These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Einheit X-6
#61 - 2013-02-04 10:28:02 UTC
Friggz wrote:
I have no sympathy for those who complain about afk cloaking, but to call this a compromise is disingenuous. The people who see AFK cloaking as a 'problem' which needs to be 'fixed' are the people who want to go into 0.0 and still be immune from pvp. This solution does not allow them to do that, in fact it just makes 0.0 even more dangerous for them. It gives one side exactly what it wants and the other side nothing.

AFK cloaking as it currently stands is already compromise itself between the wolves and the sheep. It works just fine.

The battle between the wolves and the sheep has been going on since online gaming began, namely with Ultima Online. What happens is you have wolves and sheep, and I don't call them sheep in a derogatory way. More to make a simple analogy that one play type is sustained by the environment and the other is sustained by killing and devouring the first group. Now, designers often put up a fence between the wolves and sheep, and the wolves, seeing this fence, often shake their paws in the air and dream of a better world without fences where they can have a sheep wholesale slaughter.

What the wolves don't release is if you took away that fence, the sheep don't stick around to be slaughtered over and over. They leave. What you are left with is an empty field and a bunch of starving wolves. Do you think a group of people so risk averse that they think their entire corp has to dock up their ships if one hostile is in the system is just going to stick around if you remove local, or take cloakers off local?

No. They aren't. They will go back to Hi-Sec or quit the game. How many of them are we going to kill then? You have to give the sheep something or they move on for greener pastures. Let them complain about AFK cloaking. They've been complaining about it for years.

Of course, this whole thing is nothing but a symptom of broken 0.0 mechanics. We need players to actually have incentive for defending their space. No one cares about it now because the major income at the top of the alliance foodchain is from moons and that income operates 24/7 and can't be attacked by roaming gangs. Thus no one cares to defend the sheep, because they are worthless. If making money off owning space actually required players to be online and in ships to harvest, not only would 0.0 be a lot more fun, but you'd have a back and forth between people attacking the harvesters and defending them. Everyone gets a good fight and defending your space actually matters. Until then we are stuck with nullbears who'll never fight because no one defends them or taught them how. Anyway, that's a discussion for another time.

In short: You have to give the sheep something or they go elsewhere. They'll never accept nerfing local. AFK cloaking as it stands is already a reasonable compromise that gives both sides something.


though i like your wolf & sheep analogy, i have to disagree with you.
sure, there will be a transition phase, but in the end nothing would really change. ATM you see an afk-cloaker and don't know when he'll strike or if he ever will. if you are not willing to live with the risk, you make no money in 0.0 which was your main argument against the new local- so we already have that.
for with the proposed system you only see the cloaker enter the system and still don't know when or if he will strike.
what changes: a cloaker can stay in a system without showing in local, making it possible for him to wait (e.g. in a belt) for somebody to do something in this system. however in return he doesn't know what is happening outside of his directional scanner range or if somebody else is cloaky-camping the system. so while he can build ambushes without you knowing it, youcan do the same because he has no connection to local while hes cloaked.

so the benefit of the proposed system:
cloaky gameplay is really cloaky gameplay in K-space.
no more "afk-cloaking problem" bears can complain about.

what does not change:
people unprepared for 0.0 still die
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#62 - 2013-02-04 14:30:48 UTC
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
though i like your wolf & sheep analogy, i have to disagree with you.
sure, there will be a transition phase, but in the end nothing would really change. ATM you see an afk-cloaker and don't know when he'll strike or if he ever will. if you are not willing to live with the risk, you make no money in 0.0 which was your main argument against the new local- so we already have that.
for with the proposed system you only see the cloaker enter the system and still don't know when or if he will strike.
what changes: a cloaker can stay in a system without showing in local, making it possible for him to wait (e.g. in a belt) for somebody to do something in this system. however in return he doesn't know what is happening outside of his directional scanner range or if somebody else is cloaky-camping the system. so while he can build ambushes without you knowing it, youcan do the same because he has no connection to local while hes cloaked.

so the benefit of the proposed system:
cloaky gameplay is really cloaky gameplay in K-space.
no more "afk-cloaking problem" bears can complain about.

what does not change:
people unprepared for 0.0 still die

She understands the concept.

This section highlights Friggz misunderstanding:
Friggz wrote:
What the wolves don't release is if you took away that fence, the sheep don't stick around to be slaughtered over and over. They leave. What you are left with is an empty field and a bunch of starving wolves. Do you think a group of people so risk averse that they think their entire corp has to dock up their ships if one hostile is in the system is just going to stick around if you remove local, or take cloakers off local?

