These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

In regards to Cloaks and AFK-Cloaked Campers

Author
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#61 - 2013-08-04 18:51:40 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Pelea Ming wrote:
actually, that puts the advantage squarely upon the cloaker, as whether they are afk or not, they can safely scout out and pick and choose their targets at leisure, whereas the PvE'r has no choice but to face the risk if they want to do anything other then station spin.

This clearly delineates all the risk being upon the PvE'r and 0 risk to the cloaker.

The cloaked pilot cannot surprise the PvE pilot.

Local has already defined them as present.


Until the OP deals with this, this discussion is pointless as CCP will ignore it because of this point. That is obvious to anyone who does even the smallest amount of research on this topic...which the OP clearly has not done.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#62 - 2013-08-04 18:55:41 UTC
Your already over-balanced by the fact that your basically untouchable, though. Just because they have a chance to escape is a fact of the game for any sort of PvP.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#63 - 2013-08-04 19:02:11 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
Yet this still defines no risk to the cloaker, and all risk to the PvE'r, further, the cloaker can simply repeat till that 'pilot error' kicks up for them.


Wrong.

There is no risk to the cloaker so long as he is cloaked, and in such a state there is no risk to the PVE pilot.

When the cloaker decloaks he is at risk just as any other pilot is at risk without a cloak.

Cloaks are not an "I win button".

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#64 - 2013-08-04 21:18:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Pelea Ming wrote:
Your already over-balanced by the fact that your basically untouchable, though.


They are only untouchable when they are cloaked, and the PVE pilot is also untouchable as well. You cannot target or activate any other modules when a cloak is active. When it is deactivated the cloaked ship is vulnerable to attack...and can itself attack.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#65 - 2013-08-04 22:09:12 UTC
umhmm... but as you keep pointing out, when that cloak drops, the PvE'r is running away... sounds like no risk to the cloaker to me, beyond potentially missing the kill.
RubyPorto
RubysRhymes
#66 - 2013-08-04 22:53:54 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
umhmm... but as you keep pointing out, when that cloak drops, the PvE'r is running away... sounds like no risk to the cloaker to me, beyond potentially missing the kill.


When the cloak drops, the formerly-cloaked ship can be attacked same as any other ship.

Wise target selection is not a game mechanics balance issue.

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths." -Abrazzar "the risk of having your day ruined by other people is the cornerstone with which EVE was built" -CCP Solomon

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2013-08-04 23:00:24 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
umhmm... but as you keep pointing out, when that cloak drops, the PvE'r is running away... sounds like no risk to the cloaker to me, beyond potentially missing the kill.



And no risk to PVEr either if they are running. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#68 - 2013-08-05 00:46:21 UTC
I'd like to pitch my support for the 30 second delay but increase it to 2 minutes instead to facilitate pve hunters being able to get probes out and start scanning.
Caleb Seremshur
Bloodhorn
Patchwork Freelancers
#69 - 2013-08-05 02:37:37 UTC
Just made a post in the CSM forum section if you support adding a delay to local go there and make a vote on it
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#70 - 2013-08-05 16:24:30 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Pelea Ming wrote:
umhmm... but as you keep pointing out, when that cloak drops, the PvE'r is running away... sounds like no risk to the cloaker to me, beyond potentially missing the kill.



And no risk to PVEr either if they are running. Roll

I should have phrased that as "trying to run away" :P Since obviously if they're already full speed aligned, you'd be a fool to drop cloak knowing they'd get away, but instead wait till they do something to ruin the alignment :P
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#71 - 2013-08-05 16:29:50 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Pelea Ming wrote:
umhmm... but as you keep pointing out, when that cloak drops, the PvE'r is running away... sounds like no risk to the cloaker to me, beyond potentially missing the kill.



And no risk to PVEr either if they are running. Roll

I should have phrased that as "trying to run away" :P Since obviously if they're already full speed aligned, you'd be a fool to drop cloak knowing they'd get away, but instead wait till they do something to ruin the alignment :P

That is a flawed assumption.

With proper creation of safe points, turn arounds are never done on grid with roids or rats.
It is less convenient, but mining with a venture makes that practical, and tractor beams make looting rats work with staying aligned.

Expect to need more effort for null. The rewards are supposed to be worth it.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#72 - 2013-08-06 15:35:56 UTC
for ratting, bother to set up safe spots when you can just slow burn out of the site towards station or pos? :P As for ratting, sure, a venture is most likely not ever going to be much of a valid target (less you and some friends show up to lob a bunch of bombs), but you still get those fools that take barges out.
Onomerous
KARNAGE
Ghostbirds
#73 - 2013-08-06 15:54:37 UTC
This thread is the reason for...


implied facepalm

Sad
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#74 - 2013-08-06 16:04:38 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
for ratting, bother to set up safe spots when you can just slow burn out of the site towards station or pos? :P As for ratting, sure, a venture is most likely not ever going to be much of a valid target (less you and some friends show up to lob a bunch of bombs), but you still get those fools that take barges out.

