These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Cloaking device with fuel

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
RoAnnon
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#261 - 2013-08-15 18:38:14 UTC
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
I'm afraid I'll have to back Nag'o and say that Covert Ops Cloak II's don't list cap drain as an Attribute or Fitting on SiSi anyway. Can anyone check TQ?


My apologies, I was wrong and you're absolutely right. The Cov-Ops Cloak uses no cap at all... I may need more coffee...

So, you're a bounty hunter. No, that ain't it at all. Then what are you? I'm a bounty hunter.

Broadcast4Reps

Eve Vegas 2015 Pub Crawl Group 9

Houston EVE Meet
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#262 - 2013-08-15 18:39:40 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Very well, I will clarify this.

First Possibility: The PvE pilot refuses to undock, since they now know for certain that a hostile MUST be active. As this kills the risk to the PvE pilot completely, they have the rewards for PvE dropped accordingly.

Second Possibility: The PvE pilot refuses to be intimidated, and goes out knowing the hostile is active. They fit a ship for a hostile encounter, and make it able to still glean enough income from PvE to make it worth bothering.
Note: this pilot in this description NEVER cared whether a hostile was cloaked, AFK, or furiously rubbing one off to images of dancing ponies. They are also not being represented by your idea, as a result. They will be negatively impacted in the event rewards are further reduced.

The hostile, either way: With the effort needed to hunt PvE targets raised, a corresponding number of pilots will change interests to things more reasonable to the effort they consider fun. They simply won't hunt like this, as the effort pushed it past being fun for them.


In this case removing afk cloaking is not removing risk, it's ADDING even more risk to the PvE pilot. There is no chance the cloaked pilot in space to NOT represent a threat because he can't be afk. How is that removing risk?

Because you are removing the cloaking pilot.

Either
A. He needs to leave due to limits to his play time, and the PvE pilots avoid activity till then

OR

B. With greatly reduced success potential, he quits and takes up doing missions somewhere warm and sunny.

As you kept pointing out, you don't want him there if he is not active.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#263 - 2013-08-15 18:49:55 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Very well, I will clarify this.

First Possibility: The PvE pilot refuses to undock, since they now know for certain that a hostile MUST be active. As this kills the risk to the PvE pilot completely, they have the rewards for PvE dropped accordingly.

Second Possibility: The PvE pilot refuses to be intimidated, and goes out knowing the hostile is active. They fit a ship for a hostile encounter, and make it able to still glean enough income from PvE to make it worth bothering.
Note: this pilot in this description NEVER cared whether a hostile was cloaked, AFK, or furiously rubbing one off to images of dancing ponies. They are also not being represented by your idea, as a result. They will be negatively impacted in the event rewards are further reduced.

The hostile, either way: With the effort needed to hunt PvE targets raised, a corresponding number of pilots will change interests to things more reasonable to the effort they consider fun. They simply won't hunt like this, as the effort pushed it past being fun for them.


In this case removing afk cloaking is not removing risk, it's ADDING even more risk to the PvE pilot. There is no chance the cloaked pilot in space to NOT represent a threat because he can't be afk. How is that removing risk?

Because you are removing the cloaking pilot.

Either
A. He needs to leave due to limits to his play time, and the PvE pilots avoid activity till then

OR

B. With greatly reduced success potential, he quits and takes up doing missions somewhere warm and sunny.

As you kept pointing out, you don't want him there if he is not active.


You're implying the PvE pilot have more play time than the cov-ops pilot. You can't say that for sure. The PvE pilot is losing as much time as the cov-ops wich is not the case if the cov-ops can cloak indefinitely while afk.

Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.
RoAnnon
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#264 - 2013-08-15 18:53:53 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
You're implying the PvE pilot have more play time than the cov-ops pilot. You can't say that for sure. The PvE pilot is losing as much time as the cov-ops wich is not the case if the cov-ops can cloak indefinitely while afk.


Nobody's losing any time. The AFK pilot is off doing something else, the PvE pilot is choosing, of his own accord, to assume the cloaked pilot is paying attention, and avoids the risk he perceives by doing something else as well. If he chooses to spend that time ship spinning in a POS or Station, that's on him.

