These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals

First post First post
Author
Alundil
Rolled Out
#201 - 2015-01-13 18:29:55 UTC
So many bad ideas in this thread (like all of the others tbqfh nbs).

1.
Syn Shi wrote:
A ship that boosts stats that is 100% safe (links) is ok but someone sitting afk cloaked doing nothing is an issue?

Its a sad day in new Eden.

Exactly this. "Oh noes by perfect booster can't possibly be on grid anywhere, OGB are completely fine and necessary." -- Every Boost/Gang Links Discussion through ever.
SMH

2.
Lexiana Del'Amore wrote:
disable local chat and local numbers to the person cloaked...

Disable it for everyone everywhere other than HS and problem is solved. For everyone. We (wspace folks) have been asking for this for years (and have been living with it sans irrational fear of "AFK-Cloakies" since Day 1).

3.
Jenn aSide wrote:
I think the problem is risk averse players who should have never left high sec in the 1st place, not some dude with a cloak on.

Ding-freaking-ding

4.
Jenn aSide wrote:
Let the cloaker cloak but don't let them see local OR D-SCAN.

Fine on not seeing local - normal facet of everyday life. But making them blind to directional scanner as well? Dafuq you smoking? That's a pointless change which additionally, by the way, decimates an entire area of space (1000's of systems) and it's primary form of travel/scouting/combat - non of which are AFK.

5.
Jenn aSide wrote:
maybe give probes a set time before they explode if the deploying ship is cloaked, like 20 minutes or something

All scan probes already have a timer. What would your idea solve? If someone needs their probes for 20 minutes to find something or someone they weren't going to catch anyone with the full hour and ~20 they have now so it doesn't matter.

I'm right behind you

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#202 - 2015-01-13 18:32:54 UTC
Hi everyone, at least those who are still reading the replies to this topic.

I am sure some of you were wondering when I would open my mouth.
(See my signature for more information on my views)

Feel free to copy the following, I have found it helpful to clearly define two concepts when trying to discuss them seriously.

AFK Cloaking: This is done in response to Local Chat flawlessly reporting pilot presence. It dumbs down the interaction between pilots by outright telling all parties who is present. Without this crutch, use of sensors, strategy, and cooperation would be needed to fill the void.
What does it achieve?
It creates a flaw in the usual flow of cause and effect for life in many systems. Often, a neutral or hostile pilot is seen entering, and activity is suspended until they leave. There is trivial risk, as standard procedure often involves being ready to get safe in the time frame provided by this instant alarm. Hostile pilots who refuse to leave are subsequently hunted down.
When the "AFK Cloaking" pilot enters, he disrupts this process, by not leaving. Further, since this intel tool persistently shows him present, the default response of suspending activity is perpetually pushed as chosen reaction.
This devalues the intel tool, as it is now being used against the native PvE pilots instead of helping them.
If local were removed, sensors strategy and cooperation would be placed as valuable means of protecting PvE income assets.
It would also be pointless to AFK cloak, as noone would be aware of your presence while you were passive.
It is widely anticipated that any change to local which stopped free cloaking awareness would also include a means to hunt cloaked ships.

Summary: That free intel tool favored by so many can be used by the hunters too.

Hot Dropping: Bridging is intended to bypass reinforced blockades and travel time. Here, it has been fine tuned to avoid advertising the presence of a fleet to the free intel tool as well by delaying the easily recognizable population spike till the last possible moment. The intention is to deny the warning local provides, although it still reports the presence of the cyno boat enough to be associated with AFK Cloaking instead.
Quite simply, while PvE pilots would never resume regular activities with a hostile fleet present, they are sometimes willing to gamble over whether a cloaked vessel represents that level of threat at a given time.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#203 - 2015-01-13 19:55:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Nikk Narrel wrote:


AFK Cloaking: This is done in response to Local Chat flawlessly reporting pilot presence. It dumbs down the interaction between pilots by outright telling all parties who is present. Without this crutch, use of sensors, strategy, and cooperation would be needed to fill the void.


No it wouldn't wouldn't. As with the 1st anom nerf (when CCP demonstrated thinking along the same lines you do) people just left, because EVE has more than just null space. This is one of the many things "remove local" just don't take in to account when advocating a serious change.

Local is actually a necessary evil; It makes game play possible (on both sides) in a game system where people appear suddenly in a new system (ie use jump gates, or cynos, or wormholes) and where those same people can cross great distances quickly (warp drives). The amount of changes to the game that would make game play in a space that has these things (gates,wormholes,cynos and warp drives) would amount to a full re-write of EVe online's mechanics.


