These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

AFK Cloaking Collection Thread

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1261 - 2013-09-16 16:56:25 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Quote:
Now, and this is obvious to those familiar with intel already, spotting a fleet is not hard.
Hiding a fleet, however, is made effectively impossible with local chat. Often it doesn't matter, as these are marching bands on parade, looking for trouble. Anyone willing to form up and oppose them can have plenty of time to do so, as most intel channels advertise them far enough out to re-ship and be ready for them.


Removing local does not address the issue raised by the cyno. In fact, removing local increases the threat of the cyno (fortunately w-space has no such issue with cynos). I'll say it again, a ship which costs 3-10 hours of ratting will not be risked to a hundred man cyno drop unless it is specifically fit and fleeted with its own 200 man fleet counterdrop. This is not the purpose of ratting fits. Every fit and fleet is for its own purpose. No one will bring out a 3-10 hour ISK ratting ship for a 3-10 minute risk. And so you see most of Eve warp to safety when the possibility of the threat emerges. Removing local will only increase the possibility of the threat even further so that the threat seems to persist everywhere at everytime and all non-pvp operations are brought to a complete halt.

PS: Perhaps we are now beginning to see the goal of those advocating the removal of local in k-space: The complete halt of all non-pvp activities.


Depends, IMO. Sitting on a titan or on a blops for too long and soon you'll show up on the galaxy map. Checking to see if that orange/red dot is within bridge range, if so, you might have a problem. Time to release the scouts.

I have expressly stated I want PvE in null. In fact, I want more of it. So stop insinuating I am a liar. It just makes you look like a petty brat.

"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
Oswaldos
The Upside Down
#1262 - 2013-09-16 17:03:42 UTC
This forum thread is rather a moot point, ultimately their are those that believe afk cloaking is a bad thing and needs to be nerfed and those that believe that its the only way to balance local chat as an intel tool. Each party isn't going to convince the other party that they are right the only solution is for CCP to decide on the issue and setup a case study in tranquility.

CCP give us another null sec region without local and see if your players like it, then go from their.

My 2 Cents
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1263 - 2013-09-16 17:22:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Teckos Pech wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Quote:
Now, and this is obvious to those familiar with intel already, spotting a fleet is not hard.
Hiding a fleet, however, is made effectively impossible with local chat. Often it doesn't matter, as these are marching bands on parade, looking for trouble. Anyone willing to form up and oppose them can have plenty of time to do so, as most intel channels advertise them far enough out to re-ship and be ready for them.


Removing local does not address the issue raised by the cyno. In fact, removing local increases the threat of the cyno (fortunately w-space has no such issue with cynos). I'll say it again, a ship which costs 3-10 hours of ratting will not be risked to a hundred man cyno drop unless it is specifically fit and fleeted with its own 200 man fleet counterdrop. This is not the purpose of ratting fits. Every fit and fleet is for its own purpose. No one will bring out a 3-10 hour ISK ratting ship for a 3-10 minute risk. And so you see most of Eve warp to safety when the possibility of the threat emerges. Removing local will only increase the possibility of the threat even further so that the threat seems to persist everywhere at everytime and all non-pvp operations are brought to a complete halt.

PS: Perhaps we are now beginning to see the goal of those advocating the removal of local in k-space: The complete halt of all non-pvp activities.


Depends, IMO. Sitting on a titan or on a blops for too long and soon you'll show up on the galaxy map. Checking to see if that orange/red dot is within bridge range, if so, you might have a problem. Time to release the scouts.

I have expressly stated I want PvE in null. In fact, I want more of it. So stop insinuating I am a liar. It just makes you look like a petty brat.


Maybe you are a liar. The facts illustrated above concerning the effect of removing local with the current cyno system in place are quite clear. Who in their right mind will take the risk that there is not some group sitting on a Titan for less time than the galaxy map requires before some blob appears in some system which may or may not be blue?

