These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

A plan to give balance to cloaking (Images)

Author
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#101 - 2011-10-20 15:19:53 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
If it is a stack of crap to you it must be because you are an AFK cloaker right? I have shown countless times that you can only decloak if you stay on grid and prevent your random point from changing.

Yet if your wormhole life revolves around cloaking up and going to the movies I can very much see why you are as active in this topic as I am.

I know AFK cloakers feel that the tide is turning against them. They have overplayed their hand by a mile and half. It used to be a few systems so the calls were few and far between. Now its more than a few topics and a Winter patch that is going to bring attention to nullsec and hopefully AFK cloaking again.

And here I am designing ideas for CCP to consider on it. I will have to do more ideas to give CCP options because to be frank this sounds alot like the days prior to the great concord buff in hisec. The pirates also claimed that CONCORD would not be buffed and their free kills would continue.


I live in a wormhole. There are no afk cloakers. Why is that you may ask?

No local. We can't tell if there's someone in system or not cloaked up.

That's the real issue, and you refuse to address the issue.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.

Endeavour Starfleet
#102 - 2011-10-20 15:29:23 UTC
Do you or do you not walk away from the client or otherwise not pay attention to it while cloaked while online for an extended period of time?

That is AFK cloaking.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#103 - 2011-10-20 15:50:41 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Do you or do you not walk away from the client or otherwise not pay attention to it while cloaked while online for an extended period of time?

That is AFK cloaking.


No it isn't.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.

Endeavour Starfleet
#104 - 2011-10-20 16:45:57 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Do you or do you not walk away from the client or otherwise not pay attention to it while cloaked while online for an extended period of time?

That is AFK cloaking.


No it isn't.


Yes or no Mister Ingvar? Do you walk away or spend time not active in the client when cloaked?
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#105 - 2011-10-20 16:51:57 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:

Yes or no Mister Ingvar? Do you walk away or spend time not active in the client when cloaked?


I do. And this should stay viable/safe on safespot.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#106 - 2011-10-20 17:01:03 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Do you or do you not walk away from the client or otherwise not pay attention to it while cloaked while online for an extended period of time?

That is AFK cloaking.


No it isn't.


Yes or no Mister Ingvar? Do you walk away or spend time not active in the client when cloaked?


Allow me a typical example.

I have two characters. This one, obviously, and Ingvar Engst. (Wasn't feeling too creative that day...) Often I'll have "E" off in a different part of the hole at a safe, cloaked up, while I'm on "A" doing... whatever, be it PI, sucking gas, mining, setting up productions, etc. Every so often I'll flip over to "E", hit dscan and take a peek in that area, just to be safe. (This is after the initial security sweep, rolling of holes, etc.)

Other times I'll have a nice exit to empire. "E" will be in a bomber cloaked 30K or so off the exit hole while "A" is running goods back and forth through empire. I can hear if the hole wiggles, but have no need to flip over otherwise until I'm ready to hop through.

Is "E" afk cloaking? By any sane person here, no. How about by you?

Ah, I've also been known to go pee while cloaked up in my own hole, or get the kids something to eat. By the definition of "afk cloaking that needs to be fixed", am I "afk cloaking", or am I simply cloaked while afk. (If you can't tell the difference, you've already failed the thread.)

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.

Endeavour Starfleet
#107 - 2011-10-20 17:09:08 UTC
I had a better post typed out but this forum for some reason likes to crap out and eat my post (how about you?) Ill detail it later but I consider "bad" AFK to be in the range of an hour or other long extended periods of time. My plan would have you decloaked within 30-45 mins depending.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#108 - 2011-10-20 17:21:54 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
I had a better post typed out but this forum for some reason likes to crap out and eat my post (how about you?) Ill detail it later but I consider "bad" AFK to be in the range of an hour or other long extended periods of time. My plan would have you decloaked within 30-45 mins depending.


Ugh, I hate that. Most annoying. I've been trying to remember to Ctrl+C before posting, but don't always.

30 to 45 minutes isn't enough time. Anything that allows the knowledge that a previously unknown cloaked vessel is present breaks the system and simply is unacceptable, especially in wormholes that depend on that mechanic and even thrive with that mechanic firmly ensconched in our day to day affairs.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.

Toyota County
We Have All the Fun
#109 - 2011-10-20 19:44:20 UTC
Why not just create a new system upgrade


SYSTEM CLOAK JAMMER

just like a system cyno jammer.

160 activate timer, effects ALL CLOAKS in system, friend and foe.

Costs the system owner to maintain for a little added security



Just another idea how it COULD be implemented.

