These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

So why do people hate cloaking?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#441 - 2013-07-22 00:22:40 UTC
Rishna Katar wrote:

you say that, but the game adapts all the time. they are continuously adding removing and changing stuff to change the balance of the game.


And yet since I started playingg this supposed problem has existed, and since we have been given new sov mechanics, an improved ui, tier 3 battleships, tiericide in general, exploration, and probably a bunch of other stuff I missed since I'm in and out but they have never addressed this....I wonder why that is?

Quote:

really though, you should have to actually be at your desk at least once an hour to play eve. otherwise just enable macro mining, macro pvp, macro pve and we can all go be afk.


There is a remarkable difference between a player who is afk and cloaked and all those things you just mentioned. Namely, being cloaked prevents you from any monetary gains or actually killing something, being cloaked brings absolutely no positive benefit to the player in question, and only projects a negative benefit to his opponents if they chose to let it. People who see this and go about their business, prepared to deal with the possibility that a hostile player that may suddenly become active, are not affected.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Soko99
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#442 - 2013-07-22 00:22:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Soko99
Rishna Katar wrote:
Soko99 wrote:
Rishna Katar wrote:

yes they can, but they dont. like i said time and again this is beside the point you are talking about them changing behaviour which will nto happen. im sayng they need a tool to separate afk from non afk so that whole systems arent perma camped by afks. thats all. stop telling me they can just "do it better" i know, but they wont change, so stop telling me. end of story.



Why should/would the game change for a portion of the playerbase that's unwilling to adapt to the game.. This is EvE online after all.. Adapt or die.

you say that, but the game adapts all the time. they are continuously adding removing and changing stuff to change the balance of the game.

really though, you should have to actually be at your desk at least once an hour to play eve. otherwise just enable macro mining, macro pvp, macro pve and we can all go be afk.



except that those other activities give you financial gain while doing so.. Whereas, really afk cloaking is just psychological warfare.

also.. what about station traders.. those guys aren't at their computers for days at a time. and can make billions.
Soko99
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#443 - 2013-07-22 00:23:51 UTC
Kijo Rikki wrote:
Rishna Katar wrote:

you say that, but the game adapts all the time. they are continuously adding removing and changing stuff to change the balance of the game.


And yet since I started playingg this supposed problem has existed, and since we have been given new sov mechanics, an improved ui, tier 3 battleships, tiericide in general, exploration, and probably a bunch of other stuff I missed since I'm in and out but they have never addressed this....I wonder why that is?

Quote:

really though, you should have to actually be at your desk at least once an hour to play eve. otherwise just enable macro mining, macro pvp, macro pve and we can all go be afk.


There is a remarkable difference between a player who is afk and cloaked and all those things you just mentioned. Namely, being cloaked prevents you from any monetary gains or actually killing something, being cloaked brings absolutely no positive benefit to the player in question, and only projects a negative benefit to his opponents if they chose to let it. People who see this and go about their business, prepared to deal with the possibility that a hostile player that may suddenly become active, are not affected.



damn beat me to the reply.. :D
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#444 - 2013-07-22 00:26:20 UTC
Quote:
yes you are tolling, because you have nothing to add. and that makes me a scrub?


No, the nonsense you are spouting out of the orifice below your nose makes you a scrub. Get with the reading comprehension program.

Quote:
you are yet to see a single afk cloaking thread with a coherent argument because no argument against afk cloaking to you is valid. again you are reflecting your opinions on the validity of opposed opinions.


No. Unlike you, I have a degree of openmindedness toward the receipt of ideas. The fact remains that no remotely decent argument to date has been made about eliminating afk cloaking that does not reek of butthurt.

Quote:
bascially you are the classic example of an idiot. you think everything you disagree with is automatically wrong and you lack the ability to properly oppose the argument, so you simply convey your though that the argument is automatically wrong over and over again, rapidly descending into ad hominem.


"No, you are!". Rofl, pretty predictable, I have to say. As Christopher Lee might have said, "Surely you can do better!"

Especially considering the entirety of what I just quoted, can be much better applied to you.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Rishna Katar
Doomheim
#445 - 2013-07-22 00:35:10 UTC
Kijo Rikki wrote:
Rishna Katar wrote:

you say that, but the game adapts all the time. they are continuously adding removing and changing stuff to change the balance of the game.


And yet since I started playingg this supposed problem has existed, and since we have been given new sov mechanics, an improved ui, tier 3 battleships, tiericide in general, exploration, and probably a bunch of other stuff I missed since I'm in and out but they have never addressed this....I wonder why that is?

