These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

One possible solution to an age old problem!

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#1 - 2012-12-21 06:57:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Kingpin Nil
Hey guys I know this topic has been done to death but between the tears and the anger allow me to add my two cents worth!
AKF cloaker’s love’em! hate’em! Live in a worm-hole don’t care? But are they here to stay?

We’re all aware of CCP’S stance on playing eve while AFK! Botters, warp to zero at the gate exploits all punishable offensives! So why are AFK cloakers getting a free ride?

Now I'm fully aware of the arguments from both camps on this issue! I love playing eve just as much as you and don’t want changes set to ruin anyone’s gaming experience! So I’ll attempt to resolve this annoying issue!
Cloaks are used for many reasons ranging from reconnaissance to ganking or just plain saving your arse! But were they intended for going hours, days or even sometime weeks while AFK?

So what is there purpose! Well ask anyone in null sec mining or ratting and they’ll tell you! While docked up of course! But to the uninitiated there used to disrupt null sec operations! Recovering from loses during days of battle is a big issue in null and there’s plenty of resources to make it worth your while! Hence AFK cloakers.

And now for the solution!

Without destroying cloaking altogether! I propose a POS structure (one per system) to be built only by those with sovereignty and to be fuelled via the same POS fuel that keeps the shields up to be used to detect cloaks. This structure will be on a timer (one hour for example) and once activated will consume 90 precent of your POS fuel! (Or a given amount) This will eliminate spamming the detect button and will allow the cloakers to move to another safe spot with time to spare!
So as not to give the cloaker too much of a disadvantage! The cloaker will be made aware of this device once activated and will allow him or her to move along! This will eliminate the AFK cloaker and will stop others from spamming the detect button given the fuel and time restrictions!

Please if you have any constructive feedback you’re more than welcome to add to my suggestions! I’ll be forwarding this to CCP once I'm satisfied it passed the player test.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#2 - 2012-12-21 07:02:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
In case you did not know what AFK stands for, it means "Away From Keyboard".
As in, a person who can't possibly ever kill you while he is in that particular state.
Any "damage" an AFK cloaker can possibly do is self-inflicted fear-induced loss of earning opportunity.
Also, can't go on for weeks without breaks. We still have daily downtimes.

The simplest "fix" to the so-called "problem" of AFK cloakers is...
...removing cloaked ships from "local".
Now you either constantly crap your pants at the POSSIBILITY of somebody being there, or you just suck it up and go about your business the way you actually should if you have a "known" AFK cloaker in the system.
But that's waaaay too ballsy, eh ?

As to why that would be a solution - think spy alt plus logon trap.
I dare you to explain what the radical conceptual difference might be there other than the time spent e-warping for the logoff-trapper and slightly less preparation for the mostly-AFK-cloaker.
And why the AFK cloaking "has to be fixed" but the other not.
And if you plan to fix both, pray tell, how exactly would you fix the logged off guy's "threat" ?

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Nene Ryuseika
The Ryuseika Group
#3 - 2012-12-21 07:06:56 UTC
Why should only sov owners have this ability anyway.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#4 - 2012-12-21 07:26:26 UTC
Nene Ryuseika wrote:
Why should only sov owners have this ability anyway.

Because only "the big blue league" boys that are used to better safety than highsec cream their virtual lederhosen at the thought of the boogeyman, why else ?
Roll

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#5 - 2012-12-21 07:31:41 UTC
Two better options:

A. Remove local from nullsec

...but since they couldn't find fights or use their bots and will ragequit, plan B:


B. Make cynos only mountable on BLOPS, change the skill from 5x to 8x, and add Electromagnetic Physics V to prerequisites.

This should deal with the general power projection problem as well.

.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#6 - 2012-12-21 07:32:35 UTC
Nene Ryuseika wrote:
Why should only sov owners have this ability anyway.



What ability is it that only sov holders have again?

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#7 - 2012-12-21 07:49:02 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Nene Ryuseika wrote:
Why should only sov owners have this ability anyway.

What ability is it that only sov holders have again?

Kingpin Nil wrote:
I propose a POS structure (one per system) to be built only by those with sovereignty

That one.

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#8 - 2012-12-21 07:58:40 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
We’re all aware of CCP’S stance on playing eve while AFK! Botters, warp to zero at the gate exploits all punishable offensives! So why are AFK cloakers getting a free ride?


Your logic failed at this point, so I didn't read the rest.
If you can not see why, I see no further point discussing the issue with you.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Othran
Route One
#9 - 2012-12-21 08:00:17 UTC
Too many exclamation marks for a successful troll.

0/10
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#10 - 2012-12-21 08:01:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Kingpin Nil
1
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#11 - 2012-12-21 08:04:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Kingpin Nil
Nene Ryuseika wrote:
Why should only sov owners have this ability anyway.


