These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A possible solution to AFK cloaky alts

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#401 - 2011-10-13 18:26:31 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
You're trying to turn null, and as a side effect wormholes, into warm, cuddly safe playgrounds and forgetting that these systems are meant to be inherently dangerous.


Except for cloaked ships?


Interesting use of evasive maneuvers.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#402 - 2011-10-13 18:29:50 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
You're trying to turn null, and as a side effect wormholes, into warm, cuddly safe playgrounds and forgetting that these systems are meant to be inherently dangerous.


Except for cloaked ships?


Interesting use of evasive maneuvers.

Belay that phaser order, fire photon torpedoes!

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#403 - 2011-10-13 18:31:30 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:

Lyris Nairn wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
All i've seen in this thread are ratters scared of the contacts in local, and the "pvpers" who think its impossible to hide without a cloaking device. Both pathetic.

You didn't notice those of us who are saying that this isn't an issue?


So those would have no problem with cloaking detection mechanics, however hard and troublesome they might be, with or without local? If so i apologize to those, because you stand in the same position as i do.

Yeah, I don't care about this issue at all. I mean, I care enough to post in a thread about it but that's mostly for the entertainment value of watching people talk themselves in circles of cognitive dissonance. Whatever change that does or does not happen, competent people will adapt and incompetent people will whine on the forums.

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Mag's
Azn Empire
#404 - 2011-10-13 18:35:38 UTC
Rhinanna wrote:
Quote:
Please do tell, how they do this whilst AFK.


If I point a gun at your head, then tell you not to do something or I'll shoot you, then you aren't going to do it are you?
Its the same thing. A cloaker in local is effectively pointing a cyno at anyone in system.

Now, if I should step behind a wall and poke the barrel through a piece of fabric covering a whole in the wall (making it clear I can still see you as a cloaker can also via local/d-scan), are you going to risk doing it? After all, theres no proof I'm am still holding the gun at all. I could of gone to sleep for all you know. The point is you DON'T know. However would you take the risk? I'm willing to bet the answer is no in all but extremely rare circumstances (or incredibly stupid people)

Its about POTENTIAL damage, particually if you are trying to make ISK. Losing a ship sets that back a long way and puts Null so far behind L4s or Incursions or WHs that its pointless to be in Null at all.

No argument, just ridiculous RL analogies. OK.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#405 - 2011-10-13 18:35:39 UTC
Lyris Nairn wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
You're trying to turn null, and as a side effect wormholes, into warm, cuddly safe playgrounds and forgetting that these systems are meant to be inherently dangerous.


Except for cloaked ships?


Interesting use of evasive maneuvers.

Belay that phaser order, fire photon torpedoes!


Plasma seeking torpedoes Big smile

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#406 - 2011-10-13 18:47:56 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
You're trying to turn null, and as a side effect wormholes, into warm, cuddly safe playgrounds and forgetting that these systems are meant to be inherently dangerous.


Except for cloaked ships?


Interesting use of evasive maneuvers.

Belay that phaser order, fire photon torpedoes!


Plasma seeking torpedoes Big smile

Target that explosion and fire!

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
Signal11th
#407 - 2011-10-13 18:55:33 UTC
Lyris Nairn wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:

Lyris Nairn wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
All i've seen in this thread are ratters scared of the contacts in local, and the "pvpers" who think its impossible to hide without a cloaking device. Both pathetic.

You didn't notice those of us who are saying that this isn't an issue?


So those would have no problem with cloaking detection mechanics, however hard and troublesome they might be, with or without local? If so i apologize to those, because you stand in the same position as i do.

Yeah, I don't care about this issue at all. I mean, I care enough to post in a thread about it but that's mostly for the entertainment value of watching people talk themselves in circles of cognitive dissonance. Whatever change that does or does not happen, competent people will adapt and incompetent people will whine on the forums.




Wow impressive use of fancy words just to say "I don't give a fook" Linguistic skills paying those bills!

God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster!
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#408 - 2011-10-13 19:08:30 UTC
Signal11th wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:

Lyris Nairn wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
All i've seen in this thread are ratters scared of the contacts in local, and the "pvpers" who think its impossible to hide without a cloaking device. Both pathetic.

You didn't notice those of us who are saying that this isn't an issue?


So those would have no problem with cloaking detection mechanics, however hard and troublesome they might be, with or without local? If so i apologize to those, because you stand in the same position as i do.

Yeah, I don't care about this issue at all. I mean, I care enough to post in a thread about it but that's mostly for the entertainment value of watching people talk themselves in circles of cognitive dissonance. Whatever change that does or does not happen, competent people will adapt and incompetent people will whine on the forums.




Wow impressive use of fancy words just to say "I don't give a ****" Linguistic skills paying those bills!


Because surprisingly, your message tends to get accross more often if you don't make it so obvious that you are trying to offend someone.

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Lyris Nairn
Perkone
Caldari State
#409 - 2011-10-13 19:20:30 UTC
Signal11th wrote:
Lyris Nairn wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:

Lyris Nairn wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
All i've seen in this thread are ratters scared of the contacts in local, and the "pvpers" who think its impossible to hide without a cloaking device. Both pathetic.

You didn't notice those of us who are saying that this isn't an issue?


So those would have no problem with cloaking detection mechanics, however hard and troublesome they might be, with or without local? If so i apologize to those, because you stand in the same position as i do.