Quote:

really though, you should have to actually be at your desk at least once an hour to play eve. otherwise just enable macro mining, macro pvp, macro pve and we can all go be afk.


There is a remarkable difference between a player who is afk and cloaked and all those things you just mentioned. Namely, being cloaked prevents you from any monetary gains or actually killing something, being cloaked brings absolutely no positive benefit to the player in question, and only projects a negative benefit to his opponents if they chose to let it. People who see this and go about their business, prepared to deal with the possibility that a hostile player that may suddenly become active, are not affected.


yes yes yes, and obviously i'm not actually suggesting that and know the difference. i see how you all chose to ignore the core point of it though. you should have to actually be playing eve to play eve, call me old fashioned, but i thought thats what playing meant. im sure you'll just disagree with that too though.
i should just make a thread called "afk cloaking is fine, change nothing" and you would probably just argue against that too, since you seem to literally disagree with anyone that doesn't just mirror your posts, on topic and off.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#446 - 2013-07-22 00:49:03 UTC
Honestly, people go afk in mmo's all the time. They're not actually playing, they are just there...standing in a city, stealthed off the beaten path. Boldly standing in plain sight in the middle of a road. Whatever. The point is, it doesn't matter if they can be seen or not, if they are safe or not.

What matters is are they personally gaining something other than just being an intimidating presence. Being an intimidating presence nets no gold, isk, or whatever currency is used. It cannot be traded on a market, bartered nor sold to an NPC. Intimidation is merely a mind game whose rewards relies on the minds of others.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Rishna Katar
Doomheim
#447 - 2013-07-22 07:03:20 UTC
Kijo Rikki wrote:
Honestly, people go afk in mmo's all the time. They're not actually playing, they are just there...standing in a city, stealthed off the beaten path. Boldly standing in plain sight in the middle of a road. Whatever. The point is, it doesn't matter if they can be seen or not, if they are safe or not.

What matters is are they personally gaining something other than just being an intimidating presence. Being an intimidating presence nets no gold, isk, or whatever currency is used. It cannot be traded on a market, bartered nor sold to an NPC. Intimidation is merely a mind game whose rewards relies on the minds of others.

actually quite a few people get paid isk to camp systems out though. so your idea of no benefit is bull. its a service that is paid for but requires no actual effort or risk.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#448 - 2013-07-22 08:07:16 UTC
It's these threads and the tears that makes people pay the cloakers... HTFU...

Wormholer for life.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#449 - 2013-07-22 12:49:23 UTC
People hate cloaking because they can't handle the uncertainty and risk. They want to remove uncertainty and risk from nullsec because they are bad.

Also, don't listen to the lies and attempts at distracting with regards to "AFK" status. If someone is AFK they aren't a threat - the only reason people harp on about AFK cloakers is because it appears on the surface more reasonable than saying "I want to remove all uncertainty and risk to myself".
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#450 - 2013-07-22 13:15:50 UTC
Rishna Katar wrote:
actually quite a few people get paid isk to camp systems out though. so your idea of no benefit is bull. its a service that is paid for but requires no actual effort or risk.


yes. And...? Actually people pay isk for anything, for singing a song in TS, for fashion contests, for charity, for mining plicenses in HS... is none of your business how people spend their ISK.

Go figure: there's also people paying ISK to "rent" 0.0 systems!! All perfectly safe and with no effort :)

You're missing the crucial point: if I pay you for doing or not doing anything is jsut ISK moving from my hands to yours, no ISK is created. If you mine or rat or do anomalies in perfect safety using bots or not you're CREATING new ISK and injecting in the game economy.
Sura Sadiva
Entropic Tactical Crew
#451 - 2013-07-22 13:22:44 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
People hate cloaking because they can't handle the uncertainty and risk. They want to remove uncertainty and risk from nullsec because they are bad.


Actually they also admit it explicitally.
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#452 - 2013-07-22 13:30:35 UTC
Sura Sadiva wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
People hate cloaking because they can't handle the uncertainty and risk. They want to remove uncertainty and risk from nullsec because they are bad.


Actually they also admit it explicitally.


Well, some of them do, and some don't. The ones that do seem to think they are entitled to a risk free, uncertainty free nullsec. LOL.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#453 - 2013-07-22 13:40:46 UTC
Rishna Katar wrote:

actually quite a few people get paid isk to camp systems out though. so your idea of no benefit is bull. its a service that is paid for but requires no actual effort or risk.


Can't really control what other players are willing to pay one another for what they do. I mean, I wouldn't pay someone to come afk camp camp a system with a bunch of me rolling around because that would just be a big fat waste of money, but if someone else wants to try it be my guest.

