These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1641 - 2013-09-23 08:11:36 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Was the proposal that the ship disappears from local when it cloaks or just that it does not appear in local when it has a cloak fitted?


Try reading my post Andy, this question is clearly answered. Very, very clearly.

"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
#1642 - 2013-09-23 08:18:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Sorry I haven't read the whole thread, since there's 82 pages on this now.

In short though; the problem is that people can AFK cloak and cannot be scanned or hunted down until they decloak and cyno/aggres? Victims are saying it's unfair as they cannot 'escape' this kind of harassment, and the risk vs effort for the cloaker is basically none? The AFK guy can sit there for hours / days waiting for a target?

That's kind of the idea I get from it.

I don't really understand this though; it's pretty much like any other kind of gank isn't it? You see a cyno light up, you get out. That really shouldn't be much of a problem should it, unless you are of course AFK too ...

The idea I got from this, is that all the people complaining about this; want to see "what annoys them" removed, while they get on their merry ways doing what they were doing before. That doesn't really seem fair. Instead of complaining and screaming nerf this; why don't you adapt? :-/


Actually, when you see a hostile in system in null...you get out. That is SOP for just about everybody. Even the guys who AFK cloak at other times, but are PvEing to make isk.

So, if you want to deny your enemy resources...you can AFK cloak in their systems. Lots of times people simple dock up. Some come and rage post on the forums (see the first post ITT). Some move over a system or two and keep ratting. You could get some corp/alliance buddies and keep ratting as a group with more PvP oriented fits. But the further down the list of solutions we go the less people you'll see availing themselves of these options.

The other thing people use AFK cloaking for is to try and desensitize the residents to their presence. The "Oh he is always there, probably AFK"....until he isn't AFK anymore and somebody loses a ship.

I've argued for separating intel from local, make intel something to work for, especially for sov null. So that you can have access to intel to let you go about your PvE stuff in null, but at the same time make things more risky. Not necessarily overly so where the PvPers get a few days of shooting fish in a barrel, but just a bit more risky. And if necessary, look at buffing the rewards to PvEing in null. Try to balance it to where nobody is made worse off and the game is made more interesting and exciting.

That is a quick recap of my previous dozen plus posts.

"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

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1643 - 2013-09-23 08:45:30 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Was the proposal that the ship disappears from local when it cloaks or just that it does not appear in local when it has a cloak fitted? Because if it were the latter, you know that cloaks would be standard fit for all pve ships and perhaps all ships. If it was the former, even cloaky ships would be visible in local during gate jumps as the decloak.

Now, seriously, Teckos, if you really want local removed for cloakies then are you also willing to have stargates move every 24 hours and have to be scanned down each time, and have cynos removed from known space, AND have mass limits to stargates, AND have all ships removed from local .. just like wormhole space? Not saying that I support such a massive change, just asking.

That is a laughable straw man argument.

The punchline being, if yes, go move to a wormhole.

How about this.

You can hunt cloaked vessels, but everyone entering system is delayed 60 seconds before local reports them.

Players can still be proactive, and clear every system in their sov space to boot, which gives that 60 seconds more room if effort is on the table.
Something they cannot do right now, with any cloak preventing this.
And yet still, I question why covops cloaking ships should be boosted in combat. I'm happy for covops to be buffed as long as to compensate they remove their combat ability, so no guns or cynos. If they are a pure scout ship, sure they should be invisible everywhere. But while they hold combat ability, they can;t be pushed to being that undetectable.

Undetectable?

What part of "hunt cloaked vessels" seems to leave them undetectable?

And no, mining and ratting ships could do this just fine, they simply need to scan space instead of staring at a chat list.
Hunt them how? Even if you can scan them out, unless they are sitting completely still, you won't be able to catch them. So you want to make it so they are invisible and it takes specialised equipment to find them. So ships have to lose a module to hunt down a ship that will no long be there when they arrive.
The way I see it, the only change is that PVE/Miners would have 1 less module slot to use and would have to be hammering a d-scan button every few seconds just to get the level of intel they already have, while cloakers would have a high chance of running into someone not clicking fast enough, and killing them with their scout ship. Meanwhile regular combat ships will remain unchanged, leaving them less combat viable than a covops. I don't understand how anyone can think that even remotely constitutes balance.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1644 - 2013-09-23 08:47:56 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
So the demands are:

1. Cloaking pilots should be active.
2. AFK cloaking should be some how removed or discouraged.
3. It should not impact active cloakers.