So, you're a bounty hunter. No, that ain't it at all. Then what are you? I'm a bounty hunter.

Broadcast4Reps

Eve Vegas 2015 Pub Crawl Group 9

Houston EVE Meet
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#265 - 2013-08-15 18:57:18 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
In this case removing afk cloaking is not removing risk, it's ADDING even more risk to the PvE pilot. There is no chance the cloaked pilot in space to NOT represent a threat because he can't be afk. How is that removing risk?

Because you are removing the cloaking pilot.

Either
A. He needs to leave due to limits to his play time, and the PvE pilots avoid activity till then

OR

B. With greatly reduced success potential, he quits and takes up doing missions somewhere warm and sunny.

As you kept pointing out, you don't want him there if he is not active.


You're implying the PvE pilot have more play time than the cov-ops pilot. You can't say that for sure. The PvE pilot is losing as much time as the cov-ops wich is not the case if the cov-ops can cloak indefinitely while afk.

That only makes sense if they always logged in at the exact same time, which is too unlikely to use for balance.

No, with reasonable expectations:
Either the PvE pilot will be online before the cloaked threat, and PvE operating free of threat till it's arrival...

OR

The PvE pilot will come online after the cloaked threat, and need only wait out the remaining time left in the hostile player's gaming session. They can then happily go out and operate free of threat.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#266 - 2013-08-15 19:53:05 UTC
RoAnnon wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
You're implying the PvE pilot have more play time than the cov-ops pilot. You can't say that for sure. The PvE pilot is losing as much time as the cov-ops wich is not the case if the cov-ops can cloak indefinitely while afk.


Nobody's losing any time. The AFK pilot is off doing something else, the PvE pilot is choosing, of his own accord, to assume the cloaked pilot is paying attention, and avoids the risk he perceives by doing something else as well. If he chooses to spend that time ship spinning in a POS or Station, that's on him.

Yes, the way things work now the docked pilot can just go AFK too. That's exactly what we're trying to avoid by promoting player activity.



Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.
RoAnnon
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#267 - 2013-08-15 19:59:18 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
RoAnnon wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
You're implying the PvE pilot have more play time than the cov-ops pilot. You can't say that for sure. The PvE pilot is losing as much time as the cov-ops wich is not the case if the cov-ops can cloak indefinitely while afk.


Nobody's losing any time. The AFK pilot is off doing something else, the PvE pilot is choosing, of his own accord, to assume the cloaked pilot is paying attention, and avoids the risk he perceives by doing something else as well. If he chooses to spend that time ship spinning in a POS or Station, that's on him.

Yes, the way things work now the docked pilot can just go AFK too. That's exactly what we're trying to avoid by promoting player activity.


You really don't like it for people to go AFK, do you? What's up with that?

So, you're a bounty hunter. No, that ain't it at all. Then what are you? I'm a bounty hunter.

Broadcast4Reps

Eve Vegas 2015 Pub Crawl Group 9

Houston EVE Meet
Gospadin
Bastard Children of Poinen
#268 - 2013-08-15 20:28:24 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
Yes, the way things work now the docked pilot can just go AFK too. That's exactly what we're trying to avoid by promoting player activity.


Promote player activity by giving them something interesting to do (carrot) not punishing them for being inactive (stick).

All your punishment does is force them into your gameplay, and further adds restrictions/limits/swimlanes to the sandbox that everyone claims to love, as long as everyone's sandbox is the same as yours.

This entire idea is terrible, and I hate myself for even posting in this thread.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#269 - 2013-08-15 21:11:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Nag'o wrote:
RoAnnon wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
No, they are not. The way they work now is just like a toggle.


You run outta cap and see if your cloak stays on... have you ever used a cloak? Your comments argue that you haven't.


They don't eat cap. I don't know if they can be activated without cap. Can you even be completely out of cap without a neut over you?



Yes, of course, try this:

Get in your cov ops, find a system that is really, really big. So big it will drain your cap. Activate your cloak warp across the system. When you land somewhere in between the two gates see if your cloak deactivates. Fit a MWD to help nerf your total cap amount as well.

