These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#3021 - 2013-11-20 16:16:33 UTC
Xcom wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
But risk is part of the issue. To deny this is like trying to deny that a cat is a mammal.

Why do people AFK cloak? To increase the perceived risk for PvE pilots and deny them access to resources/isk. Why do PvE pilots dislike it so? Because it increases their perception of risk.

Risk is undoubtedly an integral aspect of this discussion. To pretend otherwise is silly.


Yes risk is part of it and risk also brings challenge. As all good games risk and challenge are balanced to create content. Except there is no content here. There is just plain risk added. There is no counter, there is no game play, no nothing. Its you watching the guy in local and know hes been there for hours and he can kill you if you rat or mine. Because CCP didn't add any content to interact with that risk other then wait for it.

In relation to other games like Super Mario it would be like getting killed by the blue turtles every time. As soon as they spawned they would target you and kill you and it would be game over. That is not meaningful content and in relation to risk vs reward, that's just pore game design because there is only pure lopsided risk.

Fast interceptors on the other hand isn't. The risks are apparent, if an interceptor show up in your local system you better hope he doesn't have the new implants or he will be in your belt tagging you and waiting for his friends to show up. The reason its balanced is cause the interceptor gang cant stick around for hours or days. They leave when there job is done and you can always scout for there incoming attack.

The only reason AFK cloaking is used is cause there is an apparent lacking counter. The second CCP would add a counter all the AFK cloaking would disappear and people would have to sit actively in front of there PCs when trying to camp a hostile system.

If I understand your direction correctly, you are pushing in favor of resolution as the main priority.

You see cloaking in this context as promoting a stalemate condition, and the PvE pilot's participation as an unavoidable reflex.

In fairness, I believe you are at least partially correct.
Each step of this sequence is using an action backed by leverage beyond the scope of the immediate player performing their part.
The PvE player has leverage from the structures anchored in system, combined with intel and early warning that includes local chat as a stand-out element.
The PvP hostile has leverage from a cloaking device, as well as the unknown presence of a cyno portal backed by enough pilots to overwhelm potential targets.

We have also a notable section of players who understand all of this, and also point out they feel no problem exists here that requires any change.

I point out, as a miner, that if we put in a solution that results in increased productivity from null, then that will create a need for the devs to counter this in order to protect eve's economy.
I am also concerned that the solution they find, could very well result in my game play as a miner becoming compromised.

I don't think this consequence is entirely obvious to most PvE players, who have possibly not considered what happens after the so-called AFK cloaker is gone for good.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3022 - 2013-11-20 16:23:25 UTC
Xcom wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Xcom wrote:



Its difficult to say exactly how the economy will be affected by removal of the AFK cloaking method. But what is certain is that AFK play and specifically AFK cloaking isn't a good game mechanic. Other methods could be implemented to increase risk in null but that's besides the point. AFK cloaking is the topic at hand, lets try focus on that.


But risk is part of the issue. To deny this is like trying to deny that a cat is a mammal.

Why do people AFK cloak? To increase the perceived risk for PvE pilots and deny them access to resources/isk. Why do PvE pilots dislike it so? Because it increases their perception of risk.

Risk is undoubtedly an integral aspect of this discussion. To pretend otherwise is silly.


Yes risk is part of it and risk also brings challenge. As all good games risk and challenge are balanced to create content. Except there is no content here. There is just plain risk added. There is no counter, there is no game play, no nothing. Its you watching the guy in local and know hes been there for hours and he can kill you if you rat or mine. Because CCP didn't add any content to interact with that risk other then wait for it.

In relation to other games like Super Mario it would be like getting killed by the blue turtles every time. As soon as they spawned they would target you and kill you and it would be game over. That is not meaningful content and in relation to risk vs reward, that's just pore game design because there is only pure lopsided risk.

Fast interceptors on the other hand isn't. The risks are apparent, if an interceptor show up in your local system you better hope he doesn't have the new implants or he will be in your belt tagging you and waiting for his friends to show up. The reason its balanced is cause the interceptor gang cant stick around for hours or days. They leave when there job is done and you can always scout for there incoming attack.

The only reason AFK cloaking is used is cause there is an apparent lacking counter. The second CCP would add a counter all the AFK cloaking would disappear and people would have to sit actively in front of there PCs when trying to camp a hostile system.


