These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#1901 - 2013-09-26 16:14:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Maximus Aerelius
NightmareX wrote:
I might have seen his post a bit wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that cloaky ships like Stealth Bombers was designed to sneaks into enemy territorium to gain intels on others where you have to do some effort to do that, not to sit afk while being cloaked with zero efforts to gain advantages over those who are active playing EVE.

See the differences?


So I sit on my perch above a gate and watch, waiting for a particular person to go through who's been reported on my Alliance Intel channel that he may appear in an Etana (a very rare ship in EVE). I'm sat there like quite a few other scouts in my alliance for hours now and he's not arrived. Meanwhile we're talking on TS about who is jumping through and where but I'm not moving in game, I'm watching.

You on the other hand don't know whether I'm AFK and nor does the system. I'm at my keyboard ready to react should I see my target...how is that not "actively playing"?

[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
#1902 - 2013-09-26 16:14:35 UTC
NightmareX wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I disagree with the assertion that afk players "gain advantages" over active players. What advantage is an AFK player gaining when he isn't able to do anything at all? If your answer is "the residents dock up in fear" well then the way to stop him gaining that advantage is to ... not dock up in fear.

As for the initial design vs current uses... well I've got a bit of a shocker for you: Local was designed as a chat channel, not as a method to allow carebears in nullsec perfect safety, or to allow them to escape before an adversary has finished transitioning into system.

However, due to the low population in any given nullsec system, and due to more recent changes (the coloured standings that are visible in the list) it is now being used that way.

As a result of local being misused in this way, cloaks started being misused to counter it. You cannot fix one without fixing the other.

You don't see the problem because you see only via your own stupid eyes as a cloaker. Try seeing it through the others in local's eyes.

So why isn't it advantages that you as a player who is no where near your computer can cause fear on many other players in local?

Why is that not advantages?


I see it through the eyes of someone who spent two years in C5-C6 wormholes, where cloakers were literally undetectable.

It isn't an issue.

It is not my problem if you are scared of absolutely everything.

It is not my problem that you choose to live in an area of the game where other people are free to shoot you, and then worry about other people shooting you.

Maybe go back to highsec.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1903 - 2013-09-26 16:15:58 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I disagree with the assertion that afk players "gain advantages" over active players. What advantage is an AFK player gaining when he isn't able to do anything at all? If your answer is "the residents dock up in fear" well then the way to stop him gaining that advantage is to ... not dock up in fear.
It's not "docking up in fear" It's "using common sense to tell you that wasting a 200m isk ship for an extra 2 minutes of ratting/mining is stupid".
And yes, the advantage they gain is content denial for their chosen target.

TheGunslinger42 wrote:
As for the initial design vs current uses... well I've got a bit of a shocker for you: Local was designed as a chat channel, not as a method to allow carebears in nullsec perfect safety, or to allow them to escape before an adversary has finished transitioning into system.

However, due to the low population in any given nullsec system, and due to more recent changes (the coloured standings that are visible in the list) it is now being used that way.

As a result of local being misused in this way, cloaks started being misused to counter it. You cannot fix one without fixing the other.
Prove this too. Local was clearly designed to show players. It was clearly designed to show the icons. These things didn't happen by accident, they were programmed in.
The only thing I've seen against this is a single CCP dev stating his preference is for a separate intel tool. Well that's not proof of anything beyond his personal preference. When CCP release a dev blog telling us that local is being misused, let me know. Until then, this is your unsubstantiated opinion.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#1904 - 2013-09-26 16:19:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Maximus Aerelius
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I disagree with the assertion that afk players "gain advantages" over active players. What advantage is an AFK player gaining when he isn't able to do anything at all? If your answer is "the residents dock up in fear" well then the way to stop him gaining that advantage is to ... not dock up in fear.


Lucas Kell wrote:
It's not "docking up in fear" It's "using common sense to tell you that wasting a 200m isk ship for an extra 2 minutes of ratting/mining is stupid".
And yes, the advantage they gain is content denial for their chosen target.


