These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

'Local' is a problem? Why is that? (further study on AFK cloaking subject)

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#261 - 2013-06-20 12:30:10 UTC
Eeio wrote:


Im still waiting for these people to come up with some proper replies to this thread. They keep advocating well thought through suggestions and observations, and these points are still at the core of the whole problem.

And still havent been adressed.


I didn't address them because all of them are non-issues if you're prepared. It doesn't matter one bit when a cloaker decloaks and attacks if you've got a fleet ready for him (and a cyno on your ship, or your in a properly stabbed ship or ship like a venture or impel with built in stabs or you know how and when to use an ECM burst or are in a jump capable ship and are ready to jump out or have your mjd at the ready etc etc etc).

If you're doing the right things to begin with, cloaking (afk or otherwise) is a non-issue. If you expect to be able to solo PVE in a null sec system without support, without a plan for rescue or defense and without properly fitting your ship to survive such encounters, then the primary fault is yours to begin with. EVE Online isn't won in space, it's one before you undock.


Quote:

You know, one could argue that afk mining in itself does nothing as well. Refining your ore and then selling it or building something with it, will.

In anycase, I just noticed that other thread where someone wants to pay new players ISK every month, if they are willing to go camp a designated nullsec system whenever they are offline.

Surely thats making ISK while being afk Big smile





You cannot cling to one minor instance and expect it to be accepted as evidence. The real fact isn't that cloaking" (afk or otherwise) or local or whatever are somehow problems, it's that some players honestly don't believe in taking care of themselves or being creative in defending themselves. They literally think they are entitled to shoot at npcs in null security space in super effective PVE only fitted ships and that somehow it should be hard for people to come and kill them (or that they should have some defense against this more than the thousands of already existent tools the game makers have made available).

I think that stance is non-sense and I practice exactly what I preach daily while still making more than enough isk doing null pve (i I pve in other places but null is my home) to plex 4 accounts and fly nice ships. I find people unwilling to exert any effort to deal with their own personal "problem" (other than running to a forum and screaming "this is too hard" at the game makers) to be unworthy of respect.


I never imagined I'd be playing virtual defense attorney for freaking cloakers. It's a practice that I (as a null sec superbear) personally dislike, but even then I understand it's a legitimate "tool of war" in a war game. One must be able to separate their own personal dislikes from these kinds of issues and look at them clearly , and that's something the "anti-cloaker" people can't seem to do.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#262 - 2013-06-20 12:38:10 UTC
WhipDiddyWhip wrote:
i have only been playing 2 weeks, and my first thought when i heard about local was "that's just silly that i can instantly know if im in danger due to a CHAT CHANNEL!"

ppl are using it as an itelligence tool which it wasn't designed to be


Just like the fact that huge and expensive star gates exist in null sec/unclaimed space, so too does local. It (like many things you find in a video game) is a compromise that makes the game playable. A lot of "get rid of local" people don't understand that, even though anyone can see that the one part of EVE that doesn't have local (wormholes) work well because they were designed from the ground up to not have the easy access of regular space.

In other words, when you don't have gates (or the ability to use the other quick access mechanic, cynos and jump engines), you don't need local.

There are probably ways CCP could make a "no local" low/null security space scheme work but imo it would take lots and lots of re-working of lots and lots of game features and mechanics.

Quote:

also why are ppl moaning about cloaking afk? if someone wants to go do somwthing while cloaked what's the problem? it's up to them if they wanna do that


I agree with that totally. I sometimes ninja rat in hostile space and having to log completely off rather than just cloaking when i have to go do something else would be a pain. If that's the way it was, i'd deal with it, but it would be a dumb change if it were all in the name of getting rid of afk cloakers that people should be prepared for in the 1st place.
Eeio
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#263 - 2013-06-20 13:39:29 UTC
Stop making assumptions about how everyone else feels already.

Quote:
If you expect to be able to solo PVE in a null sec system without support, without a plan for rescue or defense and without properly fitting your ship to survive such encounters, then the primary fault is yours to begin with. EVE Online isn't won in space, it's one before you undock.