AFK cloaking does not kill you every time. If you turtle up in response that is one option, but not a good one. Again, part of the reason for AFK cloaking is to deny access to resources, if you can still access those resources you defeat the AFK cloaker, or at least make his attempt to obtain the objective harder. There have been a number of suggestions on how go about doing this. Ratting in a group of PvP fit ships would make a solo AFK camping meaningless. Even a BLOPs team might have issues if there are 5-6 guys in battle cruisers and they played smart. Nikk has provided alot of info on how to ninja mine if you are AFK camped. Are these all optimal compared to an uncamped system where you can min-max? No, but you are at least getting something out of your system.

Are you guaranteed that the camper wont drop a 150 man fleet on your heads? No, but sorry this is Eve and in null there shouldn't be that kind of safety except in very limited instances. And when you look at those instances your ability to do things is also severely curtailed.

Since this will likely bring up the yeah but cloaking is 100% safe and you can still do "stuff". Lets go over it again....

Refresher course on how cloaking actually works:

When you are cloaked, can you target anything? No.

When you are cloaked, can you activate any other module? No.

When you are cloaked, can you kill another player? No.

When you are cloaked, can you be targeted? No.

When you are cloaked, can you be killed? No.

What can you do?

When you are cloaked, you can use d-scan.

When you are cloaked, if you have a covert ops cloak fit, you can warp cloaked.

That's pretty much it.

Looks pretty balanced to me.

The biggest thing a cloaked player can do is try to lurk up on you, if you are out and about in null, and try to attack you. But a couple of points here:

1. He is not AFK.

Let me repeat that:

1. He is not AFK.

Given this he is not really part of "The Problem™" since he is, not AFK. He is at his keyboard. He is active. He is cloaked, but again, not AFK cloaked. Yes, you can't tell until he is decloaked and attacking you, but that is irrelevant, the complaint is AFK cloaking. Since he is not AFK he is not "The Problem™". So nerfing his game is just flat out wrong.

2. Once he decloaks, he looses that 100% safety everybody whines about. Lets go back over the list again:

When he decloaks, can he target you? Yes.

When he decloaks, can he activate any other modules? Yes.

When he decloaks, can he kill another player? Yes.

When he decloaks, can he be targeted? Yes.

When he decloaks, can he be killed? Yes.

Notice the 100% safety is gone. You can now kill him. And again, this isn't the issue, really. Why? Because this is a player who IS ****ING ACTIVE.

The only way to be 100% safe while cloaked is to sit at a safe spot, with the cloak active and....do nothing. Even if you are warping around and tracking down POS (yes, I've done this too in hostile territory, and a 30 minute timer would gimp this activity too--look another example) you could land too close to something and decloak and that POS might start shooting you. So even that has an element of risk in it. Once I was scouting POSes for my alliance, and I warped to one POS that had a bubble and some cans out. Whoops! Definite pucker factor there when I was dragged in and decloaked on that full armed and operational POS.

There, I've nearly maxed out my character limit with this giant wall of text of a refresher course. Apologies to everyone else who already knows this cr@p.

"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
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3023 - 2013-11-20 16:35:41 UTC
I want to reiterate this point again, because I think it is important.

Alot of the whining, bitching, and moaning is of the form, "But he is AFK, he isn't really playing the game. So he shouldn't be allowed to impact the game."

But how to tell when a guy is really AFK? Right now I have an alt in a null system. He is waiting to do something. Why is he waiting? There is a neutral in there too and my alt is in a non-combat ship. So he is at a safe and cloaked. Am I AFK? No. Why? Because I am ****ing type this post right ****ing now with my ****ing keyboard. Either that or my dog is really Goddamned mother ****ing talented.

So...should my game be nerfed so Andy, Lucas, or anyone else can have less risk while PvEing? Wait a second! Why should my PvEing be gimped in favor of theirs? And when I get done writing this, I'll switch over to that screen with the alt and do some stuff in game! What a ****ing shock! Doing something in game while cloaked at a safe. My God who ever heard of such a thing?