So, I propose removing cloaked ships from local (i.e. they don't show in local when and only when the cloak is active). And for good measure a probe to hunt for suspected AFK cloakers:

This will, I argue:

1. Make AFK cloaking pointless as it wont work for resource denial, nor will it desensitize the locals to the presence of a hostile.
2. The probes double down on this by making AFK cloaking a very risk proposition.
3. 1 & 2 imply that the only cloaked ships will be active cloaked ships.
4. 3 also implies that AFK cloaking will be a thing of the past.
5. The long time on new scan probes will mean minimal impact if any on active cloakers.

So, it seems to satisfy all the requirements, but still it is not good enough.

It seems the PvE people are just not willing to even consider options other than "nerf cloaks", or the status quo...if they really don't mind the status quo...why post?


How about we add 2 new probes. The first has a fast scan time that is "fast" but it only tells you if a cloaked vessel is in system. The second has a longer scan time and will give you a potential warp in. If the target is moving you might miss him, but a couple of scans you'd get a direction and with an inty or two you'd probably decloak him and could kill him if he is AFK, which he probably is if he is moving in a straight line and seems unaware of the probes giving away his location.

Of course, I expect this to do nothing to the anti-AFK position as they want certainty and are unwilling to give up local as a crutch.
Try this now.
Scan down one of your own ships that's moving in a straight ling twice. Bookmark both, warp to the first and align to the second. Unless you are super lucky, you will miss your ship by a fairly wide angle due to the way bookmarks are positioned. The chances of you decloaking a cloaker this way is slim.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1645 - 2013-09-23 08:51:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
And yet still, I question why covops cloaking ships should be boosted in combat. I'm happy for covops to be buffed as long as to compensate they remove their combat ability, so no guns or cynos. If they are a pure scout ship, sure they should be invisible everywhere. But while they hold combat ability, they can;t be pushed to being that undetectable.


I love this. The cov ops has to give up something, but the PvE pilot give up something? OMG no!!!!! That is totally outrageous!!!!

Why they have it so tough already with local giving them advanced warning.

(BTW, in case anyone misses it, that is called sarcasm.)
The covops is giving up nothing. It's a token gesture that in reality gives up nothing, but is clearly designed to give the appearance of balance. See above. No amount of probes will give you any realistic chance of finding the cloaker. Since the covops is a scout vessel making it more viable than a regular combat ship for combat makes no sense whatsoever. You will kill off the use of regular combat ships and kill off null industry, and in return, if you sit perfectly still cloaked, there's a small chance somebody will have a probe launcher and bother to probe you out.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1646 - 2013-09-23 08:54:46 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
By desensitizing the locals. All it takes is one guy thinking, "Oh, he is always there, probably at a safe in a imicus or some other silly ship." So he undocks and starts PvEing. If he does it at the wrong time, i.e. when I come back from being AFK, well then...now I can get to work.
I don't honestly believe that happens on any measurable scale. I should imagine more people bounce on rocks trying to warp out that the number that are desensitised by an AFK cloaker. Bear in mind not everyone doing PVE or Mining with a cloaker in system is desensitised, most will simply be either too stupid to realise or simply don't care.
Clearly though nothing said here is EVER going to matter, since you think it OK to benefit from being AFK. That's what this all boils down to. You want the benefit of AFK players having an effect, to make your scout ship more viable as a combat ship, because you refuse to simply use a combat ship for PvP, and without that, you want a programmed mechanic change to make you more viable without them.
You keep inflating this up to be some massive change that will cause PVE players and miners to be massively buffed, but it''s not. I can continue to move when there's a cloaker in system, so the change to me, and most other PVE/Miners is practically zero. If the choices are:
a) change something that affects only the AFK cloakers, removing them from the equation.
b) change something that makes cloakers considerably more difficult to avoid.
obviously I'm going to go with A. I don't want scout ships to be more viable combat ships, making regular combat ships redundant in null. Currently you'll see a lot of cynabals, and various other ships, because they know they can get in fights, rather than make everyone leave. I don't really like the idea of every single player being in a cloaky T3, because they get a super invisibility buff.