That being said, I doubt that's a big business since most people who would want something like this done will just send their alt in and perform the job for free. So really they are paying CCP 15$ a month extra for the ability to scare people while they do other stuff on their main.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#454 - 2013-07-22 13:42:46 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Sura Sadiva wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
People hate cloaking because they can't handle the uncertainty and risk. They want to remove uncertainty and risk from nullsec because they are bad.


Actually they also admit it explicitally.


Well, some of them do, and some don't. The ones that do seem to think they are entitled to a risk free, uncertainty free nullsec. LOL.


Even worse, they wouldn't like it if they got it like that, they just think they would. It would be Star Trek Online (STO) all over again.

When STO came out lots of 'bears ran to it because it was a PVE game with no non-consensual pvp, no real death penalty back then and "Better" pve including walking around on planets. In other words, EVERYTHING EvEbears (btw EvEbear is trademarked by me, pay me isk to use the term) said they wanted.

And.... they came running back to EVE for the most part, because it was boring. Risk makes things FUN, but like spoiled kids everywhere, they don't miss their water until their well runs dry lol.
Rishna Katar
Doomheim
#455 - 2013-07-22 13:56:36 UTC
wow, still all missing the point. people arent asking for anything risk free. they are simply asking for the tools to be able to determine the risk they are faced with, to determine if it is afk or an actual threat. unknown threat is always treated as high threat by anyone with half an ounce of knowledge of risk mitigation, and so people move on or dock up.

you can keep saying repeatedly that they are all bears and they all need to stop being cowards and it wont change a damn thing.

again ill repeat though, why should someone that is not actually playing the game be allowed to affect the game at all. if carebears found a way to abuse cloak to safely rat with 0 risk and while afk, you'd be on here in a heartbeat complaining that it needs to be changed and it's unacceptable. but an afk cloaker affecting the game world by reducing the isk generation overall, that's fine.

all i want is for players to actually have to play the game and not be able to be afk for the whole day while still playing. i dont think that much to ask but you guys are spinning it all out of proportion into some kind of demand for riskless null. i actually think this would bring more risk to null, as more people would be out mining and ratting. theres got to be at least 100+ systems being camped right now, so thats 100+ systems that noone will use.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#456 - 2013-07-22 14:03:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaarous Aldurald
Quote:
again ill repeat though, why should someone that is not actually playing the game be allowed to affect the game at all.


And again, I will repeat. Someone who is afk, has by definition, no effect on the game at all.

It might have an effect on a player. But a player is not the game. And whatever effect it has on that player, that person's reaction to it is entirely his responsibility.

Quote:
people arent asking for anything risk free. they are simply asking for the tools to be able to determine the risk they are faced with, to determine if it is afk or an actual threat


Tough ****. Make the judgement call, like everyone else does about everything else in the game. You aren't special.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#457 - 2013-07-22 14:07:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
Rishna Katar wrote:
wow, still all missing the point. people arent asking for anything risk free. they are simply asking for the tools to be able to determine the risk they are faced with, to determine if it is afk or an actual threat.


You want the ability to determine if any player is afk, via some "afk indicator flag" like I've previously mentioned twice.

What exactly entitles you to this information, and why is it any of your business if a player is afk or not? You are going to need a much more compelling reason than fear, entitlement, or uncertainty to make a case for this. Null is dangerous and uncertainty is to be assumed.

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Kijo Rikki
Killboard Padding Services
#458 - 2013-07-22 14:07:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Kijo Rikki
Rishna Katar wrote:
wow, still all missing the point. people arent asking for anything risk free. they are simply asking for the tools to be able to determine the risk they are faced with, to determine if it is afk or an actual threat. unknown threat is always treated as high threat by anyone with half an ounce of knowledge of risk mitigation, and so people move on or dock up.


move, dock up or fit their ships or take steps to deal with the eventuality that someone does uncloak. YOU HAVE THE TOOLS TO DEAL WITH HIM ALREADY.

Quote:

you can keep saying repeatedly that they are all bears and they all need to stop being cowards and it wont change a damn thing.

again ill repeat though, why should someone that is not actually playing the game be allowed to affect the game at all. if carebears found a way to abuse cloak to safely rat with 0 risk and while afk, you'd be on here in a heartbeat complaining that it needs to be changed and it's unacceptable. but an afk cloaker affecting the game world by reducing the isk generation overall, that's fine.


They are cowards. They want CCP to give them a surefire way to ensure their systems are 100% safe from any threat, unknown or otherwise. Furthermore, yes we would say something about being able to cloak and rat because, surprise surprise, thats making money in 100% safety, which is kinda the point. That';s what you want now and we're not here to give it to you.

