These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

[proposal] Cloaking dumb please fix

First post
Author
Black Dranzer
#1 - 2013-06-10 03:23:07 UTC
Typically I try to come across as impartial with my proposals. In this case, I doubt anybody would believe I'm impartial anyway. So with that, I bring you an entirely selfish cloaking balance proposal which considers nobody's well being but my own.

Enjoy!

Why I hate cloaking
1) I jump into a system and everybody knows I'm there and this is dumb and I want to stalk people
2) When people know I'm there it becomes a game of hiding in a corner waiting for them to go away BORING
3) I can't kill other ninjas and be top ninja because of perpetual stealth ninja standoff
4) Wormholes are scary

FIXES

1) Cloaking modules hide you from local
2) You stay hidden for like ten seconds or something after decloaking for ninja jumpouts
3a) When you jump into a system, your cloak modules are automatically activated instead of the standard gate cloak
OR
3b) You can activate your cloak modules straight out of gate cloak because showing up on overview is not ninja at all
4) Gate doesn't fire when you jump into system with a cloak module fitted because seriously PPSSHHHJWOV is not stealthy it is like the opposite of stealth
5) You can launch probes while cloaked and your probes are cloaked so they don't decloak you or something dumb, because ninja probe heron best heron
6) Combat scanner probes can find cloaked ships because I guess sometimes I want to kill other cloaked ships
7) Maybe combat scanner probes don't uncover you in wormhole space because I don't know CCP likes wormholes being different or something

cloaking fixed

dranzer 4 csm

please suport
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
#2 - 2013-06-10 08:17:27 UTC
Black Dranzer wrote:

Why I hate cloaking
1) I jump into a system and everybody knows I'm there and this is dumb and I want to stalk people
2) When people know I'm there it becomes a game of hiding in a corner waiting for them to go away BORING



Black Dranzer wrote:

FIXES

6) Combat scanner probes can find cloaked ships because I guess sometimes I want to kill other cloaked ships


Really, this is your well thought out idea?????

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.

Black Dranzer
#3 - 2013-06-10 08:24:00 UTC
I don't recall saying it was well thought out.
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
#4 - 2013-06-10 11:38:17 UTC
Black Dranzer wrote:
I don't recall saying it was well thought out.


Well played sir!

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.

Black Dranzer
#5 - 2013-06-10 17:57:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Dranzer
.. But in all seriousness, I'm not sure why you quoted those two things in particular.

Don't suppose you could humor me and spell it out for me?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#6 - 2013-06-10 20:32:39 UTC
Oh my, new ideas regarding cloaking.

Oh wait.

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

Black Dranzer
#7 - 2013-06-10 21:13:19 UTC
I don't recall saying my ideas were original, either.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#8 - 2013-06-10 21:20:10 UTC
The horse is dead, you can stop beating it now.

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

Black Dranzer
#9 - 2013-06-10 21:20:52 UTC
Mag's
Azn Empire
#10 - 2013-06-10 21:32:26 UTC
Black Dranzer wrote:
That's what they said about learning skills.
No actually, they wanted them removed. CCP just took their time in doing it. Blink

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

Lykouleon
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#11 - 2013-06-10 21:32:40 UTC
I'm usually on the side of not making EVE easier or on the side of making life a living hell for the weak...but yeah, no, this is not a good idea.

Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER so I can hit them with my sword

Black Dranzer
#12 - 2013-06-10 21:55:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Dranzer
Mag's wrote:
No actually, they wanted them removed. CCP just took their time in doing it. Blink

CCP also wants to do something about cloaking. And local. And that entire bloody intel spectrum.

I did not expect this thread to garner support, mainly because it A) Makes cloaking better, which scares the people who hate AFK cloaking, and B) It makes it possible to detect cloakers, which scares the people who love AFK cloaking. It's a balanced solution that pisses off both camps. My proposal is basically "remove local" combined with "allow cloakers to be probed". It's far more balanced than either solution on its own, but that doesn't matter, because people are self absorbed and don't like compromise.

Do you remember what it was that actually got Learning Skills fixed? It was a person in authority basically getting sick of seeing all the topics and then going up to somebody and saying "hey, you, fix it now because I'm paying you". The problem is not resources. The problem is not designs. The problem is not convincing CCP that it's an issue that needs dealing with. The problem is PRIORITY. This entire clusterfuck could be fixed in the next patch if somebody in authority mandated it. But nobody in authority is mandating it. So it isn't getting dealt with.

