These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

AFK cloaky ccp sort it out yes/ no

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Din Chao
#101 - 2013-05-10 19:15:55 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Din Chao wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:
BadAssMcKill wrote:
How many threads do we need about this



One an hour, every hour, every day, until CCP fixes the lamest game mechanic in the history of MMOs.

It is rock, paper, scissors, NUKE BOMB.

100 people sit in station or safed up at a POS, all lamenting that there is not a SINGLE F'N thing that can be done about ONE freakin' cloaky camper with a cyno, able to drop an infinite number of ships, with no warning....

A good game should provide a defense for every offense and an offense to every defense. There is no defense to the cloaky camper.

I totally want in on the corp with "an infinite number of ships."


Hell, your in it! Banlish is really a DEV and can spawn Jove ships for DTHI at will. He did for me
:)

Too bad he's always AFK...
BoBoZoBo
MGroup9
#102 - 2013-05-10 19:16:17 UTC
This topic is why we need a DISLIKE button.

I will start to think about considering to support this "idea" when you can answer me these two questions:

1) How you know someone is AFK as opposed to really really patient?
2) How is a cloaked ship with no pilot a real unfair threat as opposed to something that just makes you feel insecure?

...GO

Primary Test Subject • SmackTalker Elite
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#103 - 2013-05-10 19:17:25 UTC
LifeHatesMe wrote:
and what really happens

log in

its l8..
not many corp on..

**** cloaky cyno fooker is here again..

log off..

awesome game ... loads of fun



You chose to log off, unless your corp chose to sign a stupid rental agreement, and thats their fault. because someone is doing something allowed by the game's EULA is disrupting your activity, that's no reason for CCP to change, it s reason for YOU to change brother,
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#104 - 2013-05-10 19:20:21 UTC
BoBoZoBo wrote:
This topic is why we need a DISLIKE button.

I will start to think about considering to support this "idea" when you can answer me these two questions:

1) How you know someone is AFK as opposed to really really patient?
2) How is a cloaked ship with no pilot a real unfair threat as opposed to something that just makes you feel insecure?

...GO



Which is why the OP is incorrect.

The issue is not with "AFK" cloaky, but rather with the cloaking mechanic, whether the pilot is AFK or not.


No ship in space should ever be totally safe. The cloaky camper violates this basic tenant of EVE. There is nothing that anyone can do ti find, decloak, and kill a cloaked ship that does not want to be found.

EVE is not EVE as long as the current cloak mechanics remain in place.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#105 - 2013-05-10 19:22:04 UTC
LifeHatesMe wrote:
I love pvp

I got to grind isk to love my pvp..

all im saying is no ship should be able to cloak 24/7


The things you just said aren't related. That cloaky isn't preventing you from grinding.

For instance, if you log on and no one from your corp or alliance is on to help defend you against the hot drop, you are in the wrong corp or alliance.

If you have a rental agreement limiting you to one null sec system, you are in the wrong corp or alliance (a good rental agreement will at least let you explore "unclaimed" systems or systems claimed by the landlord alliance but with no station or upgrades).

Just because you can't figure out how to keep doing what you want despite oppostion is no reason to stop playing. I'm sorry if this is harsh, but if you can't counter cloaky ships in null sec, you should not be in null sec.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#106 - 2013-05-10 19:25:36 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
BoBoZoBo wrote:
This topic is why we need a DISLIKE button.

I will start to think about considering to support this "idea" when you can answer me these two questions:

1) How you know someone is AFK as opposed to really really patient?
2) How is a cloaked ship with no pilot a real unfair threat as opposed to something that just makes you feel insecure?

...GO



Which is why the OP is incorrect.

The issue is not with "AFK" cloaky, but rather with the cloaking mechanic, whether the pilot is AFK or not.


No ship in space should ever be totally safe. The cloaky camper violates this basic tenant of EVE. There is nothing that anyone can do ti find, decloak, and kill a cloaked ship that does not want to be found.

EVE is not EVE as long as the current cloak mechanics remain in place.


Basically incorrect. In the same way EVE has had npc corps for a long time, it's chad cloaky ships for a long time. In the sme way a docked ship can't be killed but cannot affect anyone else ini any way, a cloaked ship can't be found but cannot affect anyone in any way.

In a way, cloaking is just docking without benefit of a station lol.

As I've said, there s plenty you could do to counter the cloakys and hotdropper etc, you just choose not to because (like your hiding in npc corps to "mitigate non-consensual pvp danger"), you want to be handheld. EVE isn't about hand holding.
LifeHatesMe
LifeHatesUsAll
#107 - 2013-05-10 19:25:48 UTC
BoBoZoBo wrote:
This topic is why we need a DISLIKE button.

I will start to think about considering to support this "idea" when you can answer me these two questions:

1) How you know someone is AFK as opposed to really really patient?
2) How is a cloaked ship with no pilot a real unfair threat as opposed to something that just makes you feel insecure?

...GO


1.so someone is at there computer 24/7
2. cos that cloaked ship will light a cyno. then you got a blob on you that you can not allways do anything about..

no ship should be able to cloak 24/7

we are not all pro pvp in a massive corp...there are noobs/miners in game..

ive been playing this game for a long time..just cos I think 24/7 cloak is bad don't mean im a carebear...
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#108 - 2013-05-10 19:28:01 UTC
Simple solution.

Cloak for more than 5 minutes in a system --> remove from local until decloak.