Nobody thinks this. What do you think we are (Wait, thats actually quite obvious by all the accusations you keep throwing out)
You are the only person here thats talking about doing solo work in null. You just automatically assume thats what we are all talking about here.
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#264 - 2013-06-20 13:49:02 UTC
AFK is AFK doesnt matter if its mining or cloaking only real difference here is is that the AFK cloakers most likely never afk ice mined.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#265 - 2013-06-20 14:03:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Kijo Rikki
Eeio wrote:
MailDeadDrop wrote:

What I suspect is closer to an absolutely true statement is this combination of facts:
1. an AFK cloaked ship is indistinguishable from an actively piloted cloaked ship

A) Yes he is, just use some common sense. If you are unsure, try baiting him out and pretend to rat in a pvp ship, preferably with a point to grab him when he decloaks and a cyno to bring a counter hot-drop if that is what you fear, or at least be in fleet and have your friends waiting in a safe spot to come to your aid.

In any case after a few hours odds are he's just there to disrupt operations, carry on as normal. If you're still unsure, see above.

2. an actively piloted cloaked ship piloted by a non-blue pilot is most likely up to no good Lol

A) This is 100% correct all of the time. An enemy pilot cloaked in your system is NEVER up to any good. He is either there to gather intel, look for a target to hotdrop, or merely disrupt isk making operations in the area.

If he's there to gather intel, there is not much you can do, and this is a reality of nullsec - intel is everywhere. Deal with it. (And by deal with it I mean make sure you have your own intel, play the spy vs spy game.)

If he's looking for a hotdrop, this is mostl ikely going to happen very quickly within the first 30 minutes to an hour of being there. Why? Because his friends sitting on the Blops Battleship or Titan are going to get bored waiting, and worse, if using a Titan, it is horribly unsafe to have it exposed to danger for any length of time. A 72 billion dollar loss is not worth the risk to catch some carebear in his ratting ship.

3. the first indicator that the pilot of a cloaked ship is active and not AFK is when they uncloak to execute their plan

A) Yes. Be ready for it. See Answer 1. Also, barring that, always stay aligned when ratting and mining, if you need help knowing how to do this as a miner, hint: get a frigate and stake out several warpuot points 150+ km from your asteroid and keep aligning in a circle around them. When your target decloaks, he will have a split second delay for targeting plus whatever his locktime is, as soon as you see him, just warp off, once warping starts his targeting is broken.

4. the active pilot of a cloaked ship dictates the time and place of the encounter; the "recipient" of the event
has no opportunity to dictate to the pilot of the cloaked ship the time of the encounter (short of "never",
i.e. dock up) and limited opportunity to dictate the place.

A) If he is active, he is not AFK. People are complaining about AFK pilots. They do absolutely nothing to threaten you, it's all in your mind. If he is active I have outlined some very simple solutions to handle the situation.

In closing, I'd like to point out that nerfing afk cloaking could have unintentionally worse results for nullbears who think it will grant them safety. Namely, any time a cloaked ship is in your system for prolonged periods of time, it becomes obvious they are NOT afk, and that DOES present a real threat. Also, there is nothing to stop a pilot from observing and bookmarking where you were mining and ratting at, then log off. While this may be a hit and miss deal, simply logging in and auto-warping to the spot you logged off is much quicker than gate jumping, decloaking and warping ot a location. IF you are not doing the above and he guesses your location right you may get caught. Also, cloaking ships are fairly cheap, there is nothing to stop a large alliance from simply letting any cloak timers run out, ship get destroyed, and sending a replacement in. Trust that the players will work around any solutions you hope CCP would come up to stop this threat that really isnt a threat to begin with.



Im still waiting for these people to come up with some proper replies to this thread. They keep advocating well thought through suggestions and observations, and these points are still at the core of the whole problem.

And still havent been adressed.

A) Addressed.

Quote:
Also, as has also been explained already, unlike AFK mining (which artificially skews the entire economy of the entire game), AFK cloaking doesn't actually do anything. Finally, I suppose you can dig out some support for that claim that there is any kind of correlation between pro-AFK-cloaking and anti-AFK-mining…?


You know, one could argue that afk mining in itself does nothing as well. Refining your ore and then selling it or building something with it, will.

A) There is a remarkable difference between collecting materials of value, which can and will be sold on the market, while being away from the computer, and simply sitting unseen in space. The semantics of your argument are poor, you know full well afk mining brings materials into the game at seriously devalued prices due to the lack of effort, and at no time does afk cloaking ever do anything of the sort.

In anycase, I just noticed that other thread where someone wants to pay new players ISK every month, if they are willing to go camp a designated nullsec system whenever they are offline.