Same thing goes for a guy AFK in station. To be fair, if you are in station you should be logged every 30 minutes, right Andy? Or ejected from station right? Manually redock? Pick one or the other. If the cloaky has to re-engage the cloak the docked player should suffer a similar level of inconvenience as well, so either undocked (forcible, no cancelling) or logged (and no cancelling here). The latter is safer right?

But wait, lots of people do stuff in station. Inserting build jobs, assembling and fitting ships to go on contracts for the alliance/allies. Updating and creating new market orders. Sorting **** between different corp hangars for people. Or they could be docked and chatting away with allies, diplos, FCs, or whatever. All valid activities that we can't tell simply by looking at local if the person is AFK or not. So why should their game be gimped? So some PvE players can have it a bit easier? Really?

This idea of a timer on a cloak is possibly the worst solution to the problem ever. Because, it will impact the play of not only active cloakers, but those who rely on them as well. For example, people in a fleet during a big fight might need some cloakers for cynos, warp ins, and just simple scouting. But now they can't do those jobs as effectively because of this kind of suggested change.

The claim is to target a very narrow subset of the player base, but trying to do so with a sawed-off-shotgun....something not noted for its accuracy.

"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
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3024 - 2013-11-20 17:49:55 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
But how to tell when a guy is really AFK? Right now I have an alt in a null system. He is waiting to do something. Why is he waiting? There is a neutral in there too and my alt is in a non-combat ship. So he is at a safe and cloaked. Am I AFK? No. Why? Because I am ****ing type this post right ****ing now with my ****ing keyboard. Either that or my dog is really Goddamned mother ****ing talented.

So...should my game be nerfed so Andy, Lucas, or anyone else can have less risk while PvEing? Wait a second! Why should my PvEing be gimped in favor of theirs? And when I get done writing this, I'll switch over to that screen with the alt and do some stuff in game! What a ****ing shock! Doing something in game while cloaked at a safe. My God who ever heard of such a thing?

Same thing goes for a guy AFK in station. To be fair, if you are in station you should be logged every 30 minutes, right Andy? Or ejected from station right? Manually redock? Pick one or the other. If the cloaky has to re-engage the cloak the docked player should suffer a similar level of inconvenience as well, so either undocked (forcible, no cancelling) or logged (and no cancelling here). The latter is safer right?

It seems that I hit a nerve, but I empathize with what you are saying.

Assuming that you did "switch over to that screen with the alt and do some stuff in game" the 30 minute timer would have been reset and it would have had NO effect on you. Likewise if you were in station and spinning your ship, the log timer would be reset EVERY time you spun that ship.

Why advocate a cloak timer? Because unlike a cloaked ship, a ship in station can be detected leaving the station, aligning, and warping from a specific area in space which may be bubbled and camped to death. The cloaked ship can leave his "isolated" section of space from any location and without detection, and land right next to the target ship without any warning at all. A scout can watch the station and give some warning, but no scout can watch the grid of the cloaked ship or provide any warning. Due to such major differences in time and warning of the ships to interact with objects in space, docked ships cannot be treated the same as cloaked ships. So no, the cloak timer should only affect cloaked ships. Nevertheless, I also support the 30 minute afk auto-log idea which I presented earlier.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3025 - 2013-11-20 18:39:26 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:


Assuming that you did "switch over to that screen with the alt and do some stuff in game" the 30 minute timer would have been reset and it would have had NO effect on you. Likewise if you were in station and spinning your ship, the log timer would be reset EVERY time you spun that ship.


I'd still have to reactivate my cloak. It still affects my play and provides me nothing. It makes doing what I do harder. Not much. The only person who benefits is you. So again, why nerf my play in favor of yours? Is my PvE less than yours? Don't think so.

I note you are ingoring the 3 other examples I gave of how active play is nerfed by your horrible idea. Care to even take a second to respond to those?

Quote:
Why advocate a cloak timer? Because unlike a cloaked ship, a ship in station can be detected leaving the station, aligning, and warping from a specific area in space which may be bubbled and camped to death. The cloaked ship can leave his "isolated" section of space from any location and without detection, and land right next to the target ship without any warning at all. A scout can watch the station and give some warning, but no scout can watch the grid of the cloaked ship or provide any warning. Due to such major differences in time and warning of the ships to interact with objects in space, docked ships cannot be treated the same as cloaked ships. So no, the cloak timer should only affect cloaked ships. Nevertheless, I also support the 30 minute afk auto-log idea which I presented earlier.