Quote:

What does it achieve?
It creates a flaw in the usual flow of cause and effect for life in many systems. Often, a neutral or hostile pilot is seen entering, and activity is suspended until they leave. There is trivial risk, as standard procedure often involves being ready to get safe in the time frame provided by this instant alarm. Hostile pilots who refuse to leave are subsequently hunted down.
When the "AFK Cloaking" pilot enters, he disrupts this process, by not leaving. Further, since this intel tool persistently shows him present, the default response of suspending activity is perpetually pushed as chosen reaction.
This devalues the intel tool, as it is now being used against the native PvE pilots instead of helping them.


What you just described here is called BALANCE ie the thing that helped you is now hurting you. This is good, because without that people like me would be able to print even MORE liquid isk into the economy than even now. While I don't like losing ships, it sometimes happens (last one was a domi 3 days ago in Delve, got scrammed at the exact wrong moment trying to warp out that even activating my mjd didn't get me out before i got scrammed by a wormhole Gila) and that demonstrates the balance of the system.

Invariably, all "no local in null" ideas result in imbalance, either for the defender/pve player or for the attacker/aggressor. Why would people put up with that when you could:

- Make 200 mil an hour in low sec with a Naga and knowledge of how to convert LP while watching pop star girls shake it

-Make insane isk in FW with a Drake or Stealth Bomber

- Join a good wormhole corp and make up to 300 mil per hour

OR

- Just stay in high sec and make as much per hour as you would average in null sec anyways,but with less hassle.


Quote:

If local were removed, sensors strategy and cooperation would be placed as valuable means of protecting PvE income assets.
It would also be pointless to AFK cloak, as noone would be aware of your presence while you were passive.
It is widely anticipated that any change to local which stopped free cloaking awareness would also include a means to hunt cloaked ships.

Summary: That free intel tool favored by so many can be used by the hunters too.

Hot Dropping: Bridging is intended to bypass reinforced blockades and travel time. Here, it has been fine tuned to avoid advertising the presence of a fleet to the free intel tool as well by delaying the easily recognizable population spike till the last possible moment. The intention is to deny the warning local provides, although it still reports the presence of the cyno boat enough to be associated with AFK Cloaking instead.
Quite simply, while PvE pilots would never resume regular activities with a hostile fleet present, they are sometimes willing to gamble over whether a cloaked vessel represents that level of threat at a given time.


The bolded again is called BALANCE. That balance allows for the current healthy ecosystem of gain (ratting up a fortune) and loss (sometimes losing a ship, which any public killboard will confirm, ratting ships do die in droves in null still, even with 'perfect intel' local).

I know you don't like local and think the situation could be better. You are wrong, without making a totally new game, local has to stay unless you want a repeat of the 1st anom nerf that , instead of resulting in better gameplay and more conflict, simply resulted in longer wait times to get into high sec incursion fleets.
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#204 - 2015-01-13 20:15:13 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:
Mag's wrote:
...snip...If and it's a big if. If any changes need to take place, then ALL the mechanics involved need change. You cannot cherry pick, simply because you fail to see the big picture. Blink


This is it? Like the other guy, you couldn't address or even try to rebut any of my arguments?
Why do I need to even try to get you to understand balance and argue points? It's quite clear you're unwilling to listen and have your mind fixed. Nothing you have posted is new, or has any merit. For all I know I've been involved with this topic and it's nuances, for longer than you've been playing.

I do like emptying my bladder. But doing so against the wind, isn't something I want or intend to try. Blink


You've mentioned few mechanics other than local chat, but your arguments have all centered around me not understanding how other mechanics work. I'm convinced that my position is correct and not merely based on this dislike of a certain behavior because I've been able to systematically address each of your points in turn and offer a sound rebuttal that you've been unable to construct a cogent reply to. I've also outlined why indefinate cloaking should probably fall under balance consideration in all regions of space and why the problems associated with it are uncorrelated to local chat. If you had been able to do the same maybe I would have changed my mind, but you and other people here haven't.

Joking and drunkenness aside (I'm prone to both) a few points to consider, and I'll try to be as polite as I can about this.

You're telling me that nw you don't even need to try, that you know what I think, and that ideas are worthless. Well dude you don't need to try, but here you are and I'm sure you'll have something else to say about local or big picture or about related mechanics while failing any specific details. I think you should try, because discussion is important, and even if you say that an idea isn't new discovery is still an individual process. Every idea is new to those who haven't seen it before.

Secondly, you know nothing about me or anyone else here or how long anyone has been playing any game. Spouting off a worthless (or unprovable) qualification like how long you've been playing is tantamount to yelling 'do you know who I am?' in an effort to intimidate people. It doesn't tell anyone anything about yourself other than you think you're more important than them. You and I both are just people posting on an internet forum for a game. We all share exactly the same degree of relevance.