I leave the debate as to whether it does/doesn't need to be implemented to all of you.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#110 - 2011-10-20 19:53:15 UTC
Toyota County wrote:
Why not just create a new system upgrade


SYSTEM CLOAK JAMMER

just like a system cyno jammer.

160 activate timer, effects ALL CLOAKS in system, friend and foe.

Costs the system owner to maintain for a little added security



Just another idea how it COULD be implemented.

I leave the debate as to whether it does/doesn't need to be implemented to all of you.


Because that would be a massive nerf to cloaks, and wormholes as well, when it's not cloaks that are the problem.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.

Mr Painless
Perkone
Caldari State
#111 - 2011-10-20 20:34:37 UTC
After reading most of the discussion, I must say that I fail to see the OP as anything else than a carebear whine.

First of all, the only relevant point the OP is claiming is that basically due to AFK cloakers and their ability to make "free kills", nullsec is not safe enough for people engaging in any sort of PvE. Well, guess what - it shouldn't be. Nullsec, and WH space are considered to be the end-game of EVE and should therefore NOT provide their established dwellers with significant amounts of safety.

Second, the term "free kill" that is frequently used is really bugging me. If by "free kill" you consider a loss of a ship against overwhelming force, then lets be real, at least 70% of all kills in EVE could fall into this category.

Furhtermore OP proposes a mechanic that would effectively destimulate people from AFK cloaking by providing a tool which would allow the opposing party to make, guess what - "free kills". The rationale for this mechanic is "allowing the opposing side to fight back". Well, there is already a pretty well established method for fighting back cloaky stalkers and it's called baiting. Note that this method would be even more easy to deploy in a no-local environment.

I, like Ingvar am also a WH dweller, and i completely support his idea about cloak removing from local.

I also spent quite some time in nullsec so I think i have a pretty good idea how are things done there.

So, let me just make a quick comparison of how things are done in WH vs nullsec, PvE wise:

When you go PvE, you (in a group or just yourself) simply go and rat/mine/anomaly/whatever in your PvE ship of choice, and all you have to do is keep an eye on local. If you see a neut/red appear, you simply warp to safety and wait until the threat is gone. I know, life in nullsec is tough. But things get even worse - sometimes some neut/red prick decides to park his cloaky ride in system and go AFK, making you very nervous. Now, that is the very definition of hell.

On the other hand, when we decide to go PvE in a WH, first of all, the entire system is scanned down. After every sig is accounted for, a scout (usually an alt) is placed on every WH in system, and probes are deployed in order to detect any new sig appearing during the op. If we are doing PvE in a hostile system (any other than our own basically), then a scout is placed on every POS in sys. Note that all those scouts require ACTIVE monitoring. Also note that all these measures still DO NOT prevent the threat of AFK cloakers.

So, WH way of doing PvE requires a great deal of teamwork and organisation as opposed to nullsec. The only significant difference being that, yes, you can be hotdropped in nullsec. But hotdropping also requires teamwork and organisation from the opposing side, plus the risk of being baited and massacred.

I think I don't have to go furhter with this, but I will because I missed a very important detail - above comparison assumes that you are actually doing your PvE and not your bot! You can dismiss all my reasons which support the current cloak mechanics (and even further it by removing cloaked ships from local) as being subjective, but you simply cannot ignore the fact that what you're proposing will essentially make botting in nullsec even more profitable!

Let me just remind you that botting in high class WH systems is practically impossible due to 2 important things:
1. The sleepers are very nasty NPCs, that will almost certainly web/scram/neut/dps you to death in seconds if you attempt to do them solo.
2. THERE IS NO LOCAL!
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#112 - 2011-10-20 20:40:29 UTC
sorry to inform you but your logic is broken, not the way cloaking works.
Fly safe.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!

Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#113 - 2011-10-20 23:30:44 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
I
To answer you tho. You will have to do the simple warp off and return to prevent you from being decloaked by the probes. You do that so you dont have to deal with a cloak fuel bay or have to scramble when a message tells you that you will randomly decloak in 30 seconds.

Trust me when I say that compared to some of the other ideas I read on how to do with it. This is downright nice to cloakers in my opinion.Or do you like the idea of a POS module that can uncloak everyone in system instantly :P



You... you have something against cloakers in general, that explains it. You don't really care about "afk cloakers", you're out to nerf everyone with a cloaking device attached. Well, you've clearly shown your hand, and what little credibility you had left has gone. You're hiding under the skirt of nerfing "afk cloakers"... why... you get ganked? Your precious hulk get popped by a cloaked vessel? Hulkageddon makes you sweat and lose sleep at night? What are you really hiding? Where did the bad cloaked vessel touch you?