Alot of Bravo Sierra. If you are AFK in station there should be a negative impact just as if you are cloaked in space and AFK...heck your "solution" adversely impacts active players. Why should people in station, AFK or otherwise, get a free pass?

Your bias and inability to respond to problems with your idea suggest it is just ****.

Try again.

"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
Kenpo
The Guardians of the Beam
#3026 - 2013-11-20 18:58:50 UTC
My mind to your mind, my thoughts to your thoughts...........

Caution, rubber gloves and faceshield required when handling this equipment.
Xcom
Eclipse Strike Unit
Jump On Contact..
#3027 - 2013-11-20 19:57:21 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I point out, as a miner, that if we put in a solution that results in increased productivity from null, then that will create a need for the devs to counter this in order to protect eve's economy.
I am also concerned that the solution they find, could very well result in my game play as a miner becoming compromised.

I don't think this consequence is entirely obvious to most PvE players, who have possibly not considered what happens after the so-called AFK cloaker is gone for good.


I highly doubt the productivity will explode in such manner as to make the game more inconvenient for you. I believe your over estimating the level of impact the removal of AFK cloaking will really have. To be frank I believe your making a hen out of a feather just to divert the attention away from the problem.

Null space is not regulated by AFK cloakers, its regulated by the people that live and own that space. If more people would enter null and mine/rat then hostile entity's would in pursuit show up and start attacking them in response or rather the hostile entity's living in null would drive them back out.

There are no facts to back up my claims but just a simple numbers game would show up the impact it would have. Take the number of system in eve that is currently being camped by AFK cloaking and compare it with the number of null systems overall. You will notice that its a fraction. Just this simple fact shows AFK cloaking is having a minimal effect on the economy of eve.
Xcom
Eclipse Strike Unit
Jump On Contact..
#3028 - 2013-11-20 20:14:46 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
... giant wall of text...


Although you point out interesting points you leave out one giant elephant.

It is fair that a null mining or ratting operation solo should be frowned on and that cloaked ships brings things into balance by forcing group play. I also understand the point your making by saying a cloaked ship can only do its aggressive moves in a vulnerable state after decloaking. The issue is that you leave out the huge part about the ability to gather intel and attack when the moment is right. That advantage is to large when there exists no counter against it. That is the main problem and not the rest.

I believe intel gathering in a close to invulnerable state is to powerful. In fact believe its more powerful then any mounted gun on any ship in the game in any situation. Without a warning system no one is safe in any situation and thats what AFK cloaking brings. If your backing it up by saying its not relevant then you should drive your car blindfolded next time, see how that feels cause that's exactly what you do by mining or ratin in a system camped by a AFK cloaker no matter how big of a mining operation your running.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#3029 - 2013-11-20 20:48:29 UTC
Xcom wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
... giant wall of text...


Although you point out interesting points you leave out one giant elephant.

It is fair that a null mining or ratting operation solo should be frowned on and that cloaked ships brings things into balance by forcing group play. I also understand the point your making by saying a cloaked ship can only do its aggressive moves in a vulnerable state after decloaking. The issue is that you leave out the huge part about the ability to gather intel and attack when the moment is right. That advantage is to large when there exists no counter against it. That is the main problem and not the rest.

I believe intel gathering in a close to invulnerable state is to powerful. In fact believe its more powerful then any mounted gun on any ship in the game in any situation. Without a warning system no one is safe in any situation and thats what AFK cloaking brings. If your backing it up by saying its not relevant then you should drive your car blindfolded next time, see how that feels cause that's exactly what you do by mining or ratin in a system camped by a AFK cloaker no matter how big of a mining operation your running.

That driving analogy doesn't make any sense to me. To fix your analogy, you are not driving blindfolded, and the cloaked vehicle is not even on the road.
The cloaked guy is represented by either remote traffic cams (probe use), or an unnoticed vehicle parked with two detectives staking out a location. Emphasis on the unnoticed part, as invisible does not enter into driving.

Before this potentially threatening vehicle can run into you, they need to first get on the road with you, (decloaking).
Before they can get on the road with you, your stolen police radio alerts you to them being in the area, mentioning their name repeatedly in reference to your 'system', (local chat).

