These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Small idea about cloaking

Author
Eidric
Private Shelter for Mad People
#1 - 2012-04-22 13:26:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Eidric
*Edit*

This is mostly discussion thread so I would suggest starting from to end of the thread

I want to discuss the possibilities of tweaking cloaking in K-space that would somehow benefit both of these groups

A) People who actively scan the system

B) Cloaked active players looking for prey


By the way of redelegation the amount of information available to both. Especially since cloaking changes the amount of information accessible while boosting its defensive capabilities

Atm the players obtain passive information in term of local. Even pilots who are currently cloaked - this forces cloaked ships to afk within the system in order to catch someone.

IF CCP ever to limit such information, then a counter balance (in K-space) is necessary since even 1 CovOps can easily project a lot of firepower when backed by a gang. It would be possible by either

A) Allowing K-space pilots to gather more information (active gathering) about their system and essentially learning about the presence of the cloaked ship

B)Limiting offensive capabilities of the cloaked ship even more in K-space (e.g. Cyno-jammers


What would you think to be the better of two (or perhaps there are more options)?
And how would you think to achieve that


Personally I think a similar idea to WH might be probable, but due to stable gate system and Jumpdrives the amount of information a K-space pilot learns (w/o the local) should be boosted, (For example scanning that never reaches 100% to provide general location of cloaked ship is space, of course that would be limited to K-space only)








*Old Post


For starters I do not think that this idea is a panacea for cloaking problems, but i just want to throw it out there for others to see. It might spawn better ideas perhaps


Make cloaked ships semi-scannable - as in cloaked ship generates 1000+ km anomaly sphere in the system that either can't be scanned to 100% or has random warp in location - Therefore people wont be able to simply scan warp in and decloak the target

It is provides the basic location of the cloaked ship in space - and if it starts warping somewhere the sphere will move. Allowing these, who pay attention to notice the incoming threat. While if you slack off - well tough luck

It might be also a good idea to merge the "anomalous sphere"-s of multiple ships into one - thus denying easy intel to the scanner

Also might be a good idea to utilize upgraded module that comes with it's own set of draw-backs to offset the bonus ability (more skills, tighter fitting, less power) to keep it more for situational use


What do you guys think?
Belshazzar Babylon
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-04-22 13:41:27 UTC
Negative Ghostrider the pattern is full.
Eidric
Private Shelter for Mad People
#3 - 2012-04-22 16:05:40 UTC
And I wasn't asking a yes or no. I wanted to start a discussion, especially since I've personally agreed this isnt a cure. I wouldn't have posted this in F&I otherwise.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#4 - 2012-04-22 16:37:37 UTC
Eidric wrote:

What do you guys think?


I think to solve the problems of Cloaking you must remove Local Chat Intel. Until that happens CovOps ships can never properly fill their role.

I also think if as your post suggests a method of cloak detection is added to the game without first removing Local, CCP might as well remove cloaks from the game altogether as they would be useless.
Belshazzar Babylon
Doomheim
#5 - 2012-04-22 16:45:49 UTC
I'm sorry, it's just that this comes up about once a week. Usually the same ideas, either a special ship or probe that can find cloakies, or fuel/mechanic that makes cloakies uncloak after some arbitrary amount of time.

Then people argue and say that cloaks need a counter. Then other folks say that the counter is that cloaks can not do anything to you, or that Local is the problem.

I fall in the second category because I believe it would break WH's. I also find it funny that somehow one guy can scare up a whole system.
Eidric
Private Shelter for Mad People
#6 - 2012-04-22 17:14:45 UTC
2 Xorv

I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.

No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.

2 Belshazzar Babylon

Thank you for you comment, I know that this is one of the dead horses of Eve community that we tend to beat tirelessly, but perhaps once in a blue moon we might stumble upon a suggestion that makes both parties agree. And as I've mentioned above people usually go into extremes of cloaking \ decloaking I simply tried to find another path and start a discussion in that direction.


P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#7 - 2012-04-22 17:58:32 UTC
Eidric wrote:
2 Xorv

I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.

No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.

2 Belshazzar Babylon

Thank you for you comment, I know that this is one of the dead horses of Eve community that we tend to beat tirelessly, but perhaps once in a blue moon we might stumble upon a suggestion that makes both parties agree. And as I've mentioned above people usually go into extremes of cloaking \ decloaking I simply tried to find another path and start a discussion in that direction.


P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate.

