These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#301 - 2013-06-20 19:34:58 UTC
Yoink.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#302 - 2013-06-20 19:38:00 UTC
You know it just dawned on me what the solution is. Players will just throw an MWD on a fast interceptor and burn up from a safe. Now he can be afk, not worry about fuel concerns, knowing no one can scan him and catch him, and can still warp down to a belt and tackle and cyno in support when he gets back from being afk.

A solution has already been made for your solution.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#303 - 2013-06-20 19:41:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Victoria Sin
Tippia wrote:
…except that if they do, their fuel runs out, so they can't. So, the question remains: why shouldn't they be able to?


So, they add that into the calculation as to the benefits or otherwise of whatever it is they aren't doing.

Quote:
…which you can do in stations as well, so obviously the same rule should apply.


Sure, you can do that in station, but when you're in station people know exactly where you are and it's easy to see when you've undocked. This doesn't apply to AFK cloaked in space, does it?

Quote:

Oh, and “intentionality’? How do you propose to measure that mechanically?


You don't "measure intentionality". Same rules for everyone. Want to park your Orca at a safe and cloak it? You're going to consume fuel. Want to park it safely at a POS? Guess what? The POS is burning fuel. See how it works?

Quote:

Cloaking already has a cost: it either massively nerfs your ship, or it restricts you to a very weak ship, and either way, it doesn't let you do anything while cloaked. The cost is built into the module.


That's true on an absolute scale, but your cloaked Loki is still vastly more powerful than my Mackinaw.

Quote:

Oh, and the actual problem and the value of the proposed solution is still left unexplained.


I think you're being a bit silly here, pretending not to see any potential problem with an AFK cloaker. I know you're not stupid, so I don't think an explanation is really necessary. Please refer to my post on intentionality.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#304 - 2013-06-20 19:44:44 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:

I think you're being a bit silly here, pretending not to see any potential problem with an AFK cloaker. I know you're not stupid, so I don't think an explanation is really necessary. Please refer to my post on intentionality.


It's a bit silly to contend that there is a problem when many of us have told you the solutions already. I can do your job in a mack without fear because I know what to do.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#305 - 2013-06-20 19:49:17 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
So, they add that into the calculation as to the benefits or otherwise of whatever it is they aren't doing.
Yeah, that doesn't answer the question: why shouldn't they be able to go AFK for extended periods?

Quote:
Sure, you can do that in station
Good. So it's agreed then: the same fuel mechanic applies so that they get spat out and exposed and the poor beleaguered bastard can come and kill him. After all, there's no telling where he was hiding (since it's null — it's not like you can just dock and check the guest list).

Quote:
You don't "measure intentionality". Same rules for everyone.
Then we can strike the “element of intentionality” and it truly only becomes an issue of going AFK. So, again: auto-kick from stations and POSes and the like.

Quote:
That's true on an absolute scale, but your cloaked Loki is still vastly more powerful than my Mackinaw.
…and your Mackinaw is vastly better at mining. So what? It still doesn't change the fact that cloaks have the kind of costs you're talking about built-in.

Quote:
I think you're being a bit silly here, pretending not to see any potential problem with an AFK cloaking.
What's the problem? By very definition, he can't do anything. He has no power, no control, no input, nothing. He can't attack people, he can't collect intel, he can't call in reinforcements, he can — at best — enjoy a spot of tea in the sun… well, not actually the AFK cloaker, but the player.

So what's the problem?
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#306 - 2013-06-20 19:50:39 UTC
Kijo Rikki wrote:
Victoria Sin wrote:

I think you're being a bit silly here, pretending not to see any potential problem with an AFK cloaker. I know you're not stupid, so I don't think an explanation is really necessary. Please refer to my post on intentionality.


It's a bit silly to contend that there is a problem when many of us have told you the solutions already. I can do your job in a mack without fear because I know what to do.


Exactly. There is a difference between "there is nothing you can do" and "I can't be arsed to protect myself, CCP please do it for me".

I don't actualy care if someone AFK plays or now, damn near every hauler you see in empire is afk isk making. Should autopilot use fuel too?
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#307 - 2013-06-20 19:56:20 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

Exactly. There is a difference between "there is nothing you can do" and "I can't be arsed to protect myself, CCP please do it for me".