Third- and this is the most important one here, and I hope the mods don't cut this out because this is the most important one. Every single persons ideas are important. CCP owns this forum so they retain the right to moderate it as they chose, but the intrinsic value of all ideas still exists, despite not all ideas needing to be in every ear, and everyone is entitled to his or her own. Telling anyone that their ideas don't have merit is a dark road, my friend.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#205 - 2015-01-13 20:24:02 UTC
I must apologize for the confusion here.
Jenn aSide is combining or confusing definitions with conclusions.

I stated simple factual definitions.

Below, I will respond to the conclusions she added.

Jenn aSide wrote:
Quoting Nikk NarrelAFK Cloaking: This is done in response to Local Chat flawlessly reporting pilot presence. It dumbs down the interaction between pilots by outright telling all parties who is present. Without this crutch, use of sensors, strategy, and cooperation would be needed to fill the void.

No it wouldn't wouldn't. As with the 1st anom nerf (when CCP demonstrated thinking along the same lines you do) people just left, because EVE has more than just null space. This is one of the many things "remove local" just don't take in to account when advocating a serious change.

Local is actually a necessary evil; It makes game play possible (on both sides) in a game system where people appear suddenly in a new system (ie use jump gates, or cynos, or wormholes) and where those same people can cross great distances quickly (warp drives). The amount of changes to the game that would make game play in a space that has these things (gates,wormholes,cynos and warp drives) would amount to a full re-write of EVe online's mechanics.

In modesty, I admit that I assumed the void would need to be filled as an obvious step, should local be removed. That did step beyond being a simple definition by a small amount, in order to provide some context.

The simple truth remains that local provides a service which would only be available through player effort, otherwise.

Jenn, your belief that changing local is not an option, is your opinion.
You may support it, as is your right, but please avoid stating it as a measurable fact.

Regardless of what obstacles are involved for any changes to local, AFK cloaking would not exist without local chat.
1. Local chat makes it possible, by handing out the intel confirming the cloaked presence.
2. Local chat makes it desirable to some, by blocking otherwise concealed tactics from basic use.


Jenn aSide wrote:
Quoting Nikk Narrel
What does it achieve?
It creates a flaw in the usual flow of cause and effect for life in many systems. Often, a neutral or hostile pilot is seen entering, and activity is suspended until they leave. There is trivial risk, as standard procedure often involves being ready to get safe in the time frame provided by this instant alarm. Hostile pilots who refuse to leave are subsequently hunted down.
When the "AFK Cloaking" pilot enters, he disrupts this process, by not leaving. Further, since this intel tool persistently shows him present, the default response of suspending activity is perpetually pushed as chosen reaction.
This devalues the intel tool, as it is now being used against the native PvE pilots instead of helping them.


What you just described here is called BALANCE ie the thing that helped you is now hurting you. This is good, because without that people like me would be able to print even MORE liquid isk into the economy than even now. While I don't like losing ships, it sometimes happens (last one was a domi 3 days ago in Delve, got scrammed at the exact wrong moment trying to warp out that even activating my mjd didn't get me out before i got scrammed by a wormhole Gila) and that demonstrates the balance of the system.

Invariably, all "no local in null" ideas result in imbalance, either for the defender/pve player or for the attacker/aggressor. Why would people put up with that when you could:

- Make 200 mil an hour in low sec with a Naga and knowledge of how to convert LP while watching pop star girls shake it

-Make insane isk in FW with a Drake or Stealth Bomber

- Join a good wormhole corp and make up to 300 mil per hour

OR

- Just stay in high sec and make as much per hour as you would average in null sec anyways,but with less hassle.


Thank you.
You are making my case for me.

I never claimed our current system was out of balance.
To the contrary, the stalemates we sometimes encounter can only exist when a state of too much balance exists.

Perfect balance denies resolution, as a contest can only be resolved when one side gains an advantage.

More to follow, as this post was unexpectedly long.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#206 - 2015-01-13 20:25:01 UTC
Continued from above

Jenn aSide wrote:
Quoting Nikk Narrel
If local were removed, sensors strategy and cooperation would be placed as valuable means of protecting PvE income assets.
It would also be pointless to AFK cloak, as noone would be aware of your presence while you were passive.
It is widely anticipated that any change to local which stopped free cloaking awareness would also include a means to hunt cloaked ships.

Summary: That free intel tool favored by so many can be used by the hunters too.