Resource denial is granted by the person who does nothing to break the status quo for the fear of losing "a 200m isk ship". You dock up or safe up or whatever until that person passes on by rather than fit a module (there are plenty) to defend yourself\request assistance\get into a PVE ship that's fitted PVP to bait him etc etc. You allow the denial by your lack of inaction to change how you operate in the most dangerous place in EVE (well 2nd as WH's are so much worse because no local and every goddamn person is cloaked!).

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1905 - 2013-09-26 16:19:52 UTC
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
I might have seen his post a bit wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that cloaky ships like Stealth Bombers was designed to sneaks into enemy territorium to gain intels on others where you have to do some effort to do that, not to sit afk while being cloaked with zero efforts to gain advantages over those who are active playing EVE.

See the differences?
So I sit on my perch above a gate and watch, waiting for a particular person to go through who's been reported on my Alliance Intel channel that he may appear in an Etana (a very rare ship in EVE). I'm sat there like quite a few other scouts in my alliance for hours now and he's not arrived. Meanwhile we're talking on TS about who is jumping through and where but I'm not moving in game, I'm watching.

You on the other hand don't know whether I'm AFK and nor does the system. I'm at my keyboard ready to react should I see my target...how is that not "actively playing"?

You are not AFK though, so you wouldn't be affected. You would merely need to click the client from time to time, which undoubtedly you would be doing anyway, and if not, would not be difficult, as you must be watching your client to watch the gate.
So you are actively playing.

Even if an AFK player is only require to interact with his client to indicate to CCP activity, that's fine. You camping someone out is 100% perfectly fine, but simply being able to log on after downtime then leave for 24 hours denying content for that whole time is not good for the game.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
NightmareX
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#1906 - 2013-09-26 16:23:31 UTC  |  Edited by: NightmareX
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
I might have seen his post a bit wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that cloaky ships like Stealth Bombers was designed to sneaks into enemy territorium to gain intels on others where you have to do some effort to do that, not to sit afk while being cloaked with zero efforts to gain advantages over those who are active playing EVE.

See the differences?


So I sit on my perch above a gate and watch, waiting for a particular person to go through who's been reported on my Alliance Intel channel that he may appear in an Etana (a very rare ship in EVE). I'm sat there like quite a few other scouts in my alliance for hours now and he's not arrived. Meanwhile we're talking on TS about who is jumping through and where but I'm not moving in game, I'm watching.

You on the other hand don't know whether I'm AFK and nor does the system. I'm at my keyboard ready to react should I see my target...how is that not "actively playing"?

You are active and at your computer then.

Do you actually know the differences from being active and afk / not at your computer?

And if you are watching as you say, you can also make sure to not let the client move you to the character screen by being afk.

If you are that lazy to not even bothering to click on something in EVE every 60 minutes (to take an example), it will then just force my argument that you just want to do as much harm and create as much fear on others for no effort.

Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1907 - 2013-09-26 16:23:58 UTC
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Resource denial is granted by the person who does nothing to break the status quo for the fear of losing "a 200m isk ship". You dock up or safe up or whatever until that person passes on by rather than fit a module (there are plenty) to defend yourself\request assistance\get into a PVE ship that's fitted PVP to bait him etc etc. You allow the denial but your lack of inaction to change how you operate in the most dangerous place in EVE (well 2nd as WH's are so much worse because no local and every goddamn person is cloaked!).
Fear ant efficiency are different. It's utterly moronic to undock an exhumer in null with a red in local. it's got a minimum 14 second align time, easily enough time for anyone to get a lock on you, and it will drop in seconds, well before you can do anything to stop it, even if you have friends about.
Baiting a cloaker is pointless. They will only engage when they are 100% sure of success and in the case of an AFK cloaker, they'll never engage, so when I'm looking to earn isk between ops, wasting hours trying to bait out a player that might not even be there is a waste of time.
So the chosen solution is to move on to a different system and rat/mine there.