Somewhat bemusing that you find this legitimate game-play. It wasn't as if you were all making forum threads to call for an AFK cloaking facility so you could troll local before the cloak was introduced into the game.

Jenn aSide wrote:

I don't actualy care if someone AFK plays or now, damn near every hauler you see in empire is afk isk making. Should autopilot use fuel too?


In what respect does using autopilot disrupt someone else's game-play?
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#308 - 2013-06-20 20:01:05 UTC
I feel like helping the less fortunate.

NEVER NOT ALIGNED TO SOMETHING

If that's not security enough perhaps it's worth noting this is what I did in hi-sec mining on my other character, Ituhata. Hi sec is considerably more difficult, you know why? Because with all the random people in local your intelligence is considerably degraded. You have to stay on d-scan and watch for the catalyst gank and learn who to watch for in a local of anyhere from 30 to hundreds of players.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#309 - 2013-06-20 20:03:06 UTC
Kijo Rikki wrote:
I feel like helping the less fortunate.

NEVER NOT ALIGNED TO SOMETHING

If that's not security enough perhaps it's worth noting this is what I did in hi-sec mining on my other character, Ituhata. Hi sec is considerably more difficult, you know why? Because with all the random people in local your intelligence is considerably degraded. You have to stay on d-scan and watch for the catalyst gank and learn who to watch for in a local of anyhere from 30 to hundreds of players.



Yes, you do. But a player pays a cost in high sec when he ganks you: His sec gets a hit (OK, it's a throw-away alt, ignore that) and Concord ganks him.

Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#310 - 2013-06-20 20:08:57 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
Kijo Rikki wrote:
I feel like helping the less fortunate.

NEVER NOT ALIGNED TO SOMETHING

If that's not security enough perhaps it's worth noting this is what I did in hi-sec mining on my other character, Ituhata. Hi sec is considerably more difficult, you know why? Because with all the random people in local your intelligence is considerably degraded. You have to stay on d-scan and watch for the catalyst gank and learn who to watch for in a local of anyhere from 30 to hundreds of players.



Yes, you do. But a player pays a cost in high sec when he ganks you: His sec gets a hit (OK, it's a throw-away alt, ignore that) and Concord ganks him.



Which is irrelevant because they only need to kill a Hulk to succeed then loot the field and financially it pays off, or again, it's done for the lulz.

The point is there is a solution to dealing with an afk cloak, if that's not enough put stabs, keep a flight of ecm drones or maybe try your luck with an ecm burst module. This is all stuff you can do on your own, let alone if you had friends. But lets not forget an afk cloak by definition is harmless, and once you make the determination that someone is definitely not letting their eyes bleed by not having fun staring at space in a cloaked and powerless ship for hours and that they left the keyboard and are hoping to scare you, then don't. This is psychological warfare aimed at hurting an opponents economy. It's only effective if you let it be effective.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#311 - 2013-06-20 20:13:07 UTC
Kijo Rikki wrote:

This is psychological warfare aimed at hurting an opponents economy. It's only effective if you let it be effective.


Well, that's the point all of you AFK cloaking fans are missing, it's AFK psychological warfare. There's no cost to you whatsoever. There is a psychological cost to the people you're trolling.



Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#312 - 2013-06-20 20:14:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Kijo Rikki wrote:
The point is there is a solution to dealing with an afk cloak, if that's not enough put stabs, keep a flight of ecm drones or maybe try your luck with an ecm burst module. This is all stuff you can do on your own, let alone if you had friends. But lets not forget an afk cloak by definition is harmless, and once you make the determination that someone is definitely not letting their eyes bleed by not having fun staring at space in a cloaked and powerless ship for hours and that they left the keyboard and are hoping to scare you, then don't. This is psychological warfare aimed at hurting an opponents economy. It's only effective if you let it be effective.

Please tell the TEST ratters this. They seem to not like the afk cloaked Blackops covert ops ships.

They should start grinding isk for ships since they get blown up every now and then and the reimb---

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#313 - 2013-06-20 20:16:32 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
Kijo Rikki wrote:

This is psychological warfare aimed at hurting an opponents economy. It's only effective if you let it be effective.


Well, that's the point all of you AFK cloaking fans are missing, it's AFK psychological warfare. There's no cost to you whatsoever. There is a psychological cost to the people you're trolling.


But I am trying to teach you to not be afraid of it. Once you learn this, it becomes a complete non-issue and you can even chuckle in the knowledge that someone is wasting 15$ a month on a character that is not doing anything to slow you down. P

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#314 - 2013-06-20 20:20:08 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:

Please tell the TEST ratters this. They seem to not like the afk cloaked Blackops covert ops ships.

They should start grinding isk for ships since they get blown up every now and then and the reimb---


I heard Durrhurrdurr on comms last night. It was at that moment I realized you don't tell that man anything, you just listen and laugh your ass off. Big smile

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Victoria Sin
Doomheim
#315 - 2013-06-20 20:22:27 UTC
Kijo Rikki wrote:

But I am trying to teach you to not be afraid of it. Once you learn this, it becomes a complete non-issue and you can even chuckle in the knowledge that someone is wasting 15$ a month on a character that is not doing anything to slow you down. P


Sure. But for me that isn't the point. It's just poor game design.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#316 - 2013-06-20 20:27:01 UTC
Victoria Sin wrote:
Kijo Rikki wrote:

But I am trying to teach you to not be afraid of it. Once you learn this, it becomes a complete non-issue and you can even chuckle in the knowledge that someone is wasting 15$ a month on a character that is not doing anything to slow you down. P


Sure. But for me that isn't the point. It's just poor game design.


Maybe, but instant local intel was even moreso. But that's why the playerbase came up with afk cloaking as a mechanic to counter it, so that you can't be 100% sure it's safe to go out. It's not perfect, because after a while people should start to realize you are afk, so you surprise them every once in a while. Still, nothing they can do can hurt you if you are prepared to deal with it.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
E-2C Hawkeye
HOW to PEG SAFETY
#317 - 2013-06-20 20:57:14 UTC  |  Edited by: E-2C Hawkeye
Victoria Sin wrote:
Tippia wrote:
…except that if they do, their fuel runs out, so they can't. So, the question remains: why shouldn't they be able to?



Quote:

Oh, and the actual problem and the value of the proposed solution is still left unexplained.


I think you're being a bit silly here, pretending not to see any potential problem with an AFK cloaker. I know you're not stupid, so I don't think an explanation is really necessary. Please refer to my post on intentionality.


And here you have the SOP or the modus operandi. Same format over and over for every thread. They are not able to acknowledge there is a issue at this point because then it would make them look even more ignorant for all the previous bad posting.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#318 - 2013-06-20 20:59:44 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:

And here you the SOP or the modus operandi. Same format over and over for every thread. They are not able to acknowledge there is a issue at this point because then it would make them look even more ignorant for all the previous bad posting.


Where is the issue, other than the one where you refuse to take the tools readily available to you to make what you think is an issue and turn it into a non-issue, and instead want someone else to hardcode a solution that makes you perfectly safe from the influence of other players.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#319 - 2013-06-20 21:05:36 UTC
E-2C Hawkeye wrote:
Victoria Sin wrote:
Tippia wrote:
…except that if they do, their fuel runs out, so they can't. So, the question remains: why shouldn't they be able to?



Quote:

Oh, and the actual problem and the value of the proposed solution is still left unexplained.


I think you're being a bit silly here, pretending not to see any potential problem with an AFK cloaker. I know you're not stupid, so I don't think an explanation is really necessary. Please refer to my post on intentionality.


And here you have the SOP or the modus operandi. Same format over and over for every thread. They are not able to acknowledge there is a issue at this point because then it would make them look even more ignorant for all the previous bad posting.


So what exactly is the problem that needs to be fixed other than you don't feel safe? Until you post an actual problem that needs fixing other players are just going to continue to ridicule you and ask the same question.

Maybe you should ask your landlord to do something.



☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Sub Tzero
Deutsche Luftschlosswerke AG
#320 - 2013-06-20 21:44:47 UTC
All the time

"Highsec dwellers are risk averse carebears"

but then

"OMG, there is that one tiny little uncertainty left, that makes me feel uncomfortable in my gated nullsec community - CCP TO THE RESCUE! CHANGE TEH GAME! NERF IT! FIX IT! ZOMG! WOULD ANYONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!"