Let me explain it:

1. When you are in a given system local works in your favor.
2. AFK cloaking may induce a miner/ratter to move systems.
3. Unless they have a scout, moving is when a ratter/miner is most vulnerable.
4. If AFK cloaking makes a miner/ratter move then it puts that miner/ratter at significantly greater risk.
5. Do it enough you'll see miner/ratters dying.
6. Mission Accomplished.

Oh and of course, some people will just undock and start doing stuff figuring that guy in local is always there, and hence not a problem. Is it dumb? Yeah, sure, but I have been looking at KBs and christ there are some real dummies out there going by their fits.
Show me evidence of this happening.
I've never been killed in transit. For starters, jump bridges help. Secondly my miners travel in travel fit combat ships.
This whole idea that AFK cloaking causes PvP is a load of bull. It's resource denial and that's all it's for. People that really want PvP and are competent at PvP get kills, no AFK cloakers needed.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1647 - 2013-09-23 09:07:58 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Was the proposal that the ship disappears from local when it cloaks or just that it does not appear in local when it has a cloak fitted? Because if it were the latter, you know that cloaks would be standard fit for all pve ships and perhaps all ships. If it was the former, even cloaky ships would be visible in local during gate jumps as the decloak.


I seriously doubt cloaks would become the norm on PvP ships. After all they come with a substantial nerf to targeting times, or did you conveniently forget about that?
For starters, bombers don't get a delay. Secondly, any competent covops pilot will deactivate cloak while in warp so they can target when they've landed, giving the target the minimal time to react.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

TheGunslinger42
All Web Investigations
#1648 - 2013-09-23 09:17:31 UTC  |  Edited by: TheGunslinger42
Lucas Kell wrote:
The covops is giving up nothing. It's a token gesture that in reality gives up nothing, but is clearly designed to give the appearance of balance. See above. No amount of probes will give you any realistic chance of finding the cloaker. Since the covops is a scout vessel making it more viable than a regular combat ship for combat makes no sense whatsoever. You will kill off the use of regular combat ships and kill off null industry, and in return, if you sit perfectly still cloaked, there's a small chance somebody will have a probe launcher and bother to probe you out.


If the idea is coupled with probes that can find them then they give up a lot, bro. Too much in my opinion.

How on earth do you think it's ok for "your side" to have such a massive advantage, such a sure thing, and yet any attempt to give even the slightest bit of a chance to the "other side" - even when it is coupled with a tradeoff - you flip your lid?

Are you that unwilling to allow other playstyles a chance to succeed, and that unwilling to maintain balance?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1649 - 2013-09-23 09:26:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
The covops is giving up nothing. It's a token gesture that in reality gives up nothing, but is clearly designed to give the appearance of balance. See above. No amount of probes will give you any realistic chance of finding the cloaker. Since the covops is a scout vessel making it more viable than a regular combat ship for combat makes no sense whatsoever. You will kill off the use of regular combat ships and kill off null industry, and in return, if you sit perfectly still cloaked, there's a small chance somebody will have a probe launcher and bother to probe you out.
If the idea is coupled with probes that can find them then they give up a lot, bro. Too much in my opinion.
Probes WILL NOT find a covops ship. Unless the probe causes the covops ship to explode, or the covops ships sits perfectly still, no amount of probing will help you find a cloaker, since you'll simply land near where he was, not on him.

TheGunslinger42 wrote:
How on earth do you think it's ok for "your side" to have such a massive advantage, such a sure thing, and yet any attempt to give even the slightest bit of a chance to the "other side" - even when it is coupled with a tradeoff - you flip your lid?

Are you that unwilling to allow other playstyles a chance to succeed, and that unwilling to maintain balance?
Nuking local only benefits a covops playstyle. You can put it however you want and "but look, probes!" but it means nothing. They are token gestures giving up things you don't care about as a covops pilot. Your tradeoff is not a tradeoff, it's something that doesn't matter to you at all. It's like if I said I want more valuable ice, and I'll give up gas harvesting for it. I never harvest gas, so it's a tradeoff I couldn't care less about.
I'm al lfor balance, but the short of it is, nerfing local will make a covops more viable than any other combat ship, and would make null industry inefficient in comparison with high sec industry. I do not agree that that is balance.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Aivo Dresden
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1650 - 2013-09-23 09:48:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Aivo Dresden
Quote:
Actually, when you see a hostile in system in null...you get out. That is SOP for just about everybody. Even the guys who AFK cloak at other times, but are PvEing to make isk.