Hot Dropping: Bridging is intended to bypass reinforced blockades and travel time. Here, it has been fine tuned to avoid advertising the presence of a fleet to the free intel tool as well by delaying the easily recognizable population spike till the last possible moment. The intention is to deny the warning local provides, although it still reports the presence of the cyno boat enough to be associated with AFK Cloaking instead.
Quite simply, while PvE pilots would never resume regular activities with a hostile fleet present, they are sometimes willing to gamble over whether a cloaked vessel represents that level of threat at a given time.



The bolded again is called BALANCE. That balance allows for the current healthy ecosystem of gain (ratting up a fortune) and loss (sometimes losing a ship, which any public killboard will confirm, ratting ships do die in droves in null still, even with 'perfect intel' local).

I know you don't like local and think the situation could be better. You are wrong, without making a totally new game, local has to stay unless you want a repeat of the 1st anom nerf that , instead of resulting in better gameplay and more conflict, simply resulted in longer wait times to get into high sec incursion fleets.


Again, the presence of balance is not being disputed.

The lack of a path for enjoyable resolution is more to the center of this issue.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#207 - 2015-01-13 20:33:16 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:


Third- and this is the most important one here, and I hope the mods don't cut this out because this is the most important one. Every single persons ideas are important. CCP owns this forum so they retain the right to moderate it as they chose, but the intrinsic value of all ideas still exists, despite not all ideas needing to be in every ear, and everyone is entitled to his or her own. Telling anyone that their ideas don't have merit is a dark road, my friend.


This is plainly wrong. An idea has merit if it's a good idea, not because someone is 'entitled' to have an opinion on something. You have every right to have your ideas and you perceptions (even when they are provably wrong), Mags (and everyone else) has every right (so long as CCP allows it on their forum) to call those ideas bunk and prove them so. In my opinion, Mags has done so.

The simple fact is that the people who complain about AFK cloaking are wrong. The proof of that is those of us who live easily and profitably in null sec every day (in my case, every day since about 2008). If AFK cloaking was this terrible thing that destoryed gameplay, what I and thousands of other players do every day wouldn't be happening.

At the end of the day, AFK cloaking complaints come from the exact same illogical and unworthy place as ganking in high sec complaints come from; Players who would rather CCP fix the game for them so that unpleasant experiences don't happen (ie players who don't want to PLAY a game, they want to WIN a game). This rather than those players taking it upon themselves (like most of us do) to use the tools already provided by the game (in abundance) to prevent unpleasant experiences from happening.

Allow me to introduce you to such tool that I use:

[Typhoon, screw you AFKguy]
Internal Force Field Array I
Warp Core Stabilizer I
Warp Core Stabilizer I
Warp Core Stabilizer I
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Drone Damage Amplifier II
Ballistic Control System II

Large Micro Jump Drive
'Cetus' ECM Shockwave I
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
'Copasetic' Particle Field Acceleration
Pithum C-Type Medium Shield Booster

Cruise Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Auto-Targeting Cruise Missile I
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Auto-Targeting Cruise Missile I
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Auto-Targeting Cruise Missile I
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Auto-Targeting Cruise Missile I
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Auto-Targeting Cruise Missile I
Cruise Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Auto-Targeting Cruise Missile I
Drone Link Augmentor II

Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
Large Capacitor Control Circuit I
Large Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I

Ogre II x4
Hornet EC-300 x5



Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#208 - 2015-01-13 20:39:05 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Continued from above

Jenn aSide wrote:
Quoting Nikk Narrel
If local were removed, sensors strategy and cooperation would be placed as valuable means of protecting PvE income assets.
It would also be pointless to AFK cloak, as noone would be aware of your presence while you were passive.
It is widely anticipated that any change to local which stopped free cloaking awareness would also include a means to hunt cloaked ships.

Summary: That free intel tool favored by so many can be used by the hunters too.

Hot Dropping: Bridging is intended to bypass reinforced blockades and travel time. Here, it has been fine tuned to avoid advertising the presence of a fleet to the free intel tool as well by delaying the easily recognizable population spike till the last possible moment. The intention is to deny the warning local provides, although it still reports the presence of the cyno boat enough to be associated with AFK Cloaking instead.
Quite simply, while PvE pilots would never resume regular activities with a hostile fleet present, they are sometimes willing to gamble over whether a cloaked vessel represents that level of threat at a given time.



The bolded again is called BALANCE. That balance allows for the current healthy ecosystem of gain (ratting up a fortune) and loss (sometimes losing a ship, which any public killboard will confirm, ratting ships do die in droves in null still, even with 'perfect intel' local).

I know you don't like local and think the situation could be better. You are wrong, without making a totally new game, local has to stay unless you want a repeat of the 1st anom nerf that , instead of resulting in better gameplay and more conflict, simply resulted in longer wait times to get into high sec incursion fleets.


Again, the presence of balance is not being disputed.

The lack of a path for enjoyable resolution is more to the center of this issue.


You don't change a system that works do to 'subjective' concerns, you alter a system ONLY if it doesn't work. The current system works.

Walmart is learning this lesson now.. Walmart wanted to make their stores more "enjoyable" and paid dearly for it lol. Now they are having to backtrack.

I and I suspect many others enjoy (or at least don't have a problem with) the current situation. That doesn't mean I'm opposed to evolution in the future that actually works AND makes the situation more "enjoyable", but the risk here is CCP creating a "walmart situation" of something that is not only not any more enjoyable but also doesn't work.

This happened with the SOV system, people complained, CCP changed it, it got worse and people are complaining even more. CCP should not make this mistake again with local (and whether you realize it or not Nikk, this is what you are advocating for).
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#209 - 2015-01-13 20:41:36 UTC
Leave local. Leave cloak. Remove colors from local chat. Remove ability to look at player info unless in station. All you can see is a list of players in local. You will have to depend on coms, ingame channels, or whatever for intel.

Only show standing for a pilot if they are on grid with you.

The ability to instantly look at local and see standing is what leads to people insta docking.
Make it so they have to know players or RISK staying in space.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#210 - 2015-01-13 20:47:13 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:


Perfect balance denies resolution, as a contest can only be resolved when one side gains an advantage.

.


Perhaps, but it won't be the resolution you imagine. When people find themselves in an imbalanced situation they adapt, BY LEAVING (to other , better parts of EVE.

We saw this with the Anom nerf, rather than stay and try to make it work, people left to other types of EVE-space, prompting a series of 'un-nerfing' moves later on. CCP reasoning was not unsound...if EVE were real and only null sec. But people had options and they used those and moved pve alts to other places.

This would happen under most 'no local' ideas presented in this sub forum. It would either make aggressors too strong (repeating the anom nerf exodus) or it would make defense even easier, making the farmers to stong thus hurting the economy with unimpeded , unchecked and inflationary isk injection (remember, most null isk making is via liquid isk faucets, material and lp faucets are tiny or non-existant in comparison in null).
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#211 - 2015-01-13 20:47:26 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
...

You don't change a system that works do to 'subjective' concerns, you alter a system ONLY if it doesn't work. The current system works.

Walmart is learning this lesson now.. Walmart wanted to make their stores more "enjoyable" and paid dearly for it lol. Now they are having to backtrack.

I and I suspect many others enjoy (or at least don't have a problem with) the current situation. That doesn't mean I'm opposed to evolution in the future that actually works AND makes the situation more "enjoyable", but the risk here is CCP creating a "walmart situation" of something that is not only not any more enjoyable but also doesn't work.

This happened with the SOV system, people complained, CCP changed it, it got worse and people are complaining even more. CCP should not make this mistake again with local (and whether you realize it or not Nikk, this is what you are advocating for).

You may want to take a quick look at the links in my signature.

You seem to be under the impression I want to kill local chat, though I have no such interest.

I am content to leave things intact, but if change is demanded of cloaking, then it must be balanced.
AFK Cloaking exists as a response to local.
Changing it while leaving it's root cause intact would result in a lack of balance.
Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
Pandemic Horde
#212 - 2015-01-13 20:52:28 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

You may want to take a quick look at the links in my signature.

You seem to be under the impression I want to kill local chat, though I have no such interest.

I am content to leave things intact, but if change is demanded of cloaking, then it must be balanced.
AFK Cloaking exists as a response to local.
Changing it while leaving it's root cause intact would result in a lack of balance.


"If change is demanded"? By whom?

It doesn't matter who demands what, it matters what is necessary (for the greater good of ALL involved, of which afk cloak whiners are not ALL of). Thousands of us deal with afk cloaking and the threat it represents (and local and the necessity of it's evil) every time we play. This proves that there is no compelling need for CCP to do anything about 'it'.

Now, they may choose to do so anyways (CCP sometimes fixes things that are not broken lol), but I advise against them doing that because the result of doing that is almost never good.
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#213 - 2015-01-13 20:57:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Just chipping in my two cents worth here.

I was one of those that quit when the first anomaly nerf went through.

At the time I was dependent on ratting to fund my PvP and plex a couple of my accounts.
When the anom nerf hit, I was in a situation where I could make more isk in highsec than the rather crap space my alliance was currently in.