Surely thats making ISK while being afk Big smile

A) Nothing can stop the players from providing rewards for any activity in game, but again this argument is flawed. The isk earned was given to the player by another player, while selling ore is also bought by another player, there is no devaluation brought on by mass quantities of ore that were gained through minimal effort.





All answers have been provided above. Cheers! Big smile

EDIT: Corrected a fallacy in my own argument.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#266 - 2013-06-20 14:11:59 UTC
Eeio wrote:
Stop making assumptions about how everyone else feels already.

Quote:
If you expect to be able to solo PVE in a null sec system without support, without a plan for rescue or defense and without properly fitting your ship to survive such encounters, then the primary fault is yours to begin with. EVE Online isn't won in space, it's one before you undock.


Nobody thinks this. What do you think we are (Wait, thats actually quite obvious by all the accusations you keep throwing out)
You are the only person here thats talking about doing solo work in null. You just automatically assume thats what we are all talking about here.


So you're saying that you can't read English. This must be the case because what you are talking about and what I'm saying are totally different things.

Where did I suggest I give a flip about how anyone "feels"?

And, what God powers do you have that lets you know that "nobody" thinks a certain way. In the 13 regions I've lived in, most people I've encountered PVE solo. You can find examples on this forum of people whinning when their ratting ship gets killed...in null...while they were alone.

A cursory examination of any kill board will show you that when pve fitted ships die in null, they tend to be the only ship that dies in that system within a 15 to 20 minute window (meaning that the ratter got caught alone and the fact that no other ship, hostile or friendly , dies means that no help came, which suggest the victim was ratting solo and was not prepared to defend themselves).

The point is that the "problems" people complain about ( problems that you want to "solve" by providing people with what amounts to automated defenses
) aren't problem if people are smart and creative and use the thousands of tools that already exist, starting with their own brains..

But they don't and rather than use defensive equipment already available, they come here and ask for the game to protect them (like you did in the above linked post).

Go to those same killboards, find null sec pve ship kills, and count how many have warp core stabs, ecm burst, heavy neuts, micro jump drives, target lock breakers, FoF missiles in cargo (sometimes you get jammed and fof's are great for missile ships in those situations), ECM DRONES (the cheapest "get out fo jail free cards" in game) , dual prop set ups (so what a scram takes out a mwd, that's what ABs are for) ,, Cynos (for bringing in help) etc etc etc etc. Hint, you won't find many.

People should use what they have before asking for more.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#267 - 2013-06-20 14:12:20 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
AFK is AFK doesnt matter if its mining or cloaking only real difference here is is that the AFK cloakers most likely never afk ice mined.


This is more or less the point. CCP went after afk miners because they bring raw materials into the game, which directly influences the economy. That's ok if you're doing it but without actually playing this causes inflation because its gained without any effort and sold as such.

Never, not once, has an afk cloaked ship brought materials en masse to the market causing it to crash. The worst he has ever done was strike fear into timid pilots, hurting their individual harvests.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#268 - 2013-06-20 14:13:36 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
AFK is AFK doesnt matter if its mining or cloaking only real difference here is is that the AFK cloakers most likely never afk ice mined.


What?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#269 - 2013-06-20 14:27:01 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
AFK is AFK doesnt matter if its mining or cloaking only real difference here is is that the AFK cloakers most likely never afk ice mined.


What?
I'm not sure about you Jenn, but it made me laugh. I was expecting a 'D'oh' After it tbh. Lol

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#270 - 2013-06-20 14:39:07 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

People should use what they have before asking for more.


It's like you're saying people shouldn't feel entitled to mindlessly, endlessly, carelessly grind anoms

Seriously though, if that's what people want to do, then there's already a mechanism for that, and it's called hi-sec missions.

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

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#271 - 2013-06-20 14:42:11 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

People should use what they have before asking for more.


It's like you're saying people shouldn't feel entitled to mindlessly, endlessly, carelessly grind anoms

Seriously though, if that's what people want to do, then there's already a mechanism for that, and it's called hi-sec missions.

But...But...high sec missions don't escalate to high sec 10/10s and give phat loots.