Problem is, EVERYTHING has been sugested so there are no new ideas you can bring to the table.
Byrrssa Crendraven
Anti - Social
#8 - 2012-04-22 19:34:01 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:
Eidric wrote:
2 Xorv

I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.

No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.

2 Belshazzar Babylon

Thank you for you comment, I know that this is one of the dead horses of Eve community that we tend to beat tirelessly, but perhaps once in a blue moon we might stumble upon a suggestion that makes both parties agree. And as I've mentioned above people usually go into extremes of cloaking \ decloaking I simply tried to find another path and start a discussion in that direction.


P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate.

Problem is, EVERYTHING has been sugested so there are no new ideas you can bring to the table.


I find it hard to believe that *EVERYTHING* has been suggested. There can always be something that someone hasn't thought about. That's why you keep a discussion going. So that maybe someone that has that rare idea that fits can suggest it.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#9 - 2012-04-22 19:38:18 UTC
Byrrssa Crendraven wrote:
Astroniomix wrote:
Eidric wrote:
2 Xorv

I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.

No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.

2 Belshazzar Babylon

Thank you for you comment, I know that this is one of the dead horses of Eve community that we tend to beat tirelessly, but perhaps once in a blue moon we might stumble upon a suggestion that makes both parties agree. And as I've mentioned above people usually go into extremes of cloaking \ decloaking I simply tried to find another path and start a discussion in that direction.


P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate.

Problem is, EVERYTHING has been sugested so there are no new ideas you can bring to the table.


I find it hard to believe that *EVERYTHING* has been suggested. There can always be something that someone hasn't thought about. That's why you keep a discussion going. So that maybe someone that has that rare idea that fits can suggest it.
I can't think of anything that hasn't been posted. Use the search, you will be amazed at some of the ideas. (my favorite is that cloaked ships should self destruct 30 seconds after cloaking)
Tidurious
Blatant Alt Corp
#10 - 2012-04-22 19:55:28 UTC
Belshazzar Babylon wrote:
Negative Ghostrider the OP is stupid.



Fixed that for you.

NO.
Eidric
Private Shelter for Mad People
#11 - 2012-04-22 20:20:58 UTC
Tidurious wrote:
Belshazzar Babylon wrote:
Negative Ghostrider the OP is stupid.



Fixed that for you.

NO.



No what? did you read my question? or you just read the topic and answered w/o reading?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#12 - 2012-04-22 20:48:23 UTC
Been suggested before and no thanks.

While ever local remains the 100%, risk free, instant intel tool it is now, cloaking shouldn't be touched.
If it ever is messed with in any way, then WH dwellers need to be taken into account. WH peeps don't whine about cloaks, they deal with them. Unlike renters and pet alliances.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Tikktokk Tokkzikk
V0LTA
WE FORM V0LTA
#13 - 2012-04-22 21:23:09 UTC
Oh, and please add negrep and hide threads with -10 negrep in the OP.
That way threads like this will be easier to deal with.

Oh, and OP, l2search!

OP, click me please!
^if you click it, you'll see about a few hundred threads similar to this. You'll also see why your idea is terrible.
Eidric
Private Shelter for Mad People
#14 - 2012-04-22 22:03:41 UTC
2 Mag's

- I also live in WH and I have absolutely no qualms in the way cloaking is done right now while I also like the absence of the local myself. I was simply trying to aggregate both side of the argument and not push my idea but start a discussion in the way of: one side gives something up and another side gives up something too.

Please refer to P.S. of #6 for example.


2 Tikktokk Tokkzikk

And what made you think I didn't ? I did look up the search, but i haven't seen the suggestions similar to mine. That is why i added it to the discussion. And if you think this topic can't be discussed at all - what is the point of this forum then?


2 All

As I've stated in the 1st message * I do not think that is the solution* It was merely given as an example.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#15 - 2012-04-23 02:33:39 UTC
Eidric wrote:
2 Xorv
I know and frankly i have absolutely no qualms about cloaking myself, but people do talk about it and I thought perhaps a mid-way solution can be done: something that scans out the cloakies but never allows one to actually catch them.

No matter how much i wish for delayed local I am afraid CCP wont go there in recent future. Especially since all these new fancy additions to local they are introducing.


Nothing you said there really makes sense to me.

You're telling me that you have "no qualms about cloaking" yourself, but decided to start a new thread that claims cloaking is a problem and go on to suggest a nerf by means of detection mechanics. You're either very confused or lying.

You're not suggesting "a mid way point", there's no compromise in your proposal, it's just a nerf to CovOps. A compromise would address the problems of CovOps pilots and players as well, and that means doing something about Local Chat!