I made this thread for two reasons. 1) Query public response to compromise (which went about as well as I expected), and 2), to contribute to the growing pool of complaints so that maybe somebody in authority will stumble across the thread and get pissed enough to actually finally say the word to get this stupid thing dealt with.

Honestly, I don't care what CCP does to cloaking, because I know whatever it is, it'll be better thought out and more balanced than anything most people on this forum could propose.

I just want to see it get done.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#13 - 2013-06-10 22:18:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Black Dranzer wrote:
Mag's wrote:
No actually, they wanted them removed. CCP just took their time in doing it. Blink

CCP also wants to do something about cloaking. And local. And that entire bloody intel spectrum.

I did not expect this thread to garner support, mainly because it A) Makes cloaking better, which scares the people who hate AFK cloaking, and B) It makes it possible to detect cloakers, which scares the people who love AFK cloaking. It's a balanced solution that pisses off both camps. My proposal is basically "remove local" combined with "allow cloakers to be probed". It's far more balanced than either solution on its own, but that doesn't matter, because people are self absorbed and don't like compromise.

Do you remember what it was that actually got Learning Skills fixed? It was a person in authority basically getting sick of seeing all the topics and then going up to somebody and saying "hey, you, fix it now because I'm paying you". The problem is not resources. The problem is not designs. The problem is not convincing CCP that it's an issue that needs dealing with. The problem is PRIORITY. This entire clusterfuck could be fixed in the next patch if somebody in authority mandated it. But nobody in authority is mandating it. So it isn't getting dealt with.

I made this thread for two reasons. 1) Query public response to compromise (which went about as well as I expected), and 2), to contribute to the growing pool of complaints so that maybe somebody in authority will stumble across the thread and get pissed enough to actually finally say the word to get this stupid thing dealt with.

Honestly, I don't care what CCP does to cloaking, because I know whatever it is, it'll be better thought out and more balanced than anything most people on this forum could propose.

I just want to see it get done.
You'll have to provide me with the wide spectrum of information that relates to CCP wanting to do something about cloaking. Something that's on a par with the learning skill debate. I doubt you can, but we shall see.

They do want the intel separated from local and I agree this has been long talked about. I would also agree this is on a par with the learning skill debate.

But now we get to the crux of the matter. This thread is really all about AFK cloakers. You have an axe to grind, we get it, oh my do we get it. But these ideas have been talked to death. The complaints regarding cloaking have been going on for years. Mostly from those too ignorant of the actual mechanics at play or that believe they should have almost perfect safety in null.

This thread will not garner any more or less support, than others have on the same subject. But I see that's not your point here. The point is simply to keep flooding the forum with such threads and hope that by mere weight and repetitiveness, you'll force CCP into action.

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

Black Dranzer
#14 - 2013-06-10 22:37:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Dranzer
Mag's wrote:
You'll have to provide me with the wide spectrum of information that relates to CCP wanting to do something about cloaking. Something that's on a par with the learning skill debate. I doubt you can, but we shall see.

The extent of it is a couple of mutters at fanfast panels, mostly. It's not as explicit as "AFK cloaking is bad", so much as a non-commital "Cloaking is something we want to take a look at".

Quote:
They do want the intel separated from local and I agree this has been long talked about. I would also agree this is on a par with the learning skill debate.

Thing is, intel and stealth are implicitly intertwined. You can't cleanly separate them.

Quote:
But now we get to the crux of the matter. This thread is really all about AFK cloakers. You have an axe to grind, we get it, oh my do we get it. But these ideas have been talked to death. The complaints regarding cloaking have been going on for years. Mostly from those too ignorant of the actual mechanics at play or that believe they should have almost perfect safety in null.

Your presumptions are understandable, but highly inaccurate. I'm concerned with cloaking as a whole. Stealth in Eve poorly implemented, and I take issue with it. The reason you think this is about AFK cloaking is because it would be physically impossible to make a thread about cloaking and have it not touch on AFK cloaking in some way, shape, manner or form. I do believe my implementation would "fix" AFK cloaking, but that's not why I pieced it together.

