These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The answer to the ultimate question of Life, the Universe, and Cloaking.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#181 - 2011-12-21 00:03:16 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
Cearain wrote:


This particular proposal will make small scale eve pvp a complete crap shoot. Is that ship you are about to attack surrounded by 30 cloaked stealthbombers or even battleships? There would be no way to tell.


And now there is? They could jump from a gate, WH or even LOG if the ship is a trap...

Local is just a fake way to make you fell safe... like directional scan on a WH...



Yes now there is. You can see them in the local. When you see several in the same corp or alliance or several that you know hang out together you can use that information to avoid traps. This proposal takes that intel away so pvp becomes less about information and more about dumb luck.

Having someone jump through a gate and then start warping to you is very different from having them already on grid ready to simply uncloak and open fire. Local gives solo players some chance to try to gtfo before the blob lands. This proposal will eliminate any chance of that.


In fact, if it is a trap... the bait will be warp scrambling you... as always...and the attacker fleet will obviously take less time to get to you then you to kill the tackler... Solo PVP always lose against ambushes... get a corp and get a fleet... or have a 1-10 score...



Let me guess: You are worm hole dweller who has very litte experience in solo or small gang pvp.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#182 - 2011-12-21 00:12:16 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Cearain wrote:
I don't really think there is a choice anymore. The bonuses are too large to competitively play the game without dragging an alt around with you. Yeah I think that sucks.
There is a choice and it's an MMO after all..

Cearain wrote:
What do you disagree with in my quote? Do you not agree you will be unable to tell if any given ship is surrounded by 40 cloaked ships? That is what the proposal does.

As soon as who is seen the blob appears? Blobs don't chase after every ship they see. Most of the ships I fight are fit for pvp so they are just as likely to stick around when I come as run. Local tells me if there is a blob with them.
I agree you are basically doing the normal trick of exaggerating a circumstance to suit your argument. Much like Lord Zim does, he tells me that people are inherently lazy and won't be bothered.

So in the same vein I'll say:
Sure they have 40 cloaked ships, but then I have 80 cloaked ones and a fleet of Black Ops ready to cyno in as well as 40 supers, 40 Titans and a battle badger etc. etc. Who would know cause intel wouldn't be instant anymore, people would have to work and patient to gain it. But they are lazy, can't be arsed, so we are all screwed, Eve would lose subs and die and the iPad would have a purpose in life.

Amidoinitrite?

(Yea I know the iPad idea was really extreme and was asking way too much, but I was on a roll. Lol )



First, on boosters: just because its an mmo that doesn't mean CCPmust make it so you need to have alts to play competitively.

And your solution to the fact that this proposal will benefit blobs: Get a blob of your own. I agree that is the only answer. We just disagree on whether this is good for the game.


You correctly point out that people will need to be even more patient in order to pvp. Again I think eve would benefit from mechanics that bring about pvp faster - not make it take even longer.

I think we agree on the effects this will have we just disagree on whether they are good or bad.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Alx Warlord
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#183 - 2011-12-21 04:36:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Alx Warlord
Cearain wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
Cearain wrote:


This particular proposal will make small scale eve pvp a complete crap shoot. Is that ship you are about to attack surrounded by 30 cloaked stealthbombers or even battleships? There would be no way to tell.


And now there is? They could jump from a gate, WH or even LOG if the ship is a trap...

Local is just a fake way to make you fell safe... like directional scan on a WH...



Yes now there is. You can see them in the local. When you see several in the same corp or alliance or several that you know hang out together you can use that information to avoid traps. This proposal takes that intel away so pvp becomes less about information and more about dumb luck.

Having someone jump through a gate and then start warping to you is very different from having them already on grid ready to simply uncloak and open fire. Local gives solo players some chance to try to gtfo before the blob lands. This proposal will eliminate any chance of that.


In fact, if it is a trap... the bait will be warp scrambling you... as always...and the attacker fleet will obviously take less time to get to you then you to kill the tackler... Solo PVP always lose against ambushes... get a corp and get a fleet... or have a 1-10 score...



Let me guess: You are worm hole dweller who has very litte experience in solo or small gang pvp.


Let me guess: You are a 0,4 pirate that loves to kill smaller ships and pve ships that enter low-sec... and are afraid of WH-Space and the T3 fleet that can came out of it to get you if you don't have the local to help you flee?

Also, if ccp implements the full idea of the remove from local + possibilities to get probed then you can get this Intel probing the system...

Please read these!

New POS system New SOV system
Onyx47
U-208
#184 - 2011-12-21 15:44:52 UTC
Cearain wrote:

You have no valid response to those detailed posts you just keep bumping this bad idea so others like yourself who know nothing about small scale pvp can say "sounds cool."


