These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

My Solution to Cloaking, please read before judging.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Octoven
Stellar Production
#21 - 2013-10-17 19:51:11 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Octoven wrote:
To be honest cloaking is already a perfectly balanced feature. Not everything in eve has an anti or counter module nor should it. If cloakers were able to fire under cloak I could understand. The only issue here is your potential safety being compromised because someone is in system cloaked. Sorry to burst your bubble but that happens without cloakers too, ever heard of log in traps?

Cloaking is a passive way to get around and scout its used to gather information, most covert ships pay that price by reduced DPS and defenses. If a bomber is giving you issues than you clearly haven't learned to deal with them yet. What you are asking for is a way to potentially decloak someone, this is a bit rubbish give the level of firepower and defenses coverts have. If you wish to add in a function to seek out cloaked ships then I think its only balanced to give cloaked ships better DPS and Tank to at least have a fighting chance.


Or be removed from local so now they really are covert.


Yeah but see thats my point exactly they are even visible so they are indeed giving up the fact that they are in the system, again another minus to claokers. Yet we live with that just so we can cloak. The OP simply is asking for more control over when we can cloak and when we cant.
bloodknight2
Revenu.Quebec
#22 - 2013-10-17 20:03:19 UTC
My solution to AFK cloaking.

If you are AFK cloaked, CCP calls your mom and tell her how bad you are at Eve and how you make the poor nullbear crying.
Angeal MacNova
Holefood Inc.
Warriors of the Blood God
#23 - 2013-10-17 21:05:51 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Angeal MacNova wrote:
No input for 10min, you log out of the game.

There you go. No more AFK cloaking, or AFK anything else for that matter.



No, because it is to the detriment of players who are not AFK, but input is not required.


Really? Please do tell who these players would be...

Doing anything combat related, you shouldn't be afk.

Mining? Sure, it can take longer than 10 min to fill your ore hold. I just got into a mining barge (I had to switch since I start university courses next month on top of having a full time job, I needed to switch to a more passive profession which will be mining and trading) and with a cycle time of 2k every 3 min I fill a 24k hold in 45 minutes.

Since I have to empty my ore hold every 45 min, I can't really be AFK and I don't see a problem providing some kind of input once within a 10 min period. Using the ingame web browser, doing a survey scan to update the list/quantities, browsing the market, trading, turning pirate wrecks blue, looting the officer pirate wrecks, etc.

Gate camping? Not an AFK activity

Station camping? Again, not an AFK activity

Traveling? Autopilot sucks and you're asking to be ganked. Be at the keyboard to tell your ship to warp to 0m and jump.

http://www.projectvaulderie.com/goodnight-sweet-prince/

http://www.projectvaulderie.com/the-untold-story/

CCP's true, butthurt, colors.

Because those who can't do themselves keep others from doing too.
Friggz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#24 - 2013-10-17 21:24:07 UTC
Read it. Judged it.

Another horrible idea by someone with no experince flying a cloaked ship that would absolutely destroy almost every application of cloaking vessels in exchange for giving carebears the ability to exploit null-sec without the associated risks.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#25 - 2013-10-17 21:34:10 UTC
Didn't read and judged it

terrible idea

.
Octoven
Stellar Production
#26 - 2013-10-17 22:42:09 UTC
Roime wrote:
Didn't read and judged it

terrible idea


Haha i love how you judge something you havent read XP
Lea Swiftfoot
The Regency
The Monarchy
#27 - 2013-10-18 18:02:06 UTC
The only reason I have suggested something like this is because if this is supposed to be a simulation game, then, theoretically, wouldn't you be able to detect an anomaly on your sensors? Unless a module is "perfect" there needs to be a distinct signature/downside. Also the 100km is just a ball park number and by no means was meant to be the actual number, it was just provided for reference purposes.
Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#28 - 2013-10-18 18:27:58 UTC
This wouldn't solve anything. Cloaked ships could still sit at 150km then warp to you when the time was right. They could still strike without any warning.
Qweasdy
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2013-10-18 18:37:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Qweasdy
Octoven wrote:
To be honest cloaking is already a perfectly balanced feature. Not everything in eve has an anti or counter module nor should it. If cloakers were able to fire under cloak I could understand. The only issue here is your potential safety being compromised because someone is in system cloaked. Sorry to burst your bubble but that happens without cloakers too, ever heard of log in traps?