Barges without support are not the wisest choice with a hostile in system.

When dealing with a hostile in system, make a safe point to warp to, so your warp path is not predictable enough to bubble trap you.

A non blue in local does not necessarily mean game over, but it can mean the free ride is.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#75 - 2013-08-06 16:51:00 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
snip


Not empty quoting because I have a quote that applies :)

Alundil wrote:
This thread is fairly pointless.
I live in C2/3 wormholes. I never worry about AFK cloakers. I have gone AFK cloaked in space and AFK uncloaked in a POS.
I've never been killed by an AFK pilot (cloaked or otherwise). I've also never killed anyone or relayed any intel while I was AFK (cloaked or otherwise).

I also have a pilot in 0.0. I don't worry about AFK cloakers there either. We have intel channels and my corp/alliance actually seeks to defend our space (i.e. setting traps for the cloakers who might not be afk). I also gather my own intel about neuts and hostiles who come through our space and can reference that among other pilots in our corp/alliance/coalition (e.g. who is a known hotdropper, who are the known capital/blops/supercapital pilots and their online statuses - the watchlist and labeling system makes this trivially easy to compile and manage). I am aligned (to someplace safe and that requires scanning) if I am doing anything at all outside of station/POS. With all of this ^ benefit to me, the 0.0 pilot not AFK cloaked but actually playing the game, I've never been caught by an AFK cloaker (or even active cloakers for that matter), while ratting in a very slow battleship setup, in any of the systems (both cyno-jammed and those without cyno-jams) I've lived in and there are plenty of hostiles seeking to ruin our game by playing theirs. We simply don't allow them to do so. No whining, no crying, no tears. We play our game, they play theirs, everyone is happy (or not I don't truly care one way or another about that).

The point is that you only "lose" to the AFK cloaker if YOU allow it to happen. No more no less. YOU, the people writing these long point/counterpoint posts about "fixing" AFK "_______" are the only ones losing to the AFK cloaker. Stop it.

Theorycraft ways to counter them or avoid them (note: "refusing to play" is a cop out of the highest order) using your abilities as a thinking person. It's easily doable. Tens of thousands of players do it successfully week in week out. Why can't you? Are they special? Or are you "special"?

I'm right behind you

Mag's
Azn Empire
#76 - 2013-08-06 17:58:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Any search would have shown your idea to be flawed and based on a misunderstanding of game mechanics. Let me ask you this.

Whilst someone is AFK and cloaked, which mechanic do they use to interact with you?

I'll give you a clue, it's a one word answer. With this answer in mind, please answer me this:

Why haven't you suggested a nerf to this mechanic, as it is the actual one being used and causing your problem?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#77 - 2013-08-06 17:59:26 UTC
Cloaking isn't the problem. People keep complaining about cloaking and coming up with these complex ways of "fixing" it when it is already working exactly as CCP intends it to work. The problem is knowing that the character is in system, but not knowing if the player is afk. Since there is no way for other players to know if the cloaked player is afk or not, that only leaves some sort of change to local.

There are a few simple solutions:


  1. Remove Local.
  2. Remove the player from local when he/she is cloaked.
  3. Log-out the player after x minutes of inactivity.


Most other suggestions I've seen would require a significant allocation of resources for cloak redesign or new modules/attributes.

The first choice is simple in and of itself. But CCP has shown a high resistance to this solution, as they have stated that local channel was added to make space feel less empty and to drive activity. Personally, I would like to see immediate-mode local changed to delayed mode (just like w-space local) in all nulsec except in improved sovereign systems or NPC space. You want local? Go to NPC space or put the upgrade in your ihub. Otherwise you are limited to d-scan and probes.

The second choice would give players in system a quick 1-shot warning when the cloaker comes into system and every time he/she uncloaks. (to launch probes for example.) If they are showing in local, they are a threat. But they can also be scanned or probed.

The third choice is one I just came up with. Other games have inactivity timers. And lets face it. Going afk for an entire day is not playing the game as it was intended. It's not playing the game at all. In my opinion it is an abuse of the game mechanics. Fortunately, it is one that can very easily be changed. No inputs for an hour? Auto log-out. Bye-bye afk cloaking.

I would expect such an action to be preceeded by 5 minute and 1 minute audio+visual warnings for those who simply forgot about that boosting ship or what have you. Just click on something and the timer is reset.

