These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Ermegerd another AFK Cloak solution

First post
Author
Ecoskii
Penal Servitude
#41 - 2013-10-25 22:51:03 UTC
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:
This is the 37th cloak thread I have responded to. And once again it is just as bad as before.

No.

You cannot carebear with immunity.

Cloaking is DESIGNED to be completely invisible. It is camoflauge, not a shield of invincibility.

If you want to stop an AFK cloaker... then you MUST go on the offensive and actively hunt them.

This is what smart bombs and stealth bombers are good for... both are area of effect weapons.

You fly a battleship with multiple smart bombs out to each point in the solar system one after the next, and then you warp back in on that points line at varying distances and pop your smart bombs. If the cloaker is anywhere in the range of your smarts... you kill him.


This one amused me - seriously, do you play EVE? There is no counter to someone sitting AFK cloaked 24/7 at a safe spot. At anytime during the day/night he can walk up to his overheating PC and see if anyone is around - major alliances laugh at anyone daft enough to rat with neuts in local. It remains a dumb unbalanced mechanic that adds little content to the game - let a cloak wear out or auto-logoff people unattended after 3-4 hours and the problem is solved only to the disadvantage of those that are AFK. Easy to implement (and might cause some titans/SC to die - no bad thing either) - just do it and move on
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#42 - 2013-10-25 23:28:57 UTC
Ecoskii wrote:
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:
This is the 37th cloak thread I have responded to. And once again it is just as bad as before.

No.

You cannot carebear with immunity.

Cloaking is DESIGNED to be completely invisible. It is camoflauge, not a shield of invincibility.

If you want to stop an AFK cloaker... then you MUST go on the offensive and actively hunt them.

This is what smart bombs and stealth bombers are good for... both are area of effect weapons.

You fly a battleship with multiple smart bombs out to each point in the solar system one after the next, and then you warp back in on that points line at varying distances and pop your smart bombs. If the cloaker is anywhere in the range of your smarts... you kill him.


This one amused me - seriously, do you play EVE? There is no counter to someone sitting AFK cloaked 24/7 at a safe spot. At anytime during the day/night he can walk up to his overheating PC and see if anyone is around - major alliances laugh at anyone daft enough to rat with neuts in local. It remains a dumb unbalanced mechanic that adds little content to the game - let a cloak wear out or auto-logoff people unattended after 3-4 hours and the problem is solved only to the disadvantage of those that are AFK. Easy to implement (and might cause some titans/SC to die - no bad thing either) - just do it and move on

If that would have actually solved it in a balanced way, they would have already done it.

They have rejected this by default, already.
Ecoskii
Penal Servitude
#43 - 2013-10-26 00:44:41 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Ecoskii wrote:
SGT FUNYOUN wrote:
This is the 37th cloak thread I have responded to. And once again it is just as bad as before.

No.

You cannot carebear with immunity.

Cloaking is DESIGNED to be completely invisible. It is camoflauge, not a shield of invincibility.

If you want to stop an AFK cloaker... then you MUST go on the offensive and actively hunt them.

This is what smart bombs and stealth bombers are good for... both are area of effect weapons.

You fly a battleship with multiple smart bombs out to each point in the solar system one after the next, and then you warp back in on that points line at varying distances and pop your smart bombs. If the cloaker is anywhere in the range of your smarts... you kill him.


This one amused me - seriously, do you play EVE? There is no counter to someone sitting AFK cloaked 24/7 at a safe spot. At anytime during the day/night he can walk up to his overheating PC and see if anyone is around - major alliances laugh at anyone daft enough to rat with neuts in local. It remains a dumb unbalanced mechanic that adds little content to the game - let a cloak wear out or auto-logoff people unattended after 3-4 hours and the problem is solved only to the disadvantage of those that are AFK. Easy to implement (and might cause some titans/SC to die - no bad thing either) - just do it and move on

If that would have actually solved it in a balanced way, they would have already done it.

They have rejected this by default, already.


