These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

AFK Cloaking Collection Thread

First post First post
Author
Toshiro Hasegawa
Roving Guns Inc.
Pandemic Legion
#441 - 2013-06-10 00:42:12 UTC
Dorion Strag wrote:
ITT: Nullbear problems

The truth of the Cloak vs Local argument should be made apparent by the fact you don't see these tears from anyone who spends time in w-space.


people in WH space know what they are getting themselves into and make a conscious choice to play within those rule sets.

people in null sec doing pve are held hostage by players who arnt even at their PC, maybe.

And it is silly to suggest that a pve player can just ignore the hostile in local and go about your business as if they were not there .. which they might not be .. one has to adjust to the reality they might be there. And i accept this too, when there is an active pilot cloaked in local

what i have issue, and there is nothing you can say that will change my mind on this, just as i wont alter yours, i can not accept that someone can play the game by not playing. If your playing you get to have an effect .. if your not playing .. afk at POS or a station .. you are not impacting the game. There should be a game mechanic whereby a active cloaker can carry on their work without hassle, and a player who is actually at school, work or the beach cant. It the principle of the matter ..

History is the study of change.

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#442 - 2013-06-10 01:00:51 UTC
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
Dorion Strag wrote:
ITT: Nullbear problems

The truth of the Cloak vs Local argument should be made apparent by the fact you don't see these tears from anyone who spends time in w-space.


people in WH space know what they are getting themselves into and make a conscious choice to play within those rule sets.

people in null sec doing pve are held hostage by players who arnt even at their PC, maybe.

And it is silly to suggest that a pve player can just ignore the hostile in local and go about your business as if they were not there .. which they might not be .. one has to adjust to the reality they might be there. And i accept this too, when there is an active pilot cloaked in local

what i have issue, and there is nothing you can say that will change my mind on this, just as i wont alter yours, i can not accept that someone can play the game by not playing. If your playing you get to have an effect .. if your not playing .. afk at POS or a station .. you are not impacting the game. There should be a game mechanic whereby a active cloaker can carry on their work without hassle, and a player who is actually at school, work or the beach cant. It the principle of the matter ..

Hostage?

No, the PvE players you refer to simply refuse to accept that they can be shot at. They may talk about how tough they are for flying in null sec, but so long as they are denying to fight in the ships they undocked with originally, they are risk averse.

They could fit in high sec because concord gives them protection, but they are still possible to suicide gank or war dec.
They cannot be suicide ganked in null. You can't be war dec'd by your own corp or alliance, and that is all they accept in local before warping to safety.
Short of unexpected awoxers, they have no realistic risk that they cannot completely avoid.

Whether you like it or not, both sides being stuck doing nothing is balanced.
Whether it is broken and frustrating to both sides diminishes nothing, it is balanced because both sides can be AFK or not, and can choose to not expose themselves to risk.
They even have the same game supplied intel to verify who is present in the system.

As to which is worse, the cloaked side keeping the PvE side hidden in fear, or the PvE side refusing to take a chance and risk playing with the actual ships the hunters are after.

Perspective really, it is two sides of the same coin.
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#443 - 2013-06-10 02:21:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Theodore Giumbix wrote:
...bla bla bla... BS, more BS, holy BS... bla bla bla...

hey why should only me take a risk with you cloaky in my system, and you have no risk at all with me in that system.

because BS?

If you dock in a station or safe up in a POS, i can take that station from you and kill that poss, so you are safe there only for a limited time, while in a cloaky ship you are safe 24/7.

Cloaky AFK camping ships do make an impact in 0.0 and the problem is that 1 person can make an impact in this game more than he could actually play, because nobody would actually stay 24/7 in front on his PC to cloaky ACTIVELY camp a system.

IF tomorrow at DT CCP patch the game and remove all Local form low and null sec, cloaky AFK campers would still sit there AFK and they would be happy as never before. The only thing that would not change is people taking that risk they all taking about, because with good intel and adding someone to watchlist is pretty much the same thing as having local.

So please cut the bullshit. IT's too obvious how desperate you are for and easy game because direct combat hurts you.


What an utterly stupid and non-constructive response.

Sure, we can't compare docking up because sov can change...never mind that even if it does nothing can force a player docked up to leave. Nothing. So long as they don't undock that clone.

And lets ignore the huge effort on the part of probably 400+ players necessary for the sov grind....

