These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Increase PVP and combat afk cloaky camping

Author
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#141 - 2013-06-25 10:25:09 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I do question if your idea even would target those AFK? What's to stop them simply pointing out to space and moving constantly whilst cloaked? Then what about those scouting or gaining intel? You're basically saying they should move often, because your use of local is being compromised. This idea is a direct nerf to active cloaking, not including the latest moving of goal posts.


Exactly. It's been brought up numerous times in this thread how his ideas are direct nerfs to a number of activities that players, who are very much at the keyboard and active, partake in on a regular basis.

That's why I simply refuse to believe this thread is about "AFK" players, or about "increasing pvp" - because the nature of the ideas, which he keeps insisting on, are simply - unarguably - nerfs to active, pvp-oriented tasks.

This isn't about increasing PVP, or AFK players, or anything else. It's about removing uncertainty for carebear PVErs. They don't know what a cloaked player is up to, if he's there at all, and how much of a threat he is. So they come up with these convoluted, dishonest threads but when you get right down to it, when you ask the right questions, it all falls apart.

Thats why everyone is so sick of these threads.

I'd rather they were just honest, and said they wanted free, perfect, absolute intel and complete certainty while in nullsec.

It goes against core concepts of not just nullsec but all of EVE, but hey, at least they'd be telling the truth and not confusing the matter with threads like these.
Jint Hikaru
OffWorld Exploration Inc
#142 - 2013-06-25 11:48:44 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:


This isn't about increasing PVP, or AFK players, or anything else. It's about removing uncertainty for carebear PVErs. They don't know what a cloaked player is up to, if he's there at all, and how much of a threat he is. So they come up with these convoluted, dishonest threads but when you get right down to it, when you ask the right questions, it all falls apart.

Thats why everyone is so sick of these threads.


I couldn't agree more Gunslinger.

Jint Hikaru - Miner / Salvager / Explorer / SpaceBum In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

Shiho Weitong
Perkone
Caldari State
#143 - 2013-06-25 11:57:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Shiho Weitong
Behr Oroo wrote:
I know this has been posted on before but I am tossing an idea out there to be considered.

Several years ago a game was created by Wolfpack studios called Shadowbane. In that game there were stealth classes of character; thief, assassin, scout, etc etc. Now Wolfpack determined that stealth was a very powerful thing and limited in certain ways. I am suggesting an idea here that is similar to theirs.

Scout class ship:

In shadowbane the scout was the ONLY class that could see hidden characters. This wasn't a passive skill but one that required that the scout track down and get close enough to its target before he could see them. This idea could easily be implemented into a ship design. The scout was no more or less powerful than the average stealth character, and thus this new scout class ship would be a frigate in design, with roughly the same power as a single bomber.

How it would work:

The idea would be simple. This ship would be able to scan systems with probes, like combat probes but would be able to find a general location of a cloaked ship, say a 25KM radius around the ship, and decreasing to 5KM as you train skills. Now once the scout class ship has located the general area the cloaked ship might be, he can warp to that area but then he would have to manually fly around to locate the cloaked ship. Once the scout is within 5k of the cloaked ship, the player AND ONLY THAT PLAYER, would be able to see the cloaked ship. He would not be able to bookmark the ship or someone broadcast the location to his fleet while the cloaked ship is still cloaked. He would have to get within the standard 2.5k to decloak the ship. Once the cloak is dropped, BOTH ships are decloaked, and then normal combat can begin. NOW the scout ship would have one major advantage. A targeted cyno jammer. It only works on a single ship, only has a range of 5k and would be fueled by something like heavy water or something of that nature. Quick cycle time and fairly high use of materials to power it, so that its not used as a crutch to stop all cyno fields. The idea is a skilled player has to work to lock down a cloaked ship AND if they succeed, they need to have an advantage. The jammer is that advantage.

What this ship would do:

This would allow for PVP which is what CCP wants. It would combat AFK cloaked camping of a system. Anyone that is AFK is at risk of losing their ship. I feel that a cloak shouldn't be a safe guard. Be active or don't play. AFK cloak camping of a system is cheap tactic and requires 0 skill level to accomplish. I am purposing to add some skill back into an already skill dependent game. Most cloak campers are in ships that are worthless and they are preying on expensive ships that people have invested large amounts of time and effort into. I personally feel that if I am going to be at risk of attack, I want it to be on a level playing field.

I realize that PVPers hate care bears and CCP wants to increase the amount of PVP in the game. Well if they want that then they need to level the playing field. This ship design does that, especially with a cyno jammer.

Like I said. This is an idea. It can be and will be refined, BUT I think its a easily implemented solution that every side could agree is fair.


So you're saying that when I'm laying low on grid, watching your stations and gathering intel for my guys, I should be able to be found because I might be afk?

Ok then. In the same line of fairness, all mining lasers activated should pop up regionwide like an incursion, as the miners might be botters.

I have a real hard time seeing how local isn't the real culprit here.
The ONLY reason AFK cloakers even matter is due to that fact that people DO NOT want pvp. And we're not talking about the cloakers here.
I'm talking about the people who instantly dock or go possing when local spikes +1. How are we going to "Increase PVP" participation of these people? If you say we don't have to, you're simply a hypocrite banging on your own drums.

Local should be removed from anything that is not highsec. That would be "fair"

EDIT: I bolded a part for you. Explain how a hulk AFK within a POS-shield is at risk please?
Behr Oroo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#144 - 2013-06-25 22:36:53 UTC
I have been at work, so let me take a moment to respond to a few comments.

Mag's

If you're going to ignore my comparision to shadowbane, then you are ignoring a key part of my idea. It is clear you don't know much about this game, as you have suggested that I go play it. Well that isn't possible, as Ubisoft closed the game after they absorbed Wolfpack studios, several years ago.

There is nothing wrong with using an idea from somewhere else and molding it to fit the situation. Eve and Shadowbane are very simular, as they are both sandbox games, with heavy PVP and PVE content.

I am not ignorant to the fact that people have made suggestions about this in the past. I know this issue has been talked about. If you aren't interested in trying to help offer a solution, then you are more than welcome to not respond.

As for the cloaky floating off in one direction in a system. Yes, they could do that. It would make tracking them that much harder, but not impossible.

So with your final question. What do I really want? What I want is a way to fight back. What happens when a fleet of battleships comes into your system? Usually a CTA is called and there is an attempt to remove them. So, same thing here. If a group of hostiles comes into my home, I am asking for the ablitly to be able to fight back. Is there anything wrong with that? Why should I allow you to sit in my home system and just gather intel or threaten my opertations and no be able to do something about it? Industrial corps have invested heavily in their home systems with stations, POSs and other items. These items should give them a home field advantage. If a Hulk is parked in a POS, he is paying for his protection by fueling the POS or even being the one that built it. All these defensive structures take time and should provide the protection that they currently do.

With that said, it would seem that you dislike this idea. People have suggested that people cant hide in stations, or in POSs. What sense does this make? Honestly. They built or bought their home. Why should they not use it for what it is meant for. In turn with that said, PVPers risk very little by invading other systems. The worst is their ship, possibly their pod and more than likely no implants if its a suicide run. So if I understand right, you want me to be vulnerable to your attack, while I am mining or ratting, and be perfectly ok with the idea that I am in a ship that is no where near equiped to fight a well equiped PVP ship. How is this balanced? TO me it seems like you are just looking for the easy kills.

I have made the suggestion that local be changed. Take black ops ships and any ship that can use the covert ops out of the local channel. This is a huge buff to the current cloak. This means that unless you engage a target, no one would know you are in the area. Now that in itself is far too powerful and though I am sure it would be loved by the PVP player, I would hope you could agree it's not balanced.