So, if you want to deny your enemy resources...you can AFK cloak in their systems. Lots of times people simple dock up. Some come and rage post on the forums (see the first post ITT). Some move over a system or two and keep ratting. You could get some corp/alliance buddies and keep ratting as a group with more PvP oriented fits. But the further down the list of solutions we go the less people you'll see availing themselves of these options.

The other thing people use AFK cloaking for is to try and desensitize the residents to their presence. The "Oh he is always there, probably AFK"....until he isn't AFK anymore and somebody loses a ship.

I've argued for separating intel from local, make intel something to work for, especially for sov null. So that you can have access to intel to let you go about your PvE stuff in null, but at the same time make things more risky. Not necessarily overly so where the PvPers get a few days of shooting fish in a barrel, but just a bit more risky. And if necessary, look at buffing the rewards to PvEing in null. Try to balance it to where nobody is made worse off and the game is made more interesting and exciting.

That is a quick recap of my previous dozen plus posts.


Sorry, I'm just not seeing the problem. A guy AFKing in local is causing all the residents to dock up out of fear of losing their ships? So basically what you're saying is that the local dudes want more risk free income and since the cloaker is a threat, he needs to be penalized?

I'm just really not seeing the whole argument against it, except for some people crying because it interrupts their 0.0 PvE income. If you want to make ISK and if you want to PvE without worries or possibilities of getting ganked, go back to empire. :-/
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1651 - 2013-09-23 10:22:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Sorry, I'm just not seeing the problem. A guy AFKing in local is causing all the residents to dock up out of fear of losing their ships? So basically what you're saying is that the local dudes want more risk free income and since the cloaker is a threat, he needs to be penalized?

I'm just really not seeing the whole argument against it, except for some people crying because it interrupts their 0.0 PvE income. If you want to make ISK and if you want to PvE without worries or possibilities of getting ganked, go back to empire. :-/
Perhaps reading through the posts would help you? It's great to come jumping in at the end but you really should understand the subject.

Essentially, an AFK player adds the appearance of risk, causing miners and PVE players to move, thus denying resources from a particular system. Since people know this, they abuse this by running AFK players 24/7 in systems to damage the income of their target. Since they can do this without even being at their PC, some of us are of the opinion that to affect the game they should have to play the game, not simply go AFK. Much in the same way I'm against AFK mining, I'm against AFK cloaking. I am of the strong opinion that to have any effect you should have to put the graft in.

On the other side of it, some people refuse to accept that changing local is too big a task to undertake to solve this issue, and while it would partially resolve the issue (you could still AFK cloak, you'd just need to set yourself moving to do it) it would also introduce several other issues an imbalances, not least of which being that covops ships would become even more the ship of choice than they currently are.

So to summarise, the simplest part of the the issues is that AFK players should not be able to affect the game 24/7. Some people refuse to separate this from "nerf local" so waht we end up with is an 80+ page thread full of people screaming "local bad!" when what we should have is plain and simple a discussion over AFK cloaking, NOT cloaking in general.

EDIT: Oh and as for "So basically what you're saying is that the local dudes want more risk free income", null income is not as risk free as high sec income, and high sec income is already higher. Further penalising null sec players by adding more risk will simply move more people out of null. What in fact keeps being thrown on the table is that players in a covert ops ship, a scout ship, should be given free miner kills, as miners will need to put multiple alts and have scanning modules and upgrades to the system yet still have a chance to be killed by a covops.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Aivo Dresden
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1652 - 2013-09-23 10:35:12 UTC
People complaining about this should go back to empire, there you don't have to worry about it. It sounds like you want all the benefits of empire space (no ganks, no risk, no threats, ...) but in 0.0. Sounds like you want to make your easy ISK, without troubles or worries.