There has been complete inactivity despite thousands of posts on all sides of this simplistic and asinine mechanic
Xcom
Quantum Vortex Battalion
#44 - 2013-10-26 03:04:06 UTC
Ecoskii wrote:
There has been complete inactivity despite thousands of posts on all sides of this simplistic and asinine mechanic


Its pointless arguing with people about this subject. Clearly if you tell a bunch of people that have spent hours skilling for that perfect nitch ship they love, they will go all stupid if its going to get nerfed. Ridiculous counter arguments are brought up out of complete desperation.

Just telling a neutral observer all the benefits cloaked ships bring and how there isn't a clear counter for it shows how extremely broken it is. Anyone in a neutral stance would say cloaking is imbalanced but most often all the cloaked nagging are the ones that have a bias view of it.

Sadly CCP just ignores all the outcry. Dono why they don't want to at least try and hotfix the problem with any small fix. Till they some day decide to pick it up we just all have to give into the glory of AFK cloaking and do what ever asshat out there does. Find a cloaker we like and then afk in it like everyone else and there dog does nowdays.
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
#45 - 2013-10-26 03:48:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbara Nichole
Apollo Eros wrote:

Balance Ideas:
-Give the probe a max AU range between 2-4AU that way you cant blanket scan it.
-Allow it to be strong enough to detect the ship type but never the ships exact location. This means you should only be able to get a red dot.

The idea with this solution is to let you know that someone is there. It full fills your paranoia and then you get to make the decision if you want to take the risk.
This is not a new idea either... but your naming of the different tech and probes was certainly newer. I can already think of 3 ways this could be abused to make a cloakers life hell. I am not for any "solution" that does not involved removing all cloaked from local.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#46 - 2013-10-28 14:35:51 UTC
Xcom wrote:
Ecoskii wrote:
There has been complete inactivity despite thousands of posts on all sides of this simplistic and asinine mechanic


Its pointless arguing with people about this subject. Clearly if you tell a bunch of people that have spent hours skilling for that perfect nitch ship they love, they will go all stupid if its going to get nerfed. Ridiculous counter arguments are brought up out of complete desperation.

Just telling a neutral observer all the benefits cloaked ships bring and how there isn't a clear counter for it shows how extremely broken it is. Anyone in a neutral stance would say cloaking is imbalanced but most often all the cloaked nagging are the ones that have a bias view of it.

Sadly CCP just ignores all the outcry. Dono why they don't want to at least try and hotfix the problem with any small fix. Till they some day decide to pick it up we just all have to give into the glory of AFK cloaking and do what ever asshat out there does. Find a cloaker we like and then afk in it like everyone else and there dog does nowdays.

Neutral and objective are not the same thing, but context dependent.
Neutral is by default, a view which is equal in both directions. If one direction is insanity and madness, then being neutral is halfway to that as well.

We don't want neutral, we want objective.

Objective means able to view ALL aspects, and considerations, not just a limited set which assumes the foundations of an issue cancel out.

The foundation of this issue is local, and it most certainly does NOT cancel out.
IT does two things here, both of which favor a defender beyond any rational claim otherwise.

1. It displays all pilots flawlessly. This deprives the game of competitive intel, or any tactic which relies on a human failure to pay attention and process intel.
2. It includes cloaked pilots, in a way which immediately deprives them of the core element of cloaking. They are known to be in a system automatically.

Because of these two factors, the use of cloaking in any manner which actually relies on secrecy is lost to the game. You are known to be in the system, with no doubts.
What remains, is an artificial token equally broken, so that cloaking is not a completely meaningless function.
You cannot isolate their location within the system itself, they can only expose themselves.

Local intel, in addition, does such a good job in reporting intel, that it is possible to ignore intended group cooperation as a means of surviving in null. You can be a part time group participant, and use the intel from local to replace warnings which would otherwise require team play to provide.
Something expected to be unnecessary in high sec, is also too often unnecessary in null sec.

Being stalemated by the presence of a hostile, and the expectation of not needing team play when you are trying to overcome opposing team play by very definition*, breaks null game play too much to be taken seriously. It does quite enough already in creating the stalemate, rather than simply handing a victory to the larger force.

*(The expectation that a group of players is coordinating themselves to work together around another player, by means of a cyno generator)

Null is supposed to favor group play, above all else.
It may not ALWAYS require it, but at no time is group play meant to be beaten by those fewer in number so casually.
Black Canary Jnr
Higher Than Everest
Hazardous Company
#47 - 2013-10-28 14:54:52 UTC
Remove local or remove cloakies from local and watch how quickly null sec becomes deserted. It's not creating more pvp, it's killing the population of null sec and the pvp that population generates. GG.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#48 - 2013-10-28 15:08:54 UTC
Black Canary Jnr wrote:
Remove local or remove cloakies from local and watch how quickly null sec becomes deserted. It's not creating more pvp, it's killing the population of null sec and the pvp that population generates. GG.

Think about who exactly would leave.

The PvE players? Don't be so sure about that. I am a miner, and I am one of those pointing out that null is in many ways softer to live in than high sec is.
In null, you can rat in a carrier, if you have enough faith in your space being isolated from hostiles.
Now, while any fool can point out that you cannot take a carrier into high sec, you CAN take ships of comparable value to use.
All that protects these blinged out PvE ships, is the perception that suicide ganking in high sec won't be cost effective.

The moment a freighter, for example, becomes a target, is when the belief exists that it will drop enough to be a profit to those able to destroy it.

Now, the crude assumption that local is there to protect defenders is a blatant lie.
Local currently exists to help those who are not working together.
You can be the hostile in a cloaked ship, or the the guy by himself doing PvE.

The moment you are actually working with others, and using teamwork to advance your goals, local becomes your enemy.
It is the tool that delivers intel to your targets, on a level that only a sheer blob can overwhelm.
And then only for grinding sov by reinforcing structures, as actual pilots can avoid you reliably.

Enhancing local further, would destroy the need for group play entirely, and empty high sec into null.
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#49 - 2013-10-28 15:36:20 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Good lord I'm tired of hearing the words "perfect intel" from the same group of people in every single AFK cloak thread. Local exists, it exists by design, it's existed for a long time and that's unlikely to change.

And while yes, the reason people can see a cloaker is there is local, and removing local would remove the ability to see them, this does NOT mean it's the cause OR that it's the only fix. It's the equivalent of getting rid of your monitor to block an unwanted popup. Sure, the popup can only annoy you because the monitor shows it, and removing the monitor really does solve the issue, but it's not the cause and not the only fix.

Just remember: Correlation does not imply causation.


I'm tired of the whining from the same group of people about how cloaks are so OP and need to be nerfed to the detriment of active players.

And yes, seeing a player in local is the cause of AFK cloaking. What else is the cause? You are like a creationist in your style of argumentation, you suggest it could be another reason, but never ever provide that reason. Much like a creationist says, "Oh that could have happened by some route other than evolution," and then never go on to provide that alternate explanation (hint, its God, which the creos know will land them in trouble legally from a school curriculum point of view, hence the decpetion). And we know why you don't want to admit it is local...because then the solution becomes apparent...do something about the intel local provides flawlessly and for free.

Why else would a guy show up in your preferred ratting system and AFK cloak all day if not to impact your play style? Did he go for tea and dumplings and forget to come back and turn of his game? Are all these whine threads about people who are forgetful? If so, then ignore them and move on.

"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
#50 - 2013-10-28 15:40:35 UTC
Trii Seo wrote:
What does someone's name in local give you?

- corp/alliance -> known/not known? Known for hotdrops? Known for WH operations? Known for solo?
- name -> killboard check -> possible ship types

- Presence in system, five-ten seconds before he even finishes loading grid.

Local exists, existed for a long time and for a long time it's been an intel tool. An intel tool that's so good AFK cloakiness had to be invented (and that's an old tactic on its own) to 'counter' it.


And what does the killboard info give you? Times the player is likely to be active...which can give you a window on doing PvE with increased safety.

Couple it with the in-game map and you might even get an idea of where his BLOPs buddies are if the killboard suggests this is what he might be after.

In short, local and other free in game intel sources can give you quite the edge. And for nothing. It literally costs players, corporations, and alliances nothing. No infrastructure, no isk, no risk, it is even completely impervious to attack. The only way to subvert intel provided by local is...AFK cloaking.

"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
#51 - 2013-10-28 15:41:57 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mary Annabelle wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Good lord I'm tired of hearing the words "perfect intel" from the same group of people in every single AFK cloak thread. Local exists, it exists by design, it's existed for a long time and that's unlikely to change.

And while yes, the reason people can see a cloaker is there is local, and removing local would remove the ability to see them, this does NOT mean it's the cause OR that it's the only fix. It's the equivalent of getting rid of your monitor to block an unwanted popup. Sure, the popup can only annoy you because the monitor shows it, and removing the monitor really does solve the issue, but it's not the cause and not the only fix.

Just remember: Correlation does not imply causation.

You want to use a pop up as an analogy here? AWESOME

MAIN SOLUTION: Use a frakking anti-virus so the pop up can't actually hurt your PC

After THAT, if the pop up still bugs you:
Solution one! Stop going to that buggy website
Solution two! Get a pop up blocker
Solution three! Work around the goofy thing, minimize it, whatever.

Not using your monitor at all is like not undocking at all, and shows poor understanding.

Idea The more you know....
Erm yes, I know, there are other solutions. That was my point.
And no, not using my monitor is like getting rid of local. If I were docked, I can still see the cloaker is there (you know local doesn't disappear while docked right?).

You are some special level of genius. But thanks for supporting my point.


Bunk, not using your monitor is like logging off.

Removing local still leaves you with probes and d-scan. You are not totally blind, just blind to ships that don't show up on d-scan or with probes.

Stop exaggerating.

"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
#52 - 2013-10-28 15:49:44 UTC
Xcom wrote:
I managed to find the response from the EVE Vegas QnA section if anyone is interested.

http://www.twitch.tv/ccp/b/471606839

Question asked at 3:01:00

For anyone who doesn't want to open the link. The question about AFK cloaking was asked and one of the devs CCP Fuzzy I believe said if they change things they will try and make cloaking interactive and form some form of cat and mouse system around it. The gist I got from it was that they don't have plans for it anytime soon.



From the video...

"If we change cloaking...."

"If we change cloaking...."

"If we change cloaking...."

"If we change cloaking...."

Love how that got left out.

And the guy who asked the question: Wimp, please consider uninstalling. Roll

"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
#53 - 2013-10-28 16:00:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Xcom wrote:
Ecoskii wrote:
There has been complete inactivity despite thousands of posts on all sides of this simplistic and asinine mechanic


Its pointless arguing with people about this subject. Clearly if you tell a bunch of people that have spent hours skilling for that perfect nitch ship they love, they will go all stupid if its going to get nerfed. Ridiculous counter arguments are brought up out of complete desperation.


I love the ad hominem here. The people who disagree with you can't disagree for honest legitimate reasons, no instead they must be motivated by ulterior motives.

Nevermind that Nikk is a miner and I don't like AFK cloaking, but think it is necessary as a counter balancing mechanism for local.

Quote:
Just telling a neutral observer all the benefits cloaked ships bring and how there isn't a clear counter for it shows how extremely broken it is. Anyone in a neutral stance would say cloaking is imbalanced but most often all the cloaked nagging are the ones that have a bias view of it.


What benefits? Let me see...when at a safe and cloaked you are 100% safe. If you have a covert ops cloak you can warp around, which has some small risk of being decloaked....

Other benefits are...

Open a cyno? Nope, not while cloaked.
Shoot at ships? Nope, not while cloaked.
Activate any other module? Nope not while cloaked.
Do anything to any other player? Not much really, while cloaked. You could give intel on them, but that is about it.

So the benefits are extremely limited game play in exchange for increased safety.

So this neutral observer is going to conclude that cloaks are OP or imbalanced? And we haven't even covered how many ships that fit a covert ops cloak have paper thin tanks and not the best DPS in the game.

Oh and you are reported via local at all times. Thus, every player in that system knows you are there and are a potential threat.

Yes, horribly, horribly imbalanced. Roll

Quote:
Sadly CCP just ignores all the outcry. Dono why they don't want to at least try and hotfix the problem with any small fix. Till they some day decide to pick it up we just all have to give into the glory of AFK cloaking and do what ever asshat out there does. Find a cloaker we like and then afk in it like everyone else and there dog does nowdays.


Well go to Eve Vegas next time and cry to the Devs. I'm sure they'll pat you on the shoulder and commiserate with you then go back to work at CCP and hopefully forget about you.

"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 Canary Jnr
Higher Than Everest
Hazardous Company
#54 - 2013-10-28 16:49:43 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Black Canary Jnr wrote:
Remove local or remove cloakies from local and watch how quickly null sec becomes deserted. It's not creating more pvp, it's killing the population of null sec and the pvp that population generates. GG.

Think about who exactly would leave.

The PvE players? Don't be so sure about that. I am a miner, and I am one of those pointing out that null is in many ways softer to live in than high sec is.
In null, you can rat in a carrier, if you have enough faith in your space being isolated from hostiles.
Now, while any fool can point out that you cannot take a carrier into high sec, you CAN take ships of comparable value to use.
All that protects these blinged out PvE ships, is the perception that suicide ganking in high sec won't be cost effective.

The moment a freighter, for example, becomes a target, is when the belief exists that it will drop enough to be a profit to those able to destroy it.

Now, the crude assumption that local is there to protect defenders is a blatant lie.
Local currently exists to help those who are not working together.
You can be the hostile in a cloaked ship, or the the guy by himself doing PvE.

The moment you are actually working with others, and using teamwork to advance your goals, local becomes your enemy.
It is the tool that delivers intel to your targets, on a level that only a sheer blob can overwhelm.
And then only for grinding sov by reinforcing structures, as actual pilots can avoid you reliably.

Enhancing local further, would destroy the need for group play entirely, and empty high sec into null.


Provi will die completely because we have literally a hot dropper in 1/5 of the systems here. It's fine and dandy for people in like -0.8 where a red showing up is a once a day thing. It's a once every 15 mins thing here. If you are so insistent on changing local in null sec then why not take it out in True sec where people are making their cozy billions. We are fine in providence with the amount of cloakies we have at the moment, thanks.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#55 - 2013-10-28 17:13:37 UTC
Black Canary Jnr wrote:
Provi will die completely because we have literally a hot dropper in 1/5 of the systems here. It's fine and dandy for people in like -0.8 where a red showing up is a once a day thing. It's a once every 15 mins thing here. If you are so insistent on changing local in null sec then why not take it out in True sec where people are making their cozy billions. We are fine in providence with the amount of cloakies we have at the moment, thanks.

And you would not choose to be able to fight back?

That seems a limited view of what your options are.

Most ideas I see, do not favor the cloaked player. They make both sides work harder, but in exchange for a resolution one way or the other, and the player(s) making the best effort come out on top.
CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#56 - 2013-10-28 17:59:22 UTC
I have removed a personal attack from this thread.

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

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents

Xcom
Quantum Vortex Battalion
#57 - 2013-10-28 18:10:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Xcom
Nikk Narrel wrote:
1. Bling PvE ships? Yeah, more often than in high sec, you will see them in null. High sec will suicide gank those the moment they become cost effective to attack.
As to security, there is more involved with claiming to have security, than anchoring a POS or having an outpost in system.
If so-called AFK Cloaking pilots have an easy time getting in, your security is not effective enough to be ignored past that gate camp. Every pilot needs to compensate for this failure by fitting defensively.
Complaining on the forums about how you don't want to fit defensively, because your gate camps are not up to muster, that's just sad.

2. Of course rewards would be enhanced. You may not have noticed, but the fact you can compare rewards between high and null indicates they are close to each other in risk.
Moon goo is profitable because a POS cannot simply get safe when hostile names appears in local. It stays put.
W space is not null minus local. Local fails to be the defining difference here except to people not familiar with it.
Hint; It is not called "No-Local" space, but Wormhole, for a reason.....
Part of the reason wormhole space has no local, is that they learned from their mistakes in other areas.