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#444 - 2013-06-10 02:23:14 UTC
Theodore Giumbix wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
But when we ask you to rat in PVP fit ships, or to try and bait us, or even just ignore us then it's out of the question and CCP must change the mechanics.

Ratting in PVP fit ships sounds as stupid as it is. So you say you cloaky AFK camping people because they don't give a **** about what your asking them?

AND FOR **** SAKE, I ALWAYS TRY TO BAIT AFK CLOAKERS BUT THEY NEVER BIT, THEY ONLY TAKE EASY 100% SURE KILLS, OR HOT-DROP OUTNUMBERING LIKE LITTLE PUSSIES.


Have more BS? Please vomit it here.


I've done it. It isn't efficient, but it can be done.

And if you rat with 3-4 people, it will be even easier and you'll grind the rats faster.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Black Dranzer
#445 - 2013-06-10 02:47:58 UTC
I am of the opinion that cloaking is just a part of the larger problem; That being, intel gathering in Eve is fundamentally in need of an overhaul.

That said, if somebody threatened to pod me unless I came up with a "fix" for cloaking without disrupting balance too much or making any huge changes to the game's code..

1) Cloaking modules now hide you from local (possibly even with a 30 second grace period after decloaking to allow placement of probes?)
2) Cloaking modules can be activated straight out of post-jump cloak
3) Combat scanner probes now pick up cloaked ships (Except maybe in wormhole space?)

But really, we need a better solution for this.
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
The Gurlstas Associates
#446 - 2013-06-10 03:32:54 UTC
For that to work and be balanced local must also be hidden from you.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#447 - 2013-06-10 05:02:51 UTC
Theres plenty of good suggestions to make local go away - all we need is CCP to grow some balls to implement it.

Whether its one of the following:

1. A deployed personal module like a probe scanner that shows people in local in a proper none chat hud.
2. Electing to remove yourself from local and remove your acecss to local
3. A sov module deployed in system providing list of people in system
4. A ship module or rig

whatever it is it would be a vast improvement to non-consentual pvp.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)

Dorion Strag
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#448 - 2013-06-10 05:31:10 UTC
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
people in WH space know what they are getting themselves into and make a conscious choice to play within those rule sets.
Players in WH know what they're getting into but those in null somehow missed the memo that null isn't perfectly safe? Each type of space Hi, Low, Null, and W have their own rule sets. If players should be aware of how things work in one of them the same goes for the rest.

Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
people in null sec doing pve are held hostage by players who arnt even at their PC, maybe.

And it is silly to suggest that a pve player can just ignore the hostile in local and go about your business as if they were not there .. which they might not be .. one has to adjust to the reality they might be there. And i accept this too, when there is an active pilot cloaked in local
You have to act differently when there is a possible threat than you would if there wasn't? Why yes, yes you do. The problem is you seem to think that Sov somehow entitles you to risk free PvE but it doesn't. Just like in W, there is a certain level of risk to doing PvE in null. If you don't understand this then the problem is yours.

Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
what i have issue, and there is nothing you can say that will change my mind on this, just as i wont alter yours, i can not accept that someone can play the game by not playing. If your playing you get to have an effect .. if your not playing .. afk at POS or a station .. you are not impacting the game. There should be a game mechanic whereby a active cloaker can carry on their work without hassle, and a player who is actually at school, work or the beach cant. It the principle of the matter ..
Is the irony of this statement lost on you? Manufacture, PI, RnD, and most importantly mining as it has the same may or may not be present dichotomy as cloaked ships... Industry in general is largely done while afk or not logged on at all.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#449 - 2013-06-10 06:02:02 UTC
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
Dorion Strag wrote:
ITT: Nullbear problems

The truth of the Cloak vs Local argument should be made apparent by the fact you don't see these tears from anyone who spends time in w-space.


people in WH space know what they are getting themselves into and make a conscious choice to play within those rule sets.

people in null sec doing pve are held hostage by players who arnt even at their PC, maybe.

And it is silly to suggest that a pve player can just ignore the hostile in local and go about your business as if they were not there .. which they might not be .. one has to adjust to the reality they might be there. And i accept this too, when there is an active pilot cloaked in local

what i have issue, and there is nothing you can say that will change my mind on this, just as i wont alter yours, i can not accept that someone can play the game by not playing. If your playing you get to have an effect .. if your not playing .. afk at POS or a station .. you are not impacting the game. There should be a game mechanic whereby a active cloaker can carry on their work without hassle, and a player who is actually at school, work or the beach cant. It the principle of the matter ..


