These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1541 - 2015-03-19 15:31:20 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

In short, noone cares as much when they are flying PvP ready hulls, as they expect to be able to handle the cloaked player itself.
Whether they can hot drop is a potential concern, yes, but not as much, since the expectation that additional PvP hulls are more probable when a PvP ship is already present.
(They don't tend to operate solo, with a known hostile present)

ding - exactly, the issue is bigger and partially revolves around force projection, not a covert 1v1'ing anybody (that is the exception, not the rule).

Assets in space being at risk is the primary theme, followed by force projection. Local is a tertiary distraction.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1542 - 2015-03-19 16:02:31 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

In short, noone cares as much when they are flying PvP ready hulls, as they expect to be able to handle the cloaked player itself.
Whether they can hot drop is a potential concern, yes, but not as much, since the expectation that additional PvP hulls are more probable when a PvP ship is already present.
(They don't tend to operate solo, with a known hostile present)

ding - exactly, the issue is bigger and partially revolves around force projection, not a covert 1v1'ing anybody (that is the exception, not the rule).

Assets in space being at risk is the primary theme, followed by force projection. Local is a tertiary distraction.

FOR A DIFFERENT THREAD

This thread IS about PvE hulls, and how they often are seen as too risky to undock with when a hostile name is present in the local chat pilot roster.

AFK Cloaking is a borderline non issue without PvE hulls being involved this way.
PvE hulls are most often not chosen for use, in this context, due to seeing a hostile name listed in local chat.
Not D-Scan, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by probing, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by seeing them on grid, you can't find cloaked ships that way.

That makes PvE hulls quite central to this discussion.
That makes local chat quite central to this discussion.
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1543 - 2015-03-19 16:49:48 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Not D-Scan, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by probing, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by seeing them on grid, you can't find cloaked ships that way.


More truths, which are universal, regardless of the other ships in space.

All of the above = asset in space not at risk that can project an almost limitless amount of force virtually instantaneously.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1544 - 2015-03-19 17:13:39 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Not D-Scan, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by probing, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by seeing them on grid, you can't find cloaked ships that way.


More truths, which are universal, regardless of the other ships in space.

All of the above = asset in space not at risk that can project an almost limitless amount of force virtually instantaneously.

While debatable from a more generalized context, your concerns are not meaningful to this specific thread.

You want a General Cloaking, Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals thread, and this is not it.

AFK Cloaking fails to be an issue outside of sov null, with PvE hulls in the context.

You are trying to go OFF TOPIC, by disregarding these key elements to AFK Cloaking as necessary context.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1545 - 2015-03-19 17:35:59 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:


TL:DR; Without PvE ships being affected, fewer care nearly as much about AFK cloaking.


Exactly.

If I am successfully ratting with a buddy or two in a sanctum and we are all in PvP fit ishtars, I don't give a fracking sheet that you are sitting cloaked in system. In fact, I might very well be hoping you'll decloak and bring in your buddies.

Please don't respond with, "Oh, we'll bring enough to kill you." Fine. I don't care. Maybe you will, or maybe you wont. My point still stands, in PvP fit ships I'm LOOKING FOR THE FIGHT. Maybe you do have too many buddies for me and my friends, but that is NOT the point.

And if you are AFK cloaking, we still wont give a fracking sheet and we'll clean up a number of anomalies, and if were lucky an escalation and pick up some nice isk/loot. Totally circumventing your attempt to deny us resources/isk.

"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
#1546 - 2015-03-19 17:53:02 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

In short, noone cares as much when they are flying PvP ready hulls, as they expect to be able to handle the cloaked player itself.
Whether they can hot drop is a potential concern, yes, but not as much, since the expectation that additional PvP hulls are more probable when a PvP ship is already present.
(They don't tend to operate solo, with a known hostile present)

ding - exactly, the issue is bigger and partially revolves around force projection, not a covert 1v1'ing anybody (that is the exception, not the rule).

Assets in space being at risk is the primary theme, followed by force projection. Local is a tertiary distraction.


Force projection has already been nerfed. You might be dropped on by a BLOPs gang, but that likelihood has been diminished. Its funny, force projection takes a pretty significant hit and yet people still complain about it. If you are going to get dropped chances are you are in a very blingy boat and the people dropping on you know it.