Oh, but they could have a bot do that so easily! Congrats. You're botting. Drop the ban-hammer.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#78 - 2013-08-06 18:40:30 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
Cloaking isn't the problem. People keep complaining about cloaking and coming up with these complex ways of "fixing" it when it is already working exactly as CCP intends it to work. The problem is knowing that the character is in system, but not knowing if the player is afk. Since there is no way for other players to know if the cloaked player is afk or not, that only leaves some sort of change to local.

Going afk for an entire day is not playing the game as it was intended. It's not playing the game at all. In my opinion it is an abuse of the game mechanics.

I would like to point out that in the context of this topic, the two statements I underlined above are in conflict with each other.

This whole discussion is hiding the forest behind all those trees, to paraphrase an expression.

Let's keep it to a few points, which can be easily verified.

1. PvE pilots, operating in null space where non blue traffic is often rarely seen, are proven able to operate safely.
They fly aligned to a point, moving at minimum warp speed or better, and can insta-warp with the click of a mouse.
Hostile pilots, being reported by local chat usually before they even finish loading into the system, are not given an opportunity to prevent being reported this way.
A local pilot who watches the chat, and stays aligned at speed, can use the chat listing to be warned before it is possible for a hostile to engage.
This is not debated, it is considered common knowledge. It has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of enough to be accepted.

2. Cloaking is not detectable beyond remaining listed in local chat, causing this to be used to maintain awareness of cloaking pilots not otherwise interacting with the game actively. Hence the term: AFK Cloaker, and the expectation that this is done as a means to suppress PvE activity.

3. It is the persistence of pilot presence in local chat, more than any other detail, that inspires doubts in the local PvE pilot base regarding how likely the cloaked pilot is to being attentive. Could they be alertly patrolling the system after 1 hour?
2 hours?
10 hours?

It is this specific doubt that inspires pilot error, resulting in some PvE pilots dieing and others simply mining or ratting successfully as if no hostile were present.

Unfortunately, the risk is often limited to these details. For this reason, the devs have seen fit to roll back available rewards to limited amounts, since the threat of ship combat was proven ineffective.
Recently demonstrated as changes to null sec ice, previously inexhaustible, now quite limited.

Any change to further diminish the risk and uncertainty faced by PvE pilots, and there will be an exodus OUT of null sec, to places where PvE rewards are better.

Making it a given that a hostile must be active in order to be present, and it will be horrible, to the rewards in null, because
no player is going to risk activity if they KNOW the hostile is active.
(Specifying here the players who only risked activity because they thought the hostile might be AFK, and were otherwise unprepared for combat)
Malissa Radort
ICE is Coming to EVE
Goonswarm Federation
#79 - 2013-08-06 19:00:18 UTC
Hello,
The cloacking now destroyed this game, life in 0.0 is made possible in whole regions because of ... 15 alts connected when their mains are not here?
CCP does not even understand the problem may be too autistic or have not played enough in his own game

Friends of several alliances tell me the same thing, a ghost camp (an alt) in a system, and they all stop 3 or even 4 accounts for the duration of camping ghost, put the game simply "waiting" and sometimes stop play, WP CCP, you lost players.

Still, it really would not be hard to make it "to enable" all 10Minutes or 20 minutes making the site as hard for both sides.

Or do a self disconnection (In the resort so if you want) after 1 hour of inactivity.
Or even make cloacky very difficult to detect with a module on a ship can not fitter than that.

No, CCP chose autism loss of money from the accounts of hibernation or wasted hard players ....

And they say they want more players in 0.0?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#80 - 2013-08-06 19:41:38 UTC
Malissa Radort wrote:
Hello,
The cloacking now destroyed this game, life in 0.0 is made possible in whole regions because of ... 15 alts connected when their mains are not here?
CCP does not even understand the problem may be too autistic or have not played enough in his own game

Friends of several alliances tell me the same thing, a ghost camp (an alt) in a system, and they all stop 3 or even 4 accounts for the duration of camping ghost, put the game simply "waiting" and sometimes stop play, WP CCP, you lost players.

Still, it really would not be hard to make it "to enable" all 10Minutes or 20 minutes making the site as hard for both sides.

Or do a self disconnection (In the resort so if you want) after 1 hour of inactivity.
Or even make cloacky very difficult to detect with a module on a ship can not fitter than that.

No, CCP chose autism loss of money from the accounts of hibernation or wasted hard players ....

And they say they want more players in 0.0?
I've highlighted the issue you and your friends have.
No one cloaked and/or AFK ever stopped you using gates, modules, fitting ships, docking, undocking, forming fleets, ratting etc, etc. The one stopping you, is you.

Blaming CCP or someone not even at their PC, is rather disingenuous. It's simply you not playing the game.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.