Given a choice between playing in null while grinding my isk at an overall rate lower than highsec and paying close attention to not dying, playing in highsec, or quitting, I chose to quit. Playing the game was just not worth it making 50 mil an hour running anoms (with two chars) and I refuse to play in highsec. And given the drop in PCU shortly after the change, I was nowhere near alone.

In response to a Cloaker in my system, I can always just leave and go somewhere else. It's not a huge problem, there are other places to rat or run anoms. I have an alliance intel network, I can post alts in nearby systems, I can rat aligned. I can be smart, and be safe.

But when people start talking about removing or delaying local or removing cloakers from local, it makes me a bit sad inside. If you change cloaking or local in such a way that ratting becomes a massively more dangerous activity, it's not going to make people magically team together, have combat fleets on standby ready to deploy in an instant, and maintain perfect intel networks to track where enemies are based only on the last time our legions of alts watching gates 24/7 recorded them passing.

They will just quit. Oh the guys that support themselves with highsec Incursions won't. Same with the goo barons, the inventors, the highsec mission alts, the traders.

But the ordinary grunts like me, who make 95% of my isk from ratting? I can currently be more or less safe with a combination of intel channels, local chat, ratting aligned, alts posted in next door systems, and never ratting in a system with a cloaker.

If you change the game so that even if I pay attention, I post alts next door, I rat aligned, I keep an eye on intel, that I can't be fairly sure of my safety, I won't magically just HTFU and accept dying on a regular basis. I'll just quit playing the game.


TLDR: A player playing smart, paying attention and playing safe should be in very minimal danger in nullsec. And that more or less completely excludes cloakers not showing up in local, significantly delayed local, or removing local without implementing a mechanic very nearly as powerful. Even the best nullsec space is not worth so much that regular unavoidable death does not push it down to not being worth living exclusively there.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#214 - 2015-01-13 21:02:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Nikk Narrel
Jenn aSide wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

You may want to take a quick look at the links in my signature.

You seem to be under the impression I want to kill local chat, though I have no such interest.

I am content to leave things intact, but if change is demanded of cloaking, then it must be balanced.
AFK Cloaking exists as a response to local.
Changing it while leaving it's root cause intact would result in a lack of balance.


"If change is demanded"? By whom?

It doesn't matter who demands what, it matters what is necessary (for the greater good of ALL involved, of which afk cloak whiners are not ALL of). Thousands of us deal with afk cloaking and the threat it represents (and local and the necessity of it's evil) every time we play. This proves that there is no compelling need for CCP to do anything about 'it'.

Now, they may choose to do so anyways (CCP sometimes fixes things that are not broken lol), but I advise against them doing that because the result of doing that is almost never good.

"If change is demanded"
This is a rhetorical statement, which is specific to any third party advocating for such a change.

As you kindly quoted from me, as well:
"I am content to leave things intact, but if change is demanded of cloaking, then it must be balanced."

In other words, changing anything is unnecessary.
I want to see balance maintained, with a preference to a player driven resolution system providing the outcome.

(In my signature links) I have attempted to depict what changes might be possible on both sides of this issue, which would place the determining factors for resolution upon the players by virtue of effort and skill.

It simply goes against what I believe is good for the game, to have either side able to prevail with less effort than the other.

So far, here I have done little more than to clarify the definitions of some commonly thrown around terms, as I believe they are objectively.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#215 - 2015-01-13 22:02:33 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:
You've mentioned few mechanics other than local chat, but your arguments have all centered around me not understanding how other mechanics work. I'm convinced that my position is correct and not merely based on this dislike of a certain behavior because I've been able to systematically address each of your points in turn and offer a sound rebuttal that you've been unable to construct a cogent reply to. I've also outlined why indefinate cloaking should probably fall under balance consideration in all regions of space and why the problems associated with it are uncorrelated to local chat. If you had been able to do the same maybe I would have changed my mind, but you and other people here haven't.
I've talked about it more than enough. I don't wish to argue pointlessly with you.

Bullet Therapist wrote:
You're telling me that nw you don't even need to try, that you know what I think, and that ideas are worthless. Well dude you don't need to try, but here you are and I'm sure you'll have something else to say about local or big picture or about related mechanics while failing any specific details. I think you should try, because discussion is important, and even if you say that an idea isn't new discovery is still an individual process. Every idea is new to those who haven't seen it before.

Secondly, you know nothing about me or anyone else here or how long anyone has been playing any game. Spouting off a worthless (or unprovable) qualification like how long you've been playing is tantamount to yelling 'do you know who I am?' in an effort to intimidate people. It doesn't tell anyone anything about yourself other than you think you're more important than them. You and I both are just people posting on an internet forum for a game. We all share exactly the same degree of relevance.

