These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3781 - 2013-12-07 06:57:17 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
There is nothing hard about any of that for the stealth bomber.


The hard part is not getting instagibed before your fleet lands, also I wouldn't be opposed to them losing their targeting delay bonus.

Though seriously, what is it with you and your cyno fetish?
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3782 - 2013-12-07 08:54:19 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:

Most cloak PVP pilots are highly risk averse,

Irony.
I'd love to see the explanation of this one. Or are you still confused, thinking I'm asking for some change which makes PVE somehow easy?

Astroniomix wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
At the end of the day though, most cloak ships are designed for recon and evasion. They are not designed to go toe to toe with combat ships. If they were to be dropped from local, they would need to be totally declawed to stop them being automatically bumped to the spot of the most OP combat ship.
Interceptors are better for evasion, and equally as effective at any form of recon that doesn't involve staring at a gate for extended periods of time. And removing cloaked ships from local is not suddenly going to make them able to take down ships they can't take down now. Even PVE ships don't have much to fear from one, staying aligned (which most people would agree is what you should be doing anyway) almost guarantees they won't catch you because you can be gone before their targeting delay is up. (stealth bombers are the only exception and even they would have a hard time catching **** or even kiling it)
OK, so you are aligned, I fly my ship cloaked into the side of you. Bump. I now have plenty of time to target you before you can do anything. You had no chance to see me, no chance to respond and no chance to fight back. Oh yeah, not at all OP eh?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3783 - 2013-12-07 10:10:26 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Astroniomix wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:

Most cloak PVP pilots are highly risk averse,

Irony.
I'd love to see the explanation of this one. Or are you still confused, thinking I'm asking for some change which makes PVE somehow easy?

Astroniomix wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
At the end of the day though, most cloak ships are designed for recon and evasion. They are not designed to go toe to toe with combat ships. If they were to be dropped from local, they would need to be totally declawed to stop them being automatically bumped to the spot of the most OP combat ship.
Interceptors are better for evasion, and equally as effective at any form of recon that doesn't involve staring at a gate for extended periods of time. And removing cloaked ships from local is not suddenly going to make them able to take down ships they can't take down now. Even PVE ships don't have much to fear from one, staying aligned (which most people would agree is what you should be doing anyway) almost guarantees they won't catch you because you can be gone before their targeting delay is up. (stealth bombers are the only exception and even they would have a hard time catching **** or even kiling it)
OK, so you are aligned, I fly my ship cloaked into the side of you. Bump. I now have plenty of time to target you before you can do anything. You had no chance to see me, no chance to respond and no chance to fight back. Oh yeah, not at all OP eh?

MFW> bumping is op, nerf cloaks

That's also quite a stretch for anything other than a stealth bomber (which if you get that close you've got other problems).

I'm speaking from experience here when I say that trying to catch up to something aligned in a cloaked ship isn't going to happen 99% of the time, especially if you're trying to bump them in any direction other than the one they are traveling in.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3784 - 2013-12-07 11:36:03 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
OK, so you are aligned, I fly my ship cloaked into the side of you. Bump. I now have plenty of time to target you before you can do anything. You had no chance to see me, no chance to respond and no chance to fight back. Oh yeah, not at all OP eh?

MFW> bumping is op, nerf cloaks

That's also quite a stretch for anything other than a stealth bomber (which if you get that close you've got other problems).

I'm speaking from experience here when I say that trying to catch up to something aligned in a cloaked ship isn't going to happen 99% of the time, especially if you're trying to bump them in any direction other than the one they are travelling in.
Bull. A cloaked T3 could easily bump a miner out of alignment.
And no, bumping is not OP. Cloaking is not OP. But the ability to safely AFK 24/7 is ridiculous. So remove AFK. That's what I'm saying. At no point have I suggested a nerf to cloaks, I've merely said I'm against a massive buff to cloaks which would mean they are on you before you can even tell they are nearby. Maybe you should read the thread rather than making assumptions that make you look silly.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3785 - 2013-12-07 16:19:05 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
There is nothing hard about any of that for the stealth bomber.


The hard part is not getting instagibed before your fleet lands, also I wouldn't be opposed to them losing their targeting delay bonus.

Though seriously, what is it with you and your cyno fetish?

I'll tell you what though, show me how a solo AFK cloaky WITHOUT CYNO capability can present any substantial threat to a system. If we can't immediately see an easy way for 3-5 players to mitigate that threat, then I will stop claiming that the CYNO is the only part of AFK cloaking that anyone has an issue with.

Stealth bombers do NOT get insta-anything let alone insta-popped. As frigates, unless their MWD is on (with a cyno lit?!), they will require the most time of any ship to be locked; that alone kills the insta-anything part. The stealth bomber costs less than 1/10th of even one of their targets; a 20 mil loss is nothing. If they fail to kill that 20 mil ship, guess how much your targets will likely lose?!! All because of the CYNO, too. The CYNO forces them to kill you ASAP or LOSE EVERYTHING. .. and you wonder why my focus is on the cyno ..