If residents are that worried about it, then why not just fit a few stabs and make a few safe spots? There you go, there is your solution, you can get back to ratting. Should this AFK dude make a run for you, warp out and safe up. Or does fitting a stab break your ratting Tengu's DPS. Cry
Azrael Dinn
Imperial Mechanics
#1653 - 2013-09-23 10:46:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Azrael Dinn
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Sorry, I'm just not seeing the problem. A guy AFKing in local is causing all the residents to dock up out of fear of losing their ships? So basically what you're saying is that the local dudes want more risk free income and since the cloaker is a threat, he needs to be penalized?

I'm just really not seeing the whole argument against it, except for some people crying because it interrupts their 0.0 PvE income. If you want to make ISK and if you want to PvE without worries or possibilities of getting ganked, go back to empire. :-/


it's not that simple.

Giving people a way to find cloaked ship is not penalizing it's creating active gamaplay. If the cloaker is moving it's nerly impossible to find thim.

But on the other notes why should the industrialist be punished cause of one person / alt. Why is that ok? What makes claoking tactics something that is so much more precious than other gameplay. Many cloakers have said that they cannot get targets killed without cloaked ships cause PvErs and industrialists go for great lenghts to avoid pvp. Well there is an simple solution to that also... go fight people who want to fight back but back to cloaking and risk vs. reward what seems to be the topic here and fear tactics whats one of the main reasons this is happening. It's effective and cloakers have said that them selfs.

The thing about fear tactics is that the cloaker is gaining so much more than the other side and in my opinion it's badly unbalanced because of that. We can argue all day long about the technical balances but it wont effect the things that are happening in space. Claked ships are getting what they want with minimal effort, if it's industrialists staying inside station and loosing potential income, gathering valuable intel or getting a multi billion kill with a few million cynoship.

So as I see things this way... tell me this, how is this balanced in any way?

Why cannot I find the cloaked ship even if I wanted to?

After centuries of debating and justifying... Break Cloaks tm

JIeoH Mocc
brotherhood of desman
#1654 - 2013-09-23 11:02:12 UTC  |  Edited by: JIeoH Mocc
Azrael Dinn wrote:

Why cannot I find the cloaked ship even if I wanted to?

Because it's cloaked, duh. Pretty much ths same as I'd ask why can't I shoot some carebear who's under the POS field, i mean we've already agreed that he has 99% certainty to make it there in good health.

"multi billion kill with a few million cynoship." - I'd tip my hat off to that, because if you fit a pimped out ship and loose it to a frig with lousy combat characteristics, you sir, deserve it.

Overall, wrong wrong wrong mentality, falling for the same points over and over again.
As if someone announced it was your prerogative to carebear safely in null with maxed dps with no regard for anyone else whims. Isn't null supposed to be the part of space where people battle for resources, ego, fun, grief and pain?

"Claked ships are getting what they want with minimal effort" - why don't you make them work harder for what they want?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1655 - 2013-09-23 11:06:41 UTC
Aivo Dresden wrote:
People complaining about this should go back to empire, there you don't have to worry about it. It sounds like you want all the benefits of empire space (no ganks, no risk, no threats, ...) but in 0.0. Sounds like you want to make your easy ISK, without troubles or worries.

If residents are that worried about it, then why not just fit a few stabs and make a few safe spots? There you go, there is your solution, you can get back to ratting. Should this AFK dude make a run for you, warp out and safe up. Or does fitting a stab break your ratting Tengu's DPS. Cry
Well if that's how it sounds, then you clearly aren't listening. More likely though, you know damn well what's going on, you just feel like trolling.
null SHOULD be better isk efficiency than high sec. It takes billions of isk to own, takes a lot more logi to turn your materials into isk. Some people won't be happy with null unless they can leap in and kill any miner or ratter they want at will though. I'll happily engage combat ships that attack me, but what is the point in trying to chase around a covops? He's only going to decloak if he's fighting something that has no chance.
Perhaps since the covops pilots want to shoot stuff with 0 risk of retaliation, they should go back to high sec and wardec nooby industry corps.

Or how about, if you want to **** with null sec income you should be at your PC. I don't think that's much to ask.

Now, either understand that opinions other than your own are valid, and that people aren't automatically crying just because they disagree with you, or go back under your bridge.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Aivo Dresden
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1656 - 2013-09-23 11:08:27 UTC
Why should your industry in 0.0 be risk free. Why should you be able to mine and haul your resources without the constant threat of others ganking it?