"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
#1547 - 2015-03-19 18:04:06 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Not D-Scan, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by probing, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by seeing them on grid, you can't find cloaked ships that way.


More truths, which are universal, regardless of the other ships in space.

All of the above = asset in space not at risk that can project an almost limitless amount of force virtually instantaneously.


Nor are you at risk either so long as the above points hold. Roll

How much DPS does a cloaked ship do?

I know the answer will not be forth coming, so lets just say that question was rhetorical and I'll go ahead answer: zero. None, nada, zilch, zip, goose egg, null. No other module can be activated when the cloak is active.

I know where this is going. It is going right down the crapper into "Its the bad cynos!" But in any serious risk analysis one has to ask this key question:

How likely are you to be dropped? Are you more or less likely to be dropped in a post pheobe state? Intuition tells me it is less. The nerf to jump drives has made PvE safer--i.e. risk is reduced. Especially considering that nowadays many null sec entities prefer to have their pilots keep fatigue minimized. So you can drop 1x ever 35-40 minutes.

"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
#1548 - 2015-03-19 18:15:32 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Harry Saq wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Not D-Scan, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by probing, you can't find cloaked ships that way.
Not by seeing them on grid, you can't find cloaked ships that way.


More truths, which are universal, regardless of the other ships in space.

All of the above = asset in space not at risk that can project an almost limitless amount of force virtually instantaneously.

While debatable from a more generalized context, your concerns are not meaningful to this specific thread.

You want a General Cloaking, Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals thread, and this is not it.

AFK Cloaking fails to be an issue outside of sov null, with PvE hulls in the context.

You are trying to go OFF TOPIC, by disregarding these key elements to AFK Cloaking as necessary context.


I agree. Cynos/jump drives pose a threat whether or not the hostile was/is AFK cloaking or not. Heck the cyno ship might not even have a cloak. An interceptor can fit them. Could even be a noob ship if the person is particularly ballsy. Noob ship lands on grid tackles the PvE ship and pops a cyno. If the guys sitting on the bridging ship are fast they might get in system before the target can lock and nuke the noob ship. Now that would make for a fine comedy kill mail. 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

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#1549 - 2015-03-19 19:14:39 UTC
Quote:
This thread IS about PvE hulls, and how they often are seen as too risky to undock with when a hostile name is present in the local chat pilot roster.


Since when has this been the case? The topic is about the game play style of "AFK Cloaking". That doesnt just apply to PVE ships. It can apply to PVP ships as well.

You are ignoring the fact that a pilot can just go AFK while cloaked and will be in near perfect safety. This is an aspect of AFK cloaking and it doesnt have to deal with sov or anything.

You are correct it does apply to PVE ships but there is more too it.

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)

Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1550 - 2015-03-19 19:26:52 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Quote:
This thread IS about PvE hulls, and how they often are seen as too risky to undock with when a hostile name is present in the local chat pilot roster.


Since when has this been the case? The topic is about the game play style of "AFK Cloaking". That doesnt just apply to PVE ships. It can apply to PVP ships as well.

You are ignoring the fact that a pilot can just go AFK while cloaked and will be in near perfect safety. This is an aspect of AFK cloaking and it doesnt have to deal with sov or anything.

You are correct it does apply to PVE ships but there is more too it.

Agreed - the PvE aspect plus the local pushed to the fore front aspect are distraction and slow-death by symptom mitigation over improvements through core issues identification, which are very simple.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1551 - 2015-03-19 19:51:05 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Quote:
This thread IS about PvE hulls, and how they often are seen as too risky to undock with when a hostile name is present in the local chat pilot roster.


Since when has this been the case? The topic is about the game play style of "AFK Cloaking". That doesnt just apply to PVE ships. It can apply to PVP ships as well.

You are ignoring the fact that a pilot can just go AFK while cloaked and will be in near perfect safety. This is an aspect of AFK cloaking and it doesnt have to deal with sov or anything.

You are correct it does apply to PVE ships but there is more too it.

Agreed - the PvE aspect plus the local pushed to the fore front aspect are distraction and slow-death by symptom mitigation over improvements through core issues identification, which are very simple.


Are you sure we don't need to look at core competencies to get buy from interested parties and protect various swim lanes. Also, isn't it crucial to empower stakeholders so that we can move the needle and ensure that we use best practices that are consistent with our core values?

