Assembly Hall

This thread seems to have gone off the rails again.

Remove local intel (that's been in the game from the start) and CCP would need to replace it with a tool for defenders to use that is ether equal or stronger, don't like trying to gank with local intel messing up your day, go do ganks in WH space.....but hang on, no hot drops in WH space, guess you gankers are going to have to get skills.

Make local intel weaker, by removing people in station, in POSes and AFK cloaked from the list and you have the probem of what happens when they come back from AFK, leave station or exit the POS. Unlike logging back on in system, their is no warning, so for the AFK problem, not fixed, only made worse. POS bubbles would be fine, because u can just fly out before you warp, stations would become more painful, because you would need to undock a scout ship first, or have friends giving you system intel.

Stations aren't as overpowered as these gankers are saying they are. They can be bubbled, ships can be bumped away from them and so on. When someone is in station, they are safe, so what. If they want to pvp you, they will come out and pvp you, otherwise they will just wait for you to go away.

Defenders should always have benefits over attackers when defending their own space, otherwise there is no point to holding sovereignty.

Back to my point with the AFK cloaker time wasters. If Person A logs off in system X, Person C doesn't have to waste his game time baiting someone who is afk, Person B can mine for 2 or so hours after he logs on, he still might loose his ships when Person A comes home from work and logs back on again, but his time would not be wasted by an AFK cloaker.

Gankers wine about lack of targets in this game, make null sec more ganker friendly, make high sec more ganker friendly, give mining barges less hit points, give covert hot drops longer ranges, make it so they can't see us in local and so on and so on, what they don't realize is they already have low sec and 0.5 systems, because of this no one who is a non ganker, and has at least half a brain will risk ships in these systems because of all the gankers hanging out in them.

Gankers are really their own worst enemy lol

I for one believe claokign to be broken for an entirely differnent set of reasons than affecting PVE.

But ill tell you why WH, Low, and NPC null don't complain about cloaky camping,

NPC null/ low: Income is derived 90% by missions, in a mission site you can't light a cyno, and it cant be found without using combat scanner probes, so yes you can afk cloak active cloak w/e, but you cant appear in someones mission site without giving a telltale warning to them, your probes. You also can't hot drop directly on top of them. Im not sure you still can do it, but you used to be able to do the missions in unprobable or at least Very Very hard to probe t3's ships.

Wh: No cyno's no hotdrops, and again sites have to be scanned down by core probes, or ships in space have to be scanned down by combat probes, BOTH of which appear on DSCAN.

Im going to go with the side of local isnt the problem, Claoking in this scenario isnt the problem either.

I like the current nullsec sites (though i don't actually run them myself) not requiring probes, so i think if i were to propose anything I would say it be this, if your cloaked no DSCAN. So you can still cloak all you want in and stay there all day, but you cant find me and I cant find you unless you take risk. We both have the same amount of intel, I know your there you know im there but neither of us know where the other is in system or what ships where in. If you want to find me, you have to decloak and drop probes then recloak in which case i can see your probes on DSCAN, or spend the time to warp around system to find me, instead of spending 30-60 seconds dscannign and knowing with a high degree of certainty where I am.

Additionally i would pair this with a small change to cyno activation mechanics, you cant activate a cyno after decloaking for 45 seconds.

To introduce some more risk into the equation for the PVE'r, i would say give certain kinds of battleship rats that appear in the various sites the ability to warp disrupt, making ti so there held down longer and taking more risk allowing for more opportunities to be caught.

I don't rat, at all, but the current situation is all sorts of unbalanced and if you can't see that a fridge was dropped on your head when you were a small child. I however don't believe 1 change can fix the imbalance, i think if your going to introduce real risk, or a nerf to the cloaker, you need to also add some additional risk to the pve'r, to bring balance to the equation, make the one possible to catch and the other easier to get into trouble.

The issue again is not local though, (i actually like the idea of 1 minute delay on null local which strikes me as a pretty good balance on time)

Is what i written perfect, no far from it, but it at least has some semblance of being reasonable. Best part you can still afk and make local dangerous, but at least the pve'r has some semblance of a chance to shoot you when you make your move.