Given a delay in galaxy map updating and in getting scouts out to each potential appearance of any enemy Titan bridging presence, the galaxy map is virtually useless as an intel tool. Every system would have to be scouted at all times. Without local, every system would need multiple scouts running dscan continuously in order to cover every place where a Titan gang may log-on in order to detect their presence. Where losses can cost between 3-10 hours of pve for just a few minutes of pve ops, no one will take the risk unless it is a pvp op with plenty of pvp support (counter drop). Until then, the rule of the day is warp out, safe up, log-off; all thanks to the CYNO.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1264 - 2013-09-16 17:27:38 UTC
I caught this, and I cannot resist pointing out a fact.
Lucas Kell wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Sure, in your stylized example, then the risk is harder to determine and using a naive prior (i.e. 0.5 probability either door has the dude behind it) is not unreasonable.

However, as other have pointed out you aren't stuck in this situation. Go through kill boards to see if there are any kills associated with the guy in local. If so, when? If he is EU TZ and you are US TZ that should change your probability assessment. Look at how long he has been there, that too should change your probability assessment. And as one person, sorry forget who, suggested....sacrifice an old ship you have hanging around in your hangar if you can. That is a great way to get intel if it works.

And if you want no risk in null then dock up, POS up, or cloak up. You have those options too, probably more than the neutral in the system you are PvEing in. He just gets the cloak option.
But a KB only shows what you want it to show. If you want to seem like an active cloaker you'll bust a few heads to make it look that way. Or you could simply have no KB history. A cloaked cyno pilot is not a lifetime investment.
and again I'll say it I DON'T WANT NO RISK - I WANT RISK FROM PLAYERS WHO ARE ACTUALLY PLAYING ONLY, NOT RISK AUGMENTED WITH AFK PLAYERS.

You are clearly trolling. There's no way you can be misreading that so many times.

See that part I have underlined?

That, 1,000 times that.

Good news.

You have no risk from players who are not playing.
Whether they are AFK cloaked, docked, or POS'd up, even logged out.
If they touch no buttons, you have zero risk.

But, you don't deserve to know who is what.

Or if you do, it must be completely universal, which would not be such a great thing.

Here is your solution, then:
Before the Pilot's name, a timer indicating the last click or keypress in the game client they use.
Docked, in a POS, mining, ratting, cloaked, you name it.

You could see who was most active just by watching how often the counter reset itself.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1265 - 2013-09-16 17:29:10 UTC
Oswaldos wrote:
This forum thread is rather a moot point, ultimately their are those that believe afk cloaking is a bad thing and needs to be nerfed and those that believe that its the only way to balance local chat as an intel tool. Each party isn't going to convince the other party that they are right the only solution is for CCP to decide on the issue and setup a case study in tranquility.

CCP give us another null sec region without local and see if your players like it, then go from their.

My 2 Cents

I wish they would.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1266 - 2013-09-16 17:31:11 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:


Maybe you are a liar. .


Whatever Andy.

"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
#1267 - 2013-09-16 17:37:17 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Here is your solution, then:
Before the Pilot's name, a timer indicating the last click or keypress in the game client they use.
Docked, in a POS, mining, ratting, cloaked, you name it.


Ooohhh, the mind games a person could have with this.... Lol

"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
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1268 - 2013-09-16 17:37:41 UTC
How easy it is to not recognize that local is helping the hot-dropping mechanic.

These cyno boats are looking for situations where they have the advantage. They are not hot-dropping heavily armed fleets with their gank squads, they are targeting isolated ships, preferably high value so the kill mail impresses more.

So, what happens when they can't tell if their next drop is too good to be true? How do they know that tasty ratting ship is not tanked heavily, and prepped with an ambush fleet in quick response range?

How would they know it was safe to hot-drop, if local did not tell them....

That cyno has no tactical value that cannot be achieved by more sensible means, except when local is reporting everything.

Without local: Opening a cyno near a hostile ship is not advised. The hostile can fire on the cyno ship, or alert other vessels close enough to respond quickly. Incoming vessels by jumping or bridging will be loading the system while being fired on by prepared vessels.
Summary, you brought a mobile gate to the ones most motivated to camp it.