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
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1552 - 2015-03-19 20:14:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Quote:
This thread IS about PvE hulls, and how they often are seen as too risky to undock with when a hostile name is present in the local chat pilot roster.


Since when has this been the case? The topic is about the game play style of "AFK Cloaking". That doesnt just apply to PVE ships. It can apply to PVP ships as well.


Because the only people who care about "AFK cloaking" are null PvE pilots. Does anyone care if a pilot AFK cloaks in a worm hole? No. Does anyone care if a pilot AFK Cloaks in high sec? No. Does anyone care about low sec? Errr...I meant does anyone care if a pilot AFK cloaks in low sec? No.

Quote:
You are ignoring the fact that a pilot can just go AFK while cloaked and will be in near perfect safety. This is an aspect of AFK cloaking and it doesnt have to deal with sov or anything.


Yes, so long as the pilot is cloaked and not moving (i.e. warping around) they have perfect safety....much like when a player is docked. Are we to remove being docked as well? Should we come up with a mechanic to undock AFK docked players too?

The primary issue is is and always will be (until the mechanics are changed) the effect of AFK cloaking on null sec PvE. Those are the players that complain (the PvE players)...in fact, the set of non-PvE players who complain about AFK cloaking is probably reasonably approximated by the null set.

Edit: Fixing the quotes...

"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

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1553 - 2015-03-19 20:20:43 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Quote:
This thread IS about PvE hulls, and how they often are seen as too risky to undock with when a hostile name is present in the local chat pilot roster.


Since when has this been the case? The topic is about the game play style of "AFK Cloaking". That doesnt just apply to PVE ships. It can apply to PVP ships as well.

You are ignoring the fact that a pilot can just go AFK while cloaked and will be in near perfect safety. This is an aspect of AFK cloaking and it doesnt have to deal with sov or anything.

You are correct it does apply to PVE ships but there is more too it.

Agreed - the PvE aspect plus the local pushed to the fore front aspect are distraction and slow-death by symptom mitigation over improvements through core issues identification, which are very simple.

When you remove the aspects involved with:
Local chat
PvE hulls
Sov null

What you are left with are:
1. Fringe elements, often players who needed to step away from the game in order to deal with real life needs. Cloaking in this context is an alternative to logging out / docking in an Outpost, or parking in a POS.
This option gets used frequently when located where opposing players are expected. This has great value, as when the players again resume activity, they are creating desirable content for other players.
2. Players synchronizing in contested areas in order to launch an assault, who need to delay activity until all required members are prepared.

All of which, are highly desirable to keep intact, as it is a benefit to overall gameplay.

I feel we should not be interested in some grand bargain, where we compromise existing gameplay options in order to declare that the cloak is now compromised, while the sov structures such as an Outpost or POS remain as intact means to safely stay logged in while AFK.

I believe it is quite clear, that the main thing that would accomplish is strengthening sov holding entities, which are quite strong enough already, thank you very much.
Added to which, smaller groups, who often rely on stealth elements for supporting their strategies, will be further diminished in ability to harass larger groups.

Cloaking in general is just fine, for our sanctioned goal.
We are here to address AFK Cloaking, where it has a game altering impact, not simply failing to meet the standards set by a group who question cloaking in general.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1554 - 2015-03-19 20:48:06 UTC
Quote:
It's very important that it be possible to disrupt people's, ehh, money making in null sec,
and that AFK cloaking is one of the most effective ways that we have right now to do so.

We are, ehh, we're not worried about cloaked ships being somehow overpowered,
they, it turns out, while a ship is cloaked it has very little DPS,
but ah, we understand that it has a pretty big psychological effect.

We would like to make some changes that all tie into that sort of system, in the future,
it may not be the changes that people, ehh, are expecting though, for instance I can tell you AFK cloaking is not an issue in wormhole space, and there is a very good reason for that.

(Comments about Fozzy indirectly saying local would be removed from all null sec space)

I cannot confirm or deny that...

The idea of removing, or changing the way local works has been brought up many times,
it is not the first time CCP has brought this up.
--CCP Fozzie


You know, this quote is rather different from the way Fozzie's comments have been spun.

1. There is no time table here...at all. None.
2. What is interesting is that Fozzie does not see cloaked ships as a problem or imbalanced...at least due to their ability to cloak.
3. Disrupting null sec isk making/resource gathering is valid game play and cloaks are awesome at doing this, from Fozzie's view point.
4. Some changes to this issue at some completely unspecified data is a possibility, and his oblique reference to WH space is interesting.

There is nothing shocking here. There is nothing that we have not heard before from CCP people (e.g. Soundwave on twitter).

All this discussion about cloaked ships being perfectly safe is really a complete red herring. Yes they are safe, but guess what they are seriously gimped when the cloak is active. Even ships that can fit a covert ops cloak can only really warp around and move at sublight speeds with no penalty. Big deal. And warping entails risk, even if small risk in many instances.

It is also an appeal to consequences. The idea here is that people making the point that a cloaked ship at a safe is 100% safe is true. They hope that this truth will garner support for their position to nerf cloaks by noting that such perfect safety is antithetical to EVE. However, that perfect safety comes with substantial cost. You really can't do anything in the game if you want to retain that perfect safety. What they are trying to do is deflect from the issue of: does AFK cloaking have a point in game.

According to CCP Fozzie the answer is and unequivocal, "Yes." Or to use CCP Fozzie's words above (assuming the transcription is accurate)

Quote:
It's very important that it be possible to disrupt people's, ehh, money making in null sec, and that AFK cloaking is one of the most effective ways that we have right now to do so.--emphasis added


So everyone that wants to can keep complaining, "Cloaking at a safe is 100% safe" please do so, but for the rest of us it is abundantly clear that you are trying to derail the thread and most likely to suit your own ends or needs.

"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

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#1555 - 2015-03-19 22:27:59 UTC
To address the last several posts let me present this scenario.

System A is being contested by N3. The Goons also wish to take control of system A. If I was either one of these factions I would plant a covert ops ship in that system and just leave it there. I can collect all the information I need while I am active. I can warp around, gather information, disrupt basic operations, etc etc etc. However when I am ready to walk away OR if I feel threatened in the least, I just sit in a safe spot and watch, all from the comfort of my cloak.

Now both sides can do that. So you have invincible scout ships, flying around collecting battle data and when they are done, they just safe up and sit there.

From a strategic stand point this is a huge flaw in game play. Not only is it impossible for me to move assets without them being noticed, I cant even form a fleet without advertising to my enemy what exactly I am bringing. There is absolutely no surprise, or even any tactics to the battle. It comes down to who has the larger fleet. This is counter to everything CCP wants, which has been explained by their new suggestions on SOV mechanics. They want to spread out the battles. Well what is the point?

So on one hand you have a very legit style of game play. Using a covops asset to gather information. However the issue at the moment is that this asset has very little in the way of counters. Outside of a permacamp at all gates with smart bombing battleships, its likely a covops will make it into system. Once in system, its game over. You will never force them out till they play their hand.

This is AFK cloaking and just a valid as issue as the one that mining/ratting players bring up. This is one of my biggest issues with AFK cloaking. You are taking a very legit use of a covops ship and bastardizing its use by simply exploiting a broken mechanic.

This event happens far more than people are willing to admit. Please dont ask for proof. Any player that has been involved in SOV warfare knows that there is always a camper in a system before a battle. Could be an hour, could be weeks.

This scenario would exist with or without local. If local didnt exist and cloak worked the same, null would grind to a halt. However the inverse is not the case. If cloak was changed without modifying local, situations like what I posted above would become a lot more interesting.

And no I am not suggesting that cloak change and local stay the same. I have already stated what I think would be a valid suggestion for the situation. Just pointing out that isnt just a local or PVE issue.

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)

Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1556 - 2015-03-19 22:43:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Harry Saq
To add further emphasis, AFK cloaked ships are often strategically placed on various perches and streamed on twitch for the entire coalition, as the actual ship owners are literally at work and not anywhere near their computer. This is done in all staging areas and relevant gates and choke points, usually with one player having several streams going at once from various alts.

Additionally, Mad Anni (not sure on spelling) literally documented entire battles and broadcasted various sides staging system undocks 23/7 (not sure if he still does) while only periodically being live himself on the stream. I have literally used his streams to decide on whether to undock or not, and on a strategic level we absolutely used it to report hostile intel when it was available for free.

Assets in space need to be at risk in some way.

WH argument is disingenuous as you cannot cyno in force.

All other arguments are just white noise and rationalizations for bad mechanics.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1557 - 2015-03-19 22:46:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
To address the last several posts let me present this scenario.

