These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Hiding in Eve- Why We Cloak

Author
Loius Woo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#261 - 2012-08-11 03:33:32 UTC
I am surprised there are no comments to my suggestion.

To the OP, if you want people to take your ideas seriously, you need to be active in your own threads.
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#262 - 2012-08-11 03:37:07 UTC
Loius Woo wrote:
I am surprised there are no comments to my suggestion.

To the OP, if you want people to take your ideas seriously, you need to be active in your own threads.


1) Your ideas have merit.

2) Don't keep posting until you get the attention you think you deserve. It comes off as being a whiny brat.

3) Don't assume you know what is best for me.
Loius Woo
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#263 - 2012-08-11 04:14:04 UTC
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
Loius Woo wrote:
I am surprised there are no comments to my suggestion.

To the OP, if you want people to take your ideas seriously, you need to be active in your own threads.


1) Your ideas have merit.

2) Don't keep posting until you get the attention you think you deserve. It comes off as being a whiny brat.

3) Don't assume you know what is best for me.


HEY!

Welcome back!

What do you think of the things in your thread?
Sigras
Conglomo
#264 - 2012-08-11 08:45:46 UTC
Came to hate, ended up likeing . . .
Motoko Kusanagui
Doomheim
#265 - 2012-08-11 18:31:15 UTC
Loius Woo wrote:
Motoko Kusanagui wrote:
Cloaking also allows to take a break, and depending on what space you are or players present in the system it might be the only way to make a pause in the game, sometimes we need to take care of something in RL, kids, phone call or any other thing.

If some change is gonna be applied to cloaking this should also be considered.


Thats pretty simple actually, make cloaks require some fuel, the burn rate of fuel is based on your ship's velocity up to some maximum along a logarithmic curve so that if you are sitting still, a full load of fuel (full as in the modules "ammo") would last say 5-6 hours, if warping all over the system, fuel would last 20-30 minutes. Then make the module be shut off to reload, and require something like 45 seconds to reload, that way a reasonably good scan prober has a chance to lock you down.

To the OP's ideas, I like them immensely.

I few ideas to add to them though:

1. Terrain. I would add a bunch more of it. Large gas clouds, debris fields, comets, etc. I fell the right number of "terrain" features other than planets should be above 40 in any given system (too many for a gang to blindly warp to all of them looking for people). All of them should be discoverable by using a system scanner. The system scanner can be activated and take time to scan in an outward spiral, covering approximately 1AU per 10-20 seconds (modifiable by skills). So for example, if you want to hide, you can activate your scanner, and in a large system, it might take half an hour or more to scan the whole thing, after you have scanned, all of the terrain are now warp able objects that you can bookmark. This way, preparation will give you an advantage but that advantage can be overtaken by patience if your enemy is willing to sit and scan long enough. Into these terrain features, you should be able to either hide your ships, or hide your POS (the new POSes that will be anchor able anywhere). In addition to this, collections of bookmarks should be able to be created from scanning these sites so that explorers could map systems and sell the bookmarks on the market. Over time, the positions of different terrain features should drift, making old bookmarks (older than 2-3 weeks) no longer good enough. But each time you warp to a bookmark, it automatically corrects for spatial drift, so if you "live" in a gas cloud, you don't have to manually update the bookmark all the time.

2. Local. I would make local chat optional as it is in W-hole space, however, I would also separate the local count from local chat and add a new piece of information to the UI that indicates the total signature size of all active ships in that system that are detectable by your sensors. This should include ships that are cloaked. So, if your sensors say that there is a total of about 800m of signature right when you jump through, you know there are people active, as your sensors either get closer, or activate the active sensors, you might be able to tell that those 800m's are from 4 signatures. After that, it works as described. This way, an experienced pilot will still be able to tell when people are in the system and would have a decent idea of how many etc, but not WHO they are or what they are flying unless they work for it.

3. Strategic Intel. I think this could easily be done in two ways, first as a bribe to CONCORD to get the stats that you can currently get through the map, but the bribe would be some set amount for intel on a system, constellation, or region that is fairly cheap, but scaled by size (maybe 25,000 for a system, 100,000 for a constellation and 1 mil for a region...just as a rough swag). The bribes would be good for a 24 hour period or so. In addition, players should be able to deploy a variety of strategic scanners that are able to provide the same kinds of stats as long as the scanner probe/structure is not destroyed. Players should also be able to "sell" their intel for less than CONCORD charges via contracts. Some sensors should be able to report on gate traffic to include ship types and times. This way, being a scout recon becomes a profession able to make you money in Eve. For better quality intel (like ship types and times, an active scanner that actually scans ships as they jump in and provides fitting/cargo information) would be much more valuable, but require scanners that are much easier to identify and destroy, making them good for Alliances defending space, or scouts in deep behind enemy lines. Such intel could be contracted for millions of isk/hour if so desired.

Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#266 - 2012-08-11 18:51:55 UTC
Loius Woo wrote:
Snipped for space.



So, to reply to your ideas-

1) Strategic intel- the idea of bribing Concord already exists- locator agents. Essentially, this is what you're talking about. The problem is, it's an "ISK for capability" setup, and with alliances having trillions of ISK, it's a bad idea. There would never be a reason for them not to max out everything, in every area. The expense would be negligible and there would be no way to attack any infrastructure to destroy the capability.

Everything should be in the hands on the players, and I do agree that there should be some way for players to record intel info and then sell it or trade it to others, and have it be 100% verifiable in game. Indeed, a recon/scout/spy profession is sorely needed.

2) Local in delayed mode, enough said. Local count- only counted if you came in through a gate. Total signature ideas- each ship, even if it's a cloaked ship, should leave some sort of signature or trail of tell tale "space pollution" or "space dust" if you will, and the overall effect will be to add to the background pollution. High pollution levels, more ships in the area recently. So, I agree with your idea in a sense, in that with my original design your thoughts are taking into account.

3) Unnecessary detail at this point. Most beginning designers get too caught up in the minutia of all the 'cool stuff' when the high level design isn't complete, we have no working framework and there is no 'crawl, walk, run' process established. Your ideas are good, and are an obvious iteration/extrapolation of the basic idea. But at this point, design effort should be focused on refining and realizing the fundamental structure and framework of the concept, not adding wrapping paper and unicorn sprinkles to the cake.
Virgin Slayer
Elder Race of Man
#267 - 2012-08-12 05:20:27 UTC
Well thought out and written. I love the ideas you have presented here!

AMERICAN ΞνΞ PLAYER Caldari State  -  Give me missiles or give me death!

Frying Doom
#268 - 2012-08-13 12:49:01 UTC
Always a good idea and it comes up so often now. Smile

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Conir
Pins and Needles
#269 - 2012-08-13 17:53:50 UTC
+1 from me, hope to see this happen
Frying Doom
#270 - 2012-08-18 03:42:59 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Came to hate, ended up likeing . . .

Welcome to the best thread in the forum graveyard.

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

TheBreadMuncher
Protus Correction Facility Inc.
#271 - 2012-08-19 12:17:20 UTC
Do you believe that this system should introduce some sort of way for ships with covops capabilities to disguise themselves as other signatures? For instance, a ship with a small sig could emulate a battleship. Therefore, the small sig would make it seem like there's a battleship further away rather than a covops proteus in-warp and about to drop right on top of your gang.

"We will create the introduction thread if that is requested by the community. Also, we will have an ISD Seminar about the CCL team in the coming weeks in which you can ask your questions about the CCL team and provide some constructive feedback to us." - Countless pages of locked threads and numerous permabanned accounts later, change is coming.

Thor Kerrigan
Guardians of Asceticism
#272 - 2012-08-20 00:48:44 UTC
What if alliance/corps could setup local to what it is now but it required a module essentially similar to the POCO. Only with about half the hitpoints. Which means 5 guys with decent DPS can take it out at a planet (no passive POS guns, max of 1000 ish DPS and no 300 km point) in less than 30 minutes. Sure, put a reinforcement timer on it, but local essentially breaks back to delayed until the module is fully repaired.

I like the idea of having the more precise modules be the most vulnerable/expensive. Follows the risk/reward quite nicely.

I always thought small roaming gangs should have some clear targets they could periodically kill, thus annoying bigger alliances who control space too big to properly patrol.

Targets can easily be automatically defended by adding something similar to gate guns. Serves as a tank-check if you will, but is countered by bringing 1-2 extra guys above the tank-check.
Kethry Avenger
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#273 - 2012-08-20 02:50:42 UTC
I support EVE moving in this general direction. Maybe not in highsec. But low and null for sure.
Frying Doom
#274 - 2012-08-23 02:07:26 UTC
Kethry Avenger wrote:
I support EVE moving in this general direction. Maybe not in highsec. But low and null for sure.

Personally I feel if they implement this they should do it everywhere

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Melodee619
Heavy Industry Construction and Mining Inc.
#275 - 2012-08-23 06:25:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Melodee619
No offense but with CCPs new found "lets turn EVE into wow", they don't really need any help to make the game even easier than it is becoming. From what I read here you want everyone to have access to everything.... blizzard did that, an look what we got... world of Warcraft. As I said, not slagging you off, just hoping we don't go down this road anymore than we are already.

ratters have been demanding CCP remove the ability to "AFK" for years on cloakers, yet CCP gave it to miners in spades... So called afk cloaking is a feature it can be either a scout waiting till FC tells him to lite off... or just a random pvper looking to hunt ratters. Personally I do it, because I know it annoys the bejezus out of ratters. To be frank it shouldnt be ccp['s responsibility to play for you, even though they do these days. If you have a red in local tough... either find an kill him or deal with it, an pay attention :D
Frying Doom
#276 - 2012-08-27 00:29:24 UTC
Well 211 likes so what does it win Smile

Any spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors are because frankly, I don't care!!

Saede Riordan
Alexylva Paradox
#277 - 2012-08-27 15:29:38 UTC
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
Bloodpetal wrote:
These ideas are good, but they're not the first time they've been suggested or recommended and have been often repeated and sponsored by the EVE Community.

If CCP decides to listen today, then so be it.



I've been playing Eve for a long while (8 years now), and thinking about its game design just as long. I know full well that everything has been discussed to death. The point is to bring a few concepts together in one integrated design so that they all work together cooperatively so that the end result is greater than any one single change.



I messaged one of the CSM members, they all like the idea and say they've been trying to pitch something like this to CCP for years, but the fact is the mechanics aren't actually 'broken' they're not ideal, but they work, and so it gets a backseat to fixing things that actually are broken.
Usagi Toshiro
Null Tax Crew
#278 - 2012-08-27 15:54:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Usagi Toshiro
+1

More akin to submarine warfare with active and passive as well as using natural surroundings and events to camo your noise. I would take an active interest in a mechanic like this. Currently using D-scan and probes is a headache even after you're fluent in their use.

Trolls are like stray cats. If you feed them they multiply. Please do not  feed the trolls.

FRONT TOWARD ENEMY
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#279 - 2012-08-31 06:31:59 UTC
Thor Kerrigan wrote:
What if alliance/corps could setup local to what it is now but it required a module essentially similar to the POCO. Only with about half the hitpoints. Which means 5 guys with decent DPS can take it out at a planet (no passive POS guns, max of 1000 ish DPS and no 300 km point) in less than 30 minutes. Sure, put a reinforcement timer on it, but local essentially breaks back to delayed until the module is fully repaired.

I like the idea of having the more precise modules be the most vulnerable/expensive. Follows the risk/reward quite nicely.

I always thought small roaming gangs should have some clear targets they could periodically kill, thus annoying bigger alliances who control space too big to properly patrol.

Targets can easily be automatically defended by adding something similar to gate guns. Serves as a tank-check if you will, but is countered by bringing 1-2 extra guys above the tank-check.


I think the whole point of the thread is to specifically stay away from an ISK-for-goodies model, don't you think? Titans are a perfect example of how ISK will never be a limiting factor to proliferation. And the last thing we should do is remove local as it is, and then give it right back to 0.0 Alliances.

Nobody should ever have the perfect precision of the current local channel ever again. Regardless of what upgrades are applied.
FRONT TOWARD ENEMY
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#280 - 2012-08-31 06:33:12 UTC
Saede Riordan wrote:
Mors Sanctitatis wrote:
Bloodpetal wrote:
These ideas are good, but they're not the first time they've been suggested or recommended and have been often repeated and sponsored by the EVE Community.

If CCP decides to listen today, then so be it.



I've been playing Eve for a long while (8 years now), and thinking about its game design just as long. I know full well that everything has been discussed to death. The point is to bring a few concepts together in one integrated design so that they all work together cooperatively so that the end result is greater than any one single change.



I messaged one of the CSM members, they all like the idea and say they've been trying to pitch something like this to CCP for years, but the fact is the mechanics aren't actually 'broken' they're not ideal, but they work, and so it gets a backseat to fixing things that actually are broken.


I would argue that the mechanics are indeed 'broken'. lol.