Player Features and Ideas Discussion

You have proven nothing, except that you can side track this outside the context of AFK Cloaking.

Please note: I requested a reason to shield local from changes, not anecdotal evidence that local was not involved with non-AFK play.

The context of your point not only went outside of AFK cloaking, but failed to present a reason why changes to local should not be included.

It suggested that you were active, and so was the cloaked player.
It suggested your gameplay objective was being attempted and opposed, (catching the cloaked ship).
It did NOT define whether the cloaked player's objective was even possible, as they were only referred to as being busy evading your own efforts.

By your own admission, the topic of local was not even relevant, let alone provided game play value that suggested merit in not being changed.

Yes, based on the precedent established by accepted practices.
Being logged into the game has never been the exclusive defining aspect of being subject to risk by direct combat.

These practices, for reference:
1. Sitting in a POS shield
2. Being docked in an outpost

It may help to remember that players do not actually own ANY space, and that holding sov does nothing more than grant permission to establish POS and Outpost presence exclusive to your own group.
Use of cloaking or other tactics are universally available to all players, friendly and hostile, while the POS and Outpost grants leverage exclusively to your group.

For those seeking to avoid encounters:
This means that those not approved to use these, MUST rely exclusively on other means of avoidance, such as a cloak or persistent evasion by speed.

We have reasonable expectations that CCP wants hostile characters to encounter each other.
While cloaking in certain ways limits or reduces contact, it also has a net effect of promoting competitive gameplay in areas that would otherwise require extreme conditions to exist.
Example: It is accepted that certain systems, deep inside large alliances, see little activity from non-cloaking ships outside of large fleets, and those are by necessity rare due to organization demands.
Such large fleets are also expected to require large groups to establish, leaving little in the manner of gameplay options for smaller groups.

You do understand that no one in favor of change is here cause they enjoy the accepted practices. People that post in the F&I area are looking for change, so using the argument that "That's how the game is" is rather invalid.

Though I have accepted that people will use the argument about POSs and stations, I never have agreed that they are valid arguments. They cant be compared to AFK cloaking at all. I still believe that these items were designed as defensive items, meant for a player to us. POSs use fuel to stay active. Stations require billions in assets to create and far more effort than any cyno could possibly imagine.

Yes, cloak or pouncing points is all one can use to avoid a fight. No one is arguing that. What people are saying and have been saying since the start of this that you ignore is that cloak allows 100% safety once engaged. That avoidance of conflict can never be threatened. This is exactly the problem that people here are complaining back. I have said since day one that the 100% safety is a problem.

I have made a pretty solid attempt to offer compromise to the table in regards to hunting cloaks and changing local.

I will continue to hold the belief that cloak is flawed in that it can offer 100% safety and that no other thing IN GAME can offer that. The argument that POSs and Stations provide this as a counter is invalid as well. POSs use fuel. Stations can, however a player can be locked out if they undock and when they undock they are in a known location, which is not true of cloak. Sov ownership has no bearing on AFK cloaking, as it has been proven that someone can camp any system with or without sov and they still maintain the 100% safety.

I have not stated local offers perfect intel. I have stated however that it is accurate, free and unbiased. And that any fallibility with it's intel, comes with how people read the information it gives.

But yes if they are available, pilots can pos or dock up. I don't actually recall mentioning that at any point in this thread, although it is a rather obvious benefit of having sov.

But that's not what you said, which I find a little ironic. You actually said:
So I ask again, have I?

Haywood, with your example i agree it shows that cloaking is not always involved with local (Even though the cloaker could have left system through a WH and you would have only known this when he disappeared from local but not watch list). But your example does not separate the relationship local has with afk cloaky camping. Every criticism you have against the cloaker is applicable to null ratters.

This might be childish, but not irrelevant.



like a docked ratter waiting for someone to leave local.



Like a docked ratter waiting for someone to leave local.



Like a docked ratter waiting for someone to leave local.



Their safety is COMPLETELY based on the local. Without they would be dead. Without it they couldnt just sit in station and wait forever.



Are you serious? He is in a station in friendly space with the possibility of having any ship in the game and hundreds if not thousands of potential friends including his own cyno. He might not be very skilled in PvP but he sure as hell can bring in a lot more friends more quickly than a cloaker can with his cyno. He had more options than avoid the encounter.


So even though there maybe examples where cloaking is not involved with local, it doesnt mean the two can be independently altered with out breaking balance in other scenarios.

