Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sorry, are you mental?
You think blobs would have a harder time with this? They already have thousands of POS structures up, full intel tool and structures to deal with them as well as dedicated people to take care of their every need. If you idea were implemented, they would be set up inside a week. However anyone attacking would be going in blind.
Smaller alliances however wouldn't have the funding and the round the clock support to keep these intel structures up.

Honestly, I don't know how you even make this stuff up. Have you ever been to null?

EDIT oh, and the hard to visualise thing, that's because this is not the first time you have compared to completely separate things and told me I'm contradicting myself. I can only assume that you are unable to separate concepts into more than a single channel. This also comes across in your "idea" as it's clearly thought out from a single viewpoint with little or no thought put into other viewpoints.

How dare you! I demand that you wear a pin on your clothes to mark yourself as AFK and you will go sit in the deadspace corner until you're ready to be active again!

Hey genius, maybe you should learn a little something about ganking before jumping to conclusions. The difference between a max tank and a max yield ice mining mack in high sec is about half a catalyst. A single DC2 and the rest fit for yield would be exactly the same amount of gankers as your max tank fit.

Coming from you, this is ******* hilarious.

You're right, why should you play a game you are supposedly playing. The game should just do it all for you! AFK miners are the future! Unite highsec carebears in all your AFK mining glory!

Smaller alliances don't need the infrastructure bigger alliances do. An alliance with a handful of systems doesn't need a huge JB network for example. But under your idea suddenly they need these structures, and they need to be able to actively defend them 24/7. Effectively you want to force more manual labour on all alliances. A 10000 man alliance can absorb that quite easily, a 200 man alliance, not so much. Seriously... It's not a difficult concept to understand.

EDIT: By the way I find it quite amusing that basically what you said here is "small alliances don't matter, **** them".

And that is perfectly fine. You have to be active to do it, and it's no real benefit over jumping in system and randomly jumping to an anom. If that's what you want to do to try to score your kills, rather than just use an interceptor like a half-competent PVPer, that's fine. You would STILL be putting in more effort than an AFK cloaker currently has to.

Wow...
Just wow...
So what you are saying is, there are currently no sov holding alliances that would struggle to install, maintain and defend billions in extra intel structures to achieve what they already have? Seriously guy, do you still have an active EVE account?

And why are renters simply dismissed from discussion? They would need to either pay for their intel or live without it, since the sov holder is not going to pay the cost of building and maintaining their intel for nothing.

Oh I know, because you don't care about renters, thus they don't matter.
Much like you don't care about small alliances, thus they don't matter.
Much like you don't care about anyone outside your little activities, thus they don't matter.

And this right here, is exactly why you idea is so dumb. Because you refuse to consider it from any point of view but your own.

Come back when you've learned to consider all sides of a situation.

The instant that you click on that client, you would be warped back to your previous location. You would not be able to dscan, ship spin, type text in chat, or do anything else without losing the AFK tag and getting warped back to known space. AFK would truely mean that you were not inputing anything from the keyboard or mouse to the client, including client window activation.

Also, having the AFK tag, you would have been warped to within 1 million km of your previous location to a deadspace location with a decloaking marker, so you would show on dscan. Everyone would know what ship you were in and about where your last location was with a couple of dscans. We could simply choose to operate in locations greater than a couple million kms of you and know that you would not be warped back to our anomalies.

With these mechanics proposals being AFK really would make getting the easy AFK kill much harder, but if we need it to be harder, we can always add a 30s timer before any modules could be activated. Being AFK really shouldn't be an in-game advantage from any perspective. I would add that your local should not show anything while AFK. I prefer a complete logout, but if entering your password again is such a big deal, then we really do need a special place for AFK pilots in their own deadspace corners to think about what they should have done.

Okay, so I'll be relatively nice to ya because I feel bad for you. I respect the leadership in your alliance that I know, and I even respect the line members that I used to fly with and I have no ill will towards you or your people.