"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
#3786 - 2013-12-07 17:11:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
Astroniomix wrote:

MFW> bumping is op, nerf cloaks

That's also quite a stretch for anything other than a stealth bomber (which if you get that close you've got other problems).

I'm speaking from experience here when I say that trying to catch up to something aligned in a cloaked ship isn't going to happen 99% of the time, especially if you're trying to bump them in any direction other than the one they are traveling in.

I assume you mean the scenario where a cloaked stealth bomber is trying to catch up to a non-cloaked, aligned ship. Obviously, that aligned ship is aligned to something, and oftentimes that something is conveniently in the direction of some celestial. So what is a stealth bomber to do when the aligned ship is faster than his cloaked max speed? If there is a celestial in the direction and alignment of the target, what can we do with that? You can warp to celestials. And you can warp back to your previous location (bookmark) at 100 km. With how fast frigates warp, that puts you 100km forward in the target's direction in a few seconds of warping out and back. Rinse and repeat until you are in front of the target and suddenly you have a bump vector which is contrary to his alignment. OMG! How did I do that? Creative thinking .. The stuff that makes pvp for the smart in Eve fun.

I assume that this is under consideration of a local which hid the presence of the cloaked ships, where a ship's alignment could be screwed up without warning from a cloaked ship which also has the capability of stopping the MJD with a scram. Does he have worse problems with such close range? An energy neut, maybe. But if he had a friend at range with a point, then if he lost his scram, then the secondary long point would hold the ship without risk of the energy neutralizer taking it down.

Obviously, the non-aligned sentry boats and the slow battleships are in a much worse plight regarding cloaked bumps in a local-blind universe.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Clementina
University of Caille
#3787 - 2013-12-07 17:14:53 UTC
Sir, people have been complaining about AFK cloaking before Cynosural Field Generators existed. People would be in buzzards AFK in a system, and carebears and miners would still be afraid.

The Ghosts of Local
While sleeping, working, at play
lock down a system
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#3788 - 2013-12-07 18:21:02 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Astroniomix wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
OK, so you are aligned, I fly my ship cloaked into the side of you. Bump. I now have plenty of time to target you before you can do anything. You had no chance to see me, no chance to respond and no chance to fight back. Oh yeah, not at all OP eh?

MFW> bumping is op, nerf cloaks

That's also quite a stretch for anything other than a stealth bomber (which if you get that close you've got other problems).

I'm speaking from experience here when I say that trying to catch up to something aligned in a cloaked ship isn't going to happen 99% of the time, especially if you're trying to bump them in any direction other than the one they are travelling in.

Bull. A cloaked T3 could easily bump a miner out of alignment.

It's not aligned unless it is moving fast enough to warp.
Lucas Kell wrote:
And no, bumping is not OP. Cloaking is not OP. But the ability to safely AFK 24/7 is ridiculous. So remove AFK. That's what I'm saying. At no point have I suggested a nerf to cloaks, I've merely said I'm against a massive buff to cloaks which would mean they are on you before you can even tell they are nearby. Maybe you should read the thread rather than making assumptions that make you look silly.

Bumping a moving ship, actually moving at 75% velocity in order to properly warp as needed, does not become easier in a t3.

To intersect a moving ship already moving at speed, it either needs to be huge, or you need to be lucky. Rear ending someone because you were going faster is probably useless. You simply boost them in the direction they were already moving in.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#3789 - 2013-12-07 18:30:50 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
I assume you mean the scenario where a cloaked stealth bomber is trying to catch up to a non-cloaked, aligned ship. Obviously, that aligned ship is aligned to something, and oftentimes that something is conveniently in the direction of some celestial. So what is a stealth bomber to do when the aligned ship is faster than his cloaked max speed? If there is a celestial in the direction and alignment of the target, what can we do with that? You can warp to celestials. And you can warp back to your previous location (bookmark) at 100 km. With how fast frigates warp, that puts you 100km forward in the target's direction in a few seconds of warping out and back. Rinse and repeat until you are in front of the target and suddenly you have a bump vector which is contrary to his alignment. OMG! How did I do that? Creative thinking .. The stuff that makes pvp for the smart in Eve fun.

This is why you align to a safe, when using that tactic when you know a hostile could be in system with you.

(If you don'k know if they are AFK, you don't know if they are in game, let alone watching the client associated to that name in local)

Being aligned to a celestial lets them set up an ambush too often, to be used when you know they are in system and able to plan around you.

Being predictable is the first step in being on a kill mail.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3790 - 2013-12-07 20:24:16 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
But the ability to safely AFK 24/7 is ridiculous.