So you're saying that WH players made a decision to live in a dangerous area and accept the mechanics and risks within that area

But nullbears made an explicit decision to live in a dangerous area and REFUSE to accept the mechanics and risks within that area

Maybe you should take a leaf out of our (WH players) books and man up. If you can't accept the mechanics and risks, go back to highsec. Don't demand they be changed for you.

Duh
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#450 - 2013-06-10 14:16:49 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
Dorion Strag wrote:
ITT: Nullbear problems

The truth of the Cloak vs Local argument should be made apparent by the fact you don't see these tears from anyone who spends time in w-space.


people in WH space know what they are getting themselves into and make a conscious choice to play within those rule sets.

people in null sec doing pve are held hostage by players who arnt even at their PC, maybe.

And it is silly to suggest that a pve player can just ignore the hostile in local and go about your business as if they were not there .. which they might not be .. one has to adjust to the reality they might be there. And i accept this too, when there is an active pilot cloaked in local

what i have issue, and there is nothing you can say that will change my mind on this, just as i wont alter yours, i can not accept that someone can play the game by not playing. If your playing you get to have an effect .. if your not playing .. afk at POS or a station .. you are not impacting the game. There should be a game mechanic whereby a active cloaker can carry on their work without hassle, and a player who is actually at school, work or the beach cant. It the principle of the matter ..


So you're saying that WH players made a decision to live in a dangerous area and accept the mechanics and risks within that area

But nullbears made an explicit decision to live in a dangerous area and REFUSE to accept the mechanics and risks within that area

Maybe you should take a leaf out of our (WH players) books and man up. If you can't accept the mechanics and risks, go back to highsec. Don't demand they be changed for you.

Duh


And the WH players appear to be doing just fine. Granted null k-space is not the same as WH space (no static gates, not showing up on any maps, etc.) But, the idea that a change to local in null would drive everyone to empire is a bit over-wrought.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#451 - 2013-06-10 14:21:41 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
So you're saying that WH players made a decision to live in a dangerous area and accept the mechanics and risks within that area

But nullbears made an explicit decision to live in a dangerous area and REFUSE to accept the mechanics and risks within that area

Maybe you should take a leaf out of our (WH players) books and man up. If you can't accept the mechanics and risks, go back to highsec. Don't demand they be changed for you.

Duh


And the WH players appear to be doing just fine. Granted null k-space is not the same as WH space (no static gates, not showing up on any maps, etc.) But, the idea that a change to local in null would drive everyone to empire is a bit over-wrought.

Actually, some would leave.

Specifically, the ones who NEVER should have been in null to begin with, since they never embraced the reality that null is intended to be more dangerous than high sec.

It's like trying to watch a movie for mature audiences, and kids keep sneaking into the theater.... kick the kids out, don't turn it into a children's cartoon!
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#452 - 2013-06-10 14:32:33 UTC
Black Dranzer wrote:
I am of the opinion that cloaking is just a part of the larger problem; That being, intel gathering in Eve is fundamentally in need of an overhaul.

That said, if somebody threatened to pod me unless I came up with a "fix" for cloaking without disrupting balance too much or making any huge changes to the game's code..

1) Cloaking modules now hide you from local (possibly even with a 30 second grace period after decloaking to allow placement of probes?)
2) Cloaking modules can be activated straight out of post-jump cloak
3) Combat scanner probes now pick up cloaked ships (Except maybe in wormhole space?)

But really, we need a better solution for this.


Omnathious Deninard wrote:
For that to work and be balanced local must also be hidden from you.


What these two posts wrote. This would eliminate the reason for AFK cloaking (why bother if the locals can't see you). Further, it becomes a much more risky style of game play.

I'd also add in that when you decloak from your jump cloak before you activate your on board cloak you are visible in local so that for about a second locals do have a chance of seeing you. Other than that, they'll have to work at finding you from that point on.

No more freebie intel.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Mag's
Azn Empire
#453 - 2013-06-11 09:40:34 UTC
Page 3 even with all the stickies removed? Noooooooooo. P

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#454 - 2013-06-11 09:59:33 UTC
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:

afk at POS or a station .. you are not impacting the game.



Go figure, in EVE you affect the game also when you're offline; only an example: place market orders and log off, you're affecting my gameplay.


Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:

afk at POS or a station .. you are not impacting the game.


you're doing exactly the same; I've no way to know if you're AFK at your POS or in your station. But you want tool to know what people is doing in real life becuase "hey, they're in MY system, I BOUGTH it, is my right to know what they doing in real life". Serious?

However I think we can agree in removing the chance to be AFK when cloacked if we agree to introduce some mechanic that force your ship (or pod) to undock or eject outside the POS shield when AFK.

I'm sure you'd love this and agree.



Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#455 - 2013-06-11 10:15:41 UTC
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
people in WH space know what they are getting themselves into and make a conscious choice to play within those rule sets.


As does EVERYONE in nullsec. Yes, everyone. Yet a few risk averse people like yourself demand changes to make it safer. You knew what you were getting into, you know the affect an enemy in your system can have and yet you demand CCP change the game so you can get back to riskless PvE.


Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
people in null sec doing pve are held hostage by players who arnt even at their PC, maybe.

And it is silly to suggest that a pve player can just ignore the hostile in local and go about your business as if they were not there .. which they might not be .. one has to adjust to the reality they might be there. And i accept this too, when there is an active pilot cloaked in local


You have two choices:
1) always assume a cloaky in your system is active
2) always assume a cloaky in your system is inactive

Number 1 is the way to go if you're concerned about risk. Number 2 is the way to go if you're not. This is a choice you have to make irrespective of whether the other player is AFK or not. You don't know so you have to make a decision as to which way you're going to progress.

Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:
what i have issue, and there is nothing you can say that will change my mind on this..{snipped}


And herein is the problem. No matter how many times we explain how to get round the problem of internal fear, no matter how many many times we explain how to continue playing pve in nullsec with a cloaky in your system (move systems being the safest whilst also giving you intel on whether he's actually afk) people like you REFUSE to adapt and insist that CCP change the game because of your refusal.

I like most of the people who have, for pages, been explaining to you why the changes you want are bad don't afk cloak. I do nullsec PVE mostly. The game would be better for me specifically if the changes you want were implimented but I DO NOT believe they would be good for the game as a whole. I believe they would be detrimental as I'm not just considering the game purely from my own perspective as you are. The reason you want this is because all you can see is the "problem" that you can't do pve in nullsec without risk. Even when you've had it explained to you how you can continue to do pve in nullsec without risk you counter with "but I can't in the system I want to". So, for every explanation of how you can get around your "problem" you come up with a reason why you can't but all these reasons do is express how incapable you are of adapting to the situation. Thus, you want CCP to change the game for you so you don't need to think or adapt. That, my friend, is not good for the game. It might be good for you but it is NOT good for the game. Imagine if everyone who couldn't be bothered to work out how to actually play got what they wanted. Yes, I point you to Starwards Galaxies as an example of that.

Has it occurred to you that if lots of other people (the people on the other side of the fence in this argument) can play perfectly well with perhaps afk cloaked ships in the system they load into that you are somehow deficient, rather than there being an actual problem with the game? If not perhaps you should consider it.
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#456 - 2013-06-11 14:44:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Toshiro Hasegawa wrote:

what i have issue, and there is nothing you can say that will change my mind on this....


Ahhh so you are being dogmatic. Fine, then leave. No really leave the thread.

See, my issue isn't that cloaking couldn't use some attention, but that it has to be coupled with how players use local for intel. I'm also not suggesting that local be removed or that there isn't some manner of gathering intel. My problem with with how good the intel is from local.

To recapitulate one more time:

When somebody jumps into a new system local will show them for about a second before they even load grid.


That is pretty damn good. If you are aligned and paying attention that hostile has little chance of catching you.

Also:

Local never lies, it always gives 100% accurate information.


Again, very useful as you can tell if the person coming in is friendly, neutral or hostile via standings.

And:

Local is active so long as the servers are up.


This means you can always count on local as soon as you log in. You don't have to even turn on a module like a cloaker does.

Lastly:

With a quick dscan you can get all sorts of good information on the people in local.


In fact, some alliances have come up with websites that work with the in game browser. You can call it up and copy and paste various things like local, dscan results, etc. and it will organize them all nice and neat. Telling you corp, alliance, etc. and for dscan ship types etc. You can get the composition of a hostile gang very quickly, and you can see if maybe they don't have enough logistics support or some other weakness you can exploit when you start forming a counter gang.

