These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

CCP when can we expect to see cloaking require interaction to stay cloaked?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mag's
Azn Empire
#141 - 2013-06-07 13:40:24 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
Delen Ormand wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
Ckra Trald wrote:
cloaking should use fuel over time and cloaky ships have a fuel bay/fuel use reduction

my two cents


Not a bad suggestion. I was thinking maybe a countdown timer that allows you stay claoked for X amount of time and your allowed to reset it once it drops below a specific mark.


For what purpose, though?


To require interaction with the game. Somone not even at the keyboard or in game should not be able to influence the actions or decisions of others that are in game and at thier keyboard.

Some will argue that if they are afk then there is no influence. I say they are wrong and are onlly trying to preserve a form of AFK play.

AFK is AFK weather its the miner or the cloaker. If not afk then click the button to stay cloaked for another 10-15 min.

If your not in game playing the game then you should really not be able to effect the choices of those who are.
The only one allowing them to influence you, is you.

But answer me this. Whilst they are AFK cloaked and influencing you, which game mechanic are they using to do that?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#142 - 2013-06-07 13:41:08 UTC
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
Quote:

The only reason for sitting cloaked (I've omitted the "AFK" part, as it is irrelevent imo, since you could just as easily have someone who is "active" - i.e. actually at the computer watching the screen, but limited to say chatting in chat channels, and not hunting)


I will not allow you to omit the AFK part.

I dont care about active ckoaky campers .. i fleet up, i change ships, i move systems, i adapt and overcome.

But i am adapting to an active player - its fun, its a weird form of pvp, more posturing and maneovering than fighting but its still pvp. That is not the same as dealing with a true afk cloaker.

Having to spend all day adapting to an innactive player who is not spending any personal capital to achieve their goal is to me only a form of griefing --- the player doing the afk cloaking gains nothing for their camp other than my reaction to their presence. No intel, no chance of kill, nada.

I dont want to stop an active person from siting in local for hours.

I want to stop someone logging their toon into a system, cloaking up and heading off to work for the day.

My solution would be to allow a POS deployable to slowly over time .. lets say an hour - pinpoint a cloaked ship that had not moved, or changed course if moving during that hour. Easily avoidable if active. Costs time and fuel for the POS owner .. and still would only grant a chance to find the claoky ships as the warp in would not be exact.


I removed "AFK" because it is a pointless attempt to distract from the real issue, and the real issue is one of not wanting to deal with a potential threat. AFK players pose no such potential threat, so they're irrelevant.

Let us consider the following two players.

The classic "AFK Cloaker" bogeyman that nullbears scare their children with:
Enters system. Cloaks up. Sits stationary at a safespot.
Player goes to work for the day, or whatever.

The active cloaker:
Enters system. Cloaks up. Sits stationary at a safespot.
Remains at his PC, playing EVE: He's in chat channels talking to friends, in intel channels letting people know how many people are in the system you're both in, he's fiddling with PI, contracts, whatever. He's very active, but he's cloaked and his ship is stationary.

You make the claim of not wanting to punish active players, like the one I described above, but I've yet to see a suggestion that doesn't punish the above player, forcing him to alter his playstyle because you refuse to accept the inherent risks present in nullsec.
Delen Ormand
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#143 - 2013-06-07 13:41:30 UTC
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
I dont expect everyone to agree that AFK cloaking is an issue, or even be civil in a discussion about the topic, civility being a thing oif the past.

I would like to know though what those people who supoprt AFK cloaking see as the benifit to the cloaker.?

I mean why do it ? Whats the payoff ? Whats the reward for the risk ?

<..snip...>

Seems to me people who support afk cloakies and are so shocked and dismayed by the mere conversation of nerfing the practice to the point where they feel compelled to thow insults around to display their dipleasure are just mad that their free ride might be taken away from them.

It costs almost nothing to stick a cloakie in local and wander off for the day. To say it has no impact is BS .. as if there was no impact people would not do it , which they do .. and evidently by the rage in the thread, they do it alot. QQ.


Talking only of AFK cloakies, theres couple benefits I can see. First is disruption - they suspect that the enemy is going to feel threatened and dock up, which disrupts their ISK generation. It's basically attacking the enemy's economy through psychological warfare, although it only works if the enemy lets it work.

Second, it may be done to get you used to seeing them around, so that after a while you let your guard down. Then one day they won't be AFK and explodes happen.

By the way, I don't do AFK cloaking (unless it's something quick like grabbing a coffee or taking a leak), so I'm not in any way defending my 'free ride'.
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
#144 - 2013-06-07 13:45:24 UTC
Quote:
CURRENT CORPORATION
State War Academy [SWA] from 2012.07.28 23:03 to this day


Starting to see a pattern here. All of a sudden a bunch of prema NPC corp alts crying to nerf cloaks.

Almost as if some Zero sec Bot corp has told its members to drum up some hullabaloo on the forums!