3. Of course cloaking is broken. The expression "locked out" would also apply.
Suggesting it is overpowered implies the devs have not balanced it. Noone knows more about the game than the actual devs, so that argument falls flat immediately.
Noone in EVE is cloaked, because part of being cloaked implies being undetected. Local eliminates that for free.
But, we use the term cloaked, to mean "unscannable", and not visible in general.

As to having or not having a counter, game mechanics which directly produce no effect do not require one.
My simply logging out has no counter. If I should do so in a way that avoids a risk I brought upon myself, that invokes one.
My simply docking in an outpost has no counter. If I should have a hostilities timer, the outpost can keep me out till it expires. That is also a counter.
But for those counters to exist, I have to take an action. I had to either expose myself to PvP, or go where I am unwelcome.

Cloaking is already self limited, and requires no external counter. You cannot fire weapons, for most ships you cannot even warp.
You are no threat to others so long as that cloak is running. That is quite an effective counter, all things considered.
Playing word games and implying threat to include things you might do in the future, well, that's disingenuous.
You wouldn't be cloaked then, now would you...


Not a single faction in the entirety of eve have ever been able to prevent a cloaked ship from sneaking into there systems. Its literally impossible to run a 23.5h dirty gate camp vs cloaked ships. Please do try and catch a cloaked ship trying to enter your system before implying its possible. Also are you really saying highsec and nullsec are equally risky? Dear god what game are you playing. Do you know what type of ships people run incursions with?

Also cloaked ships don't need to fire there weapons when cloaked. Its not as if they could decloak and attack at any point in time they would deem fitting. Clearly anyone with half a brain knows to d-scan and scope out the situation before engaging. The fact your implying they are harmless is just sad. No other type of ship in eve gives you the option of guaranteeing a save kill like a cover-ops cloaking ship. You clearly must have flown anything but a cov-ops attack ship. You realize you don't actually engage unless you know its a safe kill right? Cloaked attackers don't decloak in middle of a fleet and start ganking a miner.

Also no, I don't think CCP have balanced cloaking or both of us wouldn't be in this part of the forum. What exactly are you implying, CCP are some masterful game artists that haven't done a single mistake in balancing cloaking? You do realize that cloaking doesn't have an actual counter right? being visible in local is not a counter as it still leaves the ship in a invulnerable state in space. They should infact rename it to the invulnerability module and add a label on top saying they wont ever fix cause its countered by local, except they haven't gotten around to adding the feature where you can get killed via local yet.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#58 - 2013-10-28 18:33:15 UTC
Xcom wrote:
1> Not a single faction in the entirety of eve have ever been able to prevent a cloaked ship from sneaking into there systems. Its literally impossible to run a 23.5h dirty gate camp vs cloaked ships. Please do try and catch a cloaked ship trying to enter your system before implying its possible. Also are you really saying highsec and nullsec are equally risky? Dear god what game are you playing. Do you know what type of ships people run incursions with?

2> Also cloaked ships don't need to fire there weapons when cloaked. Its not as if they could decloak and attack at any point in time they would deem fitting. Clearly anyone with half a brain knows to d-scan and scope out the situation before engaging. The fact your implying they are harmless is just sad. No other type of ship in eve gives you the option of guaranteeing a save kill like a cover-ops cloaking ship. You clearly must have flown anything but a cov-ops attack ship. You realize you don't actually engage unless you know its a safe kill right? Cloaked attackers don't decloak in middle of a fleet and start ganking a miner.

3> Also no, I don't think CCP have balanced cloaking or both of us wouldn't be in this part of the forum. What exactly are you implying, CCP are some masterful game artists that haven't done a single mistake in balancing cloaking? You do realize that cloaking doesn't have an actual counter right? being visible in local is not a counter as it still leaves the ship in a invulnerable state in space. They should infact rename it to the invulnerability module and add a label on top saying they wont ever fix cause its countered by local, except they haven't gotten around to adding the feature where you can get killed via local yet.

1. If that's the case, I would say good job for the design team.
Noone should have an absolute defense, they are dull and game breaking.
As to high and null being equally risky? Yes.
Risky in the exact same way? No.
Good luck using local as an intel tool in high sec, it is only useful against obvious threats when a NBSI policy can be used.
As to incursions, then as I previously stated, they are either not cost effective to gank the ships, or they have clever players protecting them. The second effectively establishes the first.

2. At the time they attack, they are vulnerable.
If they are using a cyno, then they are coordinating with more players, and to assume these players would not have chosen to be more direct in attacking enemy pilots is silly. It is common knowledge that pilots seek advantage when engaging in a fight, so would always run if they expected to lose. The cyno is the closest we get to non consensual combat, in this context.
Sad indeed, that such deception is so necessary.
And if you are trying to say they need to be rebalancing since cloak users are trying to get an advantage over their opponent before attacking, shall we then apply this same measure to the PvE ships they commonly seek to prey upon? After all, they are trying to avoid encounters based upon perception of advantage too.
Balance means equal terms exist on both sides.

3. This part sounds confused, but I think you are trying to say you want the people who put the current system in place, to change it for your convenience.
And this, despite the fact you do not have unanimous consensus from the player base for this.
As to that tired no-counter comment, it needs no additional external counter.
Local reveals cloaked presence, warning every player already.
Add to this, it is not even possible to commit a direct attack while cloaked.
Your versions of a counter all center around the cloaked pilot being forced to leave, while no sacrifices are required from the local sov holders beyond what already exists.
This is called changing the balance.
Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#59 - 2013-10-29 13:06:28 UTC
Xcom wrote:

Also cloaked ships don't need to fire there weapons when cloaked. Its not as if they could decloak and attack at any point in time they would deem fitting. Clearly anyone with half a brain knows to d-scan and scope out the situation before engaging. The fact your implying they are harmless is just sad. No other type of ship in eve gives you the option of guaranteeing a save kill like a cover-ops cloaking ship. You clearly must have flown anything but a cov-ops attack ship. You realize you don't actually engage unless you know its a safe kill right? Cloaked attackers don't decloak in middle of a fleet and start ganking a miner.


In your words, try doing this before you start talking about it. Practically all PvE pilots will be long, long gone by this point. They will be in a POS, logged or in station if you try to run a cloaked ship as an active hunter--i.e. go from system to system looking for targets.

And no kill is entirely safe. You have to do it before help arrives and the target itself can always shoot back. You keep strongly implying that covert ops cloaking ships are 100% they aren't. That they show up on killboards disproves this claim.

Quote:
Also no, I don't think CCP have balanced cloaking or both of us wouldn't be in this part of the forum. What exactly are you implying, CCP are some masterful game artists that haven't done a single mistake in balancing cloaking? You do realize that cloaking doesn't have an actual counter right? being visible in local is not a counter as it still leaves the ship in a invulnerable state in space. They should infact rename it to the invulnerability module and add a label on top saying they wont ever fix cause its countered by local, except they haven't gotten around to adding the feature where you can get killed via local yet.


Being visible in local is a counter. You aren't really "cloaked" as in stealth/invisible. You sit there in local (in null) with a great big sign on you saying, "Look out bad guy around." If you die to a cloaked ship in null, you messed up or were very unlucky. Why? Because you knew he was there. In fact, if he came in system while you were undocked/out of the POS shields you had ample time to get docked or get in the POS shields. If he has been in system all day, you'd see him as soon as you logged in and would know not to undock in anything expensive. All cloaking does is make one unscannable as Nikk noted.

And yeah, when at a safe a cloaked ship with its cloak is invulnerable....but then so are you. I have already pointed out a cloaked ship can do nothing with its cloak active except warp around the system. And once the cloak is down they are vulnerable...as are you.

Yes, once that cloak is down a cyno might go up and allies come in and make your life miserable. Welcome to Eve, nowhere does it say any fight has to be fair. But you know this about Eve, which makes your position truly inexplicable...unless YOU have an ulterior motive....

"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

Ecoskii
Penal Servitude
#60 - 2013-11-08 01:11:50 UTC
CCP Eterne wrote:
I have removed a personal attack from this thread.


It is interesting to note that I think this is the sole single only contribution I have seen posted by CCP in the thousands and thousands of pages on this topic. I await the next contribution with bated breath.