Therefore CCP should make missions escalate to 10/10s but only in high sec and they should only drop Chribba X-Type Mining lasers. problem solved!
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#272 - 2013-06-20 15:58:53 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:

What I suspect is closer to an absolutely true statement is this combination of facts:
1. an AFK cloaked ship is indistinguishable from an actively piloted cloaked ship
Kijo Rikki wrote:

A) Yes he is, just use some common sense. If you are unsure, try baiting him out and pretend to rat in a pvp ship, preferably with a point to grab him when he decloaks and a cyno to bring a counter hot-drop if that is what you fear, or at least be in fleet and have your friends waiting in a safe spot to come to your aid.

In any case after a few hours odds are he's just there to disrupt operations, carry on as normal. If you're still unsure, see above.

EDIT: Corrected a fallacy in my own argument.

A nice reply (really!) but there's yet another fallacy in it that remains. Your methods of detecting an actively piloted cloaked ship require that pilot's cooperation in converting his cloaked ship into an uncloaked ship. (Detecting an uncloaked, on-grid ship is a trivial exercise. Big smile ) I thought it obvious, but my statement is predicated on the idea that the cloaked ship's pilot is not cooperative.

So please tell me how to discriminate between an AFK cloaked ship and an actively piloted cloaked ship (prerequisite: pilot of said ship must intend to remain cloaked at all times).

For the record, I am neither a nullbear nor a cloak user; I have no dog in this fight. I'm just here to encourage the use of more accuracy and precision in the discussion.

MDD
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#273 - 2013-06-20 16:07:02 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:
[quote=MailDeadDrop]

A nice reply (really!) but there's yet another fallacy in it that remains. Your methods of detecting an actively piloted cloaked ship require that pilot's cooperation in converting his cloaked ship into an uncloaked ship. (Detecting an uncloaked, on-grid ship is a trivial exercise. Big smile ) I thought it obvious, but my statement is predicated on the idea that the cloaked ship's pilot is not cooperative.

So please tell me how to discriminate between an AFK cloaked ship and an actively piloted cloaked ship (prerequisite: pilot of said ship must intend to remain cloaked at all times).

For the record, I am neither a nullbear nor a cloak user; I have no dog in this fight. I'm just here to encourage the use of more accuracy and precision in the discussion.

MDD


It's a matter of time and inactivity. People who are active won't usually bore themselves to death by hanging around cloaked in a system for hours. Unless your home system is the staging point for an invasion or the expected target of an invasion, a cloaked pilot has no real reason to stay active for long periods of time other than to disrupt local production or possibly hotdrop some ratters or miners, which in that case that will become apparent after a short amount of time because, again, pilots sitting on stand-by will get bored.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#274 - 2013-06-20 16:11:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
MailDeadDrop wrote:

So please tell me how to discriminate between an AFK cloaked ship and an actively piloted cloaked ship (prerequisite: pilot of said ship must intend to remain cloaked at all times).

MDD


Why would you need to. If he's afk he's no threat, if he's there but won't decloak, he is no threat. If he decloaks and attacks, he can be killed, or he (and anyone he brings with him via a cyno or wormhole) can be evaded with proper use of the many many defensive modules (and ships) EVE Online has.

The End result is if played properly, the cloaker (afk or not) is zero threat to the knowledgeable and prepared person. I know that after 5 years of successful nullbearing lol.


So I ask, what exactly is the problem. That's a purely hypothetical question, because the answer is obvious: There is no problem with it, rather the problem is with the players who choose to not use the tools available to moot the threat presented by the cloaker.

It's the same with the people in high sec who get suicide ganked, there are any number of things they could have done (make themselves a less attractive target, fit to survive a gank, fly in a gang, avoid easy-gank systems, seperate hauling loads into smaller packets and put stuff in different ships use boosting/repping alts to tag along with them etc etc etc).

But what the did do was either quietly quit or loudly complain. Smartening up or fighting back aren't options for them, even in a video game where no real physcial harm beyond Carpal Tunnel syndrome can happen to them.

As i've said, CCP (aka them HTFU boys) should -EDIT- *NOT* be in the habit of catering to weakness such as described above.
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#275 - 2013-06-20 16:15:45 UTC
Kijo Rikki wrote:
This is more or less the point. CCP went after afk miners because they bring raw materials into the game, which directly influences the economy. That's ok if you're doing it but without actually playing this causes inflation because its gained without any effort and sold as such.

Never, not once, has an afk cloaked ship brought materials en masse to the market causing it to crash. The worst he has ever done was strike fear into timid pilots, hurting their individual harvests.

I believe your statements above are partly false (although your intention is to be truthful); if you've got citations supporting your claims, I'd like them.

