Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I would like one of the whiners to answer this question. Mag's always asks this and I don't think I have ever seen an answer.

Also notice the distinct lack of replies from the OP's on these kind of posts. A person with a genuine idea that they want to work out and revise will feedback and reply but not these little "Hot Drop a Troll" types. I doubt we'll ever see the OP post up in this thread again and so we should just let it slip into the infinite space (anywhere from Page 3 backwards) until the Gods of sanity lock it for inactivity.

Everywhere? You aren't even trying now. We have the giant list o' cloak nerf suggestions right on the top of the forum and you didn't check to see that "your idea" was actually suggested repeatedly starting years ago?

Fuel is a monumentally bad idea. Covert ships have smaller bays and making fuel a cloaking requirement would require fuel bays be added to every ship that may fit a cloak... even adding a fuel bay will not solve the problem though. Look what has been done to black ops and fuel in the past; it's very often just too small.

As I have stated many times stealthing into position for a recon mission sometimes requires an excess of 26 jumps through null sec. Doing this will use your "one hour" fuel supply before you are in place. I choose 26 because that was the actually number of jumps through low and null I need to make one way the last time I reconned a target. If I had had to depend on fuel this would have been impossible (which I argue is the purpose of these nerf posts) even not concidering the return trip the mission would not have been possible.

If you are trapped in a WH when the exit colapses it means you are dead... because your fuel will not last to get you out even if it would have even lasted long enough to do what you needed to do in the WH in the first place.

Fuel for jumping past gate camps could also mean sudden death if you run out before you are safe. These cat and mouse efforts to sneak in and out past gates can take hours.

And requiring fuel would be one more thing WH resident would then have to lug with them in mass quantities into their home...

fuel for cloaking is just one more thing that can go wrong in a dev readjustment...they've made mistakes in the past.

Finally, I do not accept your premise that afk cloaking is a big problem. If someone is cloaked they cannot hurt you. The best way to deal with your fear is to remove these supposedly "afk" cloaked from local; after which you never have to worry about them again because you won't know the afk are there. Unless the real reason you are suggesting this is to deal with the non-afk cloakers (which is what I'm thinking), there really is no reason to add fuel to cloaking. Falling asleep at your keyboard is not against the EULA.

EVE is so full of horseshit dramaqueens that you can't possibly even BEGIN to consider what COULD be a good idea because it fiddles with a 10 year old bad game mechanic that you exploit.
The fuel idea is good. The idea of a somewhat powered cloaking device is the only thing that can prevent it from being active 24/7. Being cloaked 24/7 is just not a good thing when you want player interaction. Let's say the fuel last for 2 hours. How can this be a bad thing? You can facepalm the funny clown in my pants if that's all you have for an answer.

Underlined key point for clarity.

If you are keen on player interaction, perhaps someone should remove local.

Quite honestly, it is the number one reason why players are able to AVOID interaction in null.

And isn't that kind of interaction, one ship shooting another joyfully, exactly what you are asking for?

I can quite assure you, noone will be complaining of AFK Cloaking after that.

My bad, I meant player activity. Interaction with the game, not necessarily with other players.

When someone is docked, by docking too you know exactly where he is. Do you know a lot of systems in the game don't have any stations at all? Do you know there a whole regions out there with just a couple of them? It's a big digital universe that one from EVE Online.
AND I bet that has been discussed before, but meme based communication is, you know, herpa derpa you're wrong, f a i l.

Yeah, it has nothing to do with memes. More to do with naivete.

I know a lot of systems that have no stations.

I also know entire swaths of nullsec where I do not have docking permissions.

I also know that when I am enrolled in Minmatar FW, I cannot dock in Amarr controlled systems.

So there are plenty of times when I can't dock to see who is there. Therefore I have no idea who is cloaked and who is docked.

What's more is that I fail to give a ****. If they're cloaked or docked, they can't do **** to me. Same as I can't do **** to them if I am cloaked or docked.

If you support putting a timer on the ability to cloak and monitor traffic for a few hours, then I support kicking people out of stations on the same timer. AFK or not is, of course, irrelevant.

You're talking about Outposts not regular stations. In this case the defenders are already favored for their position. Having an Outpost in the systems grants them the privilege.

Yes, but let's say the hostile ship is using a cloak itself, wich is most probably the case.
Consider the cloak uses some material as fuel like the OP sugested. How much intel will the hostile pilot be able to provide before himself needs to resuply. That depends on the cloaking mechanic but no matter what it is, he will be less time cloaked than the people in the system, because that being their system they should have easier access to resources.

This does add more strategy to scouting than just leaving an afk alt in a system for coming back at random times.

It's just a matter of cloaking not being 100% safe. It should be either an emergency or an strategy resort. If you want safety you should enter a POS shield or dock in a station.
No matter how autonomous they are, even submarines have to resuply sometime if they want their crew to survive.