To the OP, while crying to CCP to make Zero-Sec even safer, why not at least man-up on the forum and post with your main.

Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
Toshiro Hasegawa
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#145 - 2013-06-07 13:47:01 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
[quote]
I dont want to stop an active person from siting in local for hours.


Yes you do.


nope - i dont - really - i am cov ops pilot myself .. i like the cloaky intel, or cloaky recee, or cloaky hotdrop .. but they are all active jobs.


someone pelase tell me what the benifit of an afk cloaker is ? havnt seen a single post explain it to me ,.

people talk abotu intel, recon, hotdroping .. but an afk toon can not do any of that .. all they provide is the potential for such actions at some point in the future, maybe... maybe not . the only impact of afk cloaking is to dsrupt others at no expence or cost to the player .

History is the study of change.

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#146 - 2013-06-07 13:48:50 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
The active cloaker:
Enters system. Cloaks up. Sits stationary at a safespot.
Remains at his PC, playing EVE: He's in chat channels talking to friends, in intel channels letting people know how many people are in the system you're both in, he's fiddling with PI, contracts, whatever. He's very active, but he's cloaked and his ship is stationary.



This is the one I like, the one keeping juices flowing and making things interesting.
It also learns me a lot about him, his corporation, alliance, how he operates, once I start playing his game it makes my Eve playing time far more interesting than kill red crosses.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#147 - 2013-06-07 13:50:06 UTC  |  Edited by: TheGunslinger42
And to follow up my previous post, even though suggestions along the lines of detecting stationary ships are the tamest of the bunch, they still interfere with active players and force them to perform arbitrary actions (like warping around, or whatever) because the residents refuse to instead put in a bit of effort.

Why should such nonsense mechanics (I mean really, how do you justify a module that detects ships after x amount of time only if they don't move in terms of the physics or lore? It'd make more sense that ones moving around could eventually be detected) be introduced when they serve no purpose other than to mollify carebears?

Additionally, these silly mechanics, in a roundabout way, introduce even MORE imbalance, as it provides one side with even MORE intel and benefits, while not equally providing the other side with anything beneficial. It makes it impossible for a player to hide what he's up to, but being able to trick another player into thinking you're not up to anything is a good thing. Removing this is bad.

PS: Why aren't you making the same suggestions regarding people who dock or pos up? If a stationary cloaked player should be capable of getting "caught" and killed due to inactivity, why shouldn't you when you're parked up in your pos or station? I don't know if you're active or AFK, after all! Maybe there should be a mechanic that ejects you from the shields/station just for fairness!
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#148 - 2013-06-07 13:51:59 UTC
Onomerous wrote:


CCP, when can we expect to see people stop whining about cloaking?

fixed it for you!!

The whine will stop when they fix the ability of the cloaker to go AFK.
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#149 - 2013-06-07 13:53:59 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Until you can clearly define a problem that it would solve, it will never happen.
Since cloaking itself is a solution to a problem, your biggest chance is to solve that problem first, at which point cloaking becomes a non-issue and doesn't require any change anyway.

Uggh here we go with the tipia I dont agree with what you are saying so I do see a problem followed by page after of page of asking for clarification to the issue already brought to light until sh/he/it gets the thread locked for trolling.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#150 - 2013-06-07 13:54:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
Onomerous wrote:


CCP, when can we expect to see people stop whining about cloaking?

fixed it for you!!

The whine will stop when they fix the ability of the cloaker to go AFK.
And cloaks will be nerfed when local is.

Edit: Waiting for an answer to this.

Whilst they are AFK cloaked and influencing you, which game mechanic are they using to do that?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#151 - 2013-06-07 13:57:26 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Given that an afk cloaker cant do anything to another player I dont see any need for change.


Just the act its self of being afk changes the game for others. It should require interaction just like every other part of the game.


So you think we should also be active when docked or in a pos or get kicked out?

The only difference between the three is that you also show up on d-scan while in the pos.


Again you guys and horrid analogies. Lmao if your docked up your not providing intel in somones SOV because you wont be docked in their station no will you? Do you even play in SOV or spend all your time ganking miners you forgot the mechanics?
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#152 - 2013-06-07 13:57:42 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
Onomerous wrote:


CCP, when can we expect to see people stop whining about cloaking?

fixed it for you!!

The whine will stop when they fix the ability of the cloaker to go AFK.


Can we stop pretending this is about AFK players? We all know the real issue isnt the fact that someone goes afk (because why would anyone care about that?), it's the fact that they might NOT be afk, that they might be active and present a thread.

What you're asking is for CCP to remove potential threats, or to give you the means to determine absolutely if a threat exists or not.

Which is dumb
CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#153 - 2013-06-07 13:58:41 UTC
I am locking this topic as a duplicate. You can see another thread discussing AFK cloaking here: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=216699&p=19

EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative ※ EVE Illuminati ※ Fiction Adept

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents