Player Features and Ideas Discussion

IB4 flame

I surely hope you jest. Your choice to meta-game and use alts is something that is a societal problem not a game mechanics problem. Catching (or avoiding) for example a cloaking cyno legion is a more appropriate comparison than 'covert ops' ships only as that definition is very broad and tangentially includes every frigate, cruiser and black ops that can equip that cloak module (or one like it).



and as you so eloquently put it "cloakers are about as dangerous as a ball of furry kittens". Yeah, because being hotdropped at *your* convenience presents such a small threat.

It's not about being beaten to death every time you undock, that's an accepted part of life in EVE and is supposed to be a potential risk anywhere in the game - the point was not to defeat AFK cloakers which I specifically said in my OP it was to present a limited use tool for people to use in order to not just defend themselves but also give the initiative back to proactive pvpers who might want to go shark hunting.

Infact your post so completely bad I think you didn't read my OP at all. If someone is willing to risk the right ship to attack me then I wouldn't have a good chance of survival on principle. And you're not going to catch someone in an off-grid safe while cloaked anyway so I don't see your point? AFK cloaking has no solution. This is not an AFK cloaking tool.

This is a tool for tactically decloaking hostiles inside of point range so as I said the initiative can be stolen back. Nothing ruins a good hot drop like getting your cyno toon dunked before your titan bridge is up.

Are you suggesting adding a cooldown timer on cynos after cloaking and decloaking?

Hi, Mr. Seremshur! I'd like to take a moment to discuss with you the very real threat to the continued and long life of our most beloved game EVE Online. This threat is known as At The Keyboard Uncloaked Ganking(ATK Uncloaked for short). For over a decade now pilots in the New Eden star cluster have been terrorized and held hostage by prolific use of uncloaked gank boats that ruin the fun of cloaked players and their gameplay.

I implore you to ask your friends and comrades about this deplorable state of affairs and reach out to your CCP representative and tell them to say no to kowtowing and buffing the uncloaked monopoly on EVE's gameplay.


Sincerely,
Kaerakh from Surprisingly Deep Hole.

Log-off camping requires exactly 0 cloaks and precisely 1 fast warping tackler that can carry a cyno and not get blapped.

I have in total: 0 alts, one account, and no coalition.

This is not my gameplay style, I just know how to do it because knowledge is a useful thing.

50% of the benefit of a cloak is not to sneak up on a target that you can kill, but to sneak away from a target you can't lying in wait, Surviving against the odds is part of PvP and your suggestion would eliminate 100% of that functionality. Blockade runners, covert ops frigates, and Force Recons rely on cloaks almost exclusively for survivability. Unless you also propose a significant buff to those ships to give them their claws back in situations where they don't have a cyno, I wouldn't suggest changing them just to fit your desires for that one scenario in the dozens of roles those ships are used for. Nerf the cloak so covert ops ships can't get away and you necessarily have to buff them so they can fight. Enjoy getting ganked by nothing but cloaked solo campers for the next year until everyone begs CCP to "nerf" cloaks back to the way they were, UNLESS you fill your cargo hold with these, because cloaked ships will suddenly become very popular after a good buffing.

The fact that it's a deployable, that it's timed, and that it has a range means nothing. It's an offensive module designed to be a perfect counter to a defensive module in the most desirable situations - gate camps, WH ratting (whose income this will decrease not at all and make the ratters many orders of magnitude safer) and when you know you're being hunted because of a neutral in local - and that means that it's efficacy is greatly increased. And yes, it is about AFK cloaking. If you have a cloaky neutral in local and are too scared to go about your business all you have to do to get back to your ratting is drop one of these in an anomaly with an interceptor and come back in 2 minutes with your ratting BS. Nothing simpler. Until you want to completely re-work cloaking mechanics and the ships that rely on them, suggestions for adding any sort of counter to a cloak are a pretty bad idea, and poorly thought out if there is no consideration for the consequences down the chain of events.

What is the counter to the pinger?

Blowing it up. Hitting the target before it onlines. Running out its radius before it onlines. Not warping in to one. Dscanning. Probing. Fitting for combat. Fitting for defense. Fitting for alignment speed.

Lots of things really. More than what ive mentioned to be sure. If it lasted only 5 minutes would you still find it so imbalanced?

I guess my post was over your head. I'm sorry I didn't communicate it effectively.

Or we could avoid potentially hazardous to balance concepts by not implementing them. I like that idea. Can we do my idea instead?

How about a 10 man gate camp?

A 5 man gate camp?

Things can get pretty sketchy with a good chance of getting caught while trying to get a Cov-ops out of a bubble with 2 or 3 competent people watching the gate. You can't even call that a gate camp anymore.

All of this talk about bubbles.

Nothing mentioning that Interdictors and HIC's can't fit cov-ops cloaks (and if you're using a prototype, god bless your dear little heart) nor that a mobile warp disruptor takes twice as long to online as this suggested pinger.

4 minutes to gank a buzzard (who isn't going to be doing any of this) and GTFO? No problem. A Force Recon? Sure, he didn't stand a chance in 1v1 anyways, any T1 cruiser with a competent pilot can whittle him down in half that time, loot the wreck and warp to safety. Oh I'm sorry, were you ratting? Good thing you placed that large pinger so that the edge of it would be at the warp-in and placed yourself on the far side and kept your general direction towards the safe, that'll give you a good 70km buffer to get home.

Yeah, 72km... Radii and Diameter are two different things, and you defined a radius.

Nothing about this idea is good. It just takes and drives one style of gameplay into the ground in favor of another, while giving everybody else an easy exploit. Thanks for pointing out that other methods used to achieve similar results are borderline exploits by the way. Surely a deployable that is even more effective with a single right click is balanced, right?