No. They aren't. They will go back to Hi-Sec or quit the game. How many of them are we going to kill then? You have to give the sheep something or they move on for greener pastures. Let them complain about AFK cloaking. They've been complaining about it for years.


Let them leave for high sec. The residents of low and null who accept the levels of teamwork and effort required would not have a problem.

Just ask yourself, what exactly is the difference between a player who adamantly refuses to PvP, and a player who is not present at all?

From a PvP perspective, the difference does not exist.

The difference that makes no difference, IS no difference.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#63 - 2013-02-04 18:48:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Buzzy Warstl
Friggz wrote:

The battle between the wolves and the sheep has been going on since online gaming began, namely with Ultima Online.

While you make some really fine points in your post, I just have to note that the PvP vs PvE battle in on-line games goes back a lot further than UO.

PK MUDs explored that same territory over a decade before then. See the link in my signature (which predates UO as well).

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs
Mary Annabelle
Moonlit Bonsai
#64 - 2013-02-05 17:24:52 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Let them leave for high sec. The residents of low and null who accept the levels of teamwork and effort required would not have a problem.

Just ask yourself, what exactly is the difference between a player who adamantly refuses to PvP, and a player who is not present at all?

From a PvP perspective, the difference does not exist.

The difference that makes no difference, IS no difference.

Wait... does being an audience count as gameplay?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#65 - 2013-02-06 15:15:11 UTC
Mary Annabelle wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Let them leave for high sec. The residents of low and null who accept the levels of teamwork and effort required would not have a problem.

Just ask yourself, what exactly is the difference between a player who adamantly refuses to PvP, and a player who is not present at all?

From a PvP perspective, the difference does not exist.

The difference that makes no difference, IS no difference.

Wait... does being an audience count as gameplay?

LOL...

No, I don't think that counts.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Friggz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#66 - 2013-02-07 02:16:05 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:


Let them leave for high sec. The residents of low and null who accept the levels of teamwork and effort required would not have a problem.

Just ask yourself, what exactly is the difference between a player who adamantly refuses to PvP, and a player who is not present at all?

From a PvP perspective, the difference does not exist.

The difference that makes no difference, IS no difference.


Then who is benefiting from this change? By your own admission we aren't benefiting pvpers since we are simply trading people who always dock up for a canceled sub or a guy in high sec, right? We sure aren't benefiting the bears. Who's the winner in this? No one.

AFK Cloaking as it stands is the compromise between the pvpers and the nullbears. It adds a layer of difficulty to never undocking with a hostile in the system. The Nullbears are being forced to take risks by the afk cloaking tactic, and it works. If it didn't work, they wouldn't be on the forums crying about it.

AFK cloaking is a perfect compromise for now. It's a bandaid. It works, and as they say, a good compromise leaves everyone unhappy.

A better solution won't happen until 0.0 is fixed. The main problem with 0.0 is the higher ups don't care about defending it because their income is from unassailable moon-goo. This is a problem that CCP and the CSM are aware of. We need a system where space needs to be actively worked on in order to keep your sov (or at least benefit from it). Once that happens, alliances are going to need the nullbears. If you actually need PvE inclined players to work your space, then suddenly in their best interests to look after these players, to train them to pvp, to spend resources protecting them, to offer ship reimbursements, etc... All these things will make them less risk averse and make 0.0 a more interesting place for everyone. I don't see a solution coming until the fundamental issues are fixed.

There are also many consequences in other aspects of the game to removing cloakers from local. It would change the dynamic of pvp combat in 0.0, (And low-sec and high-sec too if you carried the changes over to there) and I'm not necessarily sure it would be in a good way.

That's why I say leave it well enough alone for now. Wait for the sov changes and see if that doesn't fix the problem for you, without alienating part of the player base or having unforeseen circumstances elsewhere.

It may even be that this change ends up making sense for how 0.0 is after the changes. We just don't know yet.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#67 - 2013-02-07 03:13:10 UTC
Friggz wrote:
Then who is benefiting from this change? By your own admission we aren't benefiting pvpers since we are simply trading people who always dock up for a canceled sub or a guy in high sec, right? We sure aren't benefiting the bears. Who's the winner in this? No one.

Cutting the reply at this point.