Hello.

My EVE career: highsec carebear -> member of alliance blue to B(l)oB, later IT -> WH corp (alliance it was in was created just for AT9) -> alliance focused on small gang PvP, biggest fleet I've been in was 15-20 people

tl; dr - been there, done that

Sounds cool Cool

In PvP there are no winners, only losers. The trick is to be less of a loser than the guy you're shooting at.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#185 - 2011-12-21 15:45:15 UTC
Alx Warlord wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Alx Warlord wrote:


And now there is? They could jump from a gate, WH or even LOG if the ship is a trap...

Local is just a fake way to make you fell safe... like directional scan on a WH...



Yes now there is. You can see them in the local. When you see several in the same corp or alliance or several that you know hang out together you can use that information to avoid traps. This proposal takes that intel away so pvp becomes less about information and more about dumb luck.

Having someone jump through a gate and then start warping to you is very different from having them already on grid ready to simply uncloak and open fire. Local gives solo players some chance to try to gtfo before the blob lands. This proposal will eliminate any chance of that.


In fact, if it is a trap... the bait will be warp scrambling you... as always...and the attacker fleet will obviously take less time to get to you then you to kill the tackler... Solo PVP always lose against ambushes... get a corp and get a fleet... or have a 1-10 score...



Let me guess: You are worm hole dweller who has very litte experience in solo or small gang pvp.


Let me guess: You are a 0,4 pirate that loves to kill smaller ships and pve ships that enter low-sec... and are afraid of WH-Space and the T3 fleet that can came out of it to get you if you don't have the local to help you flee?

Also, if ccp implements the full idea of the remove from local + possibilities to get probed then you can get this Intel probing the system...



You guessed wrong. Try again.

How was my guess?

The reason I ask is because this thread is full of people who do not have any experience in small scale or solo pvp yet want to tell everyone what sort of impact this change will have on it. You and the op seem to fit that mold.

Why would anyone do that? It just doesn't make any sense. I don't go telling everyone what t3 industry needs. Why are you and the op trying to argue about something you know nothing about?



The op started to actually try to argue the point but then it was clear he didn't even understand the basic pvp mechanics.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#186 - 2011-12-21 15:48:05 UTC
Cearain wrote:


The op started to actually try to argue the point but then it was clear he didn't even understand the basic pvp mechanics.


Interesting... you extrapolated that I don't know basic PvP mechanics from getting the decloak-delay time incorrect?

Fascinating.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#187 - 2011-12-21 15:56:25 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Cearain wrote:


The op started to actually try to argue the point but then it was clear he didn't even understand the basic pvp mechanics.


Interesting... you extrapolated that I don't know basic PvP mechanics from getting the decloak-delay time incorrect?

Fascinating.



Well you kept asking how would solo small gang pvpers get ganked if this proposal was the case.

So you were just pretending to not know about gate aggression timers, that fitting a cloak is not a big deal, that stealthbombers can be very effective dps, that bait ships will usually have a scram so you can't just warp away.


You didn't seem to realize that yoru proposal would allow people to just sit there on grid cloaked in ships and immediately gank anyone who started a pvp engagment. I had to go through allot of basic information about pvp. So you would understand that. I suppose that all went on deaf ears.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Onyx47
U-208
#188 - 2011-12-21 16:04:49 UTC
Cearain wrote:

Well you kept asking how would solo small gang pvpers get ganked if this proposal was the case.

So you were just pretending to not know about gate aggression timers, that fitting a cloak is not a big deal, that stealthbombers can be very effective dps, that bait ships will usually have a scram so you can't just warp away.


You didn't seem to realize that yoru proposal would allow people to just sit there on grid cloaked in ships and immediately gank anyone who started a pvp engagment. I had to go through allot of basic information about pvp. So you would understand that. I suppose that all went on deaf ears.


Hi. I'm a lone Drake on a gate with a cloaky (but in local) alt with cyno sitting on the opposite side of the gate.

Also, I have a friend who does the same but he just has a fleet on the other side, he thinks cynos are too much of a hassle.

I even know a guy sitting in a belt doing the same thing, crazy bastard is convinced he can tank long enough for his fleet to jump in and warp to him.

I guess you should just go mine in highsec, engaging anyone is too much of a risk. Oh, wait, Hulkageddon...

In PvP there are no winners, only losers. The trick is to be less of a loser than the guy you're shooting at.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#189 - 2011-12-21 16:39:20 UTC
Cearain wrote:
First, on boosters: just because its an mmo that doesn't mean CCPmust make it so you need to have alts to play competitively.
They don't, bring friends.