The problem is an AFK cloaker can camp a system every hour of every day forever, with no effort. Ridiculous.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1908 - 2013-09-26 16:27:24 UTC
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
TheGunslinger42 wrote:
I disagree with the assertion that afk players "gain advantages" over active players. What advantage is an AFK player gaining when he isn't able to do anything at all? If your answer is "the residents dock up in fear" well then the way to stop him gaining that advantage is to ... not dock up in fear.

As for the initial design vs current uses... well I've got a bit of a shocker for you: Local was designed as a chat channel, not as a method to allow carebears in nullsec perfect safety, or to allow them to escape before an adversary has finished transitioning into system.

However, due to the low population in any given nullsec system, and due to more recent changes (the coloured standings that are visible in the list) it is now being used that way.

As a result of local being misused in this way, cloaks started being misused to counter it. You cannot fix one without fixing the other.

You don't see the problem because you see only via your own stupid eyes as a cloaker. Try seeing it through the others in local's eyes.

So why isn't it advantages that you as a player who is no where near your computer can cause fear on many other players in local?

Why is that not advantages?


I see it through the eyes of someone who spent two years in C5-C6 wormholes, where cloakers were literally undetectable.

It isn't an issue.

It is not my problem if you are scared of absolutely everything.

It is not my problem that you choose to live in an area of the game where other people are free to shoot you, and then worry about other people shooting you.

Maybe go back to highsec.
We're not worried about other people shooting us. We're worried about idiots wasting our time between ops while having to expend no effort to do it. I'm perfectly happy with someone wasting my time as long as they have to waste their time too. But it's ludicrous to expect me to have to put up with the consequence while they don;t have to expend the effort.

By the way ,you certainly don't seem to have an issue with automatically calling everyone else a carebear and telling them to go back to highsec, yet you get all narky when we talk about how you just want free and easy kills, which there is easily as much evidence of that from your posts. Interesting.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#1909 - 2013-09-26 16:39:01 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
I might have seen his post a bit wrong, but that doesn't change the fact that cloaky ships like Stealth Bombers was designed to sneaks into enemy territorium to gain intels on others where you have to do some effort to do that, not to sit afk while being cloaked with zero efforts to gain advantages over those who are active playing EVE.

See the differences?
So I sit on my perch above a gate and watch, waiting for a particular person to go through who's been reported on my Alliance Intel channel that he may appear in an Etana (a very rare ship in EVE). I'm sat there like quite a few other scouts in my alliance for hours now and he's not arrived. Meanwhile we're talking on TS about who is jumping through and where but I'm not moving in game, I'm watching.

You on the other hand don't know whether I'm AFK and nor does the system. I'm at my keyboard ready to react should I see my target...how is that not "actively playing"?

You are not AFK though, so you wouldn't be affected. You would merely need to click the client from time to time, which undoubtedly you would be doing anyway, and if not, would not be difficult, as you must be watching your client to watch the gate.
So you are actively playing.

Even if an AFK player is only require to interact with his client to indicate to CCP activity, that's fine. You camping someone out is 100% perfectly fine, but simply being able to log on after downtime then leave for 24 hours denying content for that whole time is not good for the game.


Why should I be made to click into my client though? This is my point. You want to dictate that I click in my client to stop be being AFK while if I miss it by 1 second I'm logged out and you can go about your business not fearing the person in Local who may or may not be AFK because he's been removed.

They don't have this problem in Low Sec or High Sec because you know what...they don't use Local as an intel channel. You are obviously too carebear to be in Null and should get your arse back to High Sec and learn that Local isn't required, situational awareness, active intelligence gathering and appropriate fittings are.

