These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The obvious

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
#81 - 2014-04-26 19:56:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Doc Fury
LHA Tarawa wrote:
Doc Fury wrote:
LHA Tarawa wrote:

I"m ONLY against being able to do that without actually being at the keyboard and turning the cloak back on a handful of times an hour.


If he's not at the keyboard, how does he light a cyno?



Same fail counter arguments over and over.

He doesn't need to light the cyno. The threat is sufficient to shut down an entire system.

Shy should be NOT have to be at the keyboard to present that threat?



How is it fail? CCP can't fix this. You are broken, not the game.

Being the monster that I am, lets imagine together that CCP did implement your idea of cloaks having a limited cycle time.

Someone is just going to put that on an egg-timer like they are doing now with ICE spawns, and you have the same problem all over again. You are afraid of what MIGHT happen when it was you who chose to walk UNARMED down the unlit alley known to contain crackheads and muggers instead of using the well illuminated street patrolled by the occasional policeman. In that vein, we'd have to examine all other modules that have a repeating cycle time as those could also be used in AFK-type behavior that potentially inconveniences some other player(s).

Why exactly should CCP go to all the trouble of working this out and debugging how to make it balanced just to satisfy your fear of being where you already know you should not be?

☼

There's a million angry citizens looking down their tubes..at me.
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#82 - 2014-04-26 19:59:03 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Nvm, i don't even want to know what someone thinks who encounters a dilemma posed by his own choices and refuses to accept responsibility for it.



You know... I had to give you a like for that one. Big smile Unexpected. Who knows... there might be hope for you yet. Big smile
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#83 - 2014-04-26 20:03:08 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:

I strongly suggest you switch your argument to mine, where it emphasis the potential of an AFK cloaker to be gathering intelligence/reconaissance by streaming his screen's image to his corp mates, much like what's happening on this stream here:
http://www.twitch.tv/fw_subsparx

they can't defeat that argument. And it will better help you in accomplishing your goal of having a mechanism introduced that prevents someone from using a cloaking device indefinitely while AFK.


Divine Entervention wrote:

Now, I turn my cloak on, move around a bit, look at the worm hole entrance/exit. Then I turn my stream on which is being broadcast to a private link that only my corp mates, that you can't find because it's not public. I then go to work.

for 10 hours, my character is logged in, afk, cloaked, broadcasting everything that takes place at that wormhole entrance to my corp mates. While they get to do their own thing, my character is performing work for them, it's providing real, valuable intelligence.

Please, please, please publicly stream yourself doing this in nullsec, preferably somewhere in the vicinity of pure blind.
You know why what you're doing isn't zero risk? Because its extremely easy to decloak a streaming cloaky*. Oh, it's a private stream only for corp? One word: spais. So yeah, not zero risk. If you ever want a demonstration, just drop me a mail with a link to your stream the next time you go afk cloaky off a gate for 10 hours. Cool


*unless of course you park the cloaky in a safe, but then all you can really stream is the local count, not even the entire local window because an afk guy can't scroll, and there are better tools for that.


Well considering it's possible to stream a private stream that you choose to give access to only whom you choose, all that stuff about doing a public stream doesn't pertain to it.

I agree with the public part though, doing it publicly would offer an opportunity for people to interfere with it. If I were to stream something like that publicly, it would probably be lots of fun for people trying to stop it.

But it would be really hard for them to interfere with an afk cloaker streaming a private stream if they didn't even know it was happening because it's only being broadcast privately.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#84 - 2014-04-26 20:32:06 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
interfere with an afk cloaker


Christ on a bike, are you STILL on about this?

Seriously?

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#85 - 2014-04-26 20:34:02 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
interfere with an afk cloaker


Christ on a bike, are you STILL on about this?

Seriously?


Yea, do you wanna play too?
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#86 - 2014-04-26 20:40:02 UTC
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking needs to be removed from the game.

All that's left now is getting this pushed up to CCP so they can begin implementing the mechanism necessary to prevent a cloaker from remaining cloaked while AFK.
Cassandra Aurilien
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#87 - 2014-04-26 20:43:09 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking needs to be removed from the game.

All that's left now is getting this pushed up to CCP so they can begin implementing the mechanism necessary to prevent a cloaker from remaining cloaked while AFK.


Or... Come to WH space... Where fun & profit is to be had by all... And the question of "Is there someone cloaking in this system?" is always assumed to be : "Yes! and that's O.K.!"
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#88 - 2014-04-26 20:47:42 UTC
Cassandra Aurilien wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking needs to be removed from the game.

All that's left now is getting this pushed up to CCP so they can begin implementing the mechanism necessary to prevent a cloaker from remaining cloaked while AFK.


Or... Come to WH space... Where fun & profit is to be had by all... And the question of "Is there someone cloaking in this system?" is always assumed to be : "Yes! and that's O.K.!"


Sadly, I don't think I could survive in worm hole space. Everytime I've gone in there and tried to do anything, I've died. Not just to PvP, but I can't even PvE there. Those sleeper drones hit really hard.

Thanks for the invitation though!
Baronvonchickenpants
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#89 - 2014-04-26 20:48:19 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking needs to be removed from the game.

All that's left now is getting this pushed up to CCP so they can begin implementing the mechanism necessary to prevent a cloaker from remaining cloaked while AFK.

AFK is a poor game mechanic. But then , so is every other game mechanic in this game. Par for the course reaIIy
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#90 - 2014-04-26 20:50:16 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:



Please, please, please publicly stream yourself doing this in nullsec, preferably somewhere in the vicinity of pure blind.
You know why what you're doing isn't zero risk? Because its extremely easy to decloak a streaming cloaky*. Oh, it's a private stream only for corp? One word: spais. So yeah, not zero risk. If you ever want a demonstration, just drop me a mail with a link to your stream the next time you go afk cloaky off a gate for 10 hours. Cool


*unless of course you park the cloaky in a safe, but then all you can really stream is the local count, not even the entire local window because an afk guy can't scroll, and there are better tools for that.


Well considering it's possible to stream a private stream that you choose to give access to only whom you choose, all that stuff about doing a public stream doesn't pertain to it.

I agree with the public part though, doing it publicly would offer an opportunity for people to interfere with it. If I were to stream something like that publicly, it would probably be lots of fun for people trying to stop it.

But it would be really hard for them to interfere with an afk cloaker streaming a private stream if they didn't even know it was happening because it's only being broadcast privately.


I like how this entire post conveniently ignored: " Oh, it's a private stream only for corp? One word: spais." Spy joins corp. spy gains trust, spy gains access to stream (by you giving it to him), stream not so private anymore. Hence the risk. Public or private is largely irrelevant.
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#91 - 2014-04-26 20:52:38 UTC
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking is fine.

All that's left now is sit on my laurels.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#92 - 2014-04-26 20:55:48 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:


I like how this entire post conveniently ignored: " Oh, it's a private stream only for corp? One word: spais." Spy joins corp. spy gains trust, spy gains access to stream (by you giving it to him), stream not so private anymore. Hence the risk. Public or private is largely irrelevant.


Who's to say I'm going to give the link to every random guy in the corporation? I've been in a position where I've held a security clearance. I understand the concept that due to operational security, you only tell people certain things. I would also like to hold my fellow communities members to a high enough standard to not automatically assume that people are going to be stupid about things they consider important and leak information to people who don't have a need to know.

Loose lips sink ships.

I wouldn't tell the people who I felt didn't need to know. "Could" a spy still somehow get the information? sure. "IF" there is a spy, "IF" he happens to be someone I've falsely placed my trust in to tell.

Which still doesn't negate my argument.
PotatoOverdose
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#93 - 2014-04-26 20:57:58 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:


I like how this entire post conveniently ignored: " Oh, it's a private stream only for corp? One word: spais." Spy joins corp. spy gains trust, spy gains access to stream (by you giving it to him), stream not so private anymore. Hence the risk. Public or private is largely irrelevant.


Who's to say I'm going to give the link to every random guy in the corporation? I've been in a position where I've held a security clearance. I understand the concept that due to operational security, you only tell people certain things. I would also like to hold my fellow communities members to a high enough standard to not automatically assume that people are going to be stupid about things they consider important and leak information to people who don't have a need to know.

Loose lips sink ships.

I wouldn't tell the people who I felt didn't need to know. "Could" a spy still somehow get the information? sure. "IF" there is a spy, "IF" he happens to be someone I've falsely placed my trust in to tell.

Which still doesn't negate my argument.

And no corporation or alliance has ever had a director level spy. Divine Entervention is the first person to discover operational security in all of eve. Roll

Which still doesn't negate my argument.

