Player Features and Ideas Discussion

The difference is that you made this thread not I. So the onus is on you to convince us that your arguments have merit. You may feel confident in the evidence you have presented, but given this thread so far it is clearly lacking.

That being said, here is an example of what I feel is a legitimate use of long term (possibly afk) cloaking. It also illustrates well how cloaking is in fact a counter to the current state of local.

I could be ninja roaming around 0.0 space in my non-covert explorer (say ishtar) that I do happen to keep a cloak on. I get chased down and camped in a system. Exits are bubbled and covered, combat probes are out. My only real option is to safe up and cloak, hoping to wait them out. With the current log off timers they will have me probed before my timer is up. I cannot even safely check the gates as i cannot warp cloaked.

And due to the perfect nature of local intel my hunters know 2 key things. 1. I'm still in the system and 2. I'm still logged in.

So my option becomes a waiting game.

Pretty much all of your proposed ideas penalizes me for simply trying to survive.

anyone else have any ideas? im still interested. you could also propose to have a special ship designed around the idea of finding cloaked ships using propes or sensors.

...

Cloak hunthing ship:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4422625

Shot down.

Cloak using fuel:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3681813

Shot down

Pos that can decloak/detect cloakers
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=140895

Shot down.

Do you want me to continue the pattern? Just to show how every idea you post to "solve cloak" have all been shot down?

Ooo, I can see the future, spooky.

Now that that is out of the way, I'm going to stick my foot in it. I'm only doing this because this thread actually isn't a half-baked idea, it's a request for a discussion. And thus I will now throw out my own idea which I'm sure will be proven to be half-baked by someone eventually (I can't believe I'm doing this).

Alright, so the root of the issue does interact with power projection on some level but that is a problem worthy of its own discussion. If we focus exclusively on the "issue", and I'm hesitant to call it that, of afk cloaking then most of the problems come up not as bad mechanics surrounding cloaking itself, but rather the bad mechanics that currently surround intel gathering on account of local. The problem being that if you introduce mechanics that too strongly oppose cloaking it will quickly ruin its use entirely. So what we need is to change the way intel is gathered, and from there introduce something cloaking specific while keeping in mind all the other things that we don't want to affect (gate camps, station games, wormhole life). So here is my proposal.

1: Local. It needs to go. It's free intel with no more effort then looking at a box and scrolling down. And while that is, admittedly, how most intel is displayed to us in the game, it still needs to be cut. We cannot even remotely move forward in this discussion until everyone admits that having a complete list of everyone in system, updated in real time, is a bad thing.

2: Cloaking. Cloaking in fine. Really, I mean it. There is an argument to be made that no one should be completely safe while undocked, and the almost complete inability to effect anyone who is cloaked is not very EvE-like. But at the same time if you compromise cloakings apparent "safety" it loses all its uses. What needs to be done is to allow cloaks to operate with almost as much impunity as they currently have while simultaneously allowing for a degree of counter play. "But cloaking is a counter!" you say. Your right, it is, FOR THE MOST PART. Offensive applications of cloaking aren't exactly a counter. They're more of a tactical advantage that comes at the cost of reduced firepower and flexibility. And introducing a degree of counter to those situations while protecting cloakings ability to counter the things it was implemented to (like gate camps) is what needs to be strived for if we are discussing changes.

3: The proposal. With the introduction of mobile structures CCP has created a game mechanic that allows for specific situational use that can come with arbitrary restrictions. And this is exactly the approach that would have to be taken if we want to change cloaking, and therefor mobile structures fit the bill. We simply cannot introduce probes or ships or large-scale POS mods to accomplish anything without ruining cloaking in its entirety. So how do we do this?

A) Remove local chat. If we are reducing cloakings abilities in any manner then we need to ensure that those who are cloaked are actually hidden.

B) Introduce a mobile structure with low EHP. Let's call it a "Light Diffraction Array" (name pending). The LDA would have to be extremely vulnerable to destruction and have no reinforcement timer. I imagine ghost sites would be a good way to introduce this mobile structure, but that is another conversation. It would be very quick to deploy and pick up, somewhere in the realm of 1 minute. Long enough for it to get blapped of field, short enough for it to be moved around fairly easily. I imagine that both its size and sig would be quite large to keep it from being too mobile however.

C) The LDA would create a sphere with a radius of 20km. Inside of this radius, any ships that do not have permission from the array cannot cloak. Said permission would be granted by the player who deployed the LDA and could be updated or changed as necessary. The idea here is to create some counterplay, this would potentially allow for bait ships to be surrounded by cloaky T3's and would be good fun as a result.

D) The LDA cannot be deployed within 100km of Stations, Stargates, Acceleration Gates, Wormholes, or other LDA's (equipping two cloaks cancel each other out, why not the deployable?) but has no restrictions around POS's. Such a restriction would be largely unnecessary; Wormholers who put eyes on a POS from 200km away in a stealth ships are effectively enough hidden that no short range-detector is going to ruin their play. Not even a whole lot of them thanks to the distance restriction to other LDA's. These distances should also prevent the deployable from creating OP gatecamps and making station games even less fun.