Yer, I get that, local shows everyone's hands, ganking PvPers get to know who the good marks are, so will actively hunt them and people who live in null sec get to know the gankers by name, and exactly what they fly and what they do from experience and kill boards, so they too actively hunt down these gankers.

Big difference is defenders don't usually use covert opps hot drops to defend, they use more traditional pvp fleets. Only covert hot droppers in sov null sec benefit from the cloaky camper tacit as pointed out in this thread.

The only benefit they get from cloaky camping is their targets get no warning when they come back from afk, as per all grav sites, belts and standard complexes they can warp to cloaked, without the need for probes that show up on dscan.

The cost of allowing them to do this is that their little tacit effectively can shut down industry and pve in the system they camp in if they are known to be any good at hot dropping.

Some hot droppers already use logging off and logging back on as a tacit to try to lower the targets guard, this is a known tacit and information about reds logging off in system is shared on intel channels.

Big difference is loggers don't waste large amounts of the targets time, force them to work in other systems and shut down systems.

Lets look at fixes.

Give cloaks a 10 min manual cycle or consume fuel, this would work, although it's not popular with people who use cloaks and doesn't add anything to the game.

Make cloaked ships have a scannable signature after being cloaked for longer than 10 mins without warping, this would add something for defenders to do into the game, wouldn't be popular with cloakers

Make it so your ship warps to a safe point after being afk for 10 or 15 mins and disappears just like logging off, removes the person from local channel and turn local off for him/her too, but doesn't log the person off the game. When the person comes back for afk, his ship autowarps back to his previous point just like logging on, he appears in local straight away, and he can see others in local straight away, but can't do anything until his ship is out of autowarp. ie turn afk cloakers into loggers without actually logging them off the game.

When you consider the basis for your arguments is so easily countered and subsequently dismissed using facts and logic, why do you even make such obviously baseless suggestions?


More traditional PvP fleets?
Is this some attempt at humor?

If we, (and I am with no doubts a null PvE player), were to engage in PvP ship combat on a regular basis, we might have some overall preference. But we don't.
We are doing economic support, the combat support guys are quite often not even in the same region. Traditional fleets are not a PvE concept, they are relevant exclusively to ship combat. We form fleets for boosting, and when it makes sense for things like mining efficiency and hauling logistics.

If we can get a titan bridge or use a blops one, (BLOPs not common unless maybe some kind of exotic scouting for sites), we take the bridge with gratitude, since it is usually needed for combat elsewhere.



Again, local is screamingly helpful to the 'PvP ship combat' hunter here.
Unless they happen to be on grid with a target at the time they come back, for all they know they came back to a deserted and empty system.

Without Local, they have NO INTEL to tell them who is docked in the outpost, or at the POS. If they do a scan at a POS, they will get every unoccupied ship sitting near the tower, so that is not much help.

That is as it should be. Organized groups of players have by default - through organized defense and play - an advantage over the lone-wolf variants of pilots.

Are you saying that, me and my friends who have built a castle, set up watchpoints, guards and pit traps are unfairly advantaged over people who didn't?

this is beyond mechanics...this stuff is in your head, your own paranoia is ruining your own game, not any one else.

You should really look at this thread, if you have not already seen it.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=112964&find=unread

Actually, the availability of a chat channel to use represents the peak of this effort.

The actual pilot roster itself has a demonstrated chilling effect on actual socialization. It is not simply a point of diminishing returns with this list present, it has a negative impact.

It too often either lists too many pilots to be meaningful, or exposes too few to feel safe.
Outside of a corp channel where people you expect to know, and be interested in seeing, local itself is best served being as anonymous as possible.

Want to increase socialization? Offer anonymous comments as an option, with no pilot roster.
Yes, you will get trash talk, but you will also get everything else.

CCP has also stated they want to kill the pilot list aspect, but they realize so many have come to rely upon it, that they need a better alternative to simply removing it.

They are simply trying to avoid another outcry akin to the one about captains quarters, which admittedly in hindsight was more perception of error than actual. Too many assumed too much, and perception is never about truth and facts alone.