Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I won't debate how accurate your theory is at the moment, but I will point out that our excel sheet loving players won't be far behind screaming.

They crunch numbers, and can crush individual play on the expectation that the bigger picture is the most important aspect to everyone, at all times.
And if the risk is reduced as a result of this, then so are the rewards.

By the admission of several, these cloaked players have an impact that reduces the amount of ratting done, and amount of ore being mined.

What can one expect the devs to do, when this obstacle is removed? The same thing they always do, when confronted with an unwanted rise in production or revenue... they arrange for it to be reduced by other means.

My cat has her own account.

Not very chatty, but she loves mining. Giant space litterbox, I suspect she sees the belts as....

I do believe there exists such a perfect solution for the current problem. The issue is to hit it just right and not alienate anyone except the targeted group that needs eliminating.

The problem is to create a counter for a nitch type of cloaking behavior. Its generally referred to AFK cloaking but the basic gist of is to eliminate ships that have cloaking module on there ships and avoid confrontation whiles not docked and are not sitting actively in front of there PCs.

There is no need to alter other types of game mechanics to target this exact group. Its neither any reason to add extra game mechanics or overcomplicated features. Problem would just be to take action and cut through all the bullshit from all the players believing in AFK cloaking being a good game feature that should exist in the game. The second problem would be to create a very specialized feature to target only the type of behavior described above and not spill over to other types of cloaked play.

The targeted group would be cloaked ships with no pilot behind the wheals.
The group that must be protected and not affected by this feature, cloaked ships with a player behind the keyboard.

The trick is to find a feature so specialized to only affect one of the two groups and not spill over to the other one. It would also be preferred to be simplistic and easy to implement.

If a solution listed above would be found it would alienate the minimal amount of players in the game and at the same time create a more meaningful way to protect and defend space in general. This would make most players happy except for the group of players that love to AFK in there cloaked ships.

THEY INVENTED LOCATER AGENTS AGAINST AFK CLOACKING

YOU CAN SEE WHAT SHIP HE IS IN

STOP WHINING AND GO USE YOUR MISSION AGENTS

Those are interesting and vital points to the global economical systems of eve. The problem is that its outside the scope of AFK cloak play and honestly should be addressed in a more in depth thread on there own. But the general consensus is that if you eliminate income in null people find alternative methods to grind. People already grind with ease in high sec so reducing the risk in null wouldn't inflate the economy. It would just open alternatives to grinding.

But in general AFK cloak methods are cheep tactics and are used because there lacks a counter to them. There was in fact a and more balanced method introduced in the latest patch addressing your two points, warp speed buffs on interceptors. Alternative methods to small gang warfare and harassment's of economical targets should be added in a more meaningful and balanced method like the interceptor buffs. At the same time old broken mechanics should be flushed out as in the AFK cloak method.

Having a broken mechanic as in the AFK cloaking system in the game cheapens the experience of null space and eliminates meaningful pvp and decision making. Its frustrating having a system locked down by a single individual while its not frustrating getting ganked by a roaming interceptor gang. That is because there exists counters to the latter but not the former.

Effort should result in affect. The problem is that its impossible to affect cloaked ships in safespots in any way possible. That is worse then trying to balance the economy by keeping this broken method in. I would rather flush out broken mechanics then worry about the global economy.

Resource denial/economics warfare is totally valid. Right now the way to go about doing that is to use AFK camping. So, if you remove that you are declaring a type of game play (resource denial/economic warfare) invalid, at least implicitly.

What will happen if AFK cloaking is dis-allowed via a change to game mechanics?

I argue the following will occur:

1. People will be able to PvE in null more than they currently do.
2. As a result income will rise.
3. Demand for goods in game will also rise (also out of game, what is the current price of a PLEX, expect that to go up, maybe even alot).
4. People will see the higher rewards-to-risk ratio and more people will end up moving to null sec.
5. The Devs seeing this increased flow of isk into the game and having an interest in the in-game economy they may very well intervene directly.

Propositions 1 & 2 are pretty banal and non-controversial to me. Where things start to get interesting is 3. Now you might think that the extra isk from ratting or whatever in Null is great, and for a time it might even be easier to get your PLEX if that is how you "pay" for your account. But as the demand increases and the price increase you'll find yourself having to rat even more....which some people might like, but in the end that **** is still called grinding and this may not be a game play enhancing result.