So local is an excellent source of intel. Couple it with people reporting stuff and it gets even better. TEST had it set up so that with reporting of hostiles in systems it would show up on a map you could access while in game. You'd keep that open, separate local as its own window and someone trying to sneak up on you and do you harm had a tough road ahead of them.

The only way to inject uncertainty back into local is via one and only one module: the cloaking device.

This is an extremely reasonable conclusion. I would like to see you provide a counter argument to what I've just written. You could dispute one of my 4 points about the excellence of local's intel. You could argue there is another way to create uncertainty pertaining to the intel local provides. I doubt you'll even make the attempt though.

Now, absent some other way of making the intel provided by local less reliable, any nerf to cloaking will be a buff to local. Yes that even includes AFK cloaking. I agree with you that AFK cloaking sucks. Like I have written several times before, it is not something I generally do. If I were to do it though, it would likely be in conjunction with a BLOPs gang, or to try and lul the residents into a false sense of security so I could, at some point engage them and kill them (or maybe they'll kill me).

I have outlined my position very carefully. I've given you facts about local and drawn conclusions about them. From my perspective they are logical and reasonable. I am not being dogmatic. I read your posts and find the arguments lacking. Mainly because you want a buff to your intel, albeit indirectly, by nerfing cloaks. I find that unbalancing and against the very nature of this game.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Solutio Letum
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#457 - 2013-06-11 15:20:10 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
For that to work and be balanced local must also be hidden from you.


That would actually make sense, a module that makes your ship stop to report , making you look offline but also making you unable to connect with the outside world in anyways.... the problem with that is that if you dont get info about the system youll miss out on
-Stations possition (because they orbit the planet you should not even be able to warp to the exact orbit they are in anymore)
-Planets positions same reason
-Any book market..... blah blah blah

you would need an advance warp drive, enabling you to warp where you want to instead of where the coordination are saying, although this should be some kind of new sleeper tech of some sort no logal in K space meaning that its not supported explaining the whole issue around it.... non the less its workable, but you cant easily play around it.

Something like that would be interesting... i am no game designer tho so il just stop suggesting anything :P making it hard for cloakers would make carebears happy and cloakers would be happy to not be in local... right?.... oh and offline ya... this is a thread for silly random ideas right?.... GREAT!...
Endeavour Starfleet
#458 - 2013-06-11 15:44:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Endeavour Starfleet
Pretty much every enlargement has been heard. Every idea even remotely possible to deal with the issue presented. Even to the point where cloaking pilots admit to going AFK cloaked in wormhole space.

To my knowledge CCP has never embraced AFK cloaking. They will only tell you that it isn't an exploit.

So I still believe the ONLY reason this issue has not been dealt with years ago is that cloaking is one of the few remaining things from the early years of EVE Online that has not been significantly touched in years. The code that handles it must be an absolute mess and changes to it will require significant development resources.

IF they ever decide to do something about cloaking. It will no doubt be controversial. Large alliances have relied on the current cloaking system and a change that gives defenders a chance to uncloak a ship that has a pilot that has been AFK for hours will mean they will have to rethink many aspects.

IF they do change it. I hope those who have been using this way of using the cloak will find more active uses of their ships.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#459 - 2013-06-11 15:54:46 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
So I still believe the ONLY reason this issue has not been dealt with years ago is that cloaking is one of the few remaining things from the early years of EVE Online that has not been significantly touched in years. The code that handles it must be an absolute mess and changes to it will require significant development resources.

IF they ever decide to do something about cloaking. It will no doubt be controversial.

I honestly don't believe the code is much of an issue, in this context.
If that was the major obstacle, I believe they would have already dealt with it.

No, they are trying to do something far more difficult. Anticipate perception.

Reference point X: If they put out a change that is unpopular, it will create a backlash that could damage the game and / or the playerbase.

If they put out a change that is unbalanced, but not immediately seen as unpopular otherwise, the players who do recognize this will waste no time making everyone aware how bad it is.
These whistle blowers will be helped by obvious results showing a shift in the balance as players use the new mechanics to do what they always do, min/max their risk & reward efforts.
This will result in the changes becoming unpopular.
Goto :-: Reference point X above.

Quite simply, they are wishing they could go back in time and warn themselves not to put this dynamic into place to begin with. Perception can be an ugly thing to overcome.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#460 - 2013-06-11 16:03:17 UTC
I blame Incarna for CCP being hesitant to do truly new things.