No one will ever complain about afk cloakers again.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#109 - 2013-05-10 19:30:01 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

Just because you can't figure out how to keep doing what you want despite oppostion is no reason to stop playing. I'm sorry if this is harsh, but if you can't counter cloaky ships in null sec, you should not be in null sec.


Which is why high sec should be kept the way it is. So all of those that don't want to be camped in by the most moronic game mechanic in the history of MMOs (the current cloaky mechanics) have a place to go.



And, if a cloaky in null can be perfectly safe, why not a mining barge in high sec?
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#110 - 2013-05-10 19:30:40 UTC
LifeHatesMe wrote:


we are not all pro pvp in a massive corp...there are noobs/miners in game..




I had a teacher in middle school who had a saying for things like this. Every time we would say something like the above about how we couldn't do something (when we really could). she'd say "well, that sounds like a personal problem".

This sounds like a personal problem. Personal problems should be solved by persons, not by game companies.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#111 - 2013-05-10 19:31:22 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Simple solution.

Cloak for more than 5 minutes in a system --> remove from local until decloak.

No one will ever complain about afk cloakers again.



Correct, because there would be no one in null that is not cloaked up.
Seth Mortis
Lone Walker Corp
#112 - 2013-05-10 19:31:41 UTC
How about some minor changes to cloaking, like adding a very slow overheating to the module when in use. After all, cloaking means shutting down any emmissions. The biggest issue with any electric/electronic stuff or machinery in generall is the non wanted thermic emission. If ur cloaked u cant emit these into space. So a very slow overheating would be in check.

Which leads me to a different aproach. Add a second type of cloaking device. One that doesnt supress (aka accumulates) emissions, it completely shuts down evrything that could emmit anything. Aka put all ur modules offline. No overheating over time, but wozuld leave the cloaker vulnerable. Cos bringing al his modules back online would require a cap booster and some time.


Completely disallowing cloaky camping isnt the way to go, but it should come with a price or backside.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#113 - 2013-05-10 19:33:00 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

I had a teacher in middle school who had a saying for things like this. Every time we would say something like the above about how we couldn't do something (when we really could). she'd say "well, that sounds like a personal problem".

This sounds like a personal problem. Personal problems should be solved by persons, not by game companies.


So, if the ability to suicide gank was removed, and you wanted to suicide gank, would that be a personal problem, or a game mechanic problem?
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#114 - 2013-05-10 19:33:12 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

Just because you can't figure out how to keep doing what you want despite oppostion is no reason to stop playing. I'm sorry if this is harsh, but if you can't counter cloaky ships in null sec, you should not be in null sec.


Which is why high sec should be kept the way it is. So all of those that don't want to be camped in by the most moronic game mechanic in the history of MMOs (the current cloaky mechanics) have a place to go.



And, if a cloaky in null can be perfectly safe, why not a mining barge in high sec?


Because the mining barge can do things like mine.

The cloaky can do nothing by move around very very slowly unless it's a covops or recon, then it can warp.

cloaking is like docking, and there is nothing to keep the mining barge from docking.
Zephyrial
Zephyr Corp
#115 - 2013-05-10 19:33:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Zephyrial
LOL, been on hiatus for almost a year and just came back, and this is STILL an 'issue'?

And it seems that most mining ships are just about gank proof these days
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#116 - 2013-05-10 19:34:33 UTC
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

I had a teacher in middle school who had a saying for things like this. Every time we would say something like the above about how we couldn't do something (when we really could). she'd say "well, that sounds like a personal problem".

This sounds like a personal problem. Personal problems should be solved by persons, not by game companies.


So, if the ability to suicide gank was removed, and you wanted to suicide gank, would that be a personal problem, or a game mechanic problem?


It wouldn't be anything to me personally, except sad that EVE has strayed from it's roots, which have always (since launch) included non consensual pvp in all space (except noob systems).
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#117 - 2013-05-10 19:35:01 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Cloaking works as intended Straight


So did mining and they changed that. Here is how I see it. First I would like to say I have a miner and a cloaker both, I understand the uses and mechanic of each. People don’t want miners to be able to “AFK” mine so why should I be able to AFK cloak?

I run multi accounts and I will run a miner on a second account while I mission pvp etc. Because I can ice mine and unload when full many consider this to be AFK. I am sitting at my desk right? Not really AFK but people call it AFK. I can go put in a load of laundry grab a sandwich etc…

On my cloaky I will leave in a system all night while I sleep not anywhere near my desk or computer just to mess with the locals. This is truly AFK.

If people want interaction with the game then it should be global. I should have to move or click something to remain cloaked. People should also be able to scan down a cloaker that is not active.

The difference I see is people that don’t mine but cloak want to have their cake and eat it too. The people that don’t mine want to have the change but don’t want their AFK cloaker touched.

I say if you do it for one do it for all.

Let the trolling begin.
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#118 - 2013-05-10 19:35:21 UTC
I actually agree with the OP












How can we continue to allow NS to be so dangerous? The last thing EVE needs right now is for NS to be unsafe to undock. ;)
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#119 - 2013-05-10 19:35:22 UTC
Seth Mortis wrote:

Completely disallowing cloaky camping isnt the way to go, but it should come with a price or backside.


The cloaky ship must be at risk, or EVE is not EVE.

THE KEY feature of EVE, I am told, is that no one is safe anywhere. So, the cloaky mechanics means EVE is not EVE.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#120 - 2013-05-10 19:35:38 UTC
Zephyrial wrote:
LOL, been on hiatus for almost a year and just came back, and this is STILL an 'issue'?


Things that lazy people find inconveniencing will always be issues. it has been since the 1st ship cloaked in EVE lol.