Thus we have created a small degree of counter play. Mining fleets can put one of these out in belts and see if a cloaky T3 or bomber is approaching, but the travel distance of bombs will still be long enough that bombers should be able to perform their runs on targets if said runs are well executed. Hot dropping inside of brawling range would now be considerably more difficult, but I imagine that there are creative ways to get around that. Local is gone however, so players are going to have to be actively watching their surroundings/overview to gather intel rather then the chat box. While not a huge difference, one list to another, it is still a step in the right direction as a way to properly disseminate intel through the UI. The key point is that the deployable has to be cumbersome enough not to affect small gang negatively, but still mobile enough to be used for operations. I also see this as a way to slightly affect cloaky farmers in FW plexes. So that could be fun.

There is my "idea" that I'm sure will be met with rage. Sadly I'm sure I've overlooked something and am also sure that this topic will fulfill the expectations in my link given enough time.

This is exactly the problem.

Local is manifestly not a problem either. It's value is only seen in areas where local residents put out the considerable effort and manpower to secure the space against enemy incursion. High Sec is the proof of this concept...it's awash in neutrals, has an omnipotent police force to flawlessly punish aggressors, and ganks happen all the time. It is neither over powered nor infallible by itself, it is only with dedicated effort of whole alliances that it becomes useful for preemptive defense.

90% of all problems with cloaks would be solved by making them mutually exclusive with Cynos. Once you stop the fact that the safest ship in all of eve can suddenly be anything from a newb frigate to a Titan Fleet in your space, they become much more balanced. Covert Cynos are not nearly the same problem despite the fact that they become battleship fleets with minimal effort because they are still BLOPS and you can account for a limited number of T2 Battleships and what they might be worth risking for.

Cloaks should be huntable. No ship in space should be so safe as to be able to literally afk for an entire day with any kind of certainty of not exploding, especially in enemy territory. That is just goofy and clearly broken.

After living in wormholes for such a long time I have encountered many cloaked ships/strategies. I have never thought once to complain about them on the forums. This is an experience I think many experienced wormhole players share. Now suddenly on the forums I see a myriad of threads on the subject(in particular the harmless afk kind). Most of the originating posters typically don't live in a wormhole from my observations.
The most obvious differences between kspace and wspace are cynos/jumpdrives and local chat. One of these is fundamental to gameplay and the other isn't. I'll let you extrapolate the various points I'm inferring.

And you are saying, that the ability to see when ever someone comes into a system and instantly hides away isn't broken? You have a funny standard mate.

Lets not forget the process of getting TO said enemy system is hardly safe at all... Think of it as a consequence for owning a system that you can't defend.

I'm sorry but the whole BS about Cynos in 0.0 and the lack thereof in WH space is a strawman at best.

Cyno's become largely a necessity in 0.0 again "because of local". One ship entering local may raise eyebrows. But 12 will make you run. The Cyno allows for the balance of local as the spike occurs on top of the target.

The lack of cyno's in WH space is a non issue. Why? Because without local it is very easy to sneak that same fleet in covertly as the target doesn't see a local spike.

In the end, whether that overwhelming force is hotdropped on top of you, or suddenly decloaks on top of you from out of nowhere, the result is the same.

Isn't this entire thread based on a strawman argument? So basically, you are basing a Straw man, on a straw man argument...

I like these discussions personally if you don't want to read my thoughts then don't...but id like you to:). There must be a middle ground surely, something that makes the game MORE FUN for both bears and ganksters. Fun is not going to work and leaving you're cloaky logged on to pester other players, fun is running + fighting +++ being generally crafty.

I'd like to understand the pros and cons of the following scenario (and please don't auto hate :). This approach seems to nerf annoyance and buff immersion/fun imho and yep i know everything has been thought of already

One line Explanation: Everyone disappears from local if you're if not on grid with a gate or an npc station

To test the "more fun less annoyance goal" I thought about the following examples:

Example 1: Raiding party enters your ratting system, warp to anoms and the ratters may run in time...or not.
Outcome: No change, fun game play everyone enjoys

Example 2: AFK cloaker wants to soften a system up so they are a little more careless.
Outcome: Most of the intel is there but it is much less accurate. If players live in a pos instead of the station they are harder to observe and you need to be on grid to watch them...parked safely under their guns. Being on grid and cloaked gives perfect intel on that grid only.

Example 3: Mr Bear be ratting and enjoying null sec honey. A cloaky entered the day before and since then always avoids station and gate grids. In this scenario the cloaky ability to rain down misfortune is probably OP but not hard to tune. Gigans' DLA, covops cyno delays etc many solutions

The number of threads on this stuff is just staggering, i think ive read all the ones over the last few months tho. It does avoid the ones raised by Johnson Dragoon.

Is there any merit to this middle ground approach at all?

is there consensus amongst the vet community?

Respectfully....Ermagerd!