You also seem to have mind reading powers when it comes to CCP developers, in that you're convinced they will never remove/change Local, but would be happy to destroy cloaking by adding a detection method without addressing the Local issue. You are aware that CCP mentioned changing Local in the last CSM 6 minutes along with cloak detection?
Eidric
Private Shelter for Mad People
#16 - 2012-04-23 12:10:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Eidric
Xorv wrote:

Nothing you said there really makes sense to me.

You're telling me that you have "no qualms about cloaking" yourself, but decided to start a new thread that claims cloaking is a problem and go on to suggest a nerf by means of detection mechanics. You're either very confused or lying.


I have no personal problems with cloaking but i do see threads coming up once in a while. And I simply thought this idea might spawn some discussion by slightly nerfing cloakys but still keeping them invulnerable, and perhaps getting a counter balanced by something else that cloak pilots might enjoy.

Xorv wrote:

You're not suggesting "a mid way point", there's no compromise in your proposal, it's just a nerf to CovOps. A compromise would address the problems of CovOps pilots and players as well, and that means doing something about Local Chat!


This:
Eidric wrote:

P.S. I wish we had delayed local with crippled scanning of ships mentioned above, forcing players to actively collect data of their system instead of getting everything on a plate.


And I've also wanted others to provide counter balance to my offer instead of saying yes or no. Especially since I dont have very solid counter balance myself as such I've did not included it in my original post. Hence i've said that the idea isn't complete. And i've really liked that combination you proposed of this slight nerf to cloak + removed local.

Xorv wrote:

You also seem to have mind reading powers when it comes to CCP developers, in that you're convinced they will never remove/change Local, but would be happy to destroy cloaking by adding a detection method without addressing the Local issue. You are aware that CCP mentioned changing Local in the last CSM 6 minutes along with cloak detection?


I did not said CCP wont do it - I said I am afraid they won't because they are spending man-hours currently to improve handling of local UI. - Unless of course the local UI improvements they are implementing will be for Empire only.

And if CCP is actively thinking of changing cloak detection + local then it's awesome by itself. And this thread would still be viable simply by throwing an idea out there, not as final but perhaps a part of something bigger. And the discussion would help.







So how would you like" no instant local + cloak scan that shows only location but does not provide warp in point" thoughts? Is it too unbalanced? what would you want to add\modify to it to make it better for everyone?
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#17 - 2012-04-23 12:20:49 UTC
no.
cloak is fine and does not need any nerfs.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#18 - 2012-04-23 12:57:36 UTC
Eidric wrote:
2 Mag's

- I also live in WH and I have absolutely no qualms in the way cloaking is done right now while I also like the absence of the local myself. I was simply trying to aggregate both side of the argument and not push my idea but start a discussion in the way of: one side gives something up and another side gives up something too.

Please refer to P.S. of #6 for example.
For any idea to be viable, there needs to be balance. Yours misses the mark in that regard. Plus as has been said, your idea is nothing new and only breaks cloaking.

As Xorv said, you're either confused or lying.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#19 - 2012-04-23 14:42:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Nikk Narrel
People just seem to forget the original reason for cloaking.

Someone wants the element of surprise, is willing to train for it extensively, and even use a ship with limited combat abilities.

Local absolutely denies this. But in a twisted yet balancing manner, the cloak is bizarrely also an absolute, not allowing any to locate those who use it correctly.

Another described it: I feel in this case being balanced is not reflecting the best of both sides, but equally screwed up on both sides.

This means cloaking is broken, regarding it's original purpose of intent. What's left was an improvised meta-gaming tactic salvaged from the situation.

Fix cloaking.

And that means both sides of the issue.
Eidric
Private Shelter for Mad People
#20 - 2012-04-23 17:03:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Eidric
Mag's wrote:
Eidric wrote:
2 Mag's

- I also live in WH and I have absolutely no qualms in the way cloaking is done right now while I also like the absence of the local myself. I was simply trying to aggregate both side of the argument and not push my idea but start a discussion in the way of: one side gives something up and another side gives up something too.

Please refer to P.S. of #6 for example.
For any idea to be viable, there needs to be balance. Yours misses the mark in that regard. Plus as has been said, your idea is nothing new and only breaks cloaking.

As Xorv said, you're either confused or lying.



Please read #16

And even in #6 I suggested nerfed local as balance to this idea. Have you read it?

I want you to help me find a decent balancing option to this problem - I am not trying to push this idea into game as is even I know it wouldn't be fair.
123Next page