These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
NightmareX
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#2561 - 2013-10-21 19:39:08 UTC
Cage Man wrote:
I haven't read all the 100's of pages, but I think what people seem to be missing is that AFK cloakers generate revenue for CCP, so why would they change it?
I myself can't see why you would spend $15 a month to try deny a group of null bears the ability to make isk, which by the way they will still do via other methods, I made over 3 bil profit in null last month in a system that has 2 afk campers from methods other than ratting , and that was without even trying.
Its like paying gym membership and not using it.

Just because it generate CCP some money doesn't automaticly means that things like this is supposed to be like this. There have been many things in EVE that have been ingame for years and then suddenly changed drasticly or removed, because it was not working like it was supposed to work.

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

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
Cage Man
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#2562 - 2013-10-21 19:44:31 UTC
NightmareX wrote:
Cage Man wrote:
I haven't read all the 100's of pages, but I think what people seem to be missing is that AFK cloakers generate revenue for CCP, so why would they change it?
I myself can't see why you would spend $15 a month to try deny a group of null bears the ability to make isk, which by the way they will still do via other methods, I made over 3 bil profit in null last month in a system that has 2 afk campers from methods other than ratting , and that was without even trying.
Its like paying gym membership and not using it.

Just because it generate CCP some money doesn't automaticly means that things like this is supposed to be like this. There have been many things in EVE that have been ingame for years and then suddenly changed drasticly or removed, because it was not working like it was supposed to work.


if CCP had to stop all griefer activities they would loose more than a little money. There are many many, scamers, gankers, miner bumpers, incursion site campers, afk campers, etc in EVE.
NightmareX
Pandemic Horde High Sec Division
#2563 - 2013-10-21 19:49:11 UTC
Cage Man wrote:
NightmareX wrote:
Cage Man wrote:
I haven't read all the 100's of pages, but I think what people seem to be missing is that AFK cloakers generate revenue for CCP, so why would they change it?
I myself can't see why you would spend $15 a month to try deny a group of null bears the ability to make isk, which by the way they will still do via other methods, I made over 3 bil profit in null last month in a system that has 2 afk campers from methods other than ratting , and that was without even trying.
Its like paying gym membership and not using it.

Just because it generate CCP some money doesn't automaticly means that things like this is supposed to be like this. There have been many things in EVE that have been ingame for years and then suddenly changed drasticly or removed, because it was not working like it was supposed to work.


if CCP had to stop all griefer activities they would loose more than a little money. There are many many, scamers, gankers, miner bumpers, incursion site campers, afk campers, etc in EVE.

I once got scammed for 60 mill isk from a player with an alt that pretended to be my CEO witch had problems to log in his main character. Now it's not allowed to impersonate someone and do scamming that way.

Do you think CCP will lose money over changing this rule?

This is just an example on why CCP can change something to be better and still not lose any users.

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

1: Asteroid Madness

2: Clash of the Empires

3: Suddenly Spaceships fighting in Tama
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2564 - 2013-10-21 22:54:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

With impunity? Come on. All you have to do is stop ratting in that min-maxed fit, get a few guys to rat with and you have neutralized that threat.

When the threat consists of 50-100 players from the cyno blue balling you, good luck with that.

It appears CCP does see the need to push the cyno powers back a little in their development of the limited range cyno jammer. How does that affect your ideas with its change in the balance of AFK cloaky cynos?

Ultimately, it does not matter how many are behind that cyno.
Either they have enough to kill you or not.

It does not matter how many are behind that cyno, if they can't shoot at you because you warp away.

When they try to kill you, you don't have to sit there and take it.

You think that the ship you are in is not a PvP ship.

Let's assume that the cyno ship fitted a point. Let's assume that the cyno blob came through and got their points and webs on you before you got out of point range of the original cyno ship. Let's assume that the blob is easily large enough to overwhelm your tank in less than 40s. So let's assume that you cannot warp away, and unless you have a large fleet on your side and a cyno too or some other way to quickly get them in to your aid, you are pretty much done.

If these assumptions are true, and they are, then no pve op may occur in the presence of a single enemy cyno ship without a very large incursions style fleet on grid for the entire duration. So are you trying to force everyone to organize and only fly in incursions style fleets for every pve activity (minus the bling, ofc)? Sounds like it to me. And mining ships are most certainly not pvp ships in any form.

Added: PS, anyone care to comment on the new "limited range cyno jammers" and their effect on this discussion?
PPS, Teckos, I don't need to think about HS because the next system over is clear. But I am sure you knew that already and were just trolling me about showing me where HS was .. which is fine by me; no issue here ..

"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
#2565 - 2013-10-21 23:04:29 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
I just figured you can tell if there's a cloaked pilot in the system even on WH space. You just add the person to your notification list and scout the exits. Assuming you saw that person entering the system you can tell if it is still there cloaked or not.
Notification list = free intel.

And yet the pilots in wormhole space still won't care.

It's a really simple philosophy they run by.
There is either a hostile visible on grid, or not.

If not, keep in mind one could show up, and prepare accordingly. Then carry on.

If yes, have a response planned, and execute it. There is a finite variety of ships that can threaten, and they usually won't expose themselves unless they think they can win a fight with you.
Either they are right, or you are more prepared than they expect. Either way, you planned for this, and now that plan gets put into motion.

And yet, the pilots in wh space know that the hostiles which show up will be unable to use any cynos, and the total mass of the hostiles is limited by the wh size. Both of those elements are surprisingly important elements for your discussion of who cares about hostiles in system.

Good luck preparing for a blue ball cyno hot drop. They happen a lot and supers come out surprisingly often for those too. Call it risk averse, Teckos, but hot drops happen a lot, and wormholes don't ever have to worry about it. Wormholers will never see a super, either.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Vas Eldryn
#2566 - 2013-10-22 02:33:36 UTC
I cant find much info on the "limited range cyno jammer", although on the rubicon site it does mention the following:

"Guerilla-style Warfare Support - Tactics to chip away at the behemoths have surfaced, allowing small fleets of mercenaries, saboteurs and troublemakers to become cause for concern for even the most reinforced of alliance strongholds."

not sure what this entails but will AFK cyno cloaking still be a "necessity" to pose a threat to PVE ships after rubicons release? Anyone's guess at the moment!
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2567 - 2013-10-22 03:18:49 UTC
Vas Eldryn wrote:
I cant find much info on the "limited range cyno jammer", although on the rubicon site it does mention the following:

"Guerilla-style Warfare Support - Tactics to chip away at the behemoths have surfaced, allowing small fleets of mercenaries, saboteurs and troublemakers to become cause for concern for even the most reinforced of alliance strongholds."

not sure what this entails but will AFK cyno cloaking still be a "necessity" to pose a threat to PVE ships after rubicons release? Anyone's guess at the moment!


Rubicon detailed

Quote:
One of the problems faced by small groups of ships hunting lone targets in nullsec is that those lone targets are often bait ships that will call in capital ship support when attacked. Rubicon adds an interesting counter to capital hot-dropping in the form of disposable, one-time use cynosural field jammers. This device will prevent Cynosural Field Generators from activating within a range of about 70-100km, but it may not deactivate fields that are already established. The enemy can still jump in capital ships elsewhere in the system and warp them into the battlefield, but this will remove the surprise escalation element of hot-dropping and makes it much easier for a fleet to escape when the big guns arrive.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Vas Eldryn
#2568 - 2013-10-22 03:28:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Vas Eldryn
ahh cool thanks for the link! been looking for that!

It doesn't really mention whether the limited range jammer would defend against cov-ops cyno's or operate like its bigger brother (the system jammer).

my guess is it would be like the system jammer?
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#2569 - 2013-10-22 04:42:07 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Nag'o wrote:

But wouldn't that cripple the game's social infrastructure? Let's say you have a friend in a different corp, you wouldn't be able to know when he goes online if you are in a wormhole.


I almost never use the watch list. I use corp chat, alliance chat, private chat channels friends have created and invited me too, and then things like mumble, TS, and jabber.

So no.

I use the watch list a lot on my alts. They are in npc corps and I can't tell if my contacts are online from those. Plus I can't use third party tools on every computer I log in from. It would definitely break this part of the game for me but I honestly wouldn't mind if this improves gameplay. I'd love another exclusive WH mechanic.


You use it that much in a WH? Really?

Specifically in the WH I use it to check on the presence of the local corp members... as an intel tool. But that's not the only way I use it.




So shutting it off in a WH wont cripple anything except your free intel.

"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
#2570 - 2013-10-22 04:45:53 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

With impunity? Come on. All you have to do is stop ratting in that min-maxed fit, get a few guys to rat with and you have neutralized that threat.

When the threat consists of 50-100 players from the cyno blue balling you, good luck with that.

It appears CCP does see the need to push the cyno powers back a little in their development of the limited range cyno jammer. How does that affect your ideas with its change in the balance of AFK cloaky cynos?

Ultimately, it does not matter how many are behind that cyno.
Either they have enough to kill you or not.

It does not matter how many are behind that cyno, if they can't shoot at you because you warp away.

When they try to kill you, you don't have to sit there and take it.

You think that the ship you are in is not a PvP ship.

Let's assume that the cyno ship fitted a point. Let's assume that the cyno blob came through and got their points and webs on you before you got out of point range of the original cyno ship. Let's assume that the blob is easily large enough to overwhelm your tank in less than 40s. So let's assume that you cannot warp away, and unless you have a large fleet on your side and a cyno too or some other way to quickly get them in to your aid, you are pretty much done.

If these assumptions are true, and they are, then no pve op may occur in the presence of a single enemy cyno ship without a very large incursions style fleet on grid for the entire duration. So are you trying to force everyone to organize and only fly in incursions style fleets for every pve activity (minus the bling, ofc)? Sounds like it to me. And mining ships are most certainly not pvp ships in any form.

Added: PS, anyone care to comment on the new "limited range cyno jammers" and their effect on this discussion?
PPS, Teckos, I don't need to think about HS because the next system over is clear. But I am sure you knew that already and were just trolling me about showing me where HS was .. which is fine by me; no issue here ..


Noting contrived example to prove you point. Roll Lets assume the hostile doesn't have a cyno. That there is no fleet....Roll

Not every hostile has a cyno. Not every cyno is going to bring in a 50-100 man fleet.

This kind of extreme risk aversion is not something that should be promoted in null.

"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
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#2571 - 2013-10-22 05:26:00 UTC
People do bad things that they shouldn't do sometimes, like ratting in a supercarrier.

Afk cloaking is the one of the only things able to counter that.

So if you don't like afk cloaking, you surely are doing something you souldn't do.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart
Vas Eldryn
#2572 - 2013-10-22 08:44:44 UTC
Altrue wrote:
People do bad things that they shouldn't do sometimes, like ratting in a supercarrier.

Afk cloaking is the one of the only things able to counter that.

So if you don't like afk cloaking, you surely are doing something you souldn't do.


like mining, ratting or anything else that people do when you have to earn isk or support alliance needs. If there was no financial gain to being in Null or ability to become self sufficient in Null, then why be there? to be cannon fodder for the PVP handicapped that need AFK cyno camping?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#2573 - 2013-10-22 09:03:11 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I think you over estimate the need for a fleet.
Neither side in a wormhole fight is getting reinforcements beyond those already in the wh with them.

And what is this repeated claim about only a covops being able to sneak up on a player? Assuming they are tackling, every other ship involved in the fight can be non-covops, and most pilots in a wh have more than a single ship.
If you are in a wormhole and you get caught by a non-covops fleet, you did it wrong. It's that simple. You entrances should be sealed and those that aren't should be watched. In null, it's not that easy, since all entrances are unsealable and cynos bypass them.
And I'm not talking reinforcements, I'm talking the initial fleet.

Nikk Narrel wrote:
You are the only one online, for your entire alliance, and you are holding sov.
If this happens enough times, your alliance is going to have problems, or do you expect charity from opposing players?

And if noone was around to help you, your ship still has it's own sensors. Use them, and warn yourself.
No suggestion to remove or limit local ever excluded the means to replace it with an effort based system.

I want free intel or else, is about the weakest argument possible. In a competitive game, what you earn for yourself is what has meaning, not what everyone is given for free.
Yes, Currently we already have the issue if you are the only one online. You want to expand that to mean that you need scouts with you. You want to force null blocks to have to use multiple characters and spend isk just to achieve what they have now in some systems (it would be impractical to cover them all with intel).
But all that does is mean that the bigger alliances have an even larger advantage, defending alliances have an even larger advantage, and solo players have plenty of targets in non-intel systems to hunt with no resistance.
This is a bad idea. You will not convince me otherwise, no matter how many times you repeat it.
All you are doing is crying endlessly about how you want the game to be changed so you can beat up the big guys. Go find Harry Forever, you two would get on great.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#2574 - 2013-10-22 09:16:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
NightmareX wrote:
I once got scammed for 60 mill isk from a player with an alt that pretended to be my CEO witch had problems to log in his main character. Now it's not allowed to impersonate someone and do scamming that way.

Do you think CCP will lose money over changing this rule?

This is just an example on why CCP can change something to be better and still not lose any users.
It's almost always been against the rules to impersonate, they simply clarified their stance on it and how they handle such cases.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Nag'o
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2575 - 2013-10-22 10:45:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Nag'o
Nag'o wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

But wouldn't that cripple the game's social infrastructure? Let's say you have a friend in a different corp, you wouldn't be able to know when he goes online if you are in a wormhole.


I almost never use the watch list. I use corp chat, alliance chat, private chat channels friends have created and invited me too, and then things like mumble, TS, and jabber.
...
So shutting it off in a WH wont cripple anything except your free intel.

For me, it wouldn't. In fact, I would welcome that change. Like I told you, for me the ideal WH game would block all sorts of communication to outer systems. Ofc CCP won't implement that because one can simply use a third party tool to circumvent the effect. The point to consider is that anyone in a WH that relies on watchlists as a communication tool will have their game broken. Won't that be a bad thing?

Brain hackz0r. Execute schizophrenia virus. Hyper-phishing activated. Downloading reality.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#2576 - 2013-10-22 14:21:14 UTC
Nag'o wrote:
Nag'o wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

But wouldn't that cripple the game's social infrastructure? Let's say you have a friend in a different corp, you wouldn't be able to know when he goes online if you are in a wormhole.


I almost never use the watch list. I use corp chat, alliance chat, private chat channels friends have created and invited me too, and then things like mumble, TS, and jabber.
...
So shutting it off in a WH wont cripple anything except your free intel.

For me, it wouldn't. In fact, I would welcome that change. Like I told you, for me the ideal WH game would block all sorts of communication to outer systems. Ofc CCP won't implement that because one can simply use a third party tool to circumvent the effect. The point to consider is that anyone in a WH that relies on watchlists as a communication tool will have their game broken. Won't that be a bad thing?


For communication that is true, but for intel it is a different matter, IMO. Using your specific case, I doubt these guys who are in the same WH as you are unlikely to join you on Jabber or IRC.

"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
#2577 - 2013-10-22 14:27:51 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Ultimately, it does not matter how many are behind that cyno.
Either they have enough to kill you or not.

It does not matter how many are behind that cyno, if they can't shoot at you because you warp away.

When they try to kill you, you don't have to sit there and take it.

You think that the ship you are in is not a PvP ship.

Let's assume that the cyno ship fitted a point. Let's assume that the cyno blob came through and got their points and webs on you before you got out of point range of the original cyno ship. Let's assume that the blob is easily large enough to overwhelm your tank in less than 40s. So let's assume that you cannot warp away, and unless you have a large fleet on your side and a cyno too or some other way to quickly get them in to your aid, you are pretty much done.

If these assumptions are true, and they are, then no pve op may occur in the presence of a single enemy cyno ship without a very large incursions style fleet on grid for the entire duration. So are you trying to force everyone to organize and only fly in incursions style fleets for every pve activity (minus the bling, ofc)? Sounds like it to me. And mining ships are most certainly not pvp ships in any form.

Added: PS, anyone care to comment on the new "limited range cyno jammers" and their effect on this discussion?
PPS, Teckos, I don't need to think about HS because the next system over is clear. But I am sure you knew that already and were just trolling me about showing me where HS was .. which is fine by me; no issue here ..

Why are we assuming these details, apparently, were not considered and prepared for?

We can fit stabs, fly aligned, and operate in cooperation with others.
Even assuming that you don't have all of these options available at all times, you should always have at least some of them.

If you are flying in null, (a general you, not Andy specifically), should you not expect to at least need to include one of those three details?
And that is simply for tactics based around hostile avoidance and evasion, not trying to fight back at all.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#2578 - 2013-10-22 14:36:41 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

And yet the pilots in wormhole space still won't care.

It's a really simple philosophy they run by.
There is either a hostile visible on grid, or not.

If not, keep in mind one could show up, and prepare accordingly. Then carry on.

If yes, have a response planned, and execute it. There is a finite variety of ships that can threaten, and they usually won't expose themselves unless they think they can win a fight with you.
Either they are right, or you are more prepared than they expect. Either way, you planned for this, and now that plan gets put into motion.

And yet, the pilots in wh space know that the hostiles which show up will be unable to use any cynos, and the total mass of the hostiles is limited by the wh size. Both of those elements are surprisingly important elements for your discussion of who cares about hostiles in system.

Good luck preparing for a blue ball cyno hot drop. They happen a lot and supers come out surprisingly often for those too. Call it risk averse, Teckos, but hot drops happen a lot, and wormholes don't ever have to worry about it. Wormholers will never see a super, either.

Again with the cyno comment.

Even assuming they could hot drop, they will NEVER need to, much less even want to.

Their target cannot see them. Cloaked and in range, or uncloaked and beyond scanning expectations.
(The ships always at that POS floating now being manned, which d-scan won't tell you about, as an example)

The target has no local to warn them, and must be prepared and expecting to encounter hostiles.
Aside from managing PI, this usually means not being cloaked.

As to never seeing a super, if someone feels you are so isolated and vulnerable that they decide it is safe to drop a super on you... you really need to bait that thing out.
The opportunity you represent to it is not half the opportunity it represents to you....

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#2579 - 2013-10-22 14:37:39 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I think you over estimate the need for a fleet.
Neither side in a wormhole fight is getting reinforcements beyond those already in the wh with them.

And what is this repeated claim about only a covops being able to sneak up on a player? Assuming they are tackling, every other ship involved in the fight can be non-covops, and most pilots in a wh have more than a single ship.
If you are in a wormhole and you get caught by a non-covops fleet, you did it wrong. It's that simple. You entrances should be sealed and those that aren't should be watched. In null, it's not that easy, since all entrances are unsealable and cynos bypass them.
And I'm not talking reinforcements, I'm talking the initial fleet.


The same can be said in null. If we wanted to be flippant we could say, in null if you get caught you are doing it wrong. Note I'm not even making a cov-ops/non-cov-ops distinction. Local should give you plenty of time to get safe. Yes, you cannot "close" the entry points to a system but you can anchor bubbles to slow down entrants (yes after Rubicon you wont be able to do this if the entrant is an interceptor--hmmm does CCP think null is too safe?).

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#2580 - 2013-10-22 14:46:15 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I think you over estimate the need for a fleet.
Neither side in a wormhole fight is getting reinforcements beyond those already in the wh with them.

And what is this repeated claim about only a covops being able to sneak up on a player? Assuming they are tackling, every other ship involved in the fight can be non-covops, and most pilots in a wh have more than a single ship.
If you are in a wormhole and you get caught by a non-covops fleet, you did it wrong. It's that simple. You entrances should be sealed and those that aren't should be watched. In null, it's not that easy, since all entrances are unsealable and cynos bypass them.
And I'm not talking reinforcements, I'm talking the initial fleet.

So, in your wormhole environment, you have enough personnel to monitor the entrances non-stop.
They either scan down, and close new ones, or sit and watch over them.

Why do you expect to need so much more effort in a wormhole, than in null?

Do you think the rewards would not change to reflect the challenge the area required? I suspect you would have commented on the difference in rewards between the two.

Frankly, except for the mad logistical demands poised by random and changing points of entry, along with the absence of outposts, wormholes seem to be what null should have always been.

A dark place, where things go bump in the night.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...