This is the only thing that makes sense now regarding your posts... you're out to get cloaks in general. Ah well, I look at the lack of likes on your OP and that says plenty.

i dont know why, but i read this in a kind of badass old man voice.

also, betcha your right on the money about OP
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#114 - 2011-10-20 23:37:00 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
If it is a stack of crap to you it must be because you are an AFK cloaker right? I have shown countless times that you can only decloak if you stay on grid and prevent your random point from changing.

Yet if your wormhole life revolves around cloaking up and going to the movies I can very much see why you are as active in this topic as I am.

I know AFK cloakers feel that the tide is turning against them. They have overplayed their hand by a mile and half. It used to be a few systems so the calls were few and far between. Now its more than a few topics and a Winter patch that is going to bring attention to nullsec and hopefully AFK cloaking again.

And here I am designing ideas for CCP to consider on it. I will have to do more ideas to give CCP options because to be frank this sounds alot like the days prior to the great concord buff in hisec. The pirates also claimed that CONCORD would not be buffed and their free kills would continue.


its not that any of us are AFK cloakers, but that at least several of us use cloaking vessels on a regular basis, and in my case i use it to watch hostile systems "oh and get this, they dont give a flying F*ck that im there because they dont AFK MINE alone, so there is absolutely no threat top them, and as for hot drops, they also have combat pilots competent enough to be in null to counter a small hot drop)".

most fo teh anger at your diea and most "AFK cloaking" threads in general is 2 reasons:
1) if a cloaker is truly AFK, they pose no threat because they are UNABLE TO ACT because theya re NOT AT THEIR COMPUTER

2) all of the ideas proposed (yes including yours darling) directly nerf ACTIVE cloaking to the point of unusability, since any mechanic that forces you to KEEP WARPING OR DIE means you cant DO YOUR JOB which is OBSERVE THE ENEMY PASSIVELY.
Endeavour Starfleet
#115 - 2011-10-21 00:36:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Endeavour Starfleet
If you cant do a quick warp off within a 30 min period I don't know what to tell you. Then again it shows how unbalanced AFK cloaking and the entire system in general is when cloakers complain that once every thirty mins is too much while small alliances and corps they love to plague have to organize by a huge factor just in the hope to deter you from a hotdrop.

Quote:
but i read this in a kind of badass old man voice.


After I saw his sigline I read his posts as the man in that Taco bell commercial. What was it.. The volcano taco or somthin? Big smile
Mag's
Azn Empire
#116 - 2011-10-21 07:40:35 UTC
Lucien Visteen wrote:
I never said they could not be caught
And I haven't said you did, I merely clarified your position.

Lucien Visteen wrote:
and did I invent a statistic?
Lets' see.
Lucien Visteen wrote:
Nine out of ten times........
Lucien Visteen wrote:
Thats the tenth time.....
Now unless you have information to back up those claims, what else would they be?

Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
Do you or do you not walk away from the client or otherwise not pay attention to it while cloaked while online for an extended period of time?

That is AFK cloaking.
Wrong and you know it. AFKing is being used to acquire a psychological warfare effect, on those in the system. For this to take place, it requires a certain interaction.

OK you'll most likely ignore this post also, as you seem find answering certain questions uncomfortable. But answer me this.

What mechanic are they using to interact with you, whilst they are AFK?

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

Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#117 - 2011-10-21 12:39:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
the problem why people cry for an anticloak "solution" is they think the space is theirs, so they claim the right to kick out everybody of "their" systems - this is where they fail.

The space isnt yours, you should not have the right and tools to blob the **** everybody out of a given 0.0 system,
just for doing your business in full safety.


Paying sov or rent (lol) doesnt make the space being yours, if others camp and hotdrop you in the area you live in, you are living in a hostile area, disregarding your TCUs.
Endeavour Starfleet
#118 - 2011-10-21 17:50:17 UTC
You can't blob someone out of a system with my plan. They can only be uncloaked if they refuse to act or not paying attention otherwise an extended period under AFK.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#119 - 2011-10-21 18:12:25 UTC
Endeavour Starfleet wrote:
You can't blob someone out of a system with my plan. They can only be uncloaked if they refuse to act or not paying attention otherwise an extended period under AFK.


yeah thats what I mean, be at PC or get the **** blobbed out.
But there is nothing wrong with being afk waiting for something to happen. You can afk dock forever as well.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#120 - 2011-10-21 18:17:12 UTC
There's a reason the community isn't behind this proposal, Endeavour.

It sucks. It's imbalanced, breaks cloaking and nerfs areas of the game completely unrelated to your little flower garden in nullsec. Everyone else seems to realize that cloaks are the issue... it's the flawed behavior of people when they see that scary unknown ship in local.

It's a crap idea. Let it die.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.