wasn't aware you were a mod. Just sayin'.


So your friend, has spent the entire thread demanding people stay on topic, and threatening moderator action.

Obviously, if he/she had posted it here:
THE NEW IDEA SECTION
he/she may have gotten the desired results, sadly, he posted this gem in the General Discussion, so yes, you're going to get trolled here, as this subject does not belong here, and so is being treated accordingly by the populace



TheApostle wrote:
EDIT: And I missed the blue/red flags on this topic? CCP devs have spoken? Previously maybe. On this thread, no. I did ask for linky's if ya got 'em


This forum is less than a month old, are they to respond with a red and blue tag to every topic even if they've been over it 1000 times before on the old forums, now they are somehow beholden to you and yours to respond to your every beck and call?

I somehow doubt that.

What the EVE community has tried to point out to your and your friends is that this subject has been brought up about 27038490328490328 times before, and been calmly put down by CCP over and over and over and over and over and over to the point that I'm sure theres a guy with a copy paste response saved in a word document on his desktop for just such an occasion.

Unfortunately he doesn't know to look for this thread since its not in the Features and Ideas section.

So here you sit, insulting the helpful community thats trying to show you that you are not in fact treading over new ground and that everything you are saying and suggesting has both been said and suggested before, by a great number of people.

Do you really think that over 8 years somebody else hasn't said "Man I hate this cloaked dude in my system", and that somehow your stand with your 3 friends against 12 pages of people telling you that nobody cares will make a difference?

Also the trolls opinions matter too, just because you assume them to be trolls because their opinion isn't presented in a format you find desirable, or doesn't match your own opinion, doesn't invalidate it in any way shape or form.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Dray
C.O.D.E
#353 - 2011-10-13 05:47:06 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
BY THE WAY

You guys here know that local as we know it is going to be removed, right!?


IF that happens it will be replaced with somthing of equal use. Anything otherwise would wreck nullsec and CCP knows it.

Having free ganks each and every day is a fantasy. If somehow it happened you would have them for a few months before people leave Nullsec and EVE in droves now can we focus on the topic please?


Afaic local has already wrecked null sec to certain degree.

CCP has always had reservations about local and the free information it provides, is there anybody here that thinks the local mechanics in wormholes were just an idea they thought of over lunch, it's obvious to me they wanted to look at a possible solution to k-space local and where better to implement it.

Either way, removing local will fix afk cloaking, you can say it won't as often as you like but that doesn't alter the fact.
Theodoric Darkwind
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#354 - 2011-10-13 05:49:02 UTC
Name Family Name wrote:
How about you stop being ******* renters and join a real alliance that can actually defend the space you claim?

Problem solved.


QFT

Carebears are NOT entitled to nullsec space free of intruders, if you want risk free PvE go back to highsec.

absolutely nothing wrong with parking a cloaky in someones system, especially when it extracts delicious carebear tears.
The Apostle
Doomheim
#355 - 2011-10-13 05:51:04 UTC  |  Edited by: The Apostle
Grath Telkin wrote:
This forum is less than a month old, are they to respond with a red and blue tag to every topic even if they've been over it 1000 times before on the old forums, now they are somehow beholden to you and yours to respond to your every beck and call?

The actaully respond within a day or two. They've even been and cleaned posts here.

Quote:

So here you sit, insulting the helpful community thats trying to show you that you are not in fact treading over new ground and that everything you are saying and suggesting has both been said and suggested before, by a great number of people.

At which post number would you like me to start quoting the trolls that did not and will not contribute constructive discussion?

Quote:

Do you really think that over 8 years somebody else hasn't said "Man I hate this cloaked dude in my system", and that somehow your stand with your 3 friends against 12 pages of people telling you that nobody cares will make a difference?

Nice use of statistics. Did you mean in 12 pages, 3 people haven't been able to get through to YOUR friends. The debate has waxed and waned and been wasted - and neither the OP's or his "supporters" have seeen ANYTHING to justify allowing

>>>> SLEEPING AFK cloakies. <<<<<<<<

This issue is NOT about cloakies, not SB's. Not BLOPs, not HD's.... It's about

[drum roll]

>>>>>>> SLEEPING cloakies - you know - IN BED ASLEEP...... <<<<<<<<<

No argument against >>>>> this SINGLE point <<<< has been put forward conclusively. Everything else yes, but none of those were in question. NONE of them.....

