Player Features and Ideas Discussion

But it's only untouchable up until the point that they try to interact with you.

Actually there's almost no risk in living in null, only passive rewards. This is due the trivialization operated in the last years to the game mechanics. The ONLY risk element is just some occasional covert ops or hotdrop, and is just what you ask to nerf.

The only (remote) chance of non-consensual PvP is surprise "hit and run" attack. Any change. Actually this is possible only using cov-ops and hotdrops. Any change invovling the reduction of the time fram avaiable for the surprise atatck (AKA: nerf cloacking time/opportunities) basically remove also this last little door still open.

I dunno where this idea of null sec systems as instaced private areras come from, maybe from WOW raids; but please, at least do not say that improve game mechanics to discourage/prevent people to be in the same system is a PVP improvement.





You did,just in the part I had quoted:




And I know this is the psycology/habit/culture for a large part of null sec resident. "there's a neutral in local I've to stop any activity"; WH residents laugh at this idea; low sec residents laugh as well. Even high sec miners laugh. But you no, you're special, your mind is screwed by a neutral in local and your answer is not "well, I will adapt my mindest to the game and deal with it" (like 99% of EVE players already do); no, your answer is "I've to cry to adapt the game mechanics to my screwed mind".

And here another null-bears mindset: I put a flag on a palce and then I don't have to do anything, it's mine and it's a granted farming paradise.

FFS, Please, Please, Please do not use logic anymore. It is completely unfair (as well as rude) to use it against someone. Because people are crying about AFK and cloaking and AFK cloaking, it HAS to be bad. ;)

It's not our fault that this is how local works.

It does not compensate for the loss to cloaking, if you refer to black ops bridging being the required element for this.

It simply needs more to balance the reactive and proactive ability to hunt cloaked vessels in any manner.

Trying to limit scan probe range doesn't really do anything. And we still haven't even touched on how this breaks wormholes.

That is why most bad ideas like yours are (and should be) ignored with prejudice. You don't care about anything but yourself and what you want.

1. Thi is not related to cloacking, is related to EVE mechanics (local and others). Exactly the same mechanics that allow you to know if some hostile is entering your farming systems (but that's ok for you). Anyone can provide that kind of intel untouched, for sure the one traveling there in covert ops to do this put more effort than anyone docked or hidden behind a shield POS or ratting 24/7.

2. One of the role for covert ops is just to scout and spy deep inside hostile systems, is part of the game. And they need to be able to move undetected to do this. You can use them too against your enemies.

3. For some evaluable inteleligence (as your example ov capitals movements) you don't even need to be in the region: you will have added as contacts all your enemies capital pilots, and you see then they're logging.

4. If somoene is providing intel for sure is not AFK. And your thread is about "combat AFK campers". If the idea was "remove intel gathering from the game" than is a different topic.

5. Everyone in EVE is used to deal with this stuff. But seems to become an issue only for a very specific small subset of players. The rest deal with scouts, cloacker, intel gathering and is fine with it. So I'm more incline to think the issue to fix is the mindset of that minority instead of having the whole game ruined to make them happy.

Onomerous

You know you are just arguing for the sake of arguing. Just stop it. The statement was generalized around the concept of the ship. I never considered WH space when I thought about the idea and I don't care if the ship has any interaction with Wh space. If people think it breaks a mechanic in WH space, then I will consider it. Guess what. I thought about it and I agree. It effects Wh space mechanics and thus, I am more than willing to modify my suggestion by saying that the ship wouldn't work in WH for cloak detection.

So like a few others here you are attempting to derail the thread by cherry picking terminology and or statements. Stop it. I get it. You don't like the idea. That is fine. I am going to continue with the idea cause several times in this thread decent progress towards a solution has been made. If you don't wish to help, then stop reading. It is rather simple.

I disagree that a small section of Eve think this is an issue. There is a thread that is nothing but a COLLECTION of threads on the specific topic. That in itself shows that there is more than a slight interest in the issue.

Yes a covert ops ship is designed to scout and move into enemy territory. It does its job well. I have offered to let it do its job even better by removing it from local as well.

As for tagging all the cap pilots on your friends list and seeing when they log in. You have to have someone tell you who they are first and really that ability in itself is far more abusive than local. That's global intel. You seem ok with this.

Yes my original reason for posting was a frustration with AFK or seemingly afk cloak ships. I have admitted that in the course of discussing this, the idea has grown and I have accepted that it includes more than that. This is why I have been willing to consider and even modify the idea to fit both sides.

Wouldn't you like to have the ability to run someone out of your system if they were collecting info on you, or are you just ok with them watching your every move?

Maybe its just me but I like the idea of making the game of cat and mouse more fun with the variety of cloak ships out there. The ability to hunt each other would make things more interesting.

And this is a discussion forum on ideas. To think that an idea cant be adjusted on while its being discussed is ignorant. That's how progress on things is made. I understand you don't feel there is an issue here, but like I originally stated. There are several that do and I am going to continue to talk about the idea, unless a dev decides to close the topic.