These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jaegersama
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#421 - 2015-01-20 22:05:25 UTC
Fairly minor change that I think would cover most scenarios. Two things. 1. The old cycle timer idea for cloaks. If a cloak has to be re-enabled every 5 minutes or so, 23 hours of afk scarecrowing becomes less viable. 2. Make covert ships unable to be probed, but still d-scanable. Making a ship unable to be probed allows covert ships a great deal of flexibility in scouting a system, but being d-scanable prevents true invulnerably.

The idea here is that the current system isn't entirely trashed, but could use a bit more choice in interaction. A covert ship would then have to think- "how good is my safe spot?", "do I cloak and let them know I'm here, or not and make them think I'm afk?" , "how long do I think it will take them to pin me down if I really go afk?". Where as players on the other side have the option to attempt to hunt down the covert ship's safe. It isn't usually easy to hunt down a target using d-scans, but it is almost always possible if they sit still.

Possible problems. Firstly mission systems. If missions are available in a system, then the possible locations for a safe are extremely varied. Likely spike in recon mission runners. Counter- If missions were available to make a safe for a covert ship, they are available for those that would hunt it, still forces cloaker to consider safety. Secondly d-scan hunting difficulty. Tracking down a ship without probes and not at an orbital is annoying in the best scenarios, I may be over estimating the ability of people to hunt down targets this way. Counter- Difficult beats impossible, which is where it currently stands.

I don't know that I would refer to this as a perfect solution, but it adds choices. It provides evidence that allows players to suspect the afk status of a pilot, and take actions to confirm the suspicion, without notable reduction in a covert ships ability with a pilot present.
Delegate
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#422 - 2015-01-20 22:19:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Delegate
Bullet Therapist wrote:
Sorry, but not everyone that is caught ratting in null does so because they make a mistake; it's still entirely possible for players to be caught even if they're doing everything right and react appropriately, despite local. You can't escape that fact. No matter how much spin you try to put on this you can't. Kills still happen, not everyone who gets caught is a scrub with a poorly fit ship.

/snip/

Actually, all you did was try to show how my argument could also be used to prove an alternative point and failed in doing so by poorly choosing what you believed to be an analagous situation, except that one condition can actually be shown to be the case with evidence and one can't. That's also there for everyone to read. Moreover, you also tried to use the same argument to show that only the inept were the ones who were caught, which is also a failure, because, again, for the thousandth time, a little theorycraft, application, in game experience, and evidence compiled from KB stats shows us *yet again* that it is 100% possible to catch a player that does everything right.

This horse is so beaten that there's only glue left at this point. You like afk cloaking. I get it. You don't like local. That's fine too But stop making stuff up. Stop. Making these ridiculous statements is a poison in this forum, and it's rampant in this subforum in particular. There's a clade of about ten posters here, which is by far not the majority (and I'm not advocating mob rule in case you were wondering), that turn the volume to ten at the first sign of dissent in an attempt to either intellectually corner their opponent or just shout them down.

Saying something like "when an afk cloaker is afk what mechanic is he using to interact with you?' or "local is a perfect intel tool" is insane. It sounds crazy when you read it out loud and it's borderline nonsense. Local is perfect? Really? Really? Does it tell you anything about the intent of a player entering your system? Does it tell you what ships they're flying or how many people are likely to be ready to back them up? Does it tell you if they have a cyno, but that they forgot their ozone? Stop making this crap up. If you have a real argument then make it. Some of the more moderate things that people have said were along the lines of 'local never fails to report the presence of a neutral player.' Fair enough, but it doesn't take the illogical and extreme step of calling it (and not even in a hyperbolic fashion) perfect. If you've got something that makes sense to say, then say it. Otherwise, shut up, because people like me are sick of fending off your ridiculous bull to even begin to get at the heart of the argument.


Again, you are repeating the exact same arguments you made in the first 10 or so pages of this thread, and you are getting - and ignoring - the exact same responses, including the fact that local will give attacker up even before he has chance to come to the target system (will we now again read about going through wh? which of course will be rolled...). When an obvious fallacy is exposed in your argument you simply choose to repeat it again and then repeat it yet again, this time in an emotional post.
While I try to avoid putting more effort in refuting exact same arguments all over again, I will expose blatant repetitions and fallacies when I see them, whether you accept it or not.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#423 - 2015-01-20 23:01:46 UTC
Jaegersama wrote:
Fairly minor change that I think would cover most scenarios. Two things. 1. The old cycle timer idea for cloaks. If a cloak has to be re-enabled every 5 minutes or so, 23 hours of afk scarecrowing becomes less viable. 2. Make covert ships unable to be probed, but still d-scanable. Making a ship unable to be probed allows covert ships a great deal of flexibility in scouting a system, but being d-scanable prevents true invulnerably.

The idea here is that the current system isn't entirely trashed, but could use a bit more choice in interaction. A covert ship would then have to think- "how good is my safe spot?", "do I cloak and let them know I'm here, or not and make them think I'm afk?" , "how long do I think it will take them to pin me down if I really go afk?". Where as players on the other side have the option to attempt to hunt down the covert ship's safe. It isn't usually easy to hunt down a target using d-scans, but it is almost always possible if they sit still.

Possible problems. Firstly mission systems. If missions are available in a system, then the possible locations for a safe are extremely varied. Likely spike in recon mission runners. Counter- If missions were available to make a safe for a covert ship, they are available for those that would hunt it, still forces cloaker to consider safety. Secondly d-scan hunting difficulty. Tracking down a ship without probes and not at an orbital is annoying in the best scenarios, I may be over estimating the ability of people to hunt down targets this way. Counter- Difficult beats impossible, which is where it currently stands.

I don't know that I would refer to this as a perfect solution, but it adds choices. It provides evidence that allows players to suspect the afk status of a pilot, and take actions to confirm the suspicion, without notable reduction in a covert ships ability with a pilot present.

Sooo...

A cloaked pilot enters the system, local reports his name, any pilot not wanting contact gets safe.

After your change, people will understand the cloaked pilot must be active at least once every 5 minutes.
Chances of any of them assuming it is safe to undock? About zero.

Chances that the cloaked pilot will give up on this tactic, and go play somewhere else?
Considering the expected success rate is now effectively zero, cloaking this way is a waste of time.

Amount of regret over killing off a play style, while making friendly sov null the safest place to PvE in EVE?
Who cares? We can finally farm our rats n roids in peace, good riddance to that ugly booger.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#424 - 2015-01-20 23:36:17 UTC
Nikks wrote:
You accuse me of ignorance, but you fail to demonstrate grounds for this accusation beyond unfounded claims.


No I called you willfully ignorant. The quote is a perfect example of it and in itself verifies the claim

"Willful ignorance is the state and practice of ignoring any sensory input that appears to contradict one's inner model of reality. At heart, it is almost certainly driven by confirmation bias."

You completely ignore the fact that despite local existing, PVE ships die all the time. Killmail's are direct proof of that. You can claim its due to pilot error but that's not a valid excuse. Taking advantage of a players mistake happens in games all the time and even then, pilots are able to get kills all the time without error.

NIkks wrote:

The ones seeking to limit cloaks, do NOT feel that the PvE ships should ever need to encounter direct PvP combat.
They should not need to fit for this...
they should not need to bring friends...
they expect to be able to get safe, and have the cloaked ship accept it's failure to catch them, following which the cloaked ship should simply LEAVE.


That isnt really true. Actually from the last several pages you are the only one that seems to think that's the case. Most people have been arguing the fact that once a person has entered a system, you cant remove them. It is true that people do believe that a PVE ship shouldnt have to gimp its output by fitting for combat, when the opposite isnt true. However in the long run, that is a pretty minor argument and basically people need to just get over it. Either tank to survive or risk it.

Why not just admit that you feel threatened by this topic. That any change to cloak would mean that your ship is suddenly vulnerable to the wrath of so called "Carebears". Most people have even offered adjustments to local to compensate for things, which again you tend to ignore and gloss over so you can rehash old talking points in an attempt to spin the argument.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#425 - 2015-01-21 00:01:52 UTC
All this boils down to is people want to rat in safety and AFK cloaking stops that by messing with the local intel they use. Getting rid of local fixes both issues in one go. You no longer have to worry about an AFK cloakers and we no longer need to spend days sitting in a system waiting for people to ignore us.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#426 - 2015-01-21 00:06:50 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
All this boils down to is people want to rat in safety and AFK cloaking stops that by messing with the local intel they use. Getting rid of local fixes both issues in one go. You no longer have to worry about an AFK cloakers and we no longer need to spend days sitting in a system waiting for people to ignore us.


........ you dont seem to get it but then again you didnt seem to know stations in null could change hands, so... go figure.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#427 - 2015-01-21 00:50:38 UTC
Delegate wrote:

Again, you are repeating the exact same arguments you made in the first 10 or so pages of this thread, and you are getting - and ignoring - the exact same responses, including the fact that local will give attacker up even before he has chance to come to the target system (will we now again read about going through wh? which of course will be rolled...). When an obvious fallacy is exposed in your argument you simply choose to repeat it again and then repeat it yet again, this time in an emotional post.
While I try to avoid putting more effort in refuting exact same arguments all over again, I will expose blatant repetitions and fallacies when I see them, whether you accept it or not.