The foundation of your response for the rest of what you wrote is this. As I can refute this, it removes the basis your remaining points were dependent upon.

We are benefiting both the remaining PvE pilots, and definitely the PvP pilots.

The remaining PvE pilots are now free to make competitive efforts, meaning that the success rate for them to avoid PvP assault will stop being the uniform 100% success rate possible so easily thanks to perfect and free intel.
Teamwork, from other pilots ranging from just sentinels scanning for cloaked vessels to PvP pilots standing by inside a POS shields, ready to warp.
(Remember, the expectation that cloak detection and hunting is anticipated alongside this change)

Players willing to make better efforts get better results. Not just monotonous repetition, followed by the occasional: "oh look, a non blue in local... ok everyone hit warp"

It becomes a more competitive game, not just a daycare for PvE with risk levels comparable to high sec.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Mary Annabelle
Moonlit Bonsai
#68 - 2013-02-24 19:08:26 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Friggz wrote:
Then who is benefiting from this change? By your own admission we aren't benefiting pvpers since we are simply trading people who always dock up for a canceled sub or a guy in high sec, right? We sure aren't benefiting the bears. Who's the winner in this? No one.

Cutting the reply at this point.

The foundation of your response for the rest of what you wrote is this. As I can refute this, it removes the basis your remaining points were dependent upon.

We are benefiting both the remaining PvE pilots, and definitely the PvP pilots.

The remaining PvE pilots are now free to make competitive efforts, meaning that the success rate for them to avoid PvP assault will stop being the uniform 100% success rate possible so easily thanks to perfect and free intel.
Teamwork, from other pilots ranging from just sentinels scanning for cloaked vessels to PvP pilots standing by inside a POS shields, ready to warp.
(Remember, the expectation that cloak detection and hunting is anticipated alongside this change)

Players willing to make better efforts get better results. Not just monotonous repetition, followed by the occasional: "oh look, a non blue in local... ok everyone hit warp"

It becomes a more competitive game, not just a daycare for PvE with risk levels comparable to high sec.

Gee-- so if I want to sleep mine, I can go to high sec, but if I want to need effort, more than watching Local at least, I could actually find a place besides wormholes... I can dream.
Lillith Sakata
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#69 - 2013-02-24 19:15:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Lillith Sakata
(removed, read post fully, too many f'n pages)
Cyprus Black
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#70 - 2013-02-24 22:21:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Cyprus Black
Are you really that terrified of a player who's away from his keyboard? Really!? A player who's not at his keyboard and thus cannot do ANYTHING to ANYONE terrifies you? Come on man.

I think what you're really terrified about is that he may not actually be AFK but waiting for the most opportune moment to strike. And to that end deal with that issue.

Crying about afk cloaked pilots is like crying that a shadow in your house will harm you.

Perhaps you need a pair of Joo Janta 200 Super-Chromatic Peril Sensitive Sunglasses. Designed to help the wearer develop a relaxed attitude to danger. The lenses turn completely black at the first hint of trouble, thus preventing the wearer from seeing anything that might alarm him/her. Perfect for players who cry about removing local and removing afk cloakers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8nE_sYLmOk

(points for getting that reference).

Summary of EvEs last four expansions: http://imgur.com/ZL5SM33
Azrael Dinn
Imperial Mechanics
#71 - 2013-02-25 10:49:18 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Hey, null bears, you might want to seriously consider backing this idea.

Sure, the cloaked pilot becomes truly hidden.

BUT!
The moment he drops his cloak, you get your precious warning, and at a point where you will KNOW it has value.

And, as pointed out, if you want to be proactive, this does meet the popular terms often agreed on to permit some means of hunting cloaked vessels.
You can search the system you prefer as often as you like. It is in YOUR hands how safe you should be. How often should your defensive patrols be sent out?

Null is as safe as your efforts make it. If you did not accept the need for any effort, high sec may be where you fit in better.
Think it over...


Your sollution seem solid and I would like to see it in action and realy see how it actualy would work out.

This still doesn't allow people to hunt down cloaked vessels which I would want to have in the game also.

After centuries of debating and justifying... Break Cloaks tm
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#72 - 2013-02-25 13:22:38 UTC
Still entertained by null sec players who want to make NS safer. Seems rather ironic to me. Roll

It is not a problem therefore no solution is needed.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2013-02-25 13:23:53 UTC
Onomerous wrote:
Still entertained by null sec players who want to make NS safer. Seems rather ironic to me. Roll

It is not a problem therefore no solution is needed.