>>>>>> NO cloaky can possibly be "active" for 23/7, 5,6,7 days straight - doesn't matter what he's doing. <<<<<<<

Besides, YOU actually came into this debate rabbiting on about bots ffs..... That's a troll..... Period.

To whit.....
Quote:
Stealthbombers also have no tank at all, if your botting program was any good, or you weren't afk yourself, you'd just turn your guns on the offending stealth bomber and watch him go up in smoke.


And I bet you've done that too yeah... The whole HD fleet even yeah? But hey.

THAT wasn't even the topic anyway......

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Jaroslav Unwanted
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#356 - 2011-10-13 05:51:23 UTC
Actually its not local nor the afk cloackers

its ISK/hr attitude which is threatened. The all-mighty isk/hr the reason why "most" people stays in game. Some are better at it and providing wide aspect of gameplay for several other corporations or and alliances some are worse at it and worked under stress of next bill and getting things done for few people...

L Salander
All Web Investigations
#357 - 2011-10-13 05:56:58 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
L Salander wrote:
The best solution is just ignore the cloaky alts


Until they uncloak and hotdrop on you.

Your silly solution is silly.


I will support the fuel bay idea. Tho I worry it might impact some legit deep scout operations.

In my opinion the best way is a rather expensive module that can only be fit on a destroyer (Tech 1 or 2) Hull. The purpose of this module would be launching a new type of probe that can unlock someone if a random point in space is located (A puzzle so to speak)

The difference is that each scan takes 10-20x the scan time of a normal probe and is heavily influenced by scanning skills. Also a warning flashes if someone is probing your cloak sig and warping away will cause the point to reset,

All this will do is remove the incentive to walk away from the keyboard while cloaked. You will have to check it once every few mins or so like people have to keep an eye on local today. This will balance the total power the AFK cloaker has and rewards the dedicated cloaker with being able to do serious recon as a benefit to his corp or alliance.

Remove the AFK cloak incentive leave local alone.


If they uncloak and hotdrop you they're not afk. Deal with it.
The Apostle
Doomheim
#358 - 2011-10-13 05:59:51 UTC  |  Edited by: The Apostle
Theodoric Darkwind wrote:
Name Family Name wrote:
How about you stop being ******* renters and join a real alliance that can actually defend the space you claim?

Problem solved.


QFT

Carebears are NOT entitled to nullsec space free of intruders, if you want risk free PvE go back to highsec.

absolutely nothing wrong with parking a cloaky in someones system, especially when it extracts delicious carebear tears.

I've heard heaps of Testies bitching real bad at AFK cloakies in 7BX and/or PXF when you're trying to rat.

From memory, one cloaky was in 7BX for more than a month..... Is he still there?

Did you "get him"?

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]

Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#359 - 2011-10-13 06:03:08 UTC
The Apostle wrote:

No argument against >>>>> this SINGLE point <<<< has been put forward conclusively. Everything else yes, but none of those were in question. NONE of them.....

>>>>>> NO cloaky can possibly be "active" for 23/7, 5,6,7 days straight - doesn't matter what he's doing. <<<<<<<

.


No an argument has been presented, you've chosen to ignore it:


Can you prove 100% that the person in your local is AFK?

Until you can prove it, then you are making this all up in your head, and there is no way for you to prove they are AFK.

That is an argument against it.


Regardless of if you believe in the argument at all, it is an argument and the one that CCP and the rest of the community are standing on.

You have no proof, you are making wild accusations, and no game change will ever be put through on accusations alone.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

The Apostle
Doomheim
#360 - 2011-10-13 06:14:12 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
The Apostle wrote:

No argument against >>>>> this SINGLE point <<<< has been put forward conclusively. Everything else yes, but none of those were in question. NONE of them.....

>>>>>> NO cloaky can possibly be "active" for 23/7, 5,6,7 days straight - doesn't matter what he's doing. <<<<<<<

.


No an argument has been presented, you've chosen to ignore it:


Can you prove 100% that the person in your local is AFK?

You got it. Finally....

[i]Take an aspirin. If pain persists consult your local priest. WTB: An Austrian kangaroo![/i]