With local: The cyno pilot has at a glance complete intel on all ships present. No ambush using ships already in system can surprise the pilot due to this, so he can avoid risky situations. Also, the tactical advantage of delaying the warning local gives due to a population spike of PvP ships can be delayed to the last possible moment.
Summary, you have the gate ready, and local tells you when it is safest to use it.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1269 - 2013-09-16 17:41:34 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

That, 1,000 times that.

Good news.

You have no risk from players who are not playing.
Whether they are AFK cloaked, docked, or POS'd up, even logged out.
If they touch no buttons, you have zero risk.


THE CYNO IS THE RISK; 1,000 times THE CYNO IS THE GREAT RISK.
Who cares if the player is playing? He could be "touching no buttons" sitting right next to your ship cloaked with a cyno and a hundred players ready to jump AND he is still the greatest risk in the world. Cloak down, bubble up, cyno up. Good luck warping to safety. Three minutes of pve will cost you 3-10 hours cost of a pve ship. Everyone knows the risk is not worth it, even if you can know the last time any player touched their keyboard or mouse (know one cares, tbph). Far better than any "interaction" counter, would simply be an auto-logoff. Can't do cloak down, bubble up, cyno up in a timely manner when you are logged off.

The issue is not whether he is touching buttons, it is whether he can project an "infinite" cyno threat in a timely manner against you. No matter how you package the perspective on this issue, 3 minutes of pve WILL NEVER be worth 3-10 hours required to buy the ship and implants and med clone upgrades. NEVER.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1270 - 2013-09-16 17:49:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Ample proof that removing local will kill all pve ops and promote a pvp only environment.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
...

These cyno boats are looking for situations where they have the advantage. They are not hot-dropping heavily armed fleets with their gank squads, they are targeting isolated ships, preferably high value so the kill mail impresses more.

So, what happens when they can't tell if their next drop is too good to be true? How do they know that tasty ratting ship is not tanked heavily, and prepped with an ambush fleet in quick response range?
...

The ONLY ops that would make sense without local (or with local and hostile presence) is the baiting op ("that tasty ratting ship is .. tanked heavily, and prepped with an ambush fleet in quick response range", which is pure pvp. Those who advocate the removal of local are advocating the creation of an environment where pvp rules and pve ceases.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1271 - 2013-09-16 17:50:07 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:


The issue is not whether he is touching buttons, it is whether he can project an "infinite" cyno threat in a timely manner against you. No matter how you package the perspective on this issue, 3 minutes of pve WILL NEVER be worth 3-10 hours required to buy the ship and implants and med clone upgrades. NEVER.


Wow, and you have the audacity to call me a liar. Yes, I too can activate a cyno in game without hitting a button, and that cyno will project infinite...something. IDK, but an infinite something.

Fear me and my tiny cyno frig!!!!!

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
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1272 - 2013-09-16 18:00:59 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

That, 1,000 times that.

Good news.

You have no risk from players who are not playing.
Whether they are AFK cloaked, docked, or POS'd up, even logged out.
If they touch no buttons, you have zero risk.


THE CYNO IS THE RISK; 1,000 times THE CYNO IS THE GREAT RISK.
Who cares if the player is playing? He could be "touching no buttons" sitting right next to your ship cloaked with a cyno and a hundred players ready to jump AND he is still the greatest risk in the world. Cloak down, bubble up, cyno up. Good luck warping to safety. Three minutes of pve will cost you 3-10 hours cost of a pve ship. Everyone knows the risk is not worth it, even if you can know the last time any player touched their keyboard or mouse (know one cares, tbph). Far better than any "interaction" counter, would simply be an auto-logoff. Can't do cloak down, bubble up, cyno up in a timely manner when you are logged off.

The issue is not whether he is touching buttons, it is whether he can project an "infinite" cyno threat in a timely manner against you. No matter how you package the perspective on this issue, 3 minutes of pve WILL NEVER be worth 3-10 hours required to buy the ship and implants and med clone upgrades. NEVER.

Cloak down, bubble up:
You have just specified a class of ship that cannot warp cloaked. Unless you happened to be operating right near where they activated their cloak after warping, you will see them warp in on your grid first.