System A is being contested by N3. The Goons also wish to take control of system A. If I was either one of these factions I would plant a covert ops ship in that system and just leave it there. I can collect all the information I need while I am active. I can warp around, gather information, disrupt basic operations, etc etc etc. However when I am ready to walk away OR if I feel threatened in the least, I just sit in a safe spot and watch, all from the comfort of my cloak.


Disrupt operations how? With a ship with a covert ops cloak you will do damn little for the most part. Most players will be in PvP fit ships. Most players will be in fleets....maybe even BIG fleets when they are undocked.

At best you might catch the occasional straggler doing something dumb. But that will disrupt very little. I know, I've been in this situation numerous times and it pretty much stops nothing having a few reds in system because if that were the case than all invasions would grind to an immediate halt. This has not happened so it is a non-issue.

Quote:
Now both sides can do that. So you have invincible scout ships, flying around collecting battle data and when they are done, they just safe up and sit there.


Yep, and both sides can do (and do) it so its...gasp....balanced.

Quote:
From a strategic stand point this is a huge flaw in game play. Not only is it impossible for me to move assets without them being noticed, I cant even form a fleet without advertising to my enemy what exactly I am bringing. There is absolutely no surprise, or even any tactics to the battle. It comes down to who has the larger fleet. This is counter to everything CCP wants, which has been explained by their new suggestions on SOV mechanics. They want to spread out the battles. Well what is the point?


With spies, covert cloaking ships, and the fact that timers or visible anywhere on your overview in a system with said timer and the organization of most major null sec alliances nerfing cloaks will change pretty much nothing.

Nerfing cloaks is not going to stop people from trying to bring more numbers.

Quote:
So on one hand you have a very legit style of game play. Using a covops asset to gather information. However the issue at the moment is that this asset has very little in the way of counters. Outside of a permacamp at all gates with smart bombing battleships, its likely a covops will make it into system. Once in system, its game over. You will never force them out till they play their hand.

This is AFK cloaking and just a valid as issue as the one that mining/ratting players bring up. This is one of my biggest issues with AFK cloaking. You are taking a very legit use of a covops ship and bastardizing its use by simply exploiting a broken mechanic.


No. No, no, no. No! It is not AFK cloaking or play because an AFK cloaked ship/player has never ever gathered intel. Only active players gather intel.

Even if you nerf cloaks so they are only effective with active players here is the new meta:

Cloaky scout gets into system. Sets up a safe...preferably one outside d-scan range a station if there is one. Do your active scouting reporting stuff. If nothing there is nothing to report maybe hang out for a bit setting up bookmarks, then go back to your initial safe and log out. When pings go out for a scout, log back in if you are available, activate cloak, start your intel gathering.

You. Have. Changed. Nothing.

I'm going to stop there because at this point I have to wonder if you have ever been involved in a major block level war.

"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
#1558 - 2015-03-19 22:49:53 UTC
Harry Saq wrote:
To add further emphasis, AFK cloaked ships are often strategically placed on various perches and streamed on twitch for the entire coalition, as the actual ship owners are literally at work and not anywhere near their computer. This is done in all staging areas and relevant gates and choke points, usually with one player having several streams going at once from various alts.

Additionally, Mad Anni (not sure on spelling) literally documented entire battles and broadcasted various sides staging system undocks 23/7 (not sure if he still does) while only periodically being live himself on the stream. I have literally used his streams to decide on whether to undock or not, and on a strategic level we absolutely used it to report hostile intel when it was available for free.

Assets in space need to be at risk in some way.

WH argument is disingenuous as you cannot cyno in force.

All other arguments are just white noise and rationalizations for bad mechanics.


And Mad Ani has been killed doing that. So...there you go. 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

Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1559 - 2015-03-19 22:53:23 UTC
lol, one time in a million a trend does not make ;)
Harry Saq
Of Tears and ISK
ISK.Net
#1560 - 2015-03-19 23:00:09 UTC
"No. No, no, no. No! It is not AFK cloaking or play because an AFK cloaked ship/player has never ever gathered intel. Only active players gather intel."

Even in a semantics sense you have lost this argument thoroughly, this train of thought can die now. I can pretend I am not watching a live stream from a co-worker sitting beside me right now, very obviously not at his computer providing the intel, but yet...there it is...and no, I will not provide the link ;)