Safety is not what you are complaining about (at least not on the part of the guy cloaked) if safety were your problem you'd be advocating making it impossible to log off outside of a starbase or station. Uncertainty is the thing you want to remove.

I'm actually fine with an "AFK" flag, seriously, go ahead, 30 minutes without interacting with the client, pop a star next to them in local, once they do something, take it down.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3791 - 2013-12-07 21:34:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Just thought I'd leave this here...

Quote:
Will there ever be a way to avoid showing up in local?

Potentially. It's not something that is going to be an easy solution, but I can say that we don't like the fact that local chat is so powerful as an intelligence tool as well as a chat but replacing it is something that's going to be a pretty large project because it is such a valuable way of gaining intelligence right now. We don't want to take it away without providing some other way to find out with some other act of gameplay who is in the system with you -- or at least some of the people that are in the system with you. So, we don't think it'd be a good thing to just tear it out and not put anything back in to replace it but we also aren't fully happy with the way it is right now. It is something that we would definitely like to change.--CCP Fozzie.


To summarize:

1. It appears CCP does not like the way local is both a chat channel and an intel tool.
2. Simply removing it would be bad.
3. It would need to be replaced by something to allow players to gather intel via some game mechanic.

Well now.

Maybe some are going to claim I'm CCP Fozzie too now. Roll

"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
#3792 - 2013-12-07 21:36:33 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
But the ability to safely AFK 24/7 is ridiculous.

Safety is not what you are complaining about (at least not on the part of the guy cloaked) if safety were your problem you'd be advocating making it impossible to log off outside of a starbase or station. Uncertainty is the thing you want to remove.

I'm actually fine with an "AFK" flag, seriously, go ahead, 30 minutes without interacting with the client, pop a star next to them in local, once they do something, take it down.


If safety were the issue then you'd also favor doing something about people in station.

Yeah, I don't see anyone abusing the AFK flag and nobody complaining about it. No not at all. Roll

Next it wont be AFK cloaking it will be these people coming back from being flagged AFK to frequently. Roll

"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
#3793 - 2013-12-07 23:00:05 UTC
I think we can definitely say a few things now:

1. CCP either did not intend local to be such a powerful intel tool, or if they did they are now unhappy with it.

2. Local as an intel source could very well be removed from the game someday, but not without an alternate replacement.

I love it.... Lol

"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
#3794 - 2013-12-07 23:07:56 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Astroniomix wrote:
Andy Landen wrote:
There is nothing hard about any of that for the stealth bomber.


The hard part is not getting instagibed before your fleet lands, also I wouldn't be opposed to them losing their targeting delay bonus.

Though seriously, what is it with you and your cyno fetish?

I'll tell you what though, show me how a solo AFK cloaky WITHOUT CYNO capability can present any substantial threat to a system. If we can't immediately see an easy way for 3-5 players to mitigate that threat, then I will stop claiming that the CYNO is the only part of AFK cloaking that anyone has an issue with.


A solo player is not much of a threat to 3-5 players.

Then again a player with a cyno may not be much of a threat to 3-5 players either. What if the guy with a cyno can bring in only 4-5 other guys?

I know, I know in Andy's world the hostile has an infinite number of buddies who are simply waiting to get a ping to log on and gank smoe hapless PvE guy. However, the reality is that may be the case (the guy with the cyno has plenty of friends) or it may not be the case. What he has on the BLOPs right now is all he can get.

This is why I'll use words like, maybe, perhaps, possibly, probably. Whereas others here use words that are more appropriate to instances of certainty or near certainty.

If I assume the bad guy always has the upper hand...he wins without having to do anything because I have defeated myself.

"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

Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#3795 - 2013-12-08 00:50:50 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:


Maybe some are going to claim I'm CCP Fozzie too now. Roll

Actually you're all my alts, this entire thread is 190 pages of me playing sock puppets.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3796 - 2013-12-08 03:25:08 UTC
Clementina wrote:
Sir, people have been complaining about AFK cloaking before Cynosural Field Generators existed. People would be in buzzards AFK in a system, and carebears and miners would still be afraid.

Have you been around in Eve that long? That must have been WAY before my time. And even IF that is so, complaining about a Buzzard is hardly interesting. What is a Buzzard going to do? Tickle me to death? What is a cyno blue ball going to do? Anything it wants in a few seconds flat. Cyno hotdrops are worthy of concern and you know it. If the hotdropping FC only has 5 ships ready to jump, but sees an expensive PVE ship, you had better believe that if he can't wake up his friends for some easy action, then he is at the very least rattling the cages of his friend's friends. He WILL GET THE NUMBERS. Will it be infinity? No. But it most certainly will be much greater than enough to take the target down super fast AND handle anything the target can manage to bring in during those few, precious seconds.

Astro wrote:
I'm actually fine with an "AFK" flag, seriously, go ahead, 30 minutes without interacting with the client, pop a star next to them in local, once they do something, take it down.