Yeah, I don't care about this issue at all. I mean, I care enough to post in a thread about it but that's mostly for the entertainment value of watching people talk themselves in circles of cognitive dissonance. Whatever change that does or does not happen, competent people will adapt and incompetent people will whine on the forums.




Wow impressive use of fancy words just to say "I don't give a ****" Linguistic skills paying those bills!

Was it "cognitive dissonance" that struck you as fancy? What?

Sky Captain of Your Heart

Reddit: lyris_nairn Skype: lyris.nairn Twitter: @lyris_nairn
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#410 - 2011-10-13 19:32:09 UTC
Why is this thread still here?
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#411 - 2011-10-13 19:38:20 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Why is this thread still here?


People keep bumping it.

Dammit! Now you made me do it!

It's a non-issue that refuses to die sadly. Probably it could be enhanced, however people insist on drastic nerfs that negatively impact other areas of the game solely for the reason of creating a safe little warm and fuzzy carebear den in null space to frolic in.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#412 - 2011-10-13 19:43:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Why is this thread still here?



Because each side keeps failing to present valid arguments to the other? Which is only normal since the issue apparently being discussed by most people isn't there to begin with, and whenever people try to discuss the real issue, CCP people lock it because they cant see the difference.

People who are afraid of AFK cloakers != people who want tools to find cloakers.

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#413 - 2011-10-13 19:47:04 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Because each side keeps failing to present valid arguments to the other?
No. Because one side is immune to valid arguments because they want to remove cloaking but don't want to come out and say it (because they are unable to explain why such a change should happen).
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#414 - 2011-10-13 19:54:45 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Because each side keeps failing to present valid arguments to the other?
No. Because one side is immune to valid arguments because they want to remove cloaking but don't want to come out and say it (because they are unable to explain why such a change should happen).


That's one of the failed arguments and i agree with you.

Want to hear another failed argument from the other side? They want cloaked ships to remain 100% detection proof, but are also unable to explain how that is balanced with the rest of the game.

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#415 - 2011-10-13 19:56:54 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Because each side keeps failing to present valid arguments to the other?
No. Because one side is immune to valid arguments because they want to remove cloaking but don't want to come out and say it (because they are unable to explain why such a change should happen).


That's one of the failed arguments and i agree with you.

Want to hear another failed argument from the other side? They want cloaked ships to remain 100% detection proof, but are also unable to explain how that is balanced with the rest of the game.


They cant do anything or hurt anyone while cloaked.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#416 - 2011-10-13 19:59:53 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Renan Ruivo wrote:
Because each side keeps failing to present valid arguments to the other?
No. Because one side is immune to valid arguments because they want to remove cloaking but don't want to come out and say it (because they are unable to explain why such a change should happen).


That's one of the failed arguments and i agree with you.

Want to hear another failed argument from the other side? They want cloaked ships to remain 100% detection proof, but are also unable to explain how that is balanced with the rest of the game.


The balance is that by design they're meant to be 100% detection proof while cloaked. This is called "working as intended".

What's screwing the balance up is the fact that you can already detect the presence of cloaked vessels in empire space when they're cloaked. Address THAT issue and you will find your balance grasshopper.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#417 - 2011-10-13 20:08:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova Fox
You know what would be abetter fix? having the cyno anchor module be a bit larger that a el-chepo frigate cant fit it anymore. Then increase the skills required to use them so you have a better idea if cloaky alt is afking or its somone's main as they spent a bit more sp to ensure the place can goto heck soon.

Also WTF are you so worried about what is being cynoed in, sounds like you have some horrible intelligence networks if you dont know what is parked in range of that one afker.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#418 - 2011-10-13 20:14:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Renan Ruivo
baltec1 wrote:
They cant do anything or hurt anyone while cloaked.


If they can't do anything, why are you out there in the first place? If you aren't doing anything and are afraid of being detected, why not log off?

Nova Fox wrote:
You know what would be abetter fix? having the cyno anchor module be a bit larger that a el-chepo frigate cant fit it anymore. Then increase the skills required to use them so you have a better idea if cloaky alt is afking or its somone's main as they spent a bit more sp to ensure the place can goto heck soon.


No, that completely removes the purpose behind cloaked alts. They don't need to be removed, they need to have a counter. Not a remedy, not a work around. A counter. That is all.

Ingvar Angst wrote:
What's screwing the balance up is the fact that you can already detect the presence of cloaked vessels in empire space when they're cloaked. Address THAT issue and you will find your balance grasshopper.


How many times will i have to tell you that local is not what i am talking about?

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#419 - 2011-10-13 20:26:25 UTC
Renan Ruivo wrote:


If they can't do anything, why are you out there in the first place?



Hiding.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#420 - 2011-10-13 20:31:55 UTC
Rhinanna wrote:

Not going to happen unless the SB is a ******. Also I'm not in PL so I don't feel the need to bot and/or cheat like you guys. And no that isn't an unfounded accusation, Nmeh was regularly using the 'don't appear in local exploit' before it was fixed against us.

.


Well hey, at least now I know who you are!

You should have left this part out, because what Nmeh did only works against bots.


So now we at least know who and what you are and why you're so mad about afk guys in your local, those bot programs won't run unless you whitelist the person in your local and you just don't want to do that.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.