Now, this idea is pretty bad because it ruins some other methods of gameplay at the same time. If you determine that someone has been afk by module presses, then you make scanning while cloaked a punishable offense. If you determine that someone is AFK because they aren't moving while cloaked, you punish cloaky camps. If you punish this by checking for interaction with the client you make it so that multiboxers can't ever stop paying attention to a client for a site or two which means that a cloaky orca or a cloaky noctis isn't available. You punish AFK miners that way too, people who just want to make a buck or two in-game while doing their homework or watching a movie.

In short, you never really thought of the ramificatiions of your idea.

Now, on to more of why your idea is wrong.

First of all: most cloaky ships can't target anything for a set amount of time after decloaking. The exception is stealth bombers. The way around this is to decloak in warp, but that means you show up on d-scan and give your prey time to escape.

Also, you are under the impression that the guy who is the danger is the guy who is AFK cloaking. This is wrong for several reasons. The first being that someone AFK is no real danger to you. The second being that there are very few cloaky ships that can be dangerous to a ratter solo, and all of those are highly situational.

What you are actually afraid of is the force projection that is represented by bridging titans and bridging blops. A bridging blops can move a decent sized bomber/recon/tech 3 cloaky fleet to right on top of you from a pretty decent distance away. If you are unlucky, they might even be able to bridge from highsec.

You have to worry about either a large force of fairly squishy ships coming through ("large" being less than 50 reasonably) if they only have a covert cyno. The time to kill is somewhere in the 30 seconds to 2 minutes range for most subcap ratters, and then they just moonwalk out of there, right? You have no way to kill them at all?

Well, that's not true. If you can get a bubble on top of them, or some tackle in there, you might be able to respond and get some kills of your own. You aren't defenseless, and a small covops gang will die to a reasonably competant similar sized conventional gang. At the very least you get a fight and have fun.

Now, you need people that are willing to stick their necks out and help their alliance-mates for this to work. You need people to be active, and you need people to fit sensibly and be able to swap to a pre-made PvP ship on short notice. If this isn't feasible for your alliance then the problem isn't blops bridges, but your alliance.

Now, what if it is a titan that is doing the bridging? Well then, son. you're kind of ******. Titan bridges can move up to 254 people at a time of any subcap class, and they can do it from what is essentially complete safety while POSed up and surrounded by hundreds of friendlies within jump range of their entire capital support fleet.

So yeah, you shouldn't nerf cloaking. It is fine as it stands. If you are really worried about uncounterable fleets coming through a bridge lit by a cloaky, then call to nerf titan bridges. Blops bridges are already pretty well balanced due to fuel usage and fuel bay size and the fact that you can't bridge range-bonused logi through. The few things that are capable of killing you solo and mounting a covops cloak aren't going to kill you quickly if you are flying a sensibly fit ship, and if you can get a bubble on field quickly, you stand a pretty good chance of killing them dead.

Yes, the anomaly I previously went AFK in. I'd warp in and see if anyone was doing that anomaly. I they are, tackle them and light cyno.

If not, then wait and get the AFK tag again and go AFK (or switch to another client) and come back later.

Eventually, I'll catch somebody and then we'll get the forum crying again.

Edit:
To be perfectly clear, I'd be using the AFK flag/warp to a deadspace mechanice, as form of sheep's clothing. Hoping some scrub would undock and start running an anomaly. I'd come back and hit d-scan in the direction of the anomaly which would activate my warp drive....see how I could use your mechanic to actually try and subvert your feeling of less uncertainty because I have that AFK tag next to my name.

Oh, and I get to watch netflix too...either on my computer on the other screen or more comfortably on the couch in my office at home where I have the flat screen 2 steps from my PC (i.e. I could see local from the couch too). Not a bad way to spend the a rainy Sunday hoping to catch somebody who let the AFK tag lul them into a false sense of security.

And once it goes past 4pm I'd bust out the scotch too. Make it a really nice day.

Oh and look, I'm i a coalition with enough people where they could mount such a campaign probably indefinitely. And they are the type of guys to do just that to show how bad a bad mechanic can be....why do you think the CFC is using domis now? They want to get across the point that drone assist is a dubious mechanic.

My response, answered those questions.

I think we can all see that neither side will agree here and it seems to be leading to personal insults. Time to tone it down chaps.