As far as I can tell, CCP has not gone after AFK miners, or AFK mission runners, or any other AFK activity. If a miner wants to start his mining laser or mining drones on an asteroid and then walk away (letting the miner laser autorepeat), then as far as I can tell CCP is happy to let them do that. Likewise, if a mission runner wishes to start dealing DPS and walk away, then again as far as I can tell, CCP doesn't object.

What CCP has gone after is some folks using automation programs which CCP believes violates the Eve Online EULA.

I don't know that it is reasonable to make any comparisons between AFK miners, AFK mission runners, and AFK cloak users. It is reasonably easy to discriminate between AFK miners and active miners. Likewise AFK mission runners and active mission runners. I know of no way to discriminate between AFK cloak users and active cloak users.

But to reiterate something I said earlier: I have no dog in this fight. I don't know that anything need change with cloak mechanics.

MDD
MailDeadDrop
Archon Industries
#276 - 2013-06-20 16:18:06 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
As i've said, CCP (aka them HTFU boys) should be in the habit of catering to weakness such as described above.

Missing "not" detected...

MDD Lol
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#277 - 2013-06-20 16:29:02 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:

I believe your statements above are partly false (although your intention is to be truthful); if you've got citations supporting your claims, I'd like them.

As far as I can tell, CCP has not gone after AFK miners, or AFK mission runners, or any other AFK activity. If a miner wants to start his mining laser or mining drones on an asteroid and then walk away (letting the miner laser autorepeat), then as far as I can tell CCP is happy to let them do that. Likewise, if a mission runner wishes to start dealing DPS and walk away, then again as far as I can tell, CCP doesn't object.

What CCP has gone after is some folks using automation programs which CCP believes violates the Eve Online EULA.

I don't know that it is reasonable to make any comparisons between AFK miners, AFK mission runners, and AFK cloak users. It is reasonably easy to discriminate between AFK miners and active miners. Likewise AFK mission runners and active mission runners. I know of no way to discriminate between AFK cloak users and active cloak users.

But to reiterate something I said earlier: I have no dog in this fight. I don't know that anything need change with cloak mechanics.

MDD


Good point. I've been gone for over two years (came back to hi sec for a month last year and left again) so I have no idea. I am just running with what I thought I read earlier in this thread, the notion that CCP went after afk miners they should go after afk cloakers.

If it was meant they went after botters then the argument holds even less weight to me than it did before.

I again reiterate the way to determine an afk cloaker is time and inactivity. afk miners or mission runners are making bounty money or collecting ore for sale. An afk cloaker gains nothing, and to be active for any length of time without gaining anything substantial is a waste of many players time. Again, if your system is expected to be an invasion point or a staging system for your own invasion, then it makes sense to have an active cloaked pilot in-system, intel is at a premium in this scenario. To simply be scouting in a ratting system for hours makes no sense.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#278 - 2013-06-20 16:33:16 UTC
MailDeadDrop wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
As i've said, CCP (aka them HTFU boys) should be in the habit of catering to weakness such as described above.

Missing "not" detected...

MDD Lol


Yes, you know what I mean.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#279 - 2013-06-20 17:38:44 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
AFK is AFK doesnt matter if its mining or cloaking only real difference here is is that the AFK cloakers most likely never afk ice mined.

…except that AFK doing something ≠ AFK doing nothing. Earning money AFK ≠ earning nothing AFK. The game playing itself for your benefit while you're not there ≠ the game doing nothing to benefit you because you're not there. So no, AFK comes in many variants and it matter greatly which we're talking about.

You're not suggesting that I should be allowed to eject you from stations whenever I feel like it, by any chance?

MailDeadDrop wrote:
As far as I can tell, CCP has not gone after AFK miners, or AFK mission runners, or any other AFK activity.
So you haven't been around for long then. AFK ratting (be it mission running or any other kind) was given a nice (and intended) kick to the shins with the AI change. AFK (ice) mining was given one to the balls with the static belt removal. AFK cloaking seems to keep people from leaving their money-making ships unattended in null, which means it provides a very useful service towards the continuation of this trend.
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#280 - 2013-06-20 18:39:03 UTC
Honestly, I don't know why this discussion is continuing.

The fix is simple, balanced and fair: make cloaks use fuel. Doesn't have to be a lot of fuel. It's just going to run out sometime and if you want to do it for extended periods, you're going to need to go get some more.