And I'll continue to point out that your rebuttal is false and that you're also a hypocrite for attempting to use to the same argument and posting in exactly the same manner that you accuse me of. You still didn't address that your points are unproven, that and that mine can be. All you've done is say that you did, without actually doing it. Stop lying.
Delegate
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#428 - 2015-01-21 01:01:14 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:
And I'll continue to point out that your rebuttal is false and that you're also a hypocrite for attempting to use to the same argument and posting in exactly the same manner that you accuse me of. You still didn't address that your points are unproven, that and that mine can be. All you've done is say that you did, without actually doing it. Stop lying.


For the record I refer readers to

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5415738#post5415738

and the followup discussion.
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#429 - 2015-01-21 01:01:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
All this boils down to is people want to rat in safety and AFK cloaking stops that by messing with the local intel they use. Getting rid of local fixes both issues in one go. You no longer have to worry about an AFK cloakers and we no longer need to spend days sitting in a system waiting for people to ignore us.


No, it boils down to you and a handful of others who want free kills or content or whatever without having to actually do work, or have a chance that people who are actually prepared to avoid you and paying attention might actually have a shot at getting away. Who even cares about ratters anyhow? Is that what it's about? Goonswarms war on the economies of their enemies or something? Do you even want fights or just want to gank ratters and industrials?
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#430 - 2015-01-21 01:02:43 UTC
Delegate wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:
And I'll continue to point out that your rebuttal is false and that you're also a hypocrite for attempting to use to the same argument and posting in exactly the same manner that you accuse me of. You still didn't address that your points are unproven, that and that mine can be. All you've done is say that you did, without actually doing it. Stop lying.


For the record I refer readers to

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5415738#post5415738

and the followup discussion.


That's same one I'm talking about.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#431 - 2015-01-21 03:13:35 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
Doddy wrote:
AFK cloaking is no different to being afk in station or ...

Show me a station that flies about a solar system, can't be bubbled on the undock and can hot drop people. Then your argument might have a leg to stand on. Blink

Show me a PvE ship that is vulnerable to becoming a kill mail, while docked in a station.
It can't be bubbled, hot dropped, or otherwise interacted with.
It can still see who is present in the system.
It can play with the market, fit new ships, or undock in something PvP fit. This includes nullified ships which can zip past that potential bubble, cloak up on it's own, and also zip about the system at that point.


Docked ships :
- Can't bubble, hot drop or otherwise interact with ships outside.
- Can't D-scan or see where the enemies are.
- It can undock blindly into a trap and be alpha'ed out of existance instantly.

Cloak ships can:
Do PI in the system, run remote markets, send ISK to people or recieve it and settle contracts.

.... but then you are talking about AFK-cloakers as if they are real pilots and not just simply alt tools that people use for a given purpose. Shocked

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#432 - 2015-01-21 05:04:42 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
All this boils down to is people want to rat in safety and AFK cloaking stops that by messing with the local intel they use. Getting rid of local fixes both issues in one go. You no longer have to worry about an AFK cloakers and we no longer need to spend days sitting in a system waiting for people to ignore us.


........ you dont seem to get it but then again you didnt seem to know stations in null could change hands, so... go figure.


They cant.

And I do get it, this is the decade old whine from nullbears that they cannot rat in peace.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#433 - 2015-01-21 05:10:43 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:


Docked ships :
- Can't bubble, hot drop or otherwise interact with ships outside.


Neither can an AFK cloaker. Both can become active an do these things.

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

- Can't D-scan or see where the enemies are.


Neither can an AFK cloaker, both can become active in the same timeframe.

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

- It can undock blindly into a trap and be alpha'ed out of existance instantly.


Fun fact, you are immune to attack when you undock

Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

Cloak ships can:
Do PI in the system, run remote markets, send ISK to people or recieve it and settle contracts.
Shocked


Docked ships can do these things too.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#434 - 2015-01-21 13:04:51 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:

Cloak ships can:
Do PI in the system, run remote markets, send ISK to people or recieve it and settle contracts.


What the hell are you talking about?

Literally ANYONE logged into the client can do that.

Do you even play this game?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Red Teufel
Calamitous-Intent
#435 - 2015-01-21 14:45:40 UTC
eh i don't really have an issue with it. mostly the local window in 0.0 is what my issue is in.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#436 - 2015-01-21 15:28:01 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:
.... but then you are talking about AFK-cloakers as if they are real pilots and not just simply alt tools that people use for a given purpose. Shocked

Shhhh, my ability to use a seperate account to remove competition with PvE is supposed to be a secret.

But, since you spilled the beans, let's tell everyone.

Mining or ratting, and you want guys in a different corp from your alliance to leave you alone?
Bring in your domesticated AFK cloaker.

This is done simply by getting your alt in system, it doesn't matter how.

You get the ship for them, and eject from it in space, allowing them to board it.
Have them go to a safe spot, and cloak.

Next, get into a stereotype PvE ship.
Stage a fake fight. Feed your alt a kill mail for your ship. Your med clone is probably in system, so letting them pod you depends on if you have implants you are wanting to keep or not.

Gripe over the cunning of this unknown devil, about how you have no idea who he is, (NPC corp, so that give no clue).
Warn about the few close calls you had avoiding him.

Let him show up, about thirty minutes before you come online. Full AFK Cloaking glory.

You talk about how you are sitting safed up, and waiting for him to leave.
(You are actually PvE active, but noone else is due to fear)
You mine the choicest asteroids, get the good rat spawns, noone else to compete against.

In the even someone else gets bold, uncloak on grid with them, but out of range.
If necessary, feed the alt more kills from yourself.
Show that bravery is being punished by that cunning devil.

Count your ISKies...

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Leannor
State War Academy
Caldari State
#437 - 2015-01-21 16:56:59 UTC
Gabriel Elarik wrote:
Nothing should be 100% safe in eve

make a safe cloak 100% safe thats wrong nothing else as long as he is cloaked he cant harm anyone



Nothing should be 100% safe in EVE right?

Then, why is it ok for a cloaker to sit in a spot, untracable and 100% safe from discovery?

You contradict yourself.

(Also, aren't stations safe when docked? You're theory is not logical, some things are 100% safe in EVE)

That said, claoky campers do have a one sided argument. There should be balance, and a counter to at least 'try' and attempt to rout them out. Equally shouldn't be a win win to decloak them, but give a bit of cat and mouse, make it a challenge, something to do, not an impossibility.

"Lykouleon wrote:

STOP TOUCHING ICONIC SHIP PARTS"
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#438 - 2015-01-21 17:55:13 UTC
Leannor wrote:
Gabriel Elarik wrote:
Nothing should be 100% safe in eve

make a safe cloak 100% safe thats wrong nothing else as long as he is cloaked he cant harm anyone



Nothing should be 100% safe in EVE right?

Then, why is it ok for a cloaker to sit in a spot, untracable and 100% safe from discovery?

You contradict yourself.

(Also, aren't stations safe when docked? You're theory is not logical, some things are 100% safe in EVE)

That said, claoky campers do have a one sided argument. There should be balance, and a counter to at least 'try' and attempt to rout them out. Equally shouldn't be a win win to decloak them, but give a bit of cat and mouse, make it a challenge, something to do, not an impossibility.


The downside to an AFK cloaker is they can do nothing at all.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#439 - 2015-01-21 18:33:38 UTC
It is an interesting detail, which I have seen repeated by omission.

When a cloaked player enters a system, they are looking for PvE targets most likely.
(A cloaked ship being less powerful than it's T1 non cloaking as a reference)
These players have elected to try something more challenging than simply doing a roam.
They are trying to hunt targets that actually want to avoid them, and exist for reasons besides basic direct PvP combat.

Now, when PvE players often refer to hunters, it is most often with PvP ships, which had no need to get past defenses like gate camps or other obstacles.
And, exactly like the PvE ships which quickly avoided contact, the cloaked ships follow this example set by the locals.
(If you would permit them to dock in the outpost, perhaps they would reship into something equally PvP oriented. Who can say, as it is never tried...)

The idea of fighting back WITH the PvE craft is rarely, if EVER, considered.
Usually it is done as taking a PvE ship, and making it as tough as possible.

A bait ship is rarely fit to be effective doing PvE, so these ships are often undesirable for normal use.
Too bad really, if a compromise on fitting was made, and followed, you could bluff right back against that cloaked guy.
Try naming your PvE ship something like: BAIT.
They love that.

The PvE players have allowed their expectations of play to rise, up to the point where they can only be satisfied running maximum efficiency mining or ratting fitting schemes.

The idea of doing PvE in a tanked out ship, be it a tanky procurer or even a PvP fit rokh, seems a painful loss of income.
Unbearable to consider.

It is not that the PvE player cannot undock.
It is rather, that he cannot undock in the ship he WANTS to use, and has adopted an all or nothing attitude towards the affair.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#440 - 2015-01-21 19:07:52 UTC
Nikk wrote:
The PvE players have allowed their expectations of play to rise, up to the point where they can only be satisfied running maximum efficiency mining or ratting fitting schemes.


How is this any different than PVP players? It's a pointless statement. Who would willingly reduce their efficency?

You honestly dont get it or you are just trying to split hairs or something.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)