Cloaking is a passive way to get around and scout its used to gather information, most covert ships pay that price by reduced DPS and defenses. If a bomber is giving you issues than you clearly haven't learned to deal with them yet. What you are asking for is a way to potentially decloak someone, this is a bit rubbish give the level of firepower and defenses coverts have. If you wish to add in a function to seek out cloaked ships then I think its only balanced to give cloaked ships better DPS and Tank to at least have a fighting chance.


Well to be fair a recon ship can fit for 50k dps and a million ehp, it's called a cyno.

This is a terrible thread. As such, it's locked. - CCP Falcon
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#30 - 2013-10-18 19:23:06 UTC
There are no stealth ships playing EVE, except in wormholes.

If your name is listed in local, then people know you are present.
If people know you are present, then you must also realize they will behave differently than they would had they been unaware.
Some pilots will seek safety, while others will prepare for possible conflict. Either way, they react to you.

If people see your name listed long beyond a typical person's ability to remain awake, or alert, they will begin to doubt that you are actually playing the game attentively. Some people bluff by staying online just so they can be seen in local.
Will anyone call that bluff, when they actually ARE present and able to follow up?
Gosh, it's almost like playing a game!

Rock - Paper - Scissors
Rock - The PvE player
Scissors - The genuinely AFK cloaked player
Paper - The player mistaken for being AFK, but paying attention
By playing Rock, the PvE pilot is hoping that name in local represents scissors, but they won't know unless it engages them.

If you are getting your intel from a chat channel, you are being given something for free.
Take it or leave it, but don't complain about the quality of something you never earned in the first place.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#31 - 2013-10-18 19:30:26 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
The idea does nothing to address WHY people afk cloak. -1

The idea is based on the incorrect assumption there is nothing anyone can do about a cloaking ship. -1

The OP assumes that all "combat" should be a direct confrontation where the player is always there and ready to go... when, infact, you can legitimately engage in combat without ever even undocking or revealing your presence (see: psychological/asymetrical warfare). -1

Three strikes: the OP is out.

How did you Veterans start?
Michael Ignis Archangel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#32 - 2013-10-19 05:05:03 UTC
There are counters available in the game to AFK cloaking; in my opinion nothing needs to be done at all.

Assumptions:
1) You (a plural you addressed to all seeking a 'fix') are speaking of AFK cloaking in sovereign nullsec. This is generally the only place it can be complained about, since everywhere else is 'free game' for docking rights, and I don't think anyone is seriously advocating a nerf to AFK docking... I hope.
2) You are frightened of a hot-drop from said sov-null AFK cloaker. I assume this because any single cloaked combat ship should not be a realistic threat to your gaming experience to the point that the outcry would be so great. In essence, it's not the cloaker you're afraid of, it's the 50 bomber pillaging his mere presence promises.

Perhaps you've heard of the neat-o things called cyno jammers? If AFK cloaking is so horrid, anchor one and turn it on. If you cannot then deal with a single Buzzard or Manticore, well, I'm just sorry. That engagement profile is so small, if you choose to live within it, you have made the decision to be vulnerable.

"But I like moving my ratting carrier around!"
Cycle the jammer.

"That's inconvenient."
Yeah, I suppose it is. So is organizing the folks needed to present an actual threat, and not just a "ZOMG neut in local" threat.

(the following is pure opinion) AFK cloaking is one of the few ways to effectively apply asymmetric warfare on larger groups. This is a necessary element to the game that keeps the threat of danger present (or mitigated through a large ISK sink like cyno jammer bills) in null security space. Null meaning none, hence the name, etc. etc.
Lea Swiftfoot
The Regency
The Monarchy
#33 - 2013-10-19 05:37:15 UTC
To the people that are bashing my idea, its just that, an IDEA. It is meant to be a suggestion and nothing else. I thought it was good when I wrote it, but I don't have all the information to cover every point needed.
Previous page12