Now, let's give you that. Bit of a stretch, but I am trying to make a point.

I can mine in an AB equipped ship that clocks out over 1,000 m/s, with a 4 second align time if they weren't close enough with that bubble.
And it has +2 warp stability if they try to point me.
And it is not easy to target, being quite small.

I just don't see them doing it. Especially not for a boat that fitted is below 50 million ISK to replace.
By inconveniencing myself like that, my yield drops from 1,094 per minute in a Mack., to 940 in the Venture.
(Bistot ore, other categories vary)

Oh, and the Venture I use has a cloak fitted too. As they appear, I can simply vanish.
Non covops ship? Bubble or nothing, can't target due to a delay.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1273 - 2013-09-16 18:04:16 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Ample proof that removing local will kill all pve ops and promote a pvp only environment.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
...

These cyno boats are looking for situations where they have the advantage. They are not hot-dropping heavily armed fleets with their gank squads, they are targeting isolated ships, preferably high value so the kill mail impresses more.

So, what happens when they can't tell if their next drop is too good to be true? How do they know that tasty ratting ship is not tanked heavily, and prepped with an ambush fleet in quick response range?
...

The ONLY ops that would make sense without local (or with local and hostile presence) is the baiting op ("that tasty ratting ship is .. tanked heavily, and prepped with an ambush fleet in quick response range", which is pure pvp. Those who advocate the removal of local are advocating the creation of an environment where pvp rules and pve ceases.

How are the hunters finding the prey?

Here is something that is difficult for many to grasp, but is an important detail that those hunting will not have an advantage because of local being missing.

The advantage will always belong to whoever has sov, simply because the intel channels and patrols supplying them will be a huge advantage.

Those hunting in hostile territory will be on their own, and with no local to artificially tell them where everyone is, chances are they will have no idea.
They can, of course, guess, or do research to learn where people usually hang out, but unless someone spies for them and tips them where to look, they will be effectively blind.

Local is never the friend of PvE. PvE has a far more obvious advantage trading it in for an intel channel while the hunters are blind.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1274 - 2013-09-16 18:18:09 UTC
JIeoH Mocc wrote:
Of course i am not a programmer.
I did deal with algorithms though, for a while.
I am telling you that it's very easy to emulate a human pressing a key, to the point that the activations spectrum will settle right within the statistical errors of someone pressing it in two regimes - with an alarm, like suggested above, and making a mistake with the alarm, by pressing at any random time. Actually, any regime. You only have to record yourself doing that, and that's easy.

Dude. You are clearly not a programmer, because only non-programmers have that strange faith in being able to detect undetectable things. Actually even programmers have that strange faith sometimes ) And they at times get very sad when it gets broken.
I in fact am a programmer. As such I'm aware that there is more than one metric for automatic detection and more than one way to then prove a result. You on the other hand think it's both OK and undetectable to use automation software and/or hardware. Shame on you.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1275 - 2013-09-16 18:20:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Teckos Pech wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:


The issue is not whether he is touching buttons, it is whether he can project an "infinite" cyno threat in a timely manner against you. No matter how you package the perspective on this issue, 3 minutes of pve WILL NEVER be worth 3-10 hours required to buy the ship and implants and med clone upgrades. NEVER.


Wow, and you have the audacity to call me a liar. Yes, I too can activate a cyno in game without hitting a button, and that cyno will project infinite...something. IDK, but an infinite something.

Fear me and my tiny cyno frig!!!!!

Roll

I said "maybe". Maybe you don't realize that dropping local will kill pve. TBPH, it wasn't that audacious to suggest that you might lie for hidden agendas and personal gain; welcome to Eve.

Back on topic: If that tiny cyno frig manages to bring in an hundred bigger guns, yes, it should be feared. Who cares if you lose it. Oh look, that player's counter was reset with a cyno activation, but you can see the decloaking ship on overview beside you so who cares about the counter. How did it get beside you without warping? It could have just been waiting in the plex until someone else warped to it. Don't even need a cov ops cloak to do that. Don't even have to wait that long for a nice ship if you choose the right plex. This isn't rocket science. When the firepower brought in is substantially greater than the target's ability to defend itself for the next several seconds required to bring support in, then it is "infinitely" larger. When there is no limit to the number of ships that can jump through, the threat is infinite unless some intel tool reveals how many players are on the other side or able to come to the other side in a timely manner. No such tool exists at the moment, so it is infinite.