On the discussion, most interesting points and my personal experience on the matter:

Cloaky camping has bullied many people i directly know since playing this game from 2005 out of nul sec and some even out of the game. As a corp leader who tries to bring new bro's into nul sec for many years, i have to listen to my corp members complain and complain about it over and over and over. What ever your point of view on the matter may be, that is the reality.

Discussions on this subject are totally futile, so should be left off these fora. I have tried it in many polite ways over the years. Trying to reason with somebody that does not want to listen just does not work. On top of that, CCP proves itself to be just like any other company: not better nor worse, by removing and blocking anything they don't like to hear or be posted about this subject, like any good company protecting its interests will do. No doubt this post will be removed in a matter of minutes for just stating that this is happening... The reason this happens will be that giving negative feedback can be considdered being a rant, or have a negative spirit. This pretty much kills any opposition on this matter to discuss and make a point, so don't even try it!

Changing modules is something that is up to CCP. I advice people not to try and fight "the company" on this over their forums, or by use of ingame tickets, because they are sole rulers on these media and you will hit a brick wall. If you want to make a point about it, any other media will have to do (twitch, youtube, reddit, your website or blog, etc).

That said, I have renewed hope with the big jump changes and the implementation of possible anti claoking npc's that there is finally something beind done about it, or at least that CCP is realising they need to change things they were first not ready to change.

The changes on the claoks that i can think of are these:

1. I support the use of charges for the cloak. NR. 1 solution in my opinion.
load it up like cap boosters with boosters or nanites that give you x minutes of cloack. refill can be done while cloaked, but has to happen every x minutes.

2. Make the cloak like a jump ship with a fuel bay. It can hold for x minutes in cloak and you have to drag fuel into it from cargohold to keep it running.

3. Give it a cycle time of x minutes. After that the module decloaks and one has to initiate cloak again.

4. I support the idea of having NPC decloakers fly around, as listed in the first post.

Cutting off the lecture at this point, as the actual problem has been stated.
I suspect the poster does not even realize the error.

Null sec is not supposed to be safer than high sec, particularly for PvE play.
We hear all the time on these forums about how awful high sec is, with ganking happening out of nowhere, and claims that Concord can be distracted to give either side the reaction time they want.

You keep bringing new bro's into null... but did you mention to them that PvE would be harder in null?
Did you mention that you cannot promise their safety, except where your side has superior numbers on the field, and even that can be risky?

It's not just the NPC rats that are tougher, it is that there are no consequences beyond what you can enforce.
If you can get away with it, you can do it.

And here you are talking about limiting things in null, to the point that null would seem less dangerous than high.
EXAMPLE: You are in high sec.
A ganker is right next to you, watching your behavior.
Except you don't know he is a ganker. He looks like he is PvE playing just like you.
So, when your ship goes still the second time, and they recognize that you are taking another break, they call in their buddies to pop your ship and loot it.
You never even realize they were the spotters for the gank.

In null, you know that guy is hostile.
He has to stay cloaked to even watch you, but you already docked in order to avoid him.
It sounds more like the anticipation is killing it for your friends.

I dont think it really is. Though I can see how it could easily frustrate people enough to move back to High sec.

Yeah, I can agree with this sentiment.

But the funny thing is, high sec is no less dangerous.
You simply don't know if that neutral guy in the system is going to attack you in a gank attempt, either.
The real difference is, you expect to operate in a system with neutrals present, in high.
It is impractical trying to avoid them, because they are all over the place, and cannot really be avoided.

In null, that same neutral ship suddenly becomes grounds for ceasing activity.
You can avoid them enough, so that you EXPECT an opportunity to operate free of that risk.
So, having such safe expectations, you deny yourself play until it leaves.

I like analogies too.

Your spawn camping one seems a bit too oversimplified, as it ignores how easy most such campers are to be rid of.
(FPS often has one class vulnerable to certain things, like a rock paper scissors dynamic)

Now, if the FPS guy wanted to turn invisible, and only attempt to attack a class that was vulnerable to this camper, just use the area effect damage character to weed him out.
If you can't find him, just use tankier classes he can't kill without getting wiped himself.
Once he realizes his kills have dried up, he either accepts not getting more or moves on.

FPS shooters, unlike EVE, concentrate players into a bottleneck, where there usually is no perfect cover.

(My son loves plants n zombies game, kinda fun for a FPS)