And how would the cloaker get a multi billion kill? Why don't you keep a PvP alt handy, escort your industry chars around? I understand that cloakers bother you, and thus you want them removed. You only want this so you can get back to your good old easy way of making ISK.

If fear is what keeps you docked up, then why don't you just move a few PvP alts in the system, should something go down you go kill the cloaker. If it bothers your ratting, why don't you go rat in a more quiet system, a few jumps out?

I just don't understand. These things have always been there, since the dawn of 0.0 and all of a sudden now it's a problem? It's always been something to think about but people handled it. Unfortunately the current generation of 0.0 carebears seems to be unable to do so.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1657 - 2013-09-23 11:13:08 UTC
JIeoH Mocc wrote:
Azrael Dinn wrote:

Why cannot I find the cloaked ship even if I wanted to?

Because it's cloaked, duh. Pretty much ths same as I'd ask why can't I shoot some carebear who's under the POS field, i mean we've already agreed that he has 99% certainty to make it there in good health.

"multi billion kill with a few million cynoship." - I'd tip my hat off to that, because if you fit a pimped out ship and loose it to a frig with lousy combat characteristics, you sir, deserve it.

Overall, wrong wrong wrong mentality, falling for the same points over and over again.
As if someone announced it was your prerogative to carebear safely in null with maxed dps with no regard for anyone else whims. Isn't null supposed to be the part of space where people battle for resources, ego, fun, grief and pain?

"Claked ships are getting what they want with minimal effort" - why don't you make them work harder for what they want?
LOL. so the covops ship refusing to engage without certainty of success is not a carebear? A guy who's not even willing to put his name on the line, instead making an alt to sit in a system all day to disrupt operations, he's not a carebear? Don't talk ****. The cloakers are some heroic elite combatants, they are just as bad as anyone else. The only difference being they want MORE ability to hide and MORE ability to surprise ratting and mining ships, while all we want is for cloakers to be at their PC to disrupt us. I don't think that's much to ask.

It's all the "kill local" guys that are talking about cloak finding probes and all that. I'm happy with the idea of an AFK cloaker getting warped (still cloaked) to deaspace and getting an icon in local to indicate this, then auto warping back (still cloaked) to where they were upon return. This would resolve the issue, and only affect AFK cloakers, while making nobody have to lose anything.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Aivo Dresden
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1658 - 2013-09-23 11:13:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Aivo Dresden
Lucas Kell wrote:
Well if that's how it sounds, then you clearly aren't listening. More likely though, you know damn well what's going on, you just feel like trolling.
null SHOULD be better isk efficiency than high sec. It takes billions of isk to own, takes a lot more logi to turn your materials into isk. Some people won't be happy with null unless they can leap in and kill any miner or ratter they want at will though. I'll happily engage combat ships that attack me, but what is the point in trying to chase around a covops? He's only going to decloak if he's fighting something that has no chance.
Perhaps since the covops pilots want to shoot stuff with 0 risk of retaliation, they should go back to high sec and wardec nooby industry corps.

Or how about, if you want to **** with null sec income you should be at your PC. I don't think that's much to ask.

Now, either understand that opinions other than your own are valid, and that people aren't automatically crying just because they disagree with you, or go back under your bridge.

I've lived in 0.0 and I've lost a few ratting ships to single recons ganking me. You know what I did about it? I went to a system 4-5 jumps away from the station, on route to a dead end system. I took my own PvP alt with me, when I wanted to go make some ISK. You know what happened next time a recon tried to gank me? He got BBQ'd. After 2-3 times, I never saw him again. I didn't care if you're there AFK in local. Why should i? As soon as I see you uncloak next to me though, my alt will warp in and I'll gank you right back.

If it's just a Covops anyway, then why do you bother? Should a cyno go up, you get out. This really isn't a problem, unless you're of course AFK mining / ratting yourself. In which case I can totally understand your problem.

You somehow feel entitled to do industry without risk. To make ISK without risk. You feel like that's how it should be because you put efford in taking or renting 0.0 space. That's not how it works though. Why don't you just look for solutions ingame, instead of asking for game changes? Why don't you make your own security force and keep your industrialists safe?

Lucas Kell wrote:
all we want is for cloakers to be at their PC to disrupt us. I don't think that's much to ask.