I guess I figured its their space why not! who else but the SOV holders would care about AFK cloakers?
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#12 - 2012-12-21 08:05:35 UTC
Akita T wrote:
In case you did not know what AFK stands for, it means "Away From Keyboard".
As in, a person who can't possibly ever kill you while he is in that particular state.
Any "damage" an AFK cloaker can possibly do is self-inflicted fear-induced loss of earning opportunity.
Also, can't go on for weeks without breaks. We still have daily downtimes.

The simplest "fix" to the so-called "problem" of AFK cloakers is...
...removing cloaked ships from "local".
Now you either constantly crap your pants at the POSSIBILITY of somebody being there, or you just suck it up and go about your business the way you actually should if you have a "known" AFK cloaker in the system.
But that's waaaay too ballsy, eh ?

As to why that would be a solution - think spy alt plus logon trap.
I dare you to explain what the radical conceptual difference might be there other than the time spent e-warping for the logoff-trapper and slightly less preparation for the mostly-AFK-cloaker.
And why the AFK cloaking "has to be fixed" but the other not.
And if you plan to fix both, pray tell, how exactly would you fix the logged off guy's "threat" ?



actually the main reason behind this thread is to eliminate what's left of the AFK playing style! you can still stop null operations if you want just not AFK! log in stay there in the system all you want! but as soon as you're away! then expect to lose your ship!

its not about crying care bears! its about finally getting rid of the AFK element.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#13 - 2012-12-21 08:09:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Kingpin Nil wrote:
its not about crying care bears! its about finally getting rid of the AFK element.

So you should have absolutely nothing against removing cloaked ships from local then, with the caveat that uncloaking takes, say, 5 seconds before actually happening, and you start showing up in local as soon as you initiate that 5 sec timer ?

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#14 - 2012-12-21 08:09:27 UTC
Arduemont wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
We’re all aware of CCP’S stance on playing eve while AFK! Botters, warp to zero at the gate exploits all punishable offensives! So why are AFK cloakers getting a free ride?


Your logic failed at this point, so I didn't read the rest.
If you can not see why, I see no further point discussing the issue with you.



actually you're not discussing anything! but by all means do explain yourself if you can?
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#15 - 2012-12-21 08:10:15 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
its not about crying care bears! its about finally getting rid of the AFK element.

So you should have absolutely nothing against removing cloaked ships from local then.



for what purpose? how does this address the AFK players?
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#16 - 2012-12-21 08:12:14 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
for what purpose? how does this address the AFK players?

It makes them practically almost identical to logged-off players.
Also, see caveat edit : uncloaking happens on a timer (not dead set on 5 sec though) and you start showing up in local by then.
You know, 5 sec, or whatever the heck it usually takes for an log-on e-warp, so that both get treated almost exactly the same.

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#17 - 2012-12-21 08:16:54 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
for what purpose? how does this address the AFK players?

It makes them practically almost identical to logged-off players.
Also, see caveat edit : uncloaking happens on a timer (not dead set on 5 sec though) and you start showing up in local by then.
You know, 5 sec, or whatever the heck it usually takes for an log-on e-warp, so that both get treated almost exactly the same.


I guess it sounds OK, do you have any other fed back with the rest of my proposal?
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#18 - 2012-12-21 08:19:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Kingpin Nil wrote:
do you have any other fed back with the rest of my proposal?

Heavy-handed, wholly unnecessary, and downright unfair in parts. Other than that, nope, no other feedback, sorry.

AFK cloaking is not a problem, never was.
Self-induced fear always was, and always will be. You can't fix that completely.
Yes, a person returning at the keyboard after a long stint of AFK cloaking DOES get somewhat of an advantage now, but my seemingly harsh alternative actually WOULD remove that advantage without any drawbacks in the actual AFK period, where no drawback is necessary nor fair (since logging off would result in basically the same deal).

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#19 - 2012-12-21 08:24:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Kingpin Nil
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
do you have any other fed back with the rest of my proposal?

Heavy-handed, wholly unnecessary, and downright unfair in parts. Other than that, nope, no other feedback, sorry.

AFK cloaking is not a problem, never was.
Self-induced fear always was, and always will be. You can't fix that completely.
Yes, a person returning at the keyboard after a long stint of AFK cloaking DOES get somewhat of an advantage now, but my seemingly harsh alternative actually WOULD remove that advantage without any drawbacks in the actual AFK period.



Care to elaborate a bit further unfair? and like I said and you've stated! why do they need to be AFK again?
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
#20 - 2012-12-21 08:25:14 UTC
1) Use a locator agent to find Kingpin Nil.
2) Fly to where he usually hangs out in a cloaky ship.
3) Make safe spot.
4) Warp to safe spot.
5) Cloak if you already haven't.
6) Go watch TV.
123Next pageLast page