These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

War for Attackers

First post
Author
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2016-11-28 09:56:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Mark Marconi wrote:

And there you go, you just answered your own question as to why not because other forms of PvP exist and are just as valid as shooting someone. There for denying someone combat is a valid form of PvP. After all it cost the wardecer isk and they get no reward.


I never said there was a problem with avoiding combat. Never said it ever, not once, anywhere on these forums ever in my history on these forums. Do not strawman me. Go back and re-examine what I have said, and try again when you have a proper understanding of my points.

No, I never answered 'why not'. I answered why corporations shouldn't be so easy to just roll in and out of willy-nilly. Again, when you have a better understanding of the game, and my points, this one will become clearer to you, but in short, why should anyone be able to operate in a PVP environment with impunity?

About two years back, I wardecced a mining corp at the request of some local miners who were sick of being strip-mined out of business. The targets rolled their corp, and continued to mine with impunity in NPC corps, sending their materials to whatever industrial corp they had on the side to continue their production, WITH IMPUNITY. Well, with impunity right up to the point where I started to gank their barges until they left the system.

Tell me, though. Why should people be able to mine others out of business with impunity? Without any possible recourse? I see your cogs moving, "but you ganked them. that's recourse." Sure, for me. What about the miners? Think they deserve the sec hit for that?

See, people like you frequently dismiss the ideas that we 'pvp sociopaths' come up with because apparently, you seem to think we only have ourselves and what we get out of the game in mind, but actually, a lot of us are thinking of the wider consequences of issues in the game, for everyone. Those miners I wardecced for? They deserve that recourse. I would go so far as to say I would agree with a sweeping limitation on certain T2 skills for anyone who's in an NPC corp. No exhumers, no HACs, nothing, no T2. T2 skills just become unavailable if you're in an NPC corp. This is a change that would affect my hauling alt adversely, because I keep him in an NPC corp so I can take advantage of the current situation, and haul all my PVP ships to lowsec with complete impunity. As do many a nulsec alliance use their NPC alts to light cynos, fly freighters and haulers, and strip mine highsec every damn day, with impunity.

I would go so far as to agree with that because I can see the good it would do for everyone to put them in situations where they have to either cooperate, or compete, no exceptions. The game is the people, the people are the game. Too many people put themselves outside of that by playing it 'safe' without realising there is no safety, and they're actually a burden on the community.

You think this is all about 'protecting' players in high sec that don't want to fight. I'm telling you that it makes high sec a better place for everyone, and those players still don't have to fight.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#62 - 2016-11-28 09:57:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Ralph King-Griffin
Sentient Blade wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Sentient Blade wrote:
and you can't nuke their capital because at least so far as highsec mercs go they don't have such a thing

[citation needed]


Can you show me an example of at least one highsec merc group with any significant static assets in space?

thats entirely not the point here.
most of the targets we have had , dont have any static assets in space either.

believe it or not , you can hurt mercs, no static punching bag to blob needed either.
Mark Marconi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#63 - 2016-11-28 10:10:02 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:

And there you go, you just answered your own question as to why not because other forms of PvP exist and are just as valid as shooting someone. There for denying someone combat is a valid form of PvP. After all it cost the wardecer isk and they get no reward.


I never said there was a problem with avoiding combat. Never said it ever, not once, anywhere on these forums ever in my history on these forums. Do not strawman me. Go back and re-examine what I have said, and try again when you have a proper understanding of my points.

Yes you stated the corporations need to be something meaningful but without game mechanics bonuses, there is no reason for them to be.

I asked why and you said "In a game where virtually every mechanic is designed around driving PVP in one form or another, why not?"

You went on to state all of the differing types of PvP and answered your own question.

Avoiding PvP by leaving a corp or folding it is perfectly valid PvP. Therefore corporations are not a commitment that players need to make.

No strawman here.

The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.

After all we are not just players, we are customers.

Time for the CSM to be disbanded.

Black Pedro
Mine.
#64 - 2016-11-28 10:11:08 UTC
Neuntausend wrote:
However, not knowing whether your alleged opponent is even playing the game is an unnecessary annoyance. You wouldn't go play any other multiplayer game for hours on end if the server was empty and you didn't actually have opponents, would you? I experience that right now (on the defending side might I add, for everyone who's already waiting to yell "griefer!" at me), and it's just bullshit that I fly to a locator, he tells me exactly where the "scumsucker" is or whether he's docked or in space, but not if he is actually online. I get why there is no "free intel" through the watchlist, however, locator agents should at least tell me if I am fighting a person that actually exists in the game universe right now so I don't go searching for a supposed opponent for an hour, when he hasn't even logged in in days.
I agree. The current state of locator agents/no watch list is absurd. You should not have to blindly stumble around the universe looking for your opponent in a game where logging out makes you 100% safe from attack. It makes a mockery of the idea of persistent conflict and makes bounty hunting, revenge (via kill rights), mercenary work, and many other types of supposed intended game play impractical. Fights in a virtual world should not be just random things you do with people you bump into, but designed to produce meaningful content for reasons beyond serendipity.

It was however also equally absurd to have 3rd party programs that could immediately ping you when one of a thousand different super pilots logged into the game. That was broken and needed a fix, but it is a shame CCP threw so much out with the bathwater and has been so slow to address this. Hunters need ways to know if their target is online. Those ways don't have to be free, and they don't need to be invulnerable like the watchlist was, but there needs to be ways to know if you should even try to find someone or people will continue to just stop trying.

As to the OP, it is corporations that are the entities at war, not the players. Players should always be able to decide they have had enough and take their ball and go home to the NPC corp and relative safety. The fact that wars produce so little content stems from the fact corporations have so little value, that they just aren't worth defending in the majority of cases. Pride in your corp has some value, but there has to be something more to get the average loss-averse Eve player to step up and try to defend themselves when evasion is so easy, and cost-free. Corporations should give real benefits, whether through structures or otherwise, so players want to be in them and defend them to keep those benefits.

At the same time, if all corporations are going to be interchangeable in the benefits they provide, there needs to be some mechanism to prevent players from just hopping between corporations to keep those benefits but dodging wars like they do today. Perhaps just a simple 7-day ban on joining another player corporation (or perhaps you can join but somehow are excluded from most benefits for 7 days). Or another idea I like is you can leave a corporation with no penalty, but if you join another player corp during the remainder of that war, the aggressors get a corporation-level killright against you that only lasts for the remainder of that war.

Structures though may be a better answer. Moving all the corporation benefits into the new structures (which only apply to players in the same corp as the structure), inherently solves the problem as structures cannot dodge a war. Players can flee a corp, but they will lose both the benefits provided by these structures, and possibly their assets as penalty for not defending. Risk vs. reward would be restored.

Ah well, none of these fixes are easy. Let's see if CCP has the motivation to spend the significant development time necessary to revamp the whole system. I think they will get around to it eventually, but eventually can be an awfully long time when dealing with CCP.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2016-11-28 10:14:36 UTC
Mark Marconi wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:

And there you go, you just answered your own question as to why not because other forms of PvP exist and are just as valid as shooting someone. There for denying someone combat is a valid form of PvP. After all it cost the wardecer isk and they get no reward.


I never said there was a problem with avoiding combat. Never said it ever, not once, anywhere on these forums ever in my history on these forums. Do not strawman me. Go back and re-examine what I have said, and try again when you have a proper understanding of my points.

Yes you stated the corporations need to be something meaningful but without game mechanics bonuses, there is no reason for them to be.

I asked why and you said "In a game where virtually every mechanic is designed around driving PVP in one form or another, why not?"

You went on to state all of the differing types of PvP and answered your own question.

Avoiding PvP by leaving a corp or folding it is perfectly valid PvP. Therefore corporations are not a commitment that players need to make.

No strawman here.



Re-read my post. I edited it with a few additional items for further clarity of my point. Yes, you definitely did strawman me. You did not understand my point. Whether intentional or not, you still strawmanned me. You give corporations more meaning in high sec and encourage people to join them, or they PVP with impunity, regardless of what form of PVP that takes. In a game that is balanced around competition, and driving competition, that impunity unbalances it. That is my point, don't ignore it this time. Not even by 'accident'.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Mark Marconi
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#66 - 2016-11-28 10:17:29 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:

And there you go, you just answered your own question as to why not because other forms of PvP exist and are just as valid as shooting someone. There for denying someone combat is a valid form of PvP. After all it cost the wardecer isk and they get no reward.


I never said there was a problem with avoiding combat. Never said it ever, not once, anywhere on these forums ever in my history on these forums. Do not strawman me. Go back and re-examine what I have said, and try again when you have a proper understanding of my points.

Yes you stated the corporations need to be something meaningful but without game mechanics bonuses, there is no reason for them to be.

I asked why and you said "In a game where virtually every mechanic is designed around driving PVP in one form or another, why not?"

You went on to state all of the differing types of PvP and answered your own question.

Avoiding PvP by leaving a corp or folding it is perfectly valid PvP. Therefore corporations are not a commitment that players need to make.

No strawman here.



Re-read my post. I edited it with a few additional items for further clarity of my point. Yes, you definitely did strawman me. You did not understand my point. Whether intentional or not, you still strawmanned me. You give corporations more meaning in high sec and encourage people to join them, or they PVP with impunity, regardless of what form of PVP that takes. In a game that is balanced around competition, and driving competition, that impunity unbalances it. That is my point, don't ignore it this time. Not even by 'accident'.

Ok so your talking about game mechanics bonuses for why players should stay in corporations.

To that yes i agree there should be bonuses from the game for remaining in the same corp and for the corp to remain in the same alliance.

My apologies I did not grasp your meaning, so yes I did strawman you.

The CSM gets in the way of CCP communicating properly with the players of this game.

After all we are not just players, we are customers.

Time for the CSM to be disbanded.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#67 - 2016-11-28 10:20:50 UTC
Mark Marconi wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:

And there you go, you just answered your own question as to why not because other forms of PvP exist and are just as valid as shooting someone. There for denying someone combat is a valid form of PvP. After all it cost the wardecer isk and they get no reward.


I never said there was a problem with avoiding combat. Never said it ever, not once, anywhere on these forums ever in my history on these forums. Do not strawman me. Go back and re-examine what I have said, and try again when you have a proper understanding of my points.

Yes you stated the corporations need to be something meaningful but without game mechanics bonuses, there is no reason for them to be.

I asked why and you said "In a game where virtually every mechanic is designed around driving PVP in one form or another, why not?"

You went on to state all of the differing types of PvP and answered your own question.

Avoiding PvP by leaving a corp or folding it is perfectly valid PvP. Therefore corporations are not a commitment that players need to make.

No strawman here.



Re-read my post. I edited it with a few additional items for further clarity of my point. Yes, you definitely did strawman me. You did not understand my point. Whether intentional or not, you still strawmanned me. You give corporations more meaning in high sec and encourage people to join them, or they PVP with impunity, regardless of what form of PVP that takes. In a game that is balanced around competition, and driving competition, that impunity unbalances it. That is my point, don't ignore it this time. Not even by 'accident'.

Ok so your talking about game mechanics bonuses for why players should stay in corporations.

To that yes i agree there should be bonuses from the game for remaining in the same corp and for the corp to remain in the same alliance.

My apologies I did not grasp your meaning, so yes I did strawman you.



Just as an additional aside, how many high sec gankers sit in NPC corps for their own impunity to wardecs? Would it be so easy for them to gank if you could dec and station camp them, keeping your mining fleet safe without having to move to a different system? As it is, you can only really camp them if they don't fix their sec status, but seeing how easy that is to do with tags... impunity it is for them as things stand.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Dahlia Samar
Maniacal Miners INC
The Legends In The Game
#68 - 2016-11-28 10:34:57 UTC
Iria Ahrens wrote:
Well, personally, my only problem with war right now is defenders dropping corp and making new corps. I don't think that should be allowed. Normally, if two countries go to war, the defending side can't just change their name and have the war go away.

"Sorry Germany, you can't attack us today because we are not France anymore. We are Freedomville"

Play on alts or learn to fight back, or hide. But closing corps and creating a new one should be no-go.


A more apt analogy would be saying Putin wants to PvP, therefor he invades New Zealand overnight.

I'm fine with Wardec's in general, but I despise the people that call themselves "mercenaries" because they're one of the biggest cowards in the game.
Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#69 - 2016-11-28 10:43:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Dahlia Samar wrote:
Iria Ahrens wrote:
Well, personally, my only problem with war right now is defenders dropping corp and making new corps. I don't think that should be allowed. Normally, if two countries go to war, the defending side can't just change their name and have the war go away.

"Sorry Germany, you can't attack us today because we are not France anymore. We are Freedomville"

Play on alts or learn to fight back, or hide. But closing corps and creating a new one should be no-go.


A more apt analogy would be saying Putin wants to PvP, therefor he invades New Zealand overnight.

I'm fine with Wardec's in general, but I despise the people that call themselves "mercenaries" because they're one of the biggest cowards in the game.


Throwing your toys out of the pram and hurling pointless name-calling around won't solve anything. You clearly don't know enough of the mercenaries in this game if you would blanket-categorise them as 'cowards'. Perhaps it's time you meet some who aren't.

And no, your analogy is terrible. If Putin wants to PVP, he's got plenty of bears in Russia.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Dahlia Samar
Maniacal Miners INC
The Legends In The Game
#70 - 2016-11-28 10:49:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Dahlia Samar
Remiel Pollard wrote:

Throwing your toys out of the pram and hurling pointless name-calling around won't solve anything. You clearly don't know enough of the mercenaries in this game if you would blanket-categorise them as 'cowards'. Perhaps it's time you meet some who aren't.


Yeah, prove to me how manly you are by wardeccing my mining corp. /s
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#71 - 2016-11-28 10:53:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Sentient Blade wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Sentient Blade wrote:
and you can't nuke their capital because at least so far as highsec mercs go they don't have such a thing

[citation needed]


Can you show me an example of at least one highsec merc group with any significant static assets in space?

thats entirely not the point here.
most of the targets we have had , dont have any static assets in space either.

believe it or not , you can hurt mercs, no static punching bag to blob needed either.


Actually it is the point because it forces a fight.

Sentient Blade, you should note that the Merc war dec corps do not have those assets under the main corp/alliance, most Merc corps have very large POCO assets in a multitude of alt corps and people just need to know what to look for to identify them. The real question is do people have the will to go after them which is really the main issue with war decs.

Ralph I wanted to war dec the Goons, but I find it too damn expensive to justify, I agree with your suggestion on war dec costs.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Henry Plantgenet
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2016-11-28 11:07:16 UTC
Or you could make wardecs more useful against lowsec or nullsec groups and the ability to hire NPCs to attack your agressors as well. Hiring NPC guards would be interesting.
Not being able to capture someone else's systems in nullsec without having a wardec with them (because Sov is governed by concord) would also make nullsec more interesting.
Mercenary groups that only sit in hubs and in chokes to a particular cluster is boring and the equivalent of highsec gate camping.
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#73 - 2016-11-28 11:18:52 UTC
Henry Plantgenet wrote:
Not being able to capture someone else's systems in nullsec without having a wardec with them (because Sov is governed by concord) would also make nullsec more interesting.

How would this have any affect whatsoever?

Wardecs are mechanics only needed in highsec as a way to switch off CONCORD. They are not at all required in low and null to drive conflict. That happens regardless.

So how would this make nullsec more interesting?

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#74 - 2016-11-28 11:19:55 UTC
Dahlia Samar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:

Throwing your toys out of the pram and hurling pointless name-calling around won't solve anything. You clearly don't know enough of the mercenaries in this game if you would blanket-categorise them as 'cowards'. Perhaps it's time you meet some who aren't.


Yeah, prove to me how manly you are by wardeccing my mining corp. /s


I don't need to prove anything, but if a mercenary corporation does wardec your mining corp, it probably has nothing to do with being 'manly', and everything to do with who hired them to dec you. Maybe it was another mining corp that doesn't like the competition you present.

You are coming at this from an emotional approach, not a rational one. You are doing little more than getting mad, and throwing a tantrum. This does absolutely nothing for your 'cause', and everything to invite people to come and do exactly what you suggest, and wring as many tears from you as possible, regardless of your opinion of their 'manliness'. I recommend you calm down, and get a grip on reality.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Dahlia Samar
Maniacal Miners INC
The Legends In The Game
#75 - 2016-11-28 11:24:20 UTC
Remiel Pollard wrote:


I don't need to prove anything, but if a mercenary corporation does wardec your mining corp, it probably has nothing to do with being 'manly', and everything to do with who hired them to dec you. Maybe it was another mining corp that doesn't like the competition you present.

You are coming at this from an emotional approach, not a rational one. You are doing little more than getting mad, and throwing a tantrum. This does absolutely nothing for your 'cause', and everything to invite people to come and do exactly what you suggest, and wring as many tears from you as possible, regardless of your opinion of their 'manliness'. I recommend you calm down, and get a grip on reality.


I have no idea where you got the impression that I was in any way mad let alone 'throwing a tantrum' or being overly emotional.

Remiel Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#76 - 2016-11-28 11:28:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Remiel Pollard
Dahlia Samar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:


I don't need to prove anything, but if a mercenary corporation does wardec your mining corp, it probably has nothing to do with being 'manly', and everything to do with who hired them to dec you. Maybe it was another mining corp that doesn't like the competition you present.

You are coming at this from an emotional approach, not a rational one. You are doing little more than getting mad, and throwing a tantrum. This does absolutely nothing for your 'cause', and everything to invite people to come and do exactly what you suggest, and wring as many tears from you as possible, regardless of your opinion of their 'manliness'. I recommend you calm down, and get a grip on reality.


I have no idea where you got the impression that I was in any way mad let alone 'throwing a tantrum' or being overly emotional.



The insinuated pejorative when you questioned my 'manliness' for no other reason than to question my manliness made it obvious. It's completely irrelevant to the topic at hand, which is what you would have addressed had you been calm and reasonable, instead of my 'manliness'.

There was also the part where you called all mercenaries 'cowards', which is not just wrong, but off-the-charts histrionics.

“Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'. Jam those ones first, and kill them last.” - Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104

Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#77 - 2016-11-28 11:33:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
Dahlia Samar wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:


I don't need to prove anything, but if a mercenary corporation does wardec your mining corp, it probably has nothing to do with being 'manly', and everything to do with who hired them to dec you. Maybe it was another mining corp that doesn't like the competition you present.

You are coming at this from an emotional approach, not a rational one. You are doing little more than getting mad, and throwing a tantrum. This does absolutely nothing for your 'cause', and everything to invite people to come and do exactly what you suggest, and wring as many tears from you as possible, regardless of your opinion of their 'manliness'. I recommend you calm down, and get a grip on reality.


I have no idea where you got the impression that I was in any way mad let alone 'throwing a tantrum' or being overly emotional.


Your previous two posts have a bit of butthurt and spite in them.

However up to this point, the discussion in the thread has been pretty reasonable all around. Hopefully it stays that way.

Wardecs are in the game and are always likely to be. From a players perspective it's worth discussing how the current system could be changed to improve the experience, without sperging on anyone or any group.
Jennifer Starblaze
Fury Transport
#78 - 2016-11-28 12:06:23 UTC
Mark Marconi wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Mark Marconi wrote:
Remiel Pollard wrote:
Corporations need to become commitments that players have to make.

Why?

Besides as a bonus to attackers in wardecs, WHY?


In a game where virtually every mechanic is designed around driving PVP in one form or another, why not?

If that were true, there would be no mining, industry, science, stations. Hell nothing really other than a dock to refit ships and a large arena.

EvE is a lot more than just PvP, on the 2003 box while it mentions pirates it actually does not mention PvP (it does imply it), hell it starts by talking about space exploration.


Maybe you want to take a look at that box again, I am holding it in my hand right now.

Quote:
New Universe. New Rules.

Immerse yourself in the vast virgin territories of EvE where power is the Holy Grail and the ultimate aphrodisiac. Conceive a new life without boundaries, where murder, plunder, betrayel and delsions of grandeur will lead you to boundless glory or the brink of ruin. The galaxy is yours to control if you have the brains, strength and cunning to succeed.

Choose a Profession:

Dauntless fleet commander, or the most nefarious pirate ever to terrorize the galaxy - be and do anything you´d ever imagine.

Explore A Vast Universe:

Thousands of solar systems await exploration, exploitation, and corruption of the hands of you and your friends.
(This is aimed at Players building up empires and burning them to the ground)

Player-Driven Economy

Form a cartel of ruthless compatriots and control the spaceways. Buy, sell, and barter to amass great wealth.... or do it the easy way with a hostile takeover.


Where are the statements about the great experience of sitting in an asteroid belt and just chewing on rocks for hours?
Where is the line that promotes the great PvE content (which gets promoted in every non PvP centric MMO)?

Everything that is stated on the box is about interaction between players, you are as usually just twisting things to a point where they would be beneficial to your argumentation.

Thanks for making me laugh with that statement about corp tax though. Gonna keep that one in mind.

"Lower corp taxes are not a benefit, because you don´t have lower taxes as soon as you leave the corp," - ROFL.
Aubrey Addams
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2016-11-28 12:29:29 UTC
you should try pvp
Shae Tadaruwa
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#80 - 2016-11-28 12:40:30 UTC
Aubrey Addams wrote:
you should try pvp

The fact that certain players act like NPCs and bots, doesn't mean shooting them should be thought of as a PvE.

As tempting as that is, let's not be too negative towards them. Highsec carebears are people too.

Dracvlad - "...Your intel is free intel, all you do is pay for it..." && "...If you warp on the same path as a cloaked ship, you'll make a bookmark at exactly the same spot as the cloaky camper..."