Now, before we take the extra step and suggest that gathering intel has no counter, I would suggest intel gathering options more proactive than simply watching local.
Add to this, potential counter intelligence options, such as having PvP ready ships logged out, but ready to go on short notice.
This is the implied level of preparation being expected of a cloaked ship, that they have a cyno with pilots behind it ready and waiting.
Both sides have equal opportunity, if they are both able and willing to make the effort.

I would like to think a better effort would win. The advantage is stacked in the favor of the sov holders, but they also put in the ground work to establish this.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3030 - 2013-11-20 21:46:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Xcom wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
... giant wall of text...


Although you point out interesting points you leave out one giant elephant.

It is fair that a null mining or ratting operation solo should be frowned on and that cloaked ships brings things into balance by forcing group play. I also understand the point your making by saying a cloaked ship can only do its aggressive moves in a vulnerable state after decloaking. The issue is that you leave out the huge part about the ability to gather intel and attack when the moment is right. That advantage is to large when there exists no counter against it. That is the main problem and not the rest.

I believe intel gathering in a close to invulnerable state is to powerful. In fact believe its more powerful then any mounted gun on any ship in the game in any situation. Without a warning system no one is safe in any situation and thats what AFK cloaking brings. If your backing it up by saying its not relevant then you should drive your car blindfolded next time, see how that feels cause that's exactly what you do by mining or ratin in a system camped by a AFK cloaker no matter how big of a mining operation your running.


This is unbelievably dishonest horse ****. See how effortlessly and with complete contempt for honest discussion you are? No, I doubt it.

Let me explain.

Its really simple.

That guy collecting intel? Yeah...he is an active player. Not AFK.

Thus, irrelevant unless now you are talking about nerfing cloaks in general.

So stop your dissembling.

Edit:
Let me be perfectly clear here so we can stop this kind of Bravo Sierra posting:

And AFK cloaker: he collects precisely zero intel. None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Zilch.

Why? Because he isn't there to see what is going on.

So, by definition intel and AFK cloaking are two totally separate topics.

And driving a car blindfolded...da fuque is that about?

"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
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3031 - 2013-11-20 23:54:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Teckos Pech wrote:

I'd still have to reactivate my cloak. It still affects my play and provides me nothing. It makes doing what I do harder. Not much. The only person who benefits is you. So again, why nerf my play in favor of yours? Is my PvE less than yours? Don't think so.

In the cloak timer idea, you would have to reset the timer every 30 minutes of continuous cloaking. Then you might come to think about it and ask yourself, "if my pve ship has been cloaked for the last 2 hours with no end in sight, why don't I just log?"

Also, if you force decloak, the cloaky is in open space, not camped or bubbled or warpable without a scan. But if you force eject, the ship is at one place, possibly camped, possibly bubbled, definitely warpable, possibly bumped to prevent insta-warp or redock, and definitely with a redock timer. Do you see the difference here too? HUGE differences. AFK in a station projects no immediate force anywhere in system except at the station undock, which may be bubbled like no one's business and camped like crazy with the disadvantage of having to load grid at the same exact place as everyone else who undocks.

Teckos Pech wrote:

I note you are ingoring the 3 other examples I gave of how active play is nerfed by your horrible idea. Care to even take a second to respond to those?

Fine. Cynos, warpins, and scouting. Cynos are usually done to stations or to hotdrops. Stations protect you, so the cloak timer is irrelevant. Hotdrops usually happen the moment you get in system and get the first tackle. After a minute, the opportunity is usually gone, so the timer is irrelevant. Let's see, warp-ins, you find the right position while cloaked and then get a fleet warpin. Definitely much less than 30 minutes to get in position. Shoot, any more than that and your team will be screaming at you with impatience to get in position! Finally, scouting is the best one yet because this typically involves moving from system to system. If you are scouting a system for an extended period of time then you are either in a wormhole, or you are an afk cloaker, which isn't really scouting. Do you see some example where a significant number of players need to remain continuously cloaked for over an hour AND at their keyboards, besides in some kind of "desensitization" campaign (which doesn't work)?

My only bias is against those who want to pretend to have a big effect on a virtual world to which they are paying absolutely no attention to.

