These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Anti-Cloak that doesn't break the game
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kittamaru
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#121 - 2011-12-20 16:33:32 UTC
*shrugs* even if you remove local, I don't like the idea that any single module has absolutely no counter... if you go AFK in space without docking or pos'ing up, you should be able to be found and killed.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#122 - 2011-12-20 16:33:50 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Even if we're talking about a cloaked ship warping to a bookmark they made earlier?


Then they've earned the kill and hats off to them if they catch me with my pants down. It happens. It's an accepted risk. This is why my haulers in there for PI tend to be tanked and stabbed... gives me a fighting chance to escape.

Funny thing that... you actually don't have to fit a hauler for max cargo capacity... part of that whole "adapting" thing.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Kittamaru
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#123 - 2011-12-20 16:54:13 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Even if we're talking about a cloaked ship warping to a bookmark they made earlier?


Then they've earned the kill and hats off to them if they catch me with my pants down. It happens. It's an accepted risk. This is why my haulers in there for PI tend to be tanked and stabbed... gives me a fighting chance to escape.

Funny thing that... you actually don't have to fit a hauler for max cargo capacity... part of that whole "adapting" thing.


Exactly my point - this setup would allow cooperation between players to help hunt cloaks but would also give a reason to not go AFK. I mean, why is it that anyone should be able to be 100% safe while undocked for any reason? Even in a POS shield, they could, potentially, down the POS... if you're AFK long enough :)
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#124 - 2011-12-20 16:58:52 UTC
Kittamaru wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Even if we're talking about a cloaked ship warping to a bookmark they made earlier?


Then they've earned the kill and hats off to them if they catch me with my pants down. It happens. It's an accepted risk. This is why my haulers in there for PI tend to be tanked and stabbed... gives me a fighting chance to escape.

Funny thing that... you actually don't have to fit a hauler for max cargo capacity... part of that whole "adapting" thing.


Exactly my point - this setup would allow cooperation between players to help hunt cloaks but would also give a reason to not go AFK. I mean, why is it that anyone should be able to be 100% safe while undocked for any reason? Even in a POS shield, they could, potentially, down the POS... if you're AFK long enough :)


This set up breaks wormhole intel, which requires being able to remain undetected in a system.

You're failing to consider the ripple effects. You break another entire aspect of the game simply because you're afraid of the stranger in local.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#125 - 2011-12-20 17:10:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Andski
you all are dumb and your ideas are dumb, stop posting

any bullshit "fixes" to local will just lead to an even more broken nullsec, where roaming gangs have the advantage over the residents of the space. it will make travel impossible, with cloaked hictors camping jump bridges and cyno arrays with impunity. your dumb "fixes" will allow cloakers to observe an area (staging POS, cyno array/JB POS, etc.) and gather intel with zero chance of detection.

tl;dr: local works as intended, AFK cloaking works as intended, you're all dumb

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#126 - 2011-12-20 17:12:27 UTC
stop breaking the game, idiots

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#127 - 2011-12-20 17:40:36 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Even if we're talking about a cloaked ship warping to a bookmark they made earlier?


Then they've earned the kill and hats off to them if they catch me with my pants down. It happens. It's an accepted risk. This is why my haulers in there for PI tend to be tanked and stabbed... gives me a fighting chance to escape.

So, compare that with nullsec where local is changed so it's either gone or excludes cloaked ships. You jump in, safe up, wait a few hours or days and start scanning for anoms. You then jump around at random, and if you see someone in a sufficiently juicy ship being attacked by enough NPCs, you slowboat over to them and tackle them and shoot them. And the only real defense against this is eternal vigilence.

And all this to "fix afk cloaking". Heh.
Ingvar Angst wrote:
You're failing to consider the ripple effects.

Heh.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Kittamaru
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#128 - 2011-12-20 18:09:33 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Kittamaru wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Even if we're talking about a cloaked ship warping to a bookmark they made earlier?


Then they've earned the kill and hats off to them if they catch me with my pants down. It happens. It's an accepted risk. This is why my haulers in there for PI tend to be tanked and stabbed... gives me a fighting chance to escape.

Funny thing that... you actually don't have to fit a hauler for max cargo capacity... part of that whole "adapting" thing.


Exactly my point - this setup would allow cooperation between players to help hunt cloaks but would also give a reason to not go AFK. I mean, why is it that anyone should be able to be 100% safe while undocked for any reason? Even in a POS shield, they could, potentially, down the POS... if you're AFK long enough :)


This set up breaks wormhole intel, which requires being able to remain undetected in a system.

You're failing to consider the ripple effects. You break another entire aspect of the game simply because you're afraid of the stranger in local.



And you're failing to read - I said you can simply make this not work in wormhole space via spatial distortion and what not
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#129 - 2011-12-20 18:54:35 UTC
Kittamaru wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Kittamaru wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Even if we're talking about a cloaked ship warping to a bookmark they made earlier?


Then they've earned the kill and hats off to them if they catch me with my pants down. It happens. It's an accepted risk. This is why my haulers in there for PI tend to be tanked and stabbed... gives me a fighting chance to escape.

Funny thing that... you actually don't have to fit a hauler for max cargo capacity... part of that whole "adapting" thing.


Exactly my point - this setup would allow cooperation between players to help hunt cloaks but would also give a reason to not go AFK. I mean, why is it that anyone should be able to be 100% safe while undocked for any reason? Even in a POS shield, they could, potentially, down the POS... if you're AFK long enough :)


This set up breaks wormhole intel, which requires being able to remain undetected in a system.

You're failing to consider the ripple effects. You break another entire aspect of the game simply because you're afraid of the stranger in local.



And you're failing to read - I said you can simply make this not work in wormhole space via spatial distortion and what not


If the system is bad enough that you need to build exceptions into it to try to prevent it from breaking things it's probably not worth implementing in the first place.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#130 - 2011-12-20 19:03:05 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Kittamaru wrote:
And you're failing to read - I said you can simply make this not work in wormhole space via spatial distortion and what not


If the system is bad enough that you need to build exceptions into it to try to prevent it from breaking things it's probably not worth implementing in the first place.
Not only that bud, but it fails to address the reason for AFKing and adds even more power on top of the already powerful local intel tool.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#131 - 2011-12-20 19:52:51 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
If the system is bad enough that you need to build exceptions into it to try to prevent it from breaking things it's probably not worth implementing in the first place.

I've yet to see a good objection to just making cloaked ships unprobable when they're running silent/without any mods online.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#132 - 2011-12-20 20:22:21 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
If the system is bad enough that you need to build exceptions into it to try to prevent it from breaking things it's probably not worth implementing in the first place.

I've yet to see a good objection to just making cloaked ships unprobable when they're running silent/without any mods online.


Simple. You nerf the ship excessively. They're already unable to do anything while cloaked (save operate probes), now you'll make them unable to do anything when decloaking.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#133 - 2011-12-20 20:48:09 UTC
A solution requires a problem to exist to begin with, and there is no problem from what I'm seeing.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#134 - 2011-12-20 21:00:37 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Simple. You nerf the ship excessively. They're already unable to do anything while cloaked (save operate probes), now you'll make them unable to do anything when decloaking.

And your idea makes nullsec even more of a desert than it already is.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Kittamaru
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#135 - 2011-12-21 13:49:01 UTC
Except there is a very simple issue here - virtually any ship can slap on a cloak and a cyno generator and hide in a system for virtually unlimited amounts of time, completely and utterly undetectable. Not only does this disrupt the lesser-prepared players, it is a bane to even well prepared ones because you have that threat of a hotdrop at any time, knowing that you can do NOTHING to prevent it - at best, you can escape with your ship, but the chances of actually eliminating the cyno-gen before his buddies come through is virtually zero.

And besides, give one good reason why you should be able to sit, completely afk and cloaked in a hostile system for days on end without ever moving with zero chance of being discovered... nothing else gives you such impunity whilst out in space... and honestly, there's no need for it. Hell, I'm all for taking away local - none the less, being able to hide forever is just broken, at least for non-covops ship.
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#136 - 2011-12-21 14:11:14 UTC
AFK cloaking is NOT active gameplay and as such I'm against it being used systematically (we all have to go afk from time to time)
Nothing wrong with people preferring to be permantly cloaked, but they should be flying their ship. And not leave it cloaked while going at work, visitting friends or sleeping. Not without a serious risc of getting caught.

Pinky
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#137 - 2011-12-21 15:26:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
Not one person in this thread has proven anyone to be AFK and cloaking. Its a term made up to cover for the attempt at having safe PVE in dangerous areaas. Harden the **** up you pussies. You will not have safe pve in your alliance strongholds, not even if you make 20000 posts about it. On the other hand you are likely to lose local eventually as it is the biggest deterent to pvp actively happening in losec. So suffer you pathetic candyass trammies.
Lucien Visteen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#138 - 2011-12-21 16:20:57 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:
Not one person in this thread has proven anyone to be AFK and cloaking. Its a term made up to cover for the attempt at having safe PVE in dangerous areaas. Harden the **** up you pussies. You will not have safe pve in your alliance strongholds, not even if you make 20000 posts about it. On the other hand you are likely to lose local eventually as it is the biggest deterent to pvp actively happening in losec. So suffer you pathetic candyass trammies.


I would say the same to you, Man up and fly without a cloak on. If you want pvp invite to it instead of hiding behind a module.

The ships hung in the sky in much the same way that bricks don't.
Caliph Muhammed
Perkone
Caldari State
#139 - 2011-12-22 08:11:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Caliph Muhammed
You are free to say whatever you want, the game is balanced around cloaking ships existing. Cloaked ships even with max cloaking skill have a serious delay in targeting. They give up a high slot to equip it. They can not attack while cloaked. They can only observe.

Its that simple. You do not have a right to safety while generating ISK. You do have a right to safety if you aren't.

So cloak up or dock up and be safe or uncloak and undock and take the risk.
Xorv
Questionable Acquisitions
#140 - 2011-12-22 09:25:37 UTC
Caliph Muhammed wrote:

[...] You do not have a right to safety while generating ISK. You do have a right to safety if you aren't.


Very key point made here for this and many other discussions,...

Generating significant ISK should come hand in hand with risk and competition from other players. PvE should not be firewalled from PvP in a Sandbox MMO. This is a principle that CCP should vigorously apply to every aspect of their game, would fix much that is currently wrong with EVE.