The flag is pointless unless it ALSO involves a warp out to deadspace for the duration of the flag. Part of "being" AFK is being separated from the action, otherwise it doesn't mean anything. Frankly, I think that the ship's warp drive should also take 30s to come back online for it to warp out of the deadspace pocket. So the AFK tag disappears and the ship cannot begin the warp back to normal space for another 30s.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3797 - 2013-12-08 03:33:48 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Clementina wrote:
Sir, people have been complaining about AFK cloaking before Cynosural Field Generators existed. People would be in buzzards AFK in a system, and carebears and miners would still be afraid.

Have you been around in Eve that long? That must have been WAY before my time. And even IF that is so, complaining about a Buzzard is hardly interesting. What is a Buzzard going to do? Tickle me to death? What is a cyno blue ball going to do? Anything it wants in a few seconds flat. Cyno hotdrops are worthy of concern and you know it. If the hotdropping FC only has 5 ships ready to jump, but sees an expensive PVE ship, you had better believe that if he can't wake up his friends for some easy action, then he is at the very least rattling the cages of his friend's friends. He WILL GET THE NUMBERS. Will it be infinity? No. But it most certainly will be much greater than enough to take the target down super fast AND handle anything the target can manage to bring in during those few, precious seconds.

Astro wrote:
I'm actually fine with an "AFK" flag, seriously, go ahead, 30 minutes without interacting with the client, pop a star next to them in local, once they do something, take it down.


The flag is pointless unless it ALSO involves a warp out to deadspace for the duration of the flag. Part of "being" AFK is being separated from the action, otherwise it doesn't mean anything. Frankly, I think that the ship's warp drive should also take 30s to come back online for it to warp out of the deadspace pocket. So the AFK tag disappears and the ship cannot begin the warp back to normal space for another 30s.


Probably all pointless now.

:smug:

"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

Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#3798 - 2013-12-08 03:36:40 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

Andy,

You lost your carrier while testing a fit. Why didn't you test it on the test server? Losses there don't count and just about everything costs next to nothing.

You are missing out on a valuable resource...one I bet PvP pilots are making use off.

Edit:
Oh and let me add, that PvP in most systems is not allowed...well unless you and a buddy are doing some testing...I think. Then it really isn't PvP, IMO.

So you could have tested that carrier even in a null system (yes there are rats) and not risked anything at all.

I did test it on the Test server. This was the second phase of my testing. The test server does not have OP stealth bombers with regular cynos, but I had a pretty good idea how to deal with them. The thing I could not anticipate or test for on the Test server was the blue traitor who created a bookmark near me while cloaked and then turned that bookmark over to the hostile stealth bomber. That said, the loss merely illustrates the OP combination of stealth bomber with cyno and point and blue bookmark, and the OP supercap. Which is why I advocate for various solutions which scale back the powers of the stealth bomber, the cyno, and the supercap.

"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
#3799 - 2013-12-08 03:39:35 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

Probably all pointless now.

:smug:

If you think that you won your local argument with CCP, then please link the evidence for it, because I have yet to see any reason for you to celebrate yet. Until then, please post useful responses.

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#3800 - 2013-12-08 03:39:41 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Clementina wrote:
Sir, people have been complaining about AFK cloaking before Cynosural Field Generators existed. People would be in buzzards AFK in a system, and carebears and miners would still be afraid.

Have you been around in Eve that long? That must have been WAY before my time. And even IF that is so, complaining about a Buzzard is hardly interesting. What is a Buzzard going to do? Tickle me to death? What is a cyno blue ball going to do? Anything it wants in a few seconds flat. Cyno hotdrops are worthy of concern and you know it. If the hotdropping FC only has 5 ships ready to jump, but sees an expensive PVE ship, you had better believe that if he can't wake up his friends for some easy action, then he is at the very least rattling the cages of his friend's friends. He WILL GET THE NUMBERS. Will it be infinity? No. But it most certainly will be much greater than enough to take the target down super fast AND handle anything the target can manage to bring in during those few, precious seconds.

Astro wrote:
I'm actually fine with an "AFK" flag, seriously, go ahead, 30 minutes without interacting with the client, pop a star next to them in local, once they do something, take it down.


The flag is pointless unless it ALSO involves a warp out to deadspace for the duration of the flag. Part of "being" AFK is being separated from the action, otherwise it doesn't mean anything. Frankly, I think that the ship's warp drive should also take 30s to come back online for it to warp out of the deadspace pocket. So the AFK tag disappears and the ship cannot begin the warp back to normal space for another 30s.


As for the good ol' days and the buzzard, they could have had friends nearby was probably the big fear back then.

Your fear of *cyno* is a bit over-blown. And given its usefulness in other contexts the nerfs you are likely hoping for will be highly unlikely.

"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