More solutions:
A) Cynos cannot be fit to covert ops or bubble ships, OR
B) Bridges and Jump drives require 30s while the cyno is active before they can lock on and begin the jump/bridge process, OR
C) the cyno adds 1,000m to the signature of the ship generating it.

The second solution will reduce the frequency of cyno drops into combat without good tank and support ships in place. The third solution reduces the solo hotdrop too and encourages off-grid or at range cynos.

PS to Nik: The hunters could always hunt in groups. Just a thought. Being deep in enemy territory and surrounded by lots of enemy, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that being with a larger group is a good idea. Then you have intel too. Yay you.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1276 - 2013-09-16 18:22:19 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:

I don't get what your point is. Go buy one and give it a use for a bit, see what happens then.
They've even stated before that things like the G15 keyboard you have to be careful with. I don't really care if you think it is or not, ANY automated means of playing the game are disallowed, and if they detect it you will likely be banned. Even using "randomised timings" any competent programmer can work out a way of determining the difference. I mean, for starters on any suspicion, they could deactivate and reactivate the module mid run, to see if you randomly click mid cycle next time round. If you do, it's automated.


Or, I'm working from home, looking at my work laptop, they cycle my module, I don't notice, the phone beeps at me and I hit the module.

No automation, unless you are suggesting that setting a timer on my phone is against the EULA too.
If you were dumb enough to do that, yes, you'd likely get banned. People have been banned for triggering false positives for botlike behaviour.


Yes, which is why CCP doesn't just run around banning people based on idiotic algorithms that can't tell a person from a program. This is why botting still exists in the game. When it comes right down to it, CCP will most likely err on the side of the paying customer, especially with brain dead algorithms like you are suggesting. If it is something that will generate too many false positives it is no good.

A good method of bot detection is engaging the bot in a conversation, say with a GM. That is impossible to program, at least for game players. Of course, it is also labor intensive.

And I doubt CCP is going to share their bot detection algorithms...it would give the bot makers too much info.

Lastly, a timer is a nerf to cloaks for active player too. Why punish the very people you supposedly don't have an issue with?
They don't have to speak with you though. Simply cycling your timers for you and seeing if you automatically click mid cycle a few times is easy enough. Detection algorithms generally flag. It's then up to a GM to investigate the flagged behaviour in the logs and actively.

But yes, I don't necessarily think a time is a good idea. But I don't like the fact that you advocate the use of automation to bypass any feature should they implement it.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1277 - 2013-09-16 18:25:28 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:

I don't get what your point is. Go buy one and give it a use for a bit, see what happens then.
They've even stated before that things like the G15 keyboard you have to be careful with. I don't really care if you think it is or not, ANY automated means of playing the game are disallowed, and if they detect it you will likely be banned. Even using "randomised timings" any competent programmer can work out a way of determining the difference. I mean, for starters on any suspicion, they could deactivate and reactivate the module mid run, to see if you randomly click mid cycle next time round. If you do, it's automated.


Or, I'm working from home, looking at my work laptop, they cycle my module, I don't notice, the phone beeps at me and I hit the module.

No automation, unless you are suggesting that setting a timer on my phone is against the EULA too.
If you were dumb enough to do that, yes, you'd likely get banned. People have been banned for triggering false positives for botlike behaviour.