Third- and this is the most important one here, and I hope the mods don't cut this out because this is the most important one. Every single persons ideas are important. CCP owns this forum so they retain the right to moderate it as they chose, but the intrinsic value of all ideas still exists, despite not all ideas needing to be in every ear, and everyone is entitled to his or her own. Telling anyone that their ideas don't have merit is a dark road, my friend.
I don't have to try. My posting on the subject is on record. Arguing the same old points with someone who quite obviously has their mind shut, is pointless.

You are correct, I know nothing about you. But I can make judgements about how you view this topic, from your arguments.

I also do not care about how long you or I have played. That wasn't the point I was making. I said that it's more than likely I have been involved in this topic and it's nuances, for longer than you have played. Meaning I have seen and replied to just about every single argument that has been put forward. You bring nothing new or completely factual, to the table.

You don't agree, that's fine. I have no intention on trying to change your mind. You have every right to post your ideas, I have every right to say they are without merit.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#216 - 2015-01-13 22:50:16 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I've talked about it more than enough. I don't wish to argue pointlessly with you.

I don't have to try. My posting on the subject is on record. Arguing the same old points with someone who quite obviously has their mind shut, is pointless.

You are correct, I know nothing about you. But I can make judgements about how you view this topic, from your arguments.

I also do not care about how long you or I have played. That wasn't the point I was making. I said that it's more than likely I have been involved in this topic and it's nuances, for longer than you have played. Meaning I have seen and replied to just about every single argument that has been put forward. You bring nothing new or completely factual, to the table.

You don't agree, that's fine. I have no intention on trying to change your mind. You have every right to post your ideas, I have every right to say they are without merit.


Your history of posts as they relate to afk cloaking centers around one argument; that afk players aren't doing anything to anyone while they're afk. They're available for search and I can see there's only dismissiveness in the face of opposition, which indicates that you don't really have a contrary argument here. There's no nuance, it's simply the same refrain iterated over and over. Other than that you've offered essentially nothing to the topic other than that you think local is a problem without being able to explain why, despite you telling people that local is an infallible intelligence tool, that fights and ganks take place all over eve every single day.

This is why I've picked you to dog over this. If you had an actual refutation or a reason why afk cloakers should persist or local should be immediately changed in k-space you would have used it by now. You haven't because you don't actually have one. Now its down to unprovable qualifications and ad homenim attacks (which I'm sometimes guilty of Big smile,) as a measure to lessen the import of my own statements- because, again, you don't have an argument to the point.
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#217 - 2015-01-13 23:26:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Bullet Therapist
Jenn aSide wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:


Third- and this is the most important one here, and I hope the mods don't cut this out because this is the most important one. Every single persons ideas are important. CCP owns this forum so they retain the right to moderate it as they chose, but the intrinsic value of all ideas still exists, despite not all ideas needing to be in every ear, and everyone is entitled to his or her own. Telling anyone that their ideas don't have merit is a dark road, my friend.


This is plainly wrong. An idea has merit if it's a good idea, not because someone is 'entitled' to have an opinion on something. You have every right to have your ideas and you perceptions (even when they are provably wrong), Mags (and everyone else) has every right (so long as CCP allows it on their forum) to call those ideas bunk and prove them so. In my opinion, Mags has done so.

The simple fact is that the people who complain about AFK cloaking are wrong. The proof of that is those of us who live easily and profitably in null sec every day (in my case, every day since about 2008). If AFK cloaking was this terrible thing that destoryed gameplay, what I and thousands of other players do every day wouldn't be happening.


Everyone is entitled an opinion and any idea deserves consideration if it's comprehensible. Saying that an idea doesn't have merit and not explaining why it doesn't takes nothing away from the original idea. You have to show why an idea is wrong, not just simply say that it is. Mags hasn't actually directly addressed a statement that anyone has made. That hardly constitutes proof, especially in an anecdotal environment like this where strong correlations are difficult to achieve.

Moreover, a mechanic doesn't have to destroy the game to fall under consideration. Take the jump drive nerfs as an example. A big portion of the player base wasn't affected by them to a large degree, before or after the changes, but that itself doesn't mean that it shouldn't have been changed.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#218 - 2015-01-13 23:30:00 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I've talked about it more than enough. I don't wish to argue pointlessly with you.

I don't have to try. My posting on the subject is on record. Arguing the same old points with someone who quite obviously has their mind shut, is pointless.

You are correct, I know nothing about you. But I can make judgements about how you view this topic, from your arguments.

I also do not care about how long you or I have played. That wasn't the point I was making. I said that it's more than likely I have been involved in this topic and it's nuances, for longer than you have played. Meaning I have seen and replied to just about every single argument that has been put forward. You bring nothing new or completely factual, to the table.

