Player Features and Ideas Discussion

You are crossing a line, with this logic.

By expressing a desire to have the ability to affect cloaked characters, it begs the question of adding in the means to access any character not normally available to interact with.

Let's limit ourselves to the players online in the immediate system, for now.

It begins with the sov holders. They have placed structures, POS and Outpost, which can give shelter to players.
This shelter, in many ways like a cloak, removes them from practical access by hostile players.

Should we also add in a mechanic to affect players in a POS, or Outpost?
( I am not venturing into Meta-gaming aspects here, unless you do )

The simple truth, is that removing or blocking access to these structures is a completely different level of PvP, one which the PvE players can also evade with proper effort. Considering them on the same level as cloaking pretends that the PvE player actually has no control over assets protected by these structures.

Any ship short of a super capital can dock, and those can still sit in a POS.
Only a very specific list of ships are capable of warping while being cloaked. All others are either stuck on grid, or needing to drop their cloaks before entering warp.

So, I'll trade you access to affecting regular cloaked / CovOps cloaked vessels, if you trade me docked / POS sitting ones.

I think we can all get something here.

POS can be attacked ...
Outpost can be attacked, and once changed hands, redocking and services refused.

No need for any trade off or changes.

but yeah, ... this string of logic is going off topic methinks.

In what world have I crossed a line? The thread is about "AFK campers" I specifically said "A camper can hang a threat over a system and that camper is completely untouchable. What I would like to see is the ability to take an aggressive stance towards that player." Never in this thread have I implied that it should extend anywhere beyond this scope and my last post didnt do that either.

Also in regards to POS and Station. Those arguments have been proven invalid as both those items do not offer the same safety net as a cloak. A cloak can never be broken or located. A POS and a station show a location and a POS can be destroyed.



That's not completely true. The threat is always there however one can be prepared for it. However it's impossible to tell the size of a BlOps fleet that might follow in on a cyno. I agree being prepared is good but I see no reason why anyone should just let that threat exist and not be able to confront it in some fashion.

I've lived all over null sec (starting in Syndicate in 2008 and Omist later than year). I rtend to advocate for dead end systems being ratting systems in whatever alliance I am in because if you can get a guy called out in intel coming you way, that gives you a chance to get an alt into a sabre and get the gate bubbled before they arrive.

Then it's just a decloaking game (or was before ceptors became immune to bubbles, but ceptors have a decloaking delay unlike bombers, it's the bombers and recons you REALLY want to catch before they cloak in your system). Wormholes have complicated this but you can anchor a bubble on a wormhole just as easy.

Some of us actually try to play the game before we run to mommie (ccp) to fix it for us.

Being untouchable, perhaps, but only so long as they exclusively touch nothing themselves.

You, as you once accused me, are perhaps being willfully ignorant.

You say that this camper is a threat, and that they have great potential.
And YET... the fact remains supreme, that the ship which this cloaked player interacts with is completely up to the PvE player.
Should the PvE player come out with something too tough, or have too many friends around, that cloaked player has no meaningful threat to work with.

Fittings and Friends.
You are content to accuse the cloaked player of having these in abundance, but in the same breath suggest that matching this potential asks too much of the PvE players in question.
A cloaked player, as agreed by many, does not have this group of friends available at all times, and is themselves not believed to be present at all times, hence the description of being AFK.

This reasoning effectively admits awareness that the cloaked player is believed to be BLUFFING.
That hostile name in local may have nothing to throw at the PvE player, and so limited is actually no threat in truth.
But you don't know when this condition exists, just like they don't know when the PvE player has the advantage.

This is not as one sided as your claims make it out to be.



This assumes the blops fleet is real, and not a bluff.

It also assumes the cloaked player has certain knowledge regarding the PvE player's available threat potential, which is patently unavailable to them in the same manner the PvE player is also facing uncertainty.

So much a joke that you are still paying to be heard here as evidenced by your posting privileges.

You unwittingly illustrated the truth though. The 'problem' for these people isn't the threat, it's the uncertainty. Afk cloaking makes local not be the 100% perfect intel tool they rely on, and that rubs them the wrong way.


When they ask for 'active counter measures' they aren't looking at a way to mitigate a threat (I've already demonstrated multiple ways to do that), they are asking for a way to defeat the uncertainty presented by an afk cloaker. This is why we haven't seen one SINGLE complaint about afk cloaking in Wormhole space (where it is much more dangerous as people can't even see you in local). Wormholers (bless their psychotic little souls) are used to uncertainty and react accordingly.

Null sec afk cloak whiners let themselves be fooled by the effectiveness of local and an afk cloaker destroys that illusion thus the repeated pleas for CCP intervention. Again no different than high sec gank whining, Gankers break the illusion of "high security" space.

This argument here invalidated every argument you have in favor of cloak and invalidates every single criticism of PVE players you have made. This just shows that all you are interested in is maintaining your 100% safety net. Any change to how that safety net worked would mean you have to suddenly be at the keyboard and playing which is what CCP wants. Which is well illustrated by CCPs change of stance on ISBoxer.

You hammer people here saying they dont know how to play the game, yet you sit here and try to justify your stance by complaining about not being able to take 30 seconds to safe log off? Even if the statement doesnt directly relate to you, if you are going to use it as an example, you have to be in favor of it.

No other argument needs to be made on your part. Your stance is clear. You wish to maintain the 100% safety net provided by cloak and you admit that it is exactly that.

My argument has been and always will be that the 100% safety net provided by a cloak for a ship already in a system is a flaw. it allows for the exact situation you described.

Nikk I would just quote your entire post but its not worth it.

Effectively you are just twisting statements in an attempt to make them fit your stance.



You even admit it here. Yes, a cloaked ship once in a system is completely untouchable. I am not talking about gates, or travel or anything else. Nothing in the game compares to the safety of a ship sitting in space, cloaked.

That has been my entire point. It is the only flaw I have ever seen in cloaks and is one that can be abused. It makes absolutely no difference what the intention of the pilot in a system is. Hostile, or not. Why should a ship be able to sit in space with absolute safety. NOTHING in the game provides that. Not POSs or Stations.

LOL what? I have always said I wish to bring the fight to the cloaky camper. My stance completely revolves around the idea that I think the 100% safety net is a flaw. Why you continue to assert that a cloaky camper is harmless is your own fault. We all know they are not, we all know why they are there. My stance is pretty clear and its hardly selfish.

Please stop the smoke and mirrors. My stance is pretty straight forward.

I agree with Jen on everything on this page. Ive lived in HS, LS, and null. Ive flown cloaky ships, and was on the recieving end of cloaky campers back when i used to grind anoms in null.

intel channels are invaluable for this type of thing (prepare gatecamp for incoming threat). Or, BAIT the camper with friends. You are in an alliance right? There are often 5+ ppl in a ratting system at any given time. Why dont you set up bait to kill the camper? "But ill get hot dropped!". If you know it will happen, then PREPARE for it. Its not rocket science. If you dunk their blop squad, the chances of them coming back are slim.

This is even easier for those cloaky campers that like to linger for weeks, and blop drop miners/ratting ships. Grab a few tanky pvp BS, sit in plex, wait for pew. Have help in station/pos, once cyno pops, warp in your own support and dominate. But that takes socializing and working together. Which many ratters/pve players would just prefer to complain on the forums.

If it was really bad, go to a different ratting system. Many alliances i was in had multiple ratting systems, easily accessible via JB. If one was cloaky camped, and i couldnt get help, id just go to another system. Revolutionary, i know.