Now please try to do a little less ad hominem personal attacking and a little more respectful investigation. Some of your inquiries may go unanswered unless it becomes clear that they are especially important to you.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3032 - 2013-11-21 00:48:25 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

I'd still have to reactivate my cloak. It still affects my play and provides me nothing. It makes doing what I do harder. Not much. The only person who benefits is you. So again, why nerf my play in favor of yours? Is my PvE less than yours? Don't think so.

In the cloak timer idea, you would have to reset the timer every 30 minutes of continuous cloaking. Then you might come to think about it and ask yourself, "if my pve ship has been cloaked for the last 2 hours with no end in sight, why don't I just log?"

Also, if you force decloak, the cloaky is in open space, not camped or bubbled or warpable without a scan. But if you force eject, the ship is at one place, possibly camped, possibly bubbled, definitely warpable, possibly bumped to prevent insta-warp or redock, and definitely with a redock timer. Do you see the difference here too? HUGE differences. AFK in a station projects no immediate force anywhere in system except at the station undock, which may be bubbled like no one's business and camped like crazy with the disadvantage of having to load grid at the same exact place as everyone else who undocks.

Teckos Pech wrote:

I note you are ingoring the 3 other examples I gave of how active play is nerfed by your horrible idea. Care to even take a second to respond to those?

Fine. Cynos, warpins, and scouting. Cynos are usually done to stations or to hotdrops. Stations protect you, so the cloak timer is irrelevant. Hotdrops usually happen the moment you get in system and get the first tackle. After a minute, the opportunity is usually gone, so the timer is irrelevant. Let's see, warp-ins, you find the right position while cloaked and then get a fleet warpin. Definitely much less than 30 minutes to get in position. Shoot, any more than that and your team will be screaming at you with impatience to get in position! Finally, scouting is the best one yet because this typically involves moving from system to system. If you are scouting a system for an extended period of time then you are either in a wormhole, or you are an afk cloaker, which isn't really scouting. Do you see some example where a significant number of players need to remain continuously cloaked for over an hour AND at their keyboards, besides in some kind of "desensitization" campaign (which doesn't work)?

My only bias is against those who want to pretend to have a big effect on a virtual world to which they are paying absolutely no attention to.

Now please try to do a little less ad hominem personal attacking and a little more respectful investigation. Some of your inquiries may go unanswered unless it becomes clear that they are especially important to you.


These are all nerfs to other people's games. In many cases hundreds of players in the case of a big fleet. That you can't see how a recon providing a warp in is nerfed and how it could adversely impact the game for everyone in fleet, suggests a shallow understanding of fleet combat dynamics.*

This is a bad idea.

*Hint: you are the recon guy designates to get a warp-in. But your cloak has been going 27 minutes, so you warp off to a safe to reset it. Now you go to get that warp-in and the....the opportunity your FC is no longer present. Game adversely impacted for 255 other players so Lucas Kell, who happens to be ratting at that time, gets increased safety for ratting.

See how it works? Probably not.

"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
Xcom
Eclipse Strike Unit
Jump On Contact..
#3033 - 2013-11-21 03:59:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Xcom
Teckos Pech wrote:
This is unbelievably dishonest horse ****. See how effortlessly and with complete contempt for honest discussion you are? No, I doubt it.

Let me explain.

Its really simple.

That guy collecting intel? Yeah...he is an active player. Not AFK.

Thus, irrelevant unless now you are talking about nerfing cloaks in general.

So stop your dissembling.

Edit:
Let me be perfectly clear here so we can stop this kind of Bravo Sierra posting:

And AFK cloaker: he collects precisely zero intel. None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Zilch.

Why? Because he isn't there to see what is going on.

So, by definition intel and AFK cloaking are two totally separate topics.

And driving a car blindfolded...da fuque is that about?


Are you intentionally playing stupid to troll? I would have thought you would get the meaning behind the AFK cloaker collecting intel. But if your insistent and want me to make a fool out of you here it is.

The AFK cloaker is generally referred to the term of a player camping a system AFK and cloaked hiding the intent of action. They abuse the mechanic behind not being reachable in space and block other players activity by forcing mining or ratting operations to stop. There presence in said system over a prolonged period of time is due to a flaw where they are unreachable without any counter. There intent can be of any number of reasons weather it is to get free kills, prevent the systems resources from being utilized or otherwise.