I've proved that afk cloaking is fine. Now to sit on my laurels. Cool
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#94 - 2014-04-26 21:12:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Divine Entervention
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:


I like how this entire post conveniently ignored: " Oh, it's a private stream only for corp? One word: spais." Spy joins corp. spy gains trust, spy gains access to stream (by you giving it to him), stream not so private anymore. Hence the risk. Public or private is largely irrelevant.


Who's to say I'm going to give the link to every random guy in the corporation? I've been in a position where I've held a security clearance. I understand the concept that due to operational security, you only tell people certain things. I would also like to hold my fellow communities members to a high enough standard to not automatically assume that people are going to be stupid about things they consider important and leak information to people who don't have a need to know.

Loose lips sink ships.

I wouldn't tell the people who I felt didn't need to know. "Could" a spy still somehow get the information? sure. "IF" there is a spy, "IF" he happens to be someone I've falsely placed my trust in to tell.

Which still doesn't negate my argument.

And no corporation or alliance has ever had a director level spy. Divine Entervention is the first person to discover operational security in all of eve. Roll

Which still doesn't negate my argument.

I've proved that afk cloaking is fine. Now to sit on my laurels. Cool


Only thing you've proven is that the potential for spies exist(which I never disagreed with, in fact I agree spies do exist), the only time your spy defense works concerning the action of afk cloaker broadcasting of real time intelligence doesn't have an impact is when the spy(spies) knows about it, and relay(s) that information.

On the other hand, there could NOT be a spy, and the person told the stream information could NOT be a spy, so since the non-existent spy, or the spy that does exist but wasn't told the stream information, can't relay the information, your argument collapses.

#removeAFKcloaking Proven to be necessary for removal April 2014
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#95 - 2014-04-26 21:20:26 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking is fine.

All that's left now is sit on my laurels.



I did too, he just ignored reason and battered his head against the brick wall of ignorance

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#96 - 2014-04-26 21:23:14 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking is fine.

All that's left now is sit on my laurels.



I did too, he just ignored reason and battered his head against the brick wall of ignorance


When did you ever provide an actual reason I didn't shut down?
Webvan
All Kill No Skill
#97 - 2014-04-26 21:27:14 UTC
Mac Stern wrote:
Karen Avioras wrote:
Are you whining?

My game too, so if i want to whine i will

You mean in those games, where some idiot can come and grief you and you can't do jack **** about it but cry to a GM if one is even on? What the hell we want that here for?!? Every negative or positive action here has consequences, not some pansy infested petting zoo game with players dressed up as gnomes while they grope your ass and you can't do **** about it.

I'm in it for the money

Ctrl+Alt+Shift+F12
Migui X'hyrrn
No More Dramas Only Llamas
#98 - 2014-04-26 21:37:08 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Migui X'hyrrn wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Migui X'hyrrn wrote:
The obvious would be that after 11 years of EVE Online people realized that undocking means that you are accepting everyone to shoot at you.

Stop trying to make EVE a Theme Park. It will not happen.


Except for cloakers. People who cloak don't have to worry about the risk of pvp.


This whole crying about afk cloakers is very funny. People wants to rat in 0.0 like they do when concord is around. All the problem is in Local. You know that afk cloaker is there because of local, and then you complain about it.

But in wormholes, local doesn't update yet people does pve all the time. How?


Removing Local could also be another alternative to solving the issue presented by AFK cloakers.

Do you agree?


I would love if that happened. No automatic update of local. Even more. I would make gates to rely intel to people that holds sov, in some way. Perhaps attached to a ihub upgrade or limited to constellation gates. If you don't cross a gate or dock/undock, you are not reported. This means that wormholes and covert cynos will not be noticed.

Migui is running for CSM10!
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#99 - 2014-04-26 21:40:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Ramona McCandless
Divine Entervention wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking is fine.

All that's left now is sit on my laurels.



I did too, he just ignored reason and battered his head against the brick wall of ignorance


When did you ever provide an actual reason I didn't shut down?


Yes, all of them

If you choose not to see reason, I cant do anything about that

But you are wrong, whether you accept it or not

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#100 - 2014-04-26 21:40:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Divine Entervention
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Alright well that wasn't too hard.

I've proven why AFK cloaking is fine.

All that's left now is sit on my laurels.



I did too, he just ignored reason and battered his head against the brick wall of ignorance


When did you ever provide an actual reason I didn't shut down?


Yes, all of them


OK