BTW, you clearly have not been on siege fleets have you. :P I have and I bet if we used your algorithm I'd look like a bot. My client even tells me when to click the missile launcher within 10 seconds no need for an external timing device.
I have, and I doubt I'd get flagged. We don't spend very long at each structure, certainly not long enough to flag. At least from what I know from the admin on other games, you'd need to be botting for hours to get flagged up, I imagine EVE is the same.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
JIeoH Mocc
brotherhood of desman
#1278 - 2013-09-16 18:36:05 UTC  |  Edited by: JIeoH Mocc
Lucas Kell wrote:
JIeoH Mocc wrote:
Of course i am not a programmer.
I did deal with algorithms though, for a while.
I am telling you that it's very easy to emulate a human pressing a key, to the point that the activations spectrum will settle right within the statistical errors of someone pressing it in two regimes - with an alarm, like suggested above, and making a mistake with the alarm, by pressing at any random time. Actually, any regime. You only have to record yourself doing that, and that's easy.

Dude. You are clearly not a programmer, because only non-programmers have that strange faith in being able to detect undetectable things. Actually even programmers have that strange faith sometimes ) And they at times get very sad when it gets broken.
I in fact am a programmer. As such I'm aware that there is more than one metric for automatic detection and more than one way to then prove a result. You on the other hand think it's both OK and undetectable to use automation software and/or hardware. Shame on you.


I would be much obliged if you didn't lie regarding what I've said.
I never said it is OK to use whatever automation device, I just said it's pretty easy to do in this case.
Thus you propose a controversial "fix" which is easily overridden without detection possibility, by design.
You can't compare the sequences required of bots that are being detected (so why there still are bots, eh?) to the simple non conditional press of a key.
You see, i now completely understand that there's absolutely no use in explaining you where you err. The problem is deep within your mentality, and i don't think this can remedied on a forum.
But the truth is that not only you are heading the wrong way, you also propose lousy solutions =)
No matter how many metrics there are, or these mystic "ways to prove" something - no one will be able to do that. It's simply a lousy fix that will result in the fact that when you see a cloaky in local - you'll do the exact same thing you do now, dock and whine on the forums. Only this time he'll be ACTIVE for sure. Or will he?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1279 - 2013-09-16 18:49:41 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
PS to Nik: The hunters could always hunt in groups. Just a thought. Being deep in enemy territory and surrounded by lots of enemy, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that being with a larger group is a good idea. Then you have intel too. Yay you.

I salute your comment, Andy. I credit you with good intentions too.

A group traveling, be it roam or fleet sized, exponentially increases the probability that they will be spotted.
One competent gate scout taking notice of activations, can easily tell a good guess at how many are involved.
(Overlapping arrivals can be tricky)

This is where the BLOPs was intended to operate, dropping scouts and leapfrogging deeper and deeper, so a blitzkrieg could do a hard burn to the destination in the hopes of keeping the warning to a minimum.

These cloaked ships, outside of limited scenarios, are not cost effective attacking ships, but they can support the real fighters as they come in.
In the hands of a pro, they would never be seen in system, as they would avoid all direct contact.

Oh, the possibilities.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1280 - 2013-09-16 19:21:13 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

I salute your comment, Andy. I credit you with good intentions too.

A group traveling, be it roam or fleet sized, exponentially increases the probability that they will be spotted.
One competent gate scout taking notice of activations, can easily tell a good guess at how many are involved.
(Overlapping arrivals can be tricky)

This is where the BLOPs was intended to operate, dropping scouts and leapfrogging deeper and deeper, so a blitzkrieg could do a hard burn to the destination in the hopes of keeping the warning to a minimum.

These cloaked ships, outside of limited scenarios, are not cost effective attacking ships, but they can support the real fighters as they come in.
In the hands of a pro, they would never be seen in system, as they would avoid all direct contact.

Oh, the possibilities.

To be honest, the group need not travel together and only converge when a target is found or caught. Intel may show 1 ship per system in a constellation, but if they are all 1 jump out of the target system, the threat may seem much smaller than it really is, but the intel available to the group is much larger than just for one solo ship.

Good news: CCP is looking at improving the BLOPS BS.

Remember though that possibilities only exist if the reward justifies the cost of the risk. That means that players will only risk as much as can be earned in the same amount of time that it can be lost, plus something to make the time spent worthwhile. A zero net gain is a waste of time and a net loss is certainly not going to continue for long due to diminishing resources, if at all.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein