Player Features and Ideas Discussion

The issue is that it is only noobs who make that mistak, I have tried it on the off chance a few times, but never been successful, I do know however one person who did manage to get a kill doing this.

Here is the point you keep missing, whether by mistake or avoidance:

The entire striking force can already be in the wormhole, and not be known to the target at all.
They do not need to all arrive after the target has become active, or after a ship lands on grid with the target to point them.
The target becomes active, despite this force being already present.
The target knows the force could be present, and is not avoiding activity even with this knowledge.
There is a mutual bluff in effect, as the opposing force has no idea if the target also has a large fleet backing them up.

In null, the target would see immediately a large force was present, and avoid all activity.
The whole point of the cyno hot-drop is to bypass the warning being given by local.

Its not that difficult to do because operating in a WH is a communal effort so people tend to be in same TZ corps and in truth in 0.0 in many areas at certain times of the day during the week all you see is a few active people and loads of AFK cloaky campers (little joke on the last one.)

As I have decided to not do any ISK generation in 0.0 remove local, will be funny to watch from hisec

But Eve will become multiple accounts online won't it...

EDIT:

And this is my last post on this thread, an AFK flag would be awesome, but it hardly matters to me now, I am in hisec to earn ISK and will just run around 0.0 for fun and games, not to live there and not to make ISK there.

And sorry I can't help adding a bit of humour, remove local, put back in the warp to 15 km from the gate, add something in the map that indicates that someone is ratting with an expensive modules. Awesome sauce and when the whining starts about people not being around to kill and all the whining about the need to nerf level 4's start and the whining on the need to remove hisec, it will be oh so amusing.

If you're not averse to risk, then you don't need this flag. Adjust your ratting fit to enable you to do harm during an ambush, and have friends nearby to back you up. Most cloaky campers and hot droppers are even more risk averse than you are, which is why they hunt people who can't or won't fight back. Bloody thier noses a couple times, and they'll leave you alone.

Doesnt that apply to miners and ratters as well?

I don't see the problem with afk cloaking. Leave it as it is.

You asked for this response, so I hope it is not unexpected.


By the numbers, for clarity.

1
Your answer seems to be comparing the use of a covops cloak to... itself, rather than a hull which would be more desirable in a fight.
The use of the covops cloak becomes special, BECAUSE it requires the covops hull, rather than a hull which has bonuses towards damage and / or defense, which is clearly more valuable in an encounter once the fighting begins.

2
Again, you are offering no actual basis for comparison here.
The covops cloak and hull are expected to have a good chance at penetrating past gate camps, etc.
This is specifically when compared to PvP ships not capable of warping cloaked. Significantly more skill and luck are required to penetrate defenses in a normal ship, and a competent camp can stop such ships effectively enough to make such efforts pointless.

3
Pretending to be ignorant of the term 'Blue Doughnut'?
Let's agree to define this as a section of space occupied by a single sov holding entity, regardless of whether it is by direct game mechanic or established by meta-gaming diplomacy. Players across this region are effectively bound to treat each other as allies, and often to assist each other as needed.

4
The flaws in the cloak, by design or happenstance, are being balanced by a comparably flawed local being used for intel.
CCP has expressed interest in improving this dynamic, but it has apparently remained the lesser evil thus far.

5
Misrepresenting either side fails to meet my best interests, in my particular case.
I have a vested interest in playing both as a PvE player, as well as a guerrilla assaulting cloaked character against enemy PvE.
For me, the game suffers if either of these roles is placed at too great of a disadvantage. Given the choice, I would be beaten or victorious by my own efforts in either role, requiring effort to be the main deciding point I want to see in such contests.

Misrepresenting what?

I agree, the covops hull is not meant to be a front line brawler.
Neither is the typical PvE ship.
Either one is well advised to avoid front line PvP ships, and normally this happens.

As to miners needing to have a fleet ready, that is expected only if the opposing force has one ready.
This is EVE, if you want to oppose 15 players, you should expect to need 15 players or more to do it with.
If you are protesting the use of a cyno, then consider why the cyno is used in the first place.

Hot Dropping: Bridging is intended to bypass reinforced blockades and travel time. Here, it has been fine tuned to avoid advertising the presence of a fleet to the free intel tool as well by delaying the easily recognizable population spike till the last possible moment. The intention is to deny the warning local provides, although it still reports the presence of the cyno boat enough to be associated with AFK Cloaking instead.
Quite simply, while PvE pilots would never resume regular activities with a hostile fleet present, they are sometimes willing to gamble over whether a cloaked vessel represents that level of threat at a given time.

And let's be honest, would YOU play a game that just gave you easy kills?
How boring would that be? Some of us are not looking for a shortcut, we want to have fun playing against each other.

Like a musical instrument, it has a pace and style to be enjoyed. The guy who thinks he is better by simply playing the music faster, has missed the point.

You have a striking ability to twist words.


By the numbers.

1
The ship is less combat effective than the typical PvP ship.
The typical PvP ship is what can often be found operating gate camps.
Good thing they have a cloak, because they aren't designed to fight their way through those camps.
The rest of this section seems pointlessly dramatic.

2
I have no need to twist your words, I find it curious that you seem so ready to accuse me in that.
The cloak and cyno, by practical need, are often required in order to threaten ships which are otherwise prone to avoiding threats.
The cloaked player is trying to engage a ship which the PvE player is trying to avoid using in a fight, and the PvE player has local intel monitoring the continued presence of this hostile.
See? Simple facts, not twisting anything.

3
I am seeking to play as both PvE and guerrilla assault, as the opportunities present.
To attempt to define me as favoring one side over the other is short-sighted, as neither is fully realized without the other having a fair chance at winning.

4
You are entitled to your opinion, but I suggest you respect that others may not share it the way you do.
The idea that the clearly defined inferior fighting ability of a covops, should be forced to encounter front line PvP ships...
While the comparably inferior PvE ships are kept safely out of harms way...
That is not fighting back, that is avoiding the encounter by replacing the ship involved.
The covops is entitled to use of the same tactic as the PvE shipping employs, avoidance by choice.

5
There is nothing wrong with alliances, in this context. Perhaps you are in the wrong thread, on this aspect of your post.

Delighted to see you again.

1
You are confused, if you believe the first part of this has any bearing to the point I was making before.
The use of a cloaked ship, covops for the best opportunities, is a practical requirement to reach a system not bordering hostile space. Whether or not the pilot chooses to use the cloak is effectively the same as whether the pilot chooses to succeed in reaching the system.
As to PvE pilots complaining, it should be pointed out that this group has not been established as a majority, in this context.
Many, if not indeed most, players do not have a problem handling so-called AFK Cloaking™.

2
Your claims that I portray covops shipping as helpless are a misrepresentation.
They are not helpless. They are quite effectively able to avoid encountering ships which are demonstrated to be more effective in PvP encounters.
You are mistaking a strategic necessity for helplessness here.
If the PvE players were able to FORCE the encounter to happen, by scanning or a timer disabling the cloak, THEN they could be described more along the lines of being helpless, as they could neither avoid nor prevail in such an encounter.

3
Your continued emphasis on the part of my gameplay most convenient to your bias, is beginning to come across as ad hominem. It implies that I wish to unbalance the mechanics to favor one side, the one you are repeatedly trying to associate me with.
I am also a miner, and on occasion a ratter for variety sake. The value of playing on either side depends on it being a challenge, not some mindless grind fest which we would be better off automating as a background item.

4
I am not having trouble finding PvE ships to blow up, because I do not waste my time on the off chance a PvE player is going to screw up and hand me a kill mail by doing so.
There is nothing a hostile can do, in this context, that will bypass the ability of a PvE pilot to avoid them, and local plays a foundational role in that ability to avoid encounters.
I know this, most of all, by my own ability to avoid being killed by opposing hostile pilots while I mined or ratted.
Unless I were to be careless or screw up, they have no chance to catch me, or any other PvE player in sov null.

5
The blue doughnut is a prime example of sov null, which makes it a practical stereotype for this discussion.
This problem does not exist in high sec, or low sec, because the presence of neutral / hostile pilots is an expected constant item.
Your point is not being misrepresented by me, as I have yet to see you make one regarding this detail.