So the scout ship comes into existance. This ship would need to be properly balanced for its role. It's a pretty fair trade if you ask me.

This idea increases PVP. It's an almost perfert promise that a cloak gang would score a kill every time they went on a roam. Industrials would have to be on gaurd far more, and be looking over their shoulder at any given moment. The mechanics I suggested for the scout ship leave it very limited on what it can and cant do. if you have a good scout, its unlikely that a successful gank will happen, UNLESS you destroy the scout. Once that ship is gone from system, then the cloaks would have a much larger advantage.

But it provides industrials the chance to respond. I wont fight you in a Hulk. There is no reason to even think thats worth it. But if I get a combat, I am undocked and quite ready to fight. This however puts the ball in your court. Are you willing to risk your ships against other combat ships? Are you willing to put your skills as a pilot out there? That's a decision you have to make.

This idea isnt perfect but I am honestly trying to think of a way to combat cloaky camping, and be fair on all sides.

You all seem to think I am just wanting to carebear it up with no risk. My plan suggestions nothing of the sort. It suggests that I want to come fight you but I wont do it when I know there is no chance of victory. No one would.

I am sure there are other things I need to answer as well. I will do that when I get home.
Voith
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#145 - 2013-06-25 23:55:07 UTC
Johan Toralen wrote:
So i get decloaked and killed while i walk the dog, take a crap or have a cigarette break? No thanks.

Boo hoo, no more PvP immunity button for you.

GB2WoW
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#146 - 2013-06-26 07:32:37 UTC
Voith wrote:
Johan Toralen wrote:
So i get decloaked and killed while i walk the dog, take a crap or have a cigarette break? No thanks.

Boo hoo, no more PvP immunity button for you.

GB2WoW


Where are your demands that people sitting in a pos bubble or outpost get ejected and blown up, alt boy?
Nariya Kentaya
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#147 - 2013-06-26 08:18:58 UTC
Behr Oroo wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
no, afk cloaking is fine and just a result of local as OP intel tool.

afk cloaking just reflects the power of local back on its abusers, this is all right.



So let's say that Local is taken from the game so that no one knows who is in system. The idea of my ship would be EVEN MORE needed cause then the cloakers would have true rule of every system. You wouldnt be able to undock from any station without fear of a cloaked group of players waiting on you. CCP would never allow this. WHY? cause people would start logging off and then simply stop playing.


Wormholes, back when i lived with SYJ, we would have cloakies run through our system all the time, with no local, you know how we knew they were there? a combination of D-scan and them failing to gank our players who are fully prepared for the unexpected. All the while we continue on with our daily lives.

Frankly, a cloaky ship will always lose to a combat ship, even more so if he travels with a buddy. Cloaky ships are pre-nerfed already by being a cloaky.
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#148 - 2013-06-26 12:30:28 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Voith wrote:
Johan Toralen wrote:
So i get decloaked and killed while i walk the dog, take a crap or have a cigarette break? No thanks.

Boo hoo, no more PvP immunity button for you.

GB2WoW


Where are your demands that people sitting in a pos bubble or outpost get ejected and blown up, alt boy?


PLEASE REFRAIN FROM THAT TYPE OF POST












We will not allow logic or reason to be used to counter a stupid idea. Please consider yourself a bad person. ;)
Onomerous
Caldari Black Hand
Caldari Tactical Operations Command
#149 - 2013-06-26 12:31:42 UTC
Nariya Kentaya wrote:
Behr Oroo wrote:
Robert Caldera wrote:
no, afk cloaking is fine and just a result of local as OP intel tool.

afk cloaking just reflects the power of local back on its abusers, this is all right.



So let's say that Local is taken from the game so that no one knows who is in system. The idea of my ship would be EVEN MORE needed cause then the cloakers would have true rule of every system. You wouldnt be able to undock from any station without fear of a cloaked group of players waiting on you. CCP would never allow this. WHY? cause people would start logging off and then simply stop playing.


Wormholes, back when i lived with SYJ, we would have cloakies run through our system all the time, with no local, you know how we knew they were there? a combination of D-scan and them failing to gank our players who are fully prepared for the unexpected. All the while we continue on with our daily lives.

Frankly, a cloaky ship will always lose to a combat ship, even more so if he travels with a buddy. Cloaky ships are pre-nerfed already by being a cloaky.


Yeah but living in WH requires paying more attention to what is going on and people to work together. We can't have that type of stuff in NS.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#150 - 2013-06-26 13:14:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Any ideas along these lines needs to be tied to sov or it badly messes with other parts of the game where cloaking is working perfectly fine.

I do have a tiny bit of sympathy as in extreme cases its abused to the point that to put it into a wormhole concept it would be like someone having the ability to suddenly open an almost unlimited mass wormhole straight to one of the big C5/6 corps right beside your bearing fleet while you have everything locked down. But for the most part IMO its part and parcel for living in null.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#151 - 2013-06-26 13:37:48 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Any ideas along these lines needs to be tied to sov or it badly messes with other parts of the game where cloaking is working perfectly fine.

I do have a tiny bit of sympathy as in extreme cases its abused to the point that to put it into a wormhole concept it would be like someone having the ability to suddenly open an almost unlimited mass wormhole straight to one of the big C5/6 corps right beside your bearing fleet while you have everything locked down. But for the most part IMO its part and parcel for living in null.

The funny thing about wormholes, that those never having spent time in them probably never consider, is that local is unwanted by the PvE users as much if not more than the PvP ones.

You can pop on, take care of running sites with a buddy or two, and unless someone else manages to scan for and detect your presence, they don't even know you are in the system to be attacked.

It means the hunter must make an effort to track the prey, and has no assurance they are even there in the first place.
Sensors and probes found nothing? That may mean they aren't there, or it may mean they saw you first, and are able to out maneuver you.
You get to be clever.

If it was not for the uncertainties of supply logistics and limits forced by operating out of a POS exclusively, wormholes would be perfect to me.
But those elements, along with the local aspect, are what make wormholes unique. I would not try to duplicate that elsewhere.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#152 - 2013-06-26 13:38:34 UTC
Onomerous wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Voith wrote:
Johan Toralen wrote:
So i get decloaked and killed while i walk the dog, take a crap or have a cigarette break? No thanks.

Boo hoo, no more PvP immunity button for you.

GB2WoW


Where are your demands that people sitting in a pos bubble or outpost get ejected and blown up, alt boy?


PLEASE REFRAIN FROM THAT TYPE OF POST












We will not allow logic or reason to be used to counter a stupid idea. Please consider yourself a bad person. ;)

That is an official ROFFLESTOMP.

Well played.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#153 - 2013-06-26 13:47:09 UTC
Do the vast majority of AFK cloakers even have the slightest intention of ever engaging in ship-to-ship combat, or are they only there to mess with peoples' minds?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#154 - 2013-06-26 14:08:57 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Do the vast majority of AFK cloakers even have the slightest intention of ever engaging in ship-to-ship combat, or are they only there to mess with peoples' minds?

That's really a philosophical question. I would hazard a guess and say some fall into either category, and more than a few fall into both.

Right now they have no opportunity to engage the target ships, for the perfect avoidance defense exists.
If it should become possible for them to force a failure in this, or even have a realistic chance to do so, then we will know.

If it is balanced, then whoever makes the best and smartest efforts will prevail, while the other side will know they were beaten.
It will be nice to have this resolved in an interesting way, rather than that persistent stalemate effect.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#155 - 2013-06-26 14:48:24 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Do the vast majority of AFK cloakers even have the slightest intention of ever engaging in ship-to-ship combat, or are they only there to mess with peoples' minds?


To be a bit blunt: Does it even matter what their intentions are? Should anyone ever be informed of another users intentions in any way other than those which the other player initiates (for example by activating a gun...)? I don't think they should be. If he does something that shows his intentions with absolute clarity, fine. If his behaviour hints at certain intentions, but it isn't a sure thing, or causes doubt, then that's ok too. I don't see why the latter should be removed.
Behr Oroo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#156 - 2013-06-26 14:56:31 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Do the vast majority of AFK cloakers even have the slightest intention of ever engaging in ship-to-ship combat, or are they only there to mess with peoples' minds?

That's really a philosophical question. I would hazard a guess and say some fall into either category, and more than a few fall into both.

Right now they have no opportunity to engage the target ships, for the perfect avoidance defense exists.
If it should become possible for them to force a failure in this, or even have a realistic chance to do so, then we will know.

If it is balanced, then whoever makes the best and smartest efforts will prevail, while the other side will know they were beaten.
It will be nice to have this resolved in an interesting way, rather than that persistent stalemate effect.



I agree it would be nice to resolve this stalemate.

As for WH space. I am not exactly sure its fair to compare it. People that live in WH space fly ships that are setup very different than a null sec industrial would. They really are setup to fight, almost like being in a PVP ship. I can see what you are saying here, and it makes sense but I am not sure its a fair comparison. D-scanning isn't as effective either, since cloaked ships don't show up on scans.

If I am understanding this right, PVPers want a way to engage their targets. They currently feel that local provides too much intel and it makes it easy for people to run home when even slightly threatened. With industrials, they feel that they aren't given a proper chance to combat a threat in their system, since at current there is no way to engage a cloak ship, unless that ship decides to engage them. Thus the stalemate is created. Industrials stay docked and PVPers float in space, not getting a fight.

I personally would be more than welcome to float in space and fight hostile forces, however I am not going to attempt to engage a target I know is far superior to the ship I am in. Namely a PVP ship vs an industrial barge or PVE fight rat ship.

Though like I said in an earlier post. I don't think its fair to complain that people run to stations or POSs. These items were built and placed in space as defensive structures.

I think what it boils down to is PVPers want the ability to fight mining barges more effectively. I can understand this. If your in a war, the best way to win that war is to destroy the factories producing the war machines. The current use of local as intel makes it harder for an invading force to come into a territory and destroy things. I can understand how this would be frustrating, however look at it this way. You are moving into a highly populated area where it should be more difficult to accomplish a goal, though not impossible.

I do agree there needs to be a change on both sides. PVPers should be able to be more effective in their attempts to engage deeper in hostile territory, however that shouldn't one side. There should be a balanced counter where people can better defend their homes. I think a lot of the current frustration comes from the fact that people feel their hands are tied and they cant do anything.

My thread here is an attempt at a solution. It might not be the ultimate solution buts an attempt at one.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#157 - 2013-06-26 15:11:27 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Do the vast majority of AFK cloakers even have the slightest intention of ever engaging in ship-to-ship combat, or are they only there to mess with peoples' minds?


To be a bit blunt: Does it even matter what their intentions are? Should anyone ever be informed of another users intentions in any way other than those which the other player initiates (for example by activating a gun...)? I don't think they should be. If he does something that shows his intentions with absolute clarity, fine. If his behaviour hints at certain intentions, but it isn't a sure thing, or causes doubt, then that's ok too. I don't see why the latter should be removed.


I ask because OP keeps going on about being under threat and being at risk and these cloakers doing violence to his boats and why should he be in danger. It seems to me that most of the "danger" presented by an AFK cloaker is the psychological disturbance created by having a neutral in your space.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#158 - 2013-06-26 15:16:45 UTC
It's not just a desire to catch miners, in fact I don't care about miners, I want to catch people in stupid blinged out unnecessary ratting ships. From t3s to faction BS to capitals and even supers - it's far too easy for them to scurry off to safety as a result of local.

The fact of the matter is that local results in there being virtually no risk for those people, the art of sitting cloaked in a system is the only way to potentially catch those people. Sitting there long enough that they poke their heads out.

Trying to reduce or combat the ability for people to sit there and wait for their prey to make a mistake, without doing anything to balance the other side of it, is wrong. If you want a way to combat cloaked ships sitting doing nothing, I want a way to combat the people who shoot off the millisecond local changes.

As for comments about people in wormholes being in more pvp capable ships... what on earth prevents null sec pvers from doing the same, other than sheer greed and the misguided idea that they're entitled to safety?
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#159 - 2013-06-26 15:19:01 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Do the vast majority of AFK cloakers even have the slightest intention of ever engaging in ship-to-ship combat, or are they only there to mess with peoples' minds?


To be a bit blunt: Does it even matter what their intentions are? Should anyone ever be informed of another users intentions in any way other than those which the other player initiates (for example by activating a gun...)? I don't think they should be. If he does something that shows his intentions with absolute clarity, fine. If his behaviour hints at certain intentions, but it isn't a sure thing, or causes doubt, then that's ok too. I don't see why the latter should be removed.


I ask because OP keeps going on about being under threat and being at risk and these cloakers doing violence to his boats and why should he be in danger. It seems to me that most of the "danger" presented by an AFK cloaker is the psychological disturbance created by having a neutral in your space.


Pretty much. The "danger" of cloakers - afk or otherwise - is that they're unknown and OP wants to remove the uncertainty, so all he's left with is known quantities while he's doing pve.

Bad OP. Go sit in the naughty corner (highsec)
Behr Oroo
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#160 - 2013-06-26 15:30:03 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Do the vast majority of AFK cloakers even have the slightest intention of ever engaging in ship-to-ship combat, or are they only there to mess with peoples' minds?


To be a bit blunt: Does it even matter what their intentions are? Should anyone ever be informed of another users intentions in any way other than those which the other player initiates (for example by activating a gun...)? I don't think they should be. If he does something that shows his intentions with absolute clarity, fine. If his behaviour hints at certain intentions, but it isn't a sure thing, or causes doubt, then that's ok too. I don't see why the latter should be removed.


I ask because OP keeps going on about being under threat and being at risk and these cloakers doing violence to his boats and why should he be in danger. It seems to me that most of the "danger" presented by an AFK cloaker is the psychological disturbance created by having a neutral in your space.


Pretty much. The "danger" of cloakers - afk or otherwise - is that they're unknown and OP wants to remove the uncertainty, so all he's left with is known quantities while he's doing pve.

Bad OP. Go sit in the naughty corner (highsec)


Why should I not be allowed the ability to combat a threat in my system? Explain this to me. A PVPer comes into my system in a cloak. I manage to dock up my mining or ratting ship and return in a PVP ship. There is NOTHING I can do to combat the threat at all. I have put myself on the grid, I am ready to fight, but I have to wait for the cloaky to engage me. I can setup a gate camp with a bubble. What happens? Cloak warps in at 100KM seens the bubble or simply just dscans the bubble and decides its not worth the effort. He sits in the system and does nothing. The moment a PVPer feels they don't have the advantage, they run and hide.

You claim I want some freedom to be perfectly safe and this isn't the case. ALL I have advocated for is a chance to actually FIGHT back. You can spin this idea to say anything but the truth is, I am asking for a chance to defend the space I call home and I am suggesting it with the concept of battle.

if you come into a system I call home, I should be able to defend myself and ignoring you isn't the answer.

As for why PVE ratting ships aren't setup like PVP ships. I think that's quite obvious. A ratting ship is setup to deal with a different situation. They are dealing with 10-20 npc ships engaging them at any given time. It's strictly a different mechanic. A PVP ship wouldn't be able to run a PVE sit as well as a PVE ship would, and the same applies to the opposite. A PVE fit ship wouldn't be as effective in a PVP combat situation.