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
NightmareX
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#1910 - 2013-09-26 16:43:14 UTC  |  Edited by: NightmareX
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Why should I be made to click into my client though? This is my point. You want to dictate that I click in my client to stop be being AFK while if I miss it by 1 second I'm logged out and you can go about your business not fearing the person in Local who may or may not be AFK because he's been removed.

They don't have this problem in Low Sec or High Sec because you know what...they don't use Local as an intel channel. You are obviously too carebear to be in Null and should get your arse back to High Sec and learn that Local isn't required, situational awareness, active intelligence gathering and appropriate fittings are.

Basicly, all you want is to have alot of benefits and advantages over others who are active and makes alot of efforts into EVE to achieve something while you being afk and at the same time be extremely lazy and don't even want to lift a finger, make zero effort and have zero risks to do anything to achieve something.

Not sure, but i think we all see where the problem are. And that is you being extremely lazy.

Just because you can do this doesn't mean it's something good. That's why we want to get this changed a little.

Here is a list of my current EVE / PVP videos:

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1911 - 2013-09-26 16:59:26 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's really simple. Since you don;t know if they are AFK or not, you must treat them as NOT AFK, otherwise you are exposing yourself to a potential gank. Thus, AFK cloakers affect null. They know this, that's why they do it.

Removing the ambiguity of their presence denies the ability for an AFK player to affect null, but does not reduce the level of ganks, since the standard response to an AFK cloaker is avoidance.

Somehow Nikk seems to think this means I have to prove that I have the right to know the difference, when clearly all I'm stating is that what he is complaining about - the change to AFK cloaking suddenly making null risk free - is absolute nonsense. The only thing that changes is AFK players can't deny access to areas, which in my opinion, they shouldn't be able to.

Your argument is worse than I realized.

You are saying, in effect:
The AFK cloaked pilot was not going to get any kills by fooling pilots, so their removal has no impact.
They were never going to be able to return, and discover pilots taking risks due to the assumption that they would not be returning.

All the pilots would have logged out, stayed in dock, or moved to another system.

Or simply rewritten: Your tactic will fail, so you might as well quit and log out. Save us all some hassle.

You... are an idiot.
You simply don't comprehend english, then you spout out nonsense like this.
It's pointless for you to even respond when this garbage is all you produce.

So, when you can't counter a point, you resort to name calling.

Typical.

I had hoped for a more rational response, but as depicted above, my expectations for your debating ability may have been too high.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#1912 - 2013-09-26 17:32:49 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Simply saying "no issue, move on, i can has tears" at this stage is quite frankly, moronic.


The part about tears was meant to be light hearted and I am sorry that you thought I was being degrading, it wasn't intended as that phrase is also in my signature. I do like a good well natured discussion calling me a moron or idiot then I am describing a point isn't really in the spirit of things. I apologise if you found my tears comment demeaning and now back to our regular viewing.

I'll reply to the other comments as I work my way through, just home from work but I'll be back,

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1913 - 2013-09-26 17:44:09 UTC
NightmareX wrote:
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Why should I be made to click into my client though? This is my point. You want to dictate that I click in my client to stop be being AFK while if I miss it by 1 second I'm logged out and you can go about your business not fearing the person in Local who may or may not be AFK because he's been removed.

They don't have this problem in Low Sec or High Sec because you know what...they don't use Local as an intel channel. You are obviously too carebear to be in Null and should get your arse back to High Sec and learn that Local isn't required, situational awareness, active intelligence gathering and appropriate fittings are.

Basicly, all you want is to have alot of benefits and advantages over others who are active and makes alot of efforts into EVE to achieve something while you being afk and at the same time be extremely lazy and don't even want to lift a finger, make zero effort and have zero risks to do anything to achieve something.

Not sure, but i think we all see where the problem are. And that is you being extremely lazy.

Just because you can do this doesn't mean it's something good. That's why we want to get this changed a little.

This from someone spouting the benefits and rewards of "efforts", and how they should be a requirement.