From the viewpoint of the system holder (miner / ratter) he knows there is a cloaked presence in the system but he can neither do anything about the situation or preform any mining or ratting operations as he can get attacked by an overwhelming force without any warning. The only choice he has is to stop all mining and ratting operations and leave the system. Let me put an emphases on that keynote just so you get the hint about the car reference, get attacked by an overwhelming force without any warning.

The person called a AFK cloaker is not a fully 247 nonstop AFKer. He does get back to his PC and preform attacks. So stop babbling on about "And AFK cloaker: he collects precisely zero intel. None. Nada. Zip. Zero. Zilch..".

That statement really is a nice attempt to be a troll after 150 pages and it makes you frankly look stupid.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3034 - 2013-11-21 04:23:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Teckos Pech wrote:

These are all nerfs to other people's games. In many cases hundreds of players in the case of a big fleet. That you can't see how a recon providing a warp in is nerfed and how it could adversely impact the game for everyone in fleet, suggests a shallow understanding of fleet combat dynamics.*

This is a bad idea.

*Hint: you are the recon guy designates to get a warp-in. But your cloak has been going 27 minutes, so you warp off to a safe to reset it. Now you go to get that warp-in and the....the opportunity your FC is no longer present. Game adversely impacted for 255 other players so Lucas Kell, who happens to be ratting at that time, gets increased safety for ratting.

See how it works? Probably not.

This is one ever so slight nerf to cloaks. Any fleet forced to wait 30 minutes for a recon to provide a warp-in is certainly going to a have a lot of other trouble before then: wife/gf aggro, boredom, impatience, have to sleep for work the next day, omg wtf is this recon doing!, I'd rather kill a structure, omg .. what other game do I have lying around ...

On your recon example, what is he doing being cloaked up for 27 minutes when everyone could tell that the FC would need him to provide a warp-in within the next few minutes? Off-grid safes anyone? Just warp 500 km off the grid, reset in 4 seconds, and warp back. This isn't a big deal at all. Certainly far better than cloak fuel, which is an idea that is getting a bit too much attention from CCP at the moment. If nothing else, support for this may replace the cloak fuel agenda. However it happens, afk cloaking has got to go, no doubt about it, and regardless of how anyone else tries to protect it with insults or what have you. The class of player who has the least likelihood of knowing that a mechanic affected them in-game (because they were afk) certainly does not deserve to be logged in to a game that he does not intend to play at the keyboard; they are the easiest group to justify doing anything to tbph.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Skerra
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3035 - 2013-11-21 08:35:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Skerra
I'm not sure if this has been suggested, and it seems my original multi paragraph post, never actually posted, so here it is again.

What about adding a slight heat damage penalty to the cloak modules? Something that kicks in after around 4hrs and is very gradual so that your module can keep active for around 12hrs total time, but once that 12hrs is up, your module will burn out.
I figure 4hrs is a reasonable time to perform most fleet actions and you will still be able to be effective with only minor damage for several hours after. Turning your cloak off and then on will cool the module and reset the timer. This way, most players should be able to perform their tasks with no negative effects to them. Only long term afk cloakers will be affected. people will still be able to camp a system long term, they just have to pay a little more attention. CCP can even make it so the repair costs for the module will be minimal so a small amount of nanite paste will last. The only people who will be penalized are the ones who simply show up in system with an alt and then forget about them. This also gives the local population a chance to do something proactive instead of being completely at the mercy of the camper.

Totally original idea. deal with it.Big smile
Electrique Wizard
Mutually Lucrative Business Proposals
#3036 - 2013-11-21 11:19:48 UTC
Skerra wrote:
I'm not sure if this has been suggested, and it seems my original multi paragraph post, never actually posted, so here it is again.