I probably would've made an intel-related proposal, but A) I'm not qualified to do it, because my knowledge on intel gathering is disparate at best, and B) Such a proposal would necessitate widespread changes, and people are generally bad at thinking holistically. If you write a list of a dozen interconnected changes, people will take one or two of those changes, isolate them, and then tell you why your idea sucks whilst ignoring how those two changes interact with the other ten.

Quote:
The point is simply to keep flooding the forum with such threads and hope that by mere weight and repetitiveness, you'll force CCP into action.

Accurate, if inelegant. I do believe my ideas have merit on their own; I'm not just here to spam. But that's part of the bigger picture.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#15 - 2013-06-10 22:48:58 UTC
Crude, if funny, suggestions like this make me happy.

I am not saying I endorse them, but I like seeing them.

You have a rough fight fire with fire approach, which might be practical if it did not force everyone to be cloaked in order to be safe.

That describes how some people play in wormholes, although I have no doubt there are exceptions.

Oh, and even in wormholes they can't find each other when cloaked, which would make null into a rather odd place to live.

Fascinating!
Black Dranzer
#16 - 2013-06-10 22:54:38 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
You have a rough fight fire with fire approach, which might be practical if it did not force everyone to be cloaked in order to be safe.

Could you elaborate on this?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#17 - 2013-06-11 01:17:22 UTC
Black Dranzer wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
You have a rough fight fire with fire approach, which might be practical if it did not force everyone to be cloaked in order to be safe.

Could you elaborate on this?

You seemed to suggest cloaked vessels would be undetectable when cloaked, except by other cloaked vessels.

Therefore, to defend against cloaked hostiles it would be needed to have cloaked vessels standing guard.

The balance point to this must deal with the absence of local, at least regarding cloaked vessels.

I would suggest something different.

For local:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2369739#post2369739

For hunting cloaked vessels after such a change:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2668453#post2668453

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2013-06-11 15:03:43 UTC
Okay, having read the response and thought about it, I think the suggestions in the OP are too much. It gives too much to the cloaked ship. I think there should be a small chance to see the cloaked ship wihtout a new mechanice (scan probes, etc.) and that could be something like keeping cloaks and the jump cloak as they are now.

Basically,

-You wont show in local until you deactivate your jump cloak.
-You will be removed from local once you activate your own cloaking device (if you have one).
-Given the two above you at least be visible for a very short amount of time jumping in and out of a system.

Thus, if the pilot ratting in a system is not paying attention his risk factor just went up. If he went AFK even while at a POS, his risk factor just went up. And so forth.

At the same time I also like the idea that the cloaked ship cannot view local as well. Now he has to use Dscan and warp around--i.e. work for his intel.

And in addition a way of finding cloaked ships in system should be introduced. Be it with scan probes, a module whatever. Thus, if a guy is ratting and warps to a POS to go take a leak and is nervous somebody may have come in system and is waiting to "do bad things to him"™ then he'll have to re-scan the system. Just as the cloaker no longer gets quicky intel without some risk, neither does the ratter.

Nikk's suggestions cover most of this, IIRC. The OP is moving somewhat in that direction, but is not comprehensive enough and IMO, gives too much to cloaks.

Note that with the above the idea of AFK cloaking is pointless, even without some way of finding the cloaked vessel. Since you don't show up in local, you can't have any impact. Adding in a way to detect cloaked ships will introduce risk to AFK cloaking as well further discouraging it, at least for long periods of time.

"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
#19 - 2013-06-11 18:51:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Black Dranzer
Teckos Pech wrote:
I think the suggestions in the OP are too much. It gives too much to the cloaked ship.

Teckos Pech wrote:
a way of finding cloaked ships in system should be introduced. Be it with scan probes, a module whatever.

Black Dranzer wrote:
6) Combat scanner probes can find cloaked ships

Black Dranzer wrote:
If you write a list of a dozen interconnected changes, people will take one or two of those changes, isolate them, and then tell you why your idea sucks whilst ignoring how those two changes interact with the other ten.
pmchem
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#20 - 2013-06-16 23:48:27 UTC
Devs have said for a long time that AFK cloaking is not good gameplay. Maybe someday they'll do something about it.

https://twitter.com/pmchem/ || http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/community-spotlight-garpa/ || Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

12Next page