This discussion frequently centered around using a FREE intel tool, which requires zero effort to use, and bypasses other options which would use effort instead.

Lazy = local chat as intel

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#1914 - 2013-09-26 17:45:03 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Resource denial is granted by the person who does nothing to break the status quo for the fear of losing "a 200m isk ship". You dock up or safe up or whatever until that person passes on by rather than fit a module (there are plenty) to defend yourself\request assistance\get into a PVE ship that's fitted PVP to bait him etc etc. You allow the denial but your lack of inaction to change how you operate in the most dangerous place in EVE (well 2nd as WH's are so much worse because no local and every goddamn person is cloaked!).
Fear ant efficiency are different. It's utterly moronic to undock an exhumer in null with a red in local. it's got a minimum 14 second align time, easily enough time for anyone to get a lock on you, and it will drop in seconds, well before you can do anything to stop it, even if you have friends about.
Baiting a cloaker is pointless. They will only engage when they are 100% sure of success and in the case of an AFK cloaker, they'll never engage, so when I'm looking to earn isk between ops, wasting hours trying to bait out a player that might not even be there is a waste of time.
So the chosen solution is to move on to a different system and rat/mine there.

The problem is an AFK cloaker can camp a system every hour of every day forever, with no effort. Ridiculous.


OK, so let me ask you this then: How do you know that person, let us say for arguments sake a Cov-Ops Pilot, is in system with you?

Does he appear in Local: Yes, I know 100% that he is in system.
Does he appear on D-Scan: Only if you are paying attention and have intelligence on gates
Is he a "cloaker": Don't know unless above D-Scan is true and only then you can guess form ship type.
Action: Crap my pants and jump on EVE Forums to start a thread on the big bad cloaker.

Now lets look at WH's scenario as they rarely if ever post up on AFK Cloakers:

Does he appear in Local: WTF is that? Are you crazy!
Does he appear on D-Scan: Only if you are paying attention and have intelligence on the entrance point
Is he a "cloaker": Quite possibly as this is the most dangerous space.
Action: Carry on but be prepared to engage.

So removing local solves all your issues...completely.

Lucas Kell wrote:
The problem is an AFK cloaker can camp a system every hour of every day forever, with no effort. Ridiculous.


Apply this to Wormholes...not a problem there though is it. Everyone is pretty much cloaked or relying on ACTIVE intelligence gathering methods along with, shock and horror, team work to neutralise that possibly threat either with greater force\tactics or by being prepared to GTFO if required.

Lucas Kell wrote:
They will only engage when they are 100% sure of success and in the case of an AFK cloaker, they'll never engage


I guess you missed the class on baiting where you look your weakest in order for the cloaker to actually commit and then spring your trap on him? Cov-Ops are designed with that in the description, the ability to avoid unfavourable encounters and no smart pilot would engage unless they had a high certainty of success...that's just pure logic and reason.

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1915 - 2013-09-26 17:55:39 UTC
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Why should I be made to click into my client though? This is my point. You want to dictate that I click in my client to stop be being AFK while if I miss it by 1 second I'm logged out and you can go about your business not fearing the person in Local who may or may not be AFK because he's been removed.
So it's not that you see a problem with us wanting AFK cloaking removed, you are simply too lazy to click you client every now and then? That about right?

Maximus Aerelius wrote:
They don't have this problem in Low Sec or High Sec because you know what...they don't use Local as an intel channel. You are obviously too carebear to be in Null and should get your arse back to High Sec and learn that Local isn't required, situational awareness, active intelligence gathering and appropriate fittings are.
WHAT?!?
Are we even playing the same game?
Low sec, it still happens exactly the same, but less often, since most people in low sec WANT PvP. With high sec, you must be mental! Declare ware on a mining corp, then after 24 hours jump into local and watch them scatter. Of course they use local. You are utterly insane if you think they simply shut local and move on while at war.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1916 - 2013-09-26 17:57:14 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
It's really simple. Since you don;t know if they are AFK or not, you must treat them as NOT AFK, otherwise you are exposing yourself to a potential gank. Thus, AFK cloakers affect null. They know this, that's why they do it.

Removing the ambiguity of their presence denies the ability for an AFK player to affect null, but does not reduce the level of ganks, since the standard response to an AFK cloaker is avoidance.

Somehow Nikk seems to think this means I have to prove that I have the right to know the difference, when clearly all I'm stating is that what he is complaining about - the change to AFK cloaking suddenly making null risk free - is absolute nonsense. The only thing that changes is AFK players can't deny access to areas, which in my opinion, they shouldn't be able to.

Your argument is worse than I realized.

You are saying, in effect:
The AFK cloaked pilot was not going to get any kills by fooling pilots, so their removal has no impact.
They were never going to be able to return, and discover pilots taking risks due to the assumption that they would not be returning.

All the pilots would have logged out, stayed in dock, or moved to another system.

Or simply rewritten: Your tactic will fail, so you might as well quit and log out. Save us all some hassle.

You... are an idiot.
You simply don't comprehend english, then you spout out nonsense like this.
It's pointless for you to even respond when this garbage is all you produce.

So, when you can't counter a point, you resort to name calling.

Typical.

I had hoped for a more rational response, but as depicted above, my expectations for your debating ability may have been too high.

No, I actually think you are what would be defined as an idiot.
What you wrote, was nonsense. It was as if you were responding to the wrong thread.



The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#1917 - 2013-09-26 17:57:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Maximus Aerelius
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
This CONTENT was created because of someone cloaked in a system for hours on end...your comment destroyed along with that Nyx.


Lucas Kell wrote:
Yes. An ACTIVE cloaker. In space, waiting for a kill. But them I'm not arguing against that. I'm against AFK cloakers, as they deny content with no effort, not even having to be at their PC.


Actually from what I read he wasn't active and was relying on team work to call up...I might be wrong but he certainly wasn't sat on that POCO for 23.5 hours moving his mouse every 15 minutes but he was in position while all the other pieces were brought into play and created a fantastic tactical strike.

I don't think you fully comprehend the requirement that this game demands and how much meta-game is as important as game play. Market Trading for instance requires external websites to be searched, movement for scouting or whatever is required cross referencing of multiple sources like DOTLAN, TS channels, Mumble or other comms.

Now to get around your absurd idea of "You have to move your mouse to prove you are active" timer watch this Automatic Mouse Mover (Version 2) or this I don't like screen savers now do you see the issue? And to what end? More certainty that you are safe or not.

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#1918 - 2013-09-26 18:02:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Maximus Aerelius
Lucas Kell wrote:
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Why should I be made to click into my client though? This is my point. You want to dictate that I click in my client to stop be being AFK while if I miss it by 1 second I'm logged out and you can go about your business not fearing the person in Local who may or may not be AFK because he's been removed.
So it's not that you see a problem with us wanting AFK cloaking removed, you are simply too lazy to click you client every now and then? That about right?

Maximus Aerelius wrote:
They don't have this problem in Low Sec or High Sec because you know what...they don't use Local as an intel channel. You are obviously too carebear to be in Null and should get your arse back to High Sec and learn that Local isn't required, situational awareness, active intelligence gathering and appropriate fittings are.
WHAT?!?
Are we even playing the same game?

Low sec, it still happens exactly the same, but less often, since most people in low sec WANT PvP. With high sec, you must be mental! Declare ware on a mining corp, then after 24 hours jump into local and watch them scatter. Of course they use local. You are utterly insane if you think they simply shut local and move on while at war.


Ah "honourable war deccing" I see....right. Maybe we should whine on the forums about that as well...as that's blatant resource denial unless you have beef with them and them with you. We should move to consensual PVP...perhaps war deccing a mining corp is griefing...poor miners. /childish sarcasm

You chose the worst examples of what I typed (my bad in the the first place) and are we playing the same game? No, I'm playing both EVE Online and the meta game of which you have no notion of what it's about at all so it would seem.