Quote:

all i want is for players to actually have to play the game and not be able to be afk for the whole day while still playing. i dont think that much to ask but you guys are spinning it all out of proportion into some kind of demand for riskless null. i actually think this would bring more risk to null, as more people would be out mining and ratting. theres got to be at least 100+ systems being camped right now, so thats 100+ systems that noone will use.


Bwahahahaha....oh my. You think....if ccp gave them a way to be 100% safe in null....that that would bring more risk?

Again, fly out to a dead-end system, the ones where there are no less than 8 large bubbles on the only gate in. That's a system care bears are using...you know how much risk they are taking?

That's right. 0. none. nada. more secure than hisec could ever hope to be. There is absolutely no threat that anything could ever get through the bubbles and warp to your location before you could get a damned freighter aligned and warped off to safety.

Now stick one little cloaked ship in there. Everyone loses their mind, because there is a risk there! OH my....and they don't know how to deal with it, so they want CCP to give them a way to root it out, get it out of their system so they can go back to ratting and mining in safety.

Do you seriously want null filled with people who will simply dock up when you come in system, and if you cloak all they do is spend their time hunting until they've used their super awesome cloak ship removing tool ccp handed them so they can go back to bearing once local is all blue again?

Do you seriously think if I steamrolled in with a small gang that these warriors of the red cross would dare undock to face me?

No. No they wont, because that's not the kind of player you are asking for when you coddle them with tools like this.

You make a valid point, good Sir or Madam. 
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#459 - 2013-07-22 14:23:25 UTC
Rishna Katar wrote:
wow, still all missing the point. people arent asking for anything risk free. they are simply asking for the tools to be able to determine the risk they are faced with, to determine if it is afk or an actual threat. unknown threat is always treated as high threat by anyone with half an ounce of knowledge of risk mitigation, and so people move on or dock up.


Except they essentially are asking for it to be risk free. They - and you - want to remove all uncertainty. Uncertainty is a big part of "risk". Asking for methods to remove all uncertainty removes, or massively reduces, risk.

Why should you be able to remove all uncertainty in nullsec? Why should you be able to determine absolutely what another player is doing behind the keyboard, and know exactly how big a threat he is? Why? You shouldn't.

And I have no problem with people assuming that an unknown is a high threat all of the time. If they want to act like that, fine. If they want to then dock up instead of do any of the other DOZEN things they can do to minimise or counter that risk, then that is up to them. They chose to do that. Fine. Whatever. Don't come crying to CCP about your own decisions though. You can't patch cowardice.

Rishna Katar wrote:

again ill repeat though, why should someone that is not actually playing the game be allowed to affect the game at all. if carebears found a way to abuse cloak to safely rat with 0 risk and while afk, you'd be on here in a heartbeat complaining that it needs to be changed and it's unacceptable. but an afk cloaker affecting the game world by reducing the isk generation overall, that's fine.

all i want is for players to actually have to play the game and not be able to be afk for the whole day while still playing. i dont think that much to ask but you guys are spinning it all out of proportion into some kind of demand for riskless null. i actually think this would bring more risk to null, as more people would be out mining and ratting. theres got to be at least 100+ systems being camped right now, so thats 100+ systems that noone will use.


There are a few things I want to say to this...
Firstly, you make a lot of statements about "players who aren't playing" affecting the game, so this sounds like your issue is solely with players who have walked away from the computer, yes? If that is the case, then presumably if I were to sit stationary in a safespot cloaked - but very much at the keyboard, lets say talking in corp chat, reading mails, etc - then you have no problem with me having that kind of effect on players, right? To the residents I am absolutely identical to the "AFK" player, doing (or not) the same things, except I'm sitting there, interacting with the client. I can only assume then that you are absolutely fine with this, and would be against any changes to mechanics that would hinder or change my - the active cloakers - gameplay? Right?

Secondly, I dispute the claim they are affecting the game at all. They are mechanically incapable of doing anything. When you say they are affecting the game, what you actually mean is other players are misinterpreting what local is telling them, and choosing to act a certain way based on their own misinterpretations. This is not a problem with cloak mechanics, or with the cloaked players (AFK or not). This is a problem with the residents of that system. CCP can't patch the residents, as much as we wish they could.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#460 - 2013-07-22 14:25:52 UTC
Why some peopel can't see consequences is beyond me.

Some people complain about null sec overloads and new people not being able to break in without bowing to these overlords.

So what do they propose? "New Tools" that help entrenched null sec groups STAY entrenched by allowing them to hunt cloakies in their isk making systems.

Yea, nothing can go wrong with that idea lol.