You can also simulate this in smaller systems (though big would still help) by pulsing your MWD several cycles so that your cap is hit several times You can do this to basically warp short to some point if you think there is a bubble at the end. Be sure to activate the cloak before you hit the warp button.

Or...run your MWD continuously on a cap unstable fit (you can even use other modules that will suck up cap like a repper or something), as your cap gets very, very low so that 1 more cycle of the MWD will cause you to run out of cap, turn on your cloak. Your MWD will finish its last cycle and you can see if your cloak turns off.

I have given you 3 methods to test this hypothesis.

"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
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#270 - 2013-08-15 21:18:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Maximus Aerelius
Teckos Pech wrote:
I have given you 3 methods to test this hypothesis.


Hey Tecko's, I think we've covered this and we've concluded that Cov-Ops cloaks don't use cap:

RoAnnon wrote:
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
I'm afraid I'll have to back Nag'o and say that Covert Ops Cloak II's don't list cap drain as an Attribute or Fitting on SiSi anyway. Can anyone check TQ?


My apologies, I was wrong and you're absolutely right. The Cov-Ops Cloak uses no cap at all... I may need more coffee...


Sorry dude.

@RoAnnon: Points for admitting you got it wrong mate. We all make mistake sbut it's not really the main focus so don't beat yourself up about it too much. I'm sure Nag'o will be along with this nerf bat to have another go later.

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
RoAnnon
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#271 - 2013-08-15 21:21:07 UTC
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Sorry dude.


So it was YOU that drank all my coffee?!? o.0

So, you're a bounty hunter. No, that ain't it at all. Then what are you? I'm a bounty hunter.

Broadcast4Reps

Eve Vegas 2015 Pub Crawl Group 9

Houston EVE Meet
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#272 - 2013-08-15 21:22:48 UTC
RoAnnon wrote:
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Sorry dude.

So it was YOU that drank all my coffee?!? o.0


Nope that sorry was for Teckos. Get your own damn coffee! Lol

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#273 - 2013-08-15 21:26:08 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
RoAnnon wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
Please answer and make a point or else I will be obliged to just ignore you.


No, if you have no cap a cloak cannot be activated, and there are plenty of ways your cap can die without you being neuted... Now perhaps you can answer some of the other questions that others have asked you as they attempt to figure out exactly what your problem with AFK pilots is, or with cloaked ships, or exactly how to reconcile your many contradictory points.


I'm doing that. I don't remember anyone pointing a contradiction on what I said. I'm trying to answer all reasonable questions.
You're talking about needing cap to activate the cloak but doesn't make a point on how is this relevant to the discussion.




Then answer this one please:

Tell me this, who see's who first. The pilot jumping into a system (does he see the people already in system), or the pilot(s) already in system (do they see the new comer first)?


"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
#274 - 2013-08-15 21:27:49 UTC
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
I have given you 3 methods to test this hypothesis.


Hey Tecko's, I think we've covered this and we've concluded that Cov-Ops cloaks don't use cap:

RoAnnon wrote:
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
I'm afraid I'll have to back Nag'o and say that Covert Ops Cloak II's don't list cap drain as an Attribute or Fitting on SiSi anyway. Can anyone check TQ?


My apologies, I was wrong and you're absolutely right. The Cov-Ops Cloak uses no cap at all... I may need more coffee...


Sorry dude.

@RoAnnon: Points for admitting you got it wrong mate. We all make mistake sbut it's not really the main focus so don't beat yourself up about it too much. I'm sure Nag'o will be along with this nerf bat to have another go later.


No worries, but the issue of not having cap was weird since there are plenty of ways to run out of cap that don't involve an energy neutralizer/nosferatu.

"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
#275 - 2013-08-15 21:29:12 UTC
Gospadin wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
Yes, the way things work now the docked pilot can just go AFK too. That's exactly what we're trying to avoid by promoting player activity.


Promote player activity by giving them something interesting to do (carrot) not punishing them for being inactive (stick).

All your punishment does is force them into your gameplay, and further adds restrictions/limits/swimlanes to the sandbox that everyone claims to love, as long as everyone's sandbox is the same as yours.

This entire idea is terrible, and I hate myself for even posting in this thread.


Well...we like you Gospadin...for whatever that is worth. Smile

"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
#276 - 2013-08-15 21:32:44 UTC
RoAnnon wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
You're implying the PvE pilot have more play time than the cov-ops pilot. You can't say that for sure. The PvE pilot is losing as much time as the cov-ops wich is not the case if the cov-ops can cloak indefinitely while afk.


Nobody's losing any time. The AFK pilot is off doing something else, the PvE pilot is choosing, of his own accord, to assume the cloaked pilot is paying attention, and avoids the risk he perceives by doing something else as well. If he chooses to spend that time ship spinning in a POS or Station, that's on him.


Agreed with RoAnnon.

Moreover, you could....oh I don't know...move one system over. Trying doing your PVE thing with buddies in ships fit more towards PVP. Start looking at when this AFK cloaker is getting his kills. If it is at a TZ different from when you play, you are probably safe.

"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
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#277 - 2013-08-15 21:36:53 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
No worries, but the issue of not having cap was weird since there are plenty of ways to run out of cap that don't involve an energy neutralizer/nosferatu.


Yeah that was a weird one, I agree. I lose track of this guys points sometimes as they just aren't organised down one route unlike the response that all point to one thing:

Local.

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#278 - 2013-08-15 21:58:06 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

The timed cloak changes the dynamic, specifically in a manner that only favors the PvE pilot seeking to avoid risk.

Currently: If you do not know if a potential hostile is paying attention, you may risk exposure for activities.

After the change: A hostile by necessity is always alert and present. No chance of them being AFK. Additionally, it is much more difficult for them to remain in system cloaked over long periods, so waiting is almost always rewarded, and consequently always the default choice.

PvE wins, stalemate over.

It changes the dynamic in favor of everyone that wants more activity in the game.



Tired of the "remove risk" crowd hiding behind this smokescreen. It's not about "more activity". The people who go afk while they walk their dog or go to work aren't suddenly going to stop walking their dog or going to work. They can't just "be more active" as a result of these changes. The net "activity" of players remains the same, but it drastically REDUCES uncertainty and risk. And also of course these ideas massively hinder active players as well, again to the degree that it reduces uncertainty and risk for you.

So stop being dishonest, this isn't about the activity levels of other players, which isn't an issue at all
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#279 - 2013-08-15 22:03:32 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:

Tired of the "remove risk" crowd hiding behind this smokescreen. It's not about "more activity". The people who go afk while they walk their dog or go to work aren't suddenly going to stop walking their dog or going to work. They can't just "be more active" as a result of these changes. The net "activity" of players remains the same, but it drastically REDUCES uncertainty and risk. And also of course these ideas massively hinder active players as well, again to the degree that it reduces uncertainty and risk for you.

So stop being dishonest, this isn't about the activity levels of other players, which isn't an issue at all


An excellent point. I doubt activity levels will increase much if at all. I find such claims dubious.

"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
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#280 - 2013-08-16 00:04:09 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

The timed cloak changes the dynamic, specifically in a manner that only favors the PvE pilot seeking to avoid risk.

Currently: If you do not know if a potential hostile is paying attention, you may risk exposure for activities.

After the change: A hostile by necessity is always alert and present. No chance of them being AFK. Additionally, it is much more difficult for them to remain in system cloaked over long periods, so waiting is almost always rewarded, and consequently always the default choice.

PvE wins, stalemate over.

It changes the dynamic in favor of everyone that wants more activity in the game.



Tired of the "remove risk" crowd hiding behind this smokescreen. It's not about "more activity". The people who go afk while they walk their dog or go to work aren't suddenly going to stop walking their dog or going to work. They can't just "be more active" as a result of these changes. The net "activity" of players remains the same, but it drastically REDUCES uncertainty and risk. And also of course these ideas massively hinder active players as well, again to the degree that it reduces uncertainty and risk for you.

So stop being dishonest, this isn't about the activity levels of other players, which isn't an issue at all


There's a tool built exactly for you walking out with your dog while you aren't playing. It's called logging off.
You may also turn your computer off while you do it. I'm not trying to impose this to you, it's just a suggestion. It will reward you with some electric energy saving.



Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.