You don't agree, that's fine. I have no intention on trying to change your mind. You have every right to post your ideas, I have every right to say they are without merit.


Your history of posts as they relate to afk cloaking centers around one argument; that afk players aren't doing anything to anyone while they're afk. They're available for search and I can see there's only dismissiveness in the face of opposition, which indicates that you don't really have a contrary argument here. There's no nuance, it's simply the same refrain iterated over and over. Other than that you've offered essentially nothing to the topic other than that you think local is a problem without being able to explain why, despite you telling people that local is an infallible intelligence tool, that fights and ganks take place all over eve every single day.

This is why I've picked you to dog over this. If you had an actual refutation or a reason why afk cloakers should persist or local should be immediately changed in k-space you would have used it by now. You haven't because you don't actually have one. Now its down to unprovable qualifications and ad homenim attacks (which I'm sometimes guilty of Big smile,) as a measure to lessen the import of my own statements- because, again, you don't have an argument to the point.

Are you quite serious?

As Jenn aSide quite directly pointed out, you can fit a ship to resist attack, by simply fitting for PvP instead of maximum speed PvE.

If you are concerned about cyno use, then arrange for friends to punch their return ticket.
They either need a titan or a Black ops to bridge out, unless they landed in a cluster of capitals.

Knowing they can't leave without a fight can be one heck of a deterrent.

AFK Cloakers are IRRELEVANT to the properly prepared pilot.
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#219 - 2015-01-13 23:32:04 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I've talked about it more than enough. I don't wish to argue pointlessly with you.

I don't have to try. My posting on the subject is on record. Arguing the same old points with someone who quite obviously has their mind shut, is pointless.

You are correct, I know nothing about you. But I can make judgements about how you view this topic, from your arguments.

I also do not care about how long you or I have played. That wasn't the point I was making. I said that it's more than likely I have been involved in this topic and it's nuances, for longer than you have played. Meaning I have seen and replied to just about every single argument that has been put forward. You bring nothing new or completely factual, to the table.

You don't agree, that's fine. I have no intention on trying to change your mind. You have every right to post your ideas, I have every right to say they are without merit.


Your history of posts as they relate to afk cloaking centers around one argument; that afk players aren't doing anything to anyone while they're afk. They're available for search and I can see there's only dismissiveness in the face of opposition, which indicates that you don't really have a contrary argument here. There's no nuance, it's simply the same refrain iterated over and over. Other than that you've offered essentially nothing to the topic other than that you think local is a problem without being able to explain why, despite you telling people that local is an infallible intelligence tool, that fights and ganks take place all over eve every single day.

This is why I've picked you to dog over this. If you had an actual refutation or a reason why afk cloakers should persist or local should be immediately changed in k-space you would have used it by now. You haven't because you don't actually have one. Now its down to unprovable qualifications and ad homenim attacks (which I'm sometimes guilty of Big smile,) as a measure to lessen the import of my own statements- because, again, you don't have an argument to the point.

Are you quite serious?

As Jenn aSide quite directly pointed out, you can fit a ship to resist attack, by simply fitting for PvP instead of maximum speed PvE.

If you are concerned about cyno use, then arrange for friends to punch their return ticket.
They either need a titan or a Black ops to bridge out, unless they landed in a cluster of capitals.

Knowing they can't leave without a fight can be one heck of a deterrent.

AFK Cloakers are IRRELEVANT to the properly prepared pilot.


Ganking is not the concern to me, it's the nature of the strength of intel combined with the unlimited window for the capacity to strike.
Mario Putzo
#220 - 2015-01-13 23:40:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Bullet Therapist wrote:

Ganking is not the concern to me, it's the nature of the strength of intel combined with the unlimited window for the capacity to strike.


What intel can I actually acquire if I am AFK?

If I am AFK I don't know who comes and goes from system
If I am AFK I don't know where people go in system
If I am AFK I don't know what ships are around in system
If I am AFK I don't know what pos you hang out at
If I am AFK I don't know anything.

But if I am AFK anyone who comes into that system can find out everything about me.

Except what ship I am in
Where I am in system.

Seems pretty even to me.

Or do you just not like cloaking in general because it certainly seems through your numerous amount of replies in this thread that your problem is with cloaking period, and not with AFK cloaking. Whatever the **** that is anyway, since you have no idea if anyone is AFK or not.

Cloaking is fine, and the only solution to the gross amount of whine on the subject is to change local chat. No more free intel. Maybe show the number of people in system, but unless they talk in local, no one shows up.