[b]Fast Character Switching "XP Stylee" Undocking - More Routes Out of Station[/b] Here's my tear jar > |_| < Fill 'er up!
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1919 - 2013-09-26 18:06:39 UTC
Even though you are comparing ACTIVE CLOAKERS not what the actual thread is about, I'll entertain this
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
OK, so let me ask you this then: How do you know that person, let us say for arguments sake a Cov-Ops Pilot, is in system with you?

Does he appear in Local: Yes, I know 100% that he is in system.
Does he appear on D-Scan: Only if you are paying attention and have intelligence on gates
Is he a "cloaker": Don't know unless above D-Scan is true and only then you can guess form ship type.
Action: Crap my pants and jump on EVE Forums to start a thread on the big bad cloaker.
If d-scan still shows nothing after the gate timer, then he's cloaked. Also if a scout see's him blink uncloaked at a gate. And the ACTION is move on to a new system if he persists. I like how rather than be serious, you resort to taking a dig at me.

Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Now lets look at WH's scenario as they rarely if ever post up on AFK Cloakers:

Does he appear in Local: WTF is that? Are you crazy!
Does he appear on D-Scan: Only if you are paying attention and have intelligence on the entrance point
Is he a "cloaker": Quite possibly as this is the most dangerous space.
Action: Carry on but be prepared to engage.

Lets see
Do wormholes have cynos? Nope
Do wormhols have strict limits on the maximum size of ship? Yep
Can you collapse all but your static wormhole(s) leaving you with 0, 1 or 2 entrances depending on your choice of wormhole (0 being the important choice here): Yep

Needless to say, as well as local, WH space has considerable differences to null. Not surprising, since WH space was DESIGNED to work with delayed local(that's right, WHs do in fact have it), while the rest of the space was designed with immediate local.

Maximus Aerelius wrote:
So removing local solves all your issues...completely.
I have NEVER denied this. I have simply stated that removing local adds even more issues as well as fixing this one. It's a fix that will not happen for a while, possibly forever, since it affect null s heavily and CCP aren't likely to consider that a good move.

Maximus Aerelius wrote:
I guess you missed the class on baiting where you look your weakest in order for the cloaker to actually commit and then spring your trap on him? Cov-Ops are designed with that in the description, the ability to avoid unfavourable encounters and no smart pilot would engage unless they had a high certainty of success...that's just pure logic and reason.
Erm... no. Chances are you aren't baiting an idiot though. If it was Harry Forever in system, I wouldn't exactly worry, but a lot of cloakers actually know what they are doing and can tell what's bait.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1920 - 2013-09-26 18:10:39 UTC
Maximus Aerelius wrote:
Actually from what I read he wasn't active and was relying on team work to call up...I might be wrong but he certainly wasn't sat on that POCO for 23.5 hours moving his mouse every 15 minutes but he was in position while all the other pieces were brought into play and created a fantastic tactical strike.

I don't think you fully comprehend the requirement that this game demands and how much meta-game is as important as game play. Market Trading for instance requires external websites to be searched, movement for scouting or whatever is required cross referencing of multiple sources like DOTLAN, TS channels, Mumble or other comms.

Now to get around your absurd idea of "You have to move your mouse to prove you are active" timer watch this Automatic Mouse Mover (Version 2) or this I don't like screen savers now do you see the issue? And to what end? More certainty that you are safe or not.

If fully understand the requirement thanks. But I don not believe that was a result of an AFK cloaker. He MUST have been active to choose to engage. Prove to me first that he was AFK, and secondly that the kill would not have happened should he have been active.

And yes, I'm FULLY aware that it's easy to get around, though it would require client interaction, not just a mouse move. So clicking on something. I just have faith that most people wouldn't break the EULA to AFK cloak. Are you saying you would?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.