Unless you are **** scared of everything that isn't blue, how exactly is an AFK pilot a threat to you? Are you that scared to undock when there's a neutral / red in local?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
#1659 - 2013-09-23 11:22:22 UTC
Aivo Dresden wrote:
Why should your industry in 0.0 be risk free. Why should you be able to mine and haul your resources without the constant threat of others ganking it?

It shouldn't, and it isn't. Buy why should a guy whos at work, or off fapping be able to add as much appearance of threat as an actively playing cloaker?

Aivo Dresden wrote:
And how would the cloaker get a multi billion kill? Why don't you keep a PvP alt handy, escort your industry chars around? I understand that cloakers bother you, and thus you want them removed. You only want this so you can get back to your good old easy way of making ISK.
Firstly, a cloaker can drop an indy char pretty quick. Secondly, why should I have to have an alt, while the cloaker doesn't? THIRDLY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY - How does removing AFK cloakers affect that IN THE SLIGHTEST? I'm not asking for ANY changes to active cloakers, so they can continue as normal.

Aivo Dresden wrote:
If fear is what keeps you docked up, then why don't you just move a few PvP alts in the system, should something go down you go kill the cloaker. If it bothers your ratting, why don't you go rat in a more quiet system, a few jumps out?
We do go into other systems. I have 4 different systems with ships set up, and only 1 of them has ever been camped. But when it happens it makes null just a little more empty. I like my null to be a bit less empty, and I'm sure combat ships want the same. Some idiot sitting in system to reduce the industry index is not generating content, they are taking it away.

Aivo Dresden wrote:
I just don't understand. These things have always been there, since the dawn of 0.0 and all of a sudden now it's a problem? It's always been something to think about but people handled it. Unfortunately the current generation of 0.0 carebears seems to be unable to do so.
It's been getting more and more common. As people are realising it's a good way of resource denial, they are using it more. Now with gravs not requiring probes, miners are even more at risk, so they are quicker to leave a system. With ice mining buffed, high sec mining now generates a lot more isk, with no worry about freighting it about to sell. With the anom changes and the ai changes, L4s offer considerably less risk for the income. Overall the changes are heading in a direction that makes null less favorable. I'd like to see changes that encourage more mining, more ratting and more PvP in null. Buffing cloakers is not a way to do that, since cloakers don't PvP, they gank. Give combat cruisers more ability to roam null by all means, but don't buff covops, that's just silly.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

JIeoH Mocc
brotherhood of desman
#1660 - 2013-09-23 11:27:12 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
]LOL. so the covops ship refusing to engage without certainty of success is not a carebear? A guy who's not even willing to put his name on the line, instead making an alt to sit in a system all day to disrupt operations, he's not a carebear? Don't talk ****. The cloakers are some heroic elite combatants, they are just as bad as anyone else. The only difference being they want MORE ability to hide and MORE ability to surprise ratting and mining ships, while all we want is for cloakers to be at their PC to disrupt us. I don't think that's much to ask.

It's all the "kill local" guys that are talking about cloak finding probes and all that. I'm happy with the idea of an AFK cloaker getting warped (still cloaked) to deaspace and getting an icon in local to indicate this, then auto warping back (still cloaked) to where they were upon return. This would resolve the issue, and only affect AFK cloakers, while making nobody have to lose anything.


I thought we've also agreed to the fact that you don't know when someone is AFK, and who's whose alt and all that...
What's the use to bring that to an argument, except shaking some air. Alt or no alt , AFK or not - it's a subscribed user, and your attempts to make his playing experience lesser than yours by tagging him as an "alt" or "AFK" in order to call for solutions for your maladies ... You're just the same as that guy, in every aspect of privileges and rights the mechanics should allow, in general.

Regarding that cloaked carebear, i don't know if he is... he might be. Why don't you setup a bait and check it?

I wonder,about that thing someone described earlier about warping to some location with a beacon or whatever... why shouldn't it affect all "AFK" ships? Under POS as well? Orcas, Rorquels, bonus ships, "AFK" Dominixes and Thannies...

And i am deeply troubled by the fact that you won't accept that it's impossible for CCP to require and enforce for someone to be near his PC all the time, or suffer ... some weird inventions of yours. It's impossible for them and undesirable for them, both technically and PR wise. Everyone wants the game to have 50k users online, not 10k.