Assembly Hall

Or, you know, you can set traps?

We mine in peace with proper pvp support and cloakyfags in a system. Maybe you should come take some notes the next time I deploy my full mining support duders.

*sigh*

I'll explain this for you, since I would hate for a fellow member of my alliance to fail as badly as you are showing.

You set traps, you create situations to pull him in to attack, yes, you even get your pvp bros or alt to sit in the belt with you in a cloaky recon waiting for them to attack.

If all this fails, you just find out where his corp/alliance does their carebearing and return the favor by shutting down their systems.

Its not like FA has not dealt with this before, and its not like we won't deal with it again. Don't whine on the forums, just deal with it. Cloaky AFK can't hurt you, and when they come back from AFK, they can only find your miners with probes which you can see coming before they can get a lock and warp(you are riding dscan, right?)

If you need help dealing with this, go to the alliance forums and ask someone for help. Just stop shiptoasting about it in public.

Its NOT an issue, tho. They can't affect you(beyond making you switch systems) unless you LET them do so.

Work with your mates if they are in your way, do some intel work, and DEAL with it. We get those guys often enough that their contracts to grief us usually don't get renewed, and the few times the have been good enough to actually become a real problem, we took the fight to them.

http://eveboard.com/pilot/Dawn_Flare

Do your homework, this is a dedicated indy toon.

Cloaks are NOT something that should shut you down if you have even half a brain. Grow a pair and learn how to handle psyops.

They do, in fact, shut down small, unprepared ops.

But only if the miners in question let their fear overwhelm their common sense.

My corp maintains unlisted belt bookmarks across several good mining system in out of the way corners of our space, just so that those very small 2-3 man ops have options if the pvpers can't/won't help for whatever reason. Its a PVPers job to maintain those(pvpers tend to have better probing skills).

You have to be organized, and support each other. Letting a cloaky shut you down is YOUR failure tho, not a failure of the mechanic.

Edit: Oh, and I maintain my pvp main in fairly close proximity to said miners so I can rapid response to help them in a pinch, with carrier hotdrops or recon cruiser support(usually the latter, carrier hotdrops are pretty much suicide) so I have a fair grasp of BOTH sides of the coin.

FA is a PVP alliance, but alot of us have indy alts. Dawn happens to be my indy alt, who is posting while my main is sadly forum banned(Yeah, I totally fess up to being a troll, but I have found the best troll is the truth)


Considering EVE was originally designed by a couple dudes pissed they were not allowed to grief in other MMOs, I am inclined to think most griefing tactics are a feature. The game has moved past that, and some actions are actually bannable as griefing, but not many(only confirmed one I have found is bumping a freighter for hours, preventing its warp, just for the lulz) but in the end, assume any grief potential is supposed to be there, and is accepted by CCP.

I don't LIKE cloakyfags, but I accept their right to do their thing, and see it as a legit tactic in a war against other large entities where you need to impair their ability to make isk.

The other thing about nerfing them is the fact that doing so is a direct buff to bots, since a standard tactic to deal with them is to cloak in their botting system for a week or 2, til the bot whitelists you(meaning they will do their thing and ignore you being in system) while allows you to kill them with impunity.

All in all, they should stay, even if it causes me a little inconvenience.

If the cloaker is afk, why are you afraid of him? Most people continue doing whatever it is you do in 0.0 all day without letting an AFK cloaker ruin it for them.

I support cloaking for long durations as a tactic of disrupting gameplay.

However, to me it would seem that true AFK cloaking is in effect unattended gameplay as there is intent with the action of AFK cloaking and unattended gameplay breaks some rules I hope.

So with that viewpoint in mind maybe we can agree that cloaking under some circumstances is being abused, and if we can agree on this then we can agree that something needs to be done about it. First we need a problem and maybe that problem can be unattended gameplay.

A solution can only follow once we agree on a problem!

Fly safe. o7

Another cloaker expert alt with 1 kill and 18 losses.
Where you flying ? Let's check what will be happening when i go there with a cloaker alt. Checking you cowardice when you cant go to make isk.
Just when i was in Khanid low sec (three lvl4 agents was there). In the first day, the local was 38. I just got some kills and two weeks later the local decreased to 12.
Four weeks later the local decreased to 3. Most of time i was there in AFK. Sometimes i just dropped out some cheap scanner probes, but i didn't scan and mission runners docked up instantly. Probes in space :P
This is the real AFK terror. Enemy players dont know the status of AFK player, they dont know ambush when starting. Not all pilots playing in same time. Sometimes easy to catch one or two peoples there, who do a mistake. Sometimes they want to make a trap or something to kill cloakers, but against smart pilots who has intel or using a spies, that's useless thing and experienced AFK cloaked player uncatchable.
But the AFK terror is working, i used this tactic many times with successful. Everytime where i was in AFK cloak, activities on local drastically decreased after few days.
So, dont tell me, AFK cloakers does not have effect on active players.

With all the chitchat surrounding this subject I decided to peruse old posts about the subject, the main reason being to see if CCP had ever communicated their stance on this subject. This is what I found:

CSM December Summit – Meeting Minutes Are Out - links to a Devblog.

PDF document (containing the minutes of the meeting) linked in the Devblog.

I draw your attention to the 'Game balance' section (page 22) where it says:



So it would appear that CCP are open to a counter of some sort to cloaked ships. As the previous CSM were not against the idea, I hope the current CSM panel can maintain some continuity in relation to this topic.

Hopefully this can lead to a more definitive answer to this whole cloaky business and ultimately a much clearer idea as to what CCP's stance is.

Have a good one. o7