Proposition 4 is also intriguing to me, that it is quite possible that some of the same people complaining about AFK campers might show up here on the forums complaining about the poop-socking ratters in their ideal systems. About how they can't get a good anomaly anymore because of other people showing up. I could even see the cost of renting going up as well for you renters. After all, the additional time ratting and doing PvE could mean that any given system is no more valuable. And your corp or alliance might want even more people to try and help cover possible rental increases.

Proposition 5 also has plenty of evidence as well. Alchemy changes, particularly the ones for technetium back when it was a T2 production bottleneck is an example. The moon goo re-balancing is yet another. Nerfs to things like incursions are yet another. I'd even argue that the implementation of invention was CCP intervening in the Eve economy because they did not like what they saw. Want more examples? Drone poo removal, changing loot drops for missions, changing insurance payouts. All of these things had a direct impact on the economics of the game.

Qne speaking of economics, the eve economy is largely a closed economy. Whatever happens in 1 part will have a direct impact elsewhere in the game economy. Change the flow of isk in one part and it will, absolutely, have secondary and tertiary effects through out the rest of the economy. Moon goo, is currently a fixed quantity. There is only so much of it, and hence there is only so much T2 components that can be produced at any given time. Increase the over all level of isk in the game and those prices have to go up. Which will necessitate more grinding for isk. This will continue until there is a new equilibrium level...and all that extra isk you are making doesn't see like as much as it initially did.

And lastly, Eve is a game where players seem to take delight in causing mayhem, chaos and destruction and when it leads to another player or player(s) raging in local, or the forums, etc. That is particularly delightful. So, removing local could very well lead to more things like log on traps, AWOXing, to name two ways to keep doing what they are doing now with AFK cloaking.

It is a basic lesson of economics....everything comes with a trade off(s)....everything. What are the trade offs from getting rid of AFK cloaking by simply logging the cloaker off, or some other boneheaded solution? Its funny, you go to any discussion about the economy and when somebody says, "I mine my minerals, hence they are free..." everyone is quick to point out the opportunity cost argument. But they ignore the opportunity cost argument here. Is part of that cost increased AWOXing and a noticable jump in PLEX prices, and more people competing for more anomalies?

Its difficult to say exactly how the economy will be affected by removal of the AFK cloaking method. But what is certain is that AFK play and specifically AFK cloaking isn't a good game mechanic. Other methods could be implemented to increase risk in null but that's besides the point. AFK cloaking is the topic at hand, lets try focus on that.

But risk is part of the issue. To deny this is like trying to deny that a cat is a mammal.

Why do people AFK cloak? To increase the perceived risk for PvE pilots and deny them access to resources/isk. Why do PvE pilots dislike it so? Because it increases their perception of risk.

Risk is undoubtedly an integral aspect of this discussion. To pretend otherwise is silly.

How about cloaking releases a relay probe with users name attached to it within a random 50km radius

shows up on dscan but the cloaked player can move it from the probe scanner view to anywhere in the system

the probe is displayed with "(active)" if it has been moved or launched within the last 1h 10m and "(inactive)" if it has not been moved or interacted with in that time

Possibly: if the probe is "(inactive)" the player will remain in local but can not observe its changes or discussions

Yes risk is part of it and risk also brings challenge. As all good games risk and challenge are balanced to create content. Except there is no content here. There is just plain risk added. There is no counter, there is no game play, no nothing. Its you watching the guy in local and know hes been there for hours and he can kill you if you rat or mine. Because CCP didn't add any content to interact with that risk other then wait for it.

In relation to other games like Super Mario it would be like getting killed by the blue turtles every time. As soon as they spawned they would target you and kill you and it would be game over. That is not meaningful content and in relation to risk vs reward, that's just pore game design because there is only pure lopsided risk.

Fast interceptors on the other hand isn't. The risks are apparent, if an interceptor show up in your local system you better hope he doesn't have the new implants or he will be in your belt tagging you and waiting for his friends to show up. The reason its balanced is cause the interceptor gang cant stick around for hours or days. They leave when there job is done and you can always scout for there incoming attack.

The only reason AFK cloaking is used is cause there is an apparent lacking counter. The second CCP would add a counter all the AFK cloaking would disappear and people would have to sit actively in front of there PCs when trying to camp a hostile system.