What about adding a slight heat damage penalty to the cloak modules? Something that kicks in after around 4hrs and is very gradual so that your module can keep active for around 12hrs total time, but once that 12hrs is up, your module will burn out.
I figure 4hrs is a reasonable time to perform most fleet actions and you will still be able to be effective with only minor damage for several hours after. Turning your cloak off and then on will cool the module and reset the timer. This way, most players should be able to perform their tasks with no negative effects to them. Only long term afk cloakers will be affected. people will still be able to camp a system long term, they just have to pay a little more attention. CCP can even make it so the repair costs for the module will be minimal so a small amount of nanite paste will last. The only people who will be penalized are the ones who simply show up in system with an alt and then forget about them. This also gives the local population a chance to do something proactive instead of being completely at the mercy of the camper.

Totally original idea. deal with it.Big smile


Prepare to be trolled for posting a reasonable suggestion that doesnt involve completely breaking current cloaking mechanics.

I am the Zodiac, I am the stars, You are the sorceress, my priestess of Mars, Queen of the night, swathed in satin black, Your ivory flesh upon my torture rack.
Samuel Wess
Doomheim
#3037 - 2013-11-21 11:28:33 UTC
Add an AFK icon in local after 15 minutes of inactivity ? Campers should work more than just going afk for 23 hours.

Walk into the club like "What up? I got a big cockpit!"
Kenpo
The Guardians of the Beam
#3038 - 2013-11-21 13:43:35 UTC
Samuel Wess wrote:
Add an AFK icon in local after 15 minutes of inactivity ? Campers should work more than just going afk for 23 hours.



Now that is the first sensible suggestion I have read in this entire thread.

Caution, rubber gloves and faceshield required when handling this equipment.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3039 - 2013-11-21 14:02:25 UTC
Kenpo wrote:
Samuel Wess wrote:
Add an AFK icon in local after 15 minutes of inactivity ? Campers should work more than just going afk for 23 hours.



Now that is the first sensible suggestion I have read in this entire thread.

I take it that it is the 1st post that you read in this entire thread too. What good is an AFK icon? It doesn't actually mean anything since the player could really be at the keyboard and ready to pounce in a split second. That is why another suggestion also put a deadspace warp together with that icon so that any action would require warping from the deadspace and losing the icon first.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#3040 - 2013-11-21 15:09:23 UTC
Electrique Wizard wrote:
Skerra wrote:
I'm not sure if this has been suggested, and it seems my original multi paragraph post, never actually posted, so here it is again.

What about adding a slight heat damage penalty to the cloak modules? Something that kicks in after around 4hrs and is very gradual so that your module can keep active for around 12hrs total time, but once that 12hrs is up, your module will burn out.
I figure 4hrs is a reasonable time to perform most fleet actions and you will still be able to be effective with only minor damage for several hours after. Turning your cloak off and then on will cool the module and reset the timer. This way, most players should be able to perform their tasks with no negative effects to them. Only long term afk cloakers will be affected. people will still be able to camp a system long term, they just have to pay a little more attention. CCP can even make it so the repair costs for the module will be minimal so a small amount of nanite paste will last. The only people who will be penalized are the ones who simply show up in system with an alt and then forget about them. This also gives the local population a chance to do something proactive instead of being completely at the mercy of the camper.

Totally original idea. deal with it.Big smile


Prepare to be trolled for posting a reasonable suggestion that doesnt involve completely breaking current cloaking mechanics.

Electrique, in your opinion, this is a good idea that does not break cloaking.
I am sure some who post here may even go so far as to agree with you.

But not all, and certainly not enough to create agreement that it is a better solution than currently is in the game.

Whether you respect them or not, the CCP devs have established the fairest system they can already. That system permits so-called "AFK cloaking", and even could be considered to have null rewards balanced with this effect in mind.

When modifying something like cloaking, the WORST thing to assume is that the devs stuck something in the game, and never compensated for it in other ways. It simply does not follow the pattern of their work, and assuming this to endorse a one sided change of this caliber is merely a self serving delusion.

The responsible position, is to put some degree of faith in what the devs created, and expect that other facets of the game are in harmony with this aspect. They have excel sheets too, and can easily project and modify items to create a best possible game balance.
We even know they tweak things on the fly, when emergent gameplay takes an unexpected direction. And to take an unexpected direction, they had to have had mapped out where they planned things to go.
This means they not only care, but are shaping the game based on real feedback, not simply perception alone.

Summary: The devs already balanced cloaking, local, the economy in null, and even the effects of the gate system.
Change any single aspect by itself, and you WILL throw off the others as a result.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...