This is not a nerf cloaking thread, it is a pro cloaking nerf local balance thread.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Evanga
DoctorOzz
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#74 - 2013-02-25 14:00:35 UTC
Quote:

AFK Cloaking's terror



could you please clarify how exactly are cloakers terrorizing you? Are they kicking you out of the POS or something?
And not everybody is AFK while cloaked, just an fyi
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#75 - 2013-02-25 14:01:12 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
All details being considered and weighted... It seems the answer to AFK Cloaking's terror aspect is to ignore it while they are cloaked.
(A cloaked vessel not being capable of inflicting damage directly)

As it is not currently possible to evaluate threat levels properly under the current system, I suggest we upgrade local to exclude vessels which are not capable of interacting with ships and objects directly.

For balance, I would deny these classifications from accessing local at all. Let them be sent chat information in a version of local missing the pilot roster, no free intel for them. (Fully delayed local for all pilots present but not listed)

The vessels which should fit this classification for full local exclusion I described:

Vessels within the shields of a POS (They cannot target or fire, AFK POS items are misleading)
Vessels docked at an outpost (They cannot target or fire, AFK Outpost items are misleading)
Vessels cloaked in a system (They cannot target or fire, AFK Cloaked items are misleading)

Upgrading local intel with improved relevancy in this manner will benefit players wanting to know the actual active players present.


I wil abuse this to no end as an invisible, not in local gate alt in a cov ops dishing out traffic reports the world over.

If you thought meta gaming intel was bad before.....

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#76 - 2013-02-25 14:28:41 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
All details being considered and weighted... It seems the answer to AFK Cloaking's terror aspect is to ignore it while they are cloaked.
(A cloaked vessel not being capable of inflicting damage directly)

As it is not currently possible to evaluate threat levels properly under the current system, I suggest we upgrade local to exclude vessels which are not capable of interacting with ships and objects directly.

For balance, I would deny these classifications from accessing local at all. Let them be sent chat information in a version of local missing the pilot roster, no free intel for them. (Fully delayed local for all pilots present but not listed)

The vessels which should fit this classification for full local exclusion I described:

Vessels within the shields of a POS (They cannot target or fire, AFK POS items are misleading)
Vessels docked at an outpost (They cannot target or fire, AFK Outpost items are misleading)
Vessels cloaked in a system (They cannot target or fire, AFK Cloaked items are misleading)

Upgrading local intel with improved relevancy in this manner will benefit players wanting to know the actual active players present.


I wil abuse this to no end as an invisible, not in local gate alt in a cov ops dishing out traffic reports the world over.

If you thought meta gaming intel was bad before.....

But you are not AFK so it is fine, it is the terrifing AFK cloaker that is the danger.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#77 - 2013-02-25 15:47:28 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
All details being considered and weighted... It seems the answer to AFK Cloaking's terror aspect is to ignore it while they are cloaked.
(A cloaked vessel not being capable of inflicting damage directly)

As it is not currently possible to evaluate threat levels properly under the current system, I suggest we upgrade local to exclude vessels which are not capable of interacting with ships and objects directly.

For balance, I would deny these classifications from accessing local at all. Let them be sent chat information in a version of local missing the pilot roster, no free intel for them. (Fully delayed local for all pilots present but not listed)

The vessels which should fit this classification for full local exclusion I described:

Vessels within the shields of a POS (They cannot target or fire, AFK POS items are misleading)
Vessels docked at an outpost (They cannot target or fire, AFK Outpost items are misleading)
Vessels cloaked in a system (They cannot target or fire, AFK Cloaked items are misleading)

Upgrading local intel with improved relevancy in this manner will benefit players wanting to know the actual active players present.


I wil abuse this to no end as an invisible, not in local gate alt in a cov ops dishing out traffic reports the world over.

If you thought meta gaming intel was bad before.....

So, you would make an effort to provide intel.

We love you. -Signed The people who think intel should require effort to be balanced.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#78 - 2013-02-26 22:29:15 UTC
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#79 - 2013-04-11 02:34:16 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
This ties in nicely with this:

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2668453#post2668453


The link takes you to a thread explaining how cloaked vessels could be hunted in the event local no longer freely advertises them.

It is the only solution to this I know of that creates a mirror image of cloaking to hunt cloaking.
I can think of no better balance to a thing than it's duplicate.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#80 - 2013-05-18 14:56:20 UTC