Cearain wrote:
And your solution to the fact that this proposal will benefit blobs: Get a blob of your own. I agree that is the only answer. We just disagree on whether this is good for the game.
No it was you that claimed the blob, I merely replied in an exaggerated manner. The point being, that type of response is pointless and counter productive.

Cearain wrote:
You correctly point out that people will need to be even more patient in order to pvp. Again I think eve would benefit from mechanics that bring about pvp faster - not make it take even longer.
This game has many mechanics that require patients, I don't think this change would change that fact for the worse.

Lord Zim wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I agree you are basically doing the normal trick of exaggerating a circumstance to suit your argument. Much like Lord Zim does, he tells me that people are inherently lazy and won't be bothered.

Oh, so you're saying that I'm wrong and that nullsec will suddenly flourish with carebears when it becomes more dangerous without becoming more profitable?

I find that hard to believe.
You illustrated my point quite nicely, thank you.

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
#190 - 2011-12-21 17:25:10 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I agree you are basically doing the normal trick of exaggerating a circumstance to suit your argument. Much like Lord Zim does, he tells me that people are inherently lazy and won't be bothered.

Oh, so you're saying that I'm wrong and that nullsec will suddenly flourish with carebears when it becomes more dangerous without becoming more profitable?

I find that hard to believe.
You illustrated my point quite nicely, thank you.

So, you really do believe that nullsec will flourish with carebears when it ecomes more dangerous without becoming more profitable?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#191 - 2011-12-21 17:48:39 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I agree you are basically doing the normal trick of exaggerating a circumstance to suit your argument. Much like Lord Zim does, he tells me that people are inherently lazy and won't be bothered.

Oh, so you're saying that I'm wrong and that nullsec will suddenly flourish with carebears when it becomes more dangerous without becoming more profitable?

I find that hard to believe.
You illustrated my point quite nicely, thank you.

So, you really do believe that nullsec will flourish with carebears when it ecomes more dangerous without becoming more profitable?


It's the "carebears" thing that's throwing it all off. Null sec isn't intended to be a safe haven for carebears in the first place. Now, if you asked whether or not null sec itself would flourish is these changes were enacted I'd have to give you a definite maybe. Some things you could see would be:

* People daring to venture deeper into null space in covops ships for a variety of reasons, including hunting.
* People daring to venture into mega-alliance controlled space to cause trouble
* Carebears deciding to leave null space.
* Other carebears adapting and becoming more profitable in the absence of those that left.
* Other people venturing into null to see what the fuss is about. Some may stay.

Regardless, it would shake things up a little. Predicting exactly how is an inexact science. We can try to declare as fact that so and so will leave, such and such will cause more or less blobs, etc... but the facts remain that the only thing we can predict is that for the most part Eve players are unpredictable.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#192 - 2011-12-21 17:51:48 UTC
Onyx47 wrote:
Cearain wrote:

Well you kept asking how would solo small gang pvpers get ganked if this proposal was the case.

So you were just pretending to not know about gate aggression timers, that fitting a cloak is not a big deal, that stealthbombers can be very effective dps, that bait ships will usually have a scram so you can't just warp away.


You didn't seem to realize that yoru proposal would allow people to just sit there on grid cloaked in ships and immediately gank anyone who started a pvp engagment. I had to go through allot of basic information about pvp. So you would understand that. I suppose that all went on deaf ears.


Hi. I'm a lone Drake on a gate with a cloaky (but in local) alt with cyno sitting on the opposite side of the gate.


I think your situations will help establish how this mechanic will take all chances a solo or small gang pvper will have.

Ok there you get me once. But then the next time I see your buddy in local on the other side of the gate I don't engage. That is unless this proposal gets passed because if it does I won't see him in local on the other side of the gate anymore.
And yes as a solo pilot I do typically try to find out what is in the system right on the other side of the gate.

Of course if this proposal is passed I won't be able to see that he is there in system so, I won't be able to learn from my first loss and he will catch me every time I engage.

Onyx47 wrote:

Also, I have a friend who does the same but he just has a fleet on the other side, he thinks cynos are too much of a hassle.


This is much more common than the first sitution - at least where I roam.

So I see that lone drake has a whole fleet in the system next store because they show up in local. So i avoid getting blobbed.

Of course if everyone is just on grid with the lone drake but not showing up in local there is nothing I can do.

Onyx47 wrote:
[
I even know a guy sitting in a belt doing the same thing, crazy bastard is convinced he can tank long enough for his fleet to jump in and warp to him..


First his fleet 1 jump away may have been spotted by me as I am coming through. Yep just by checking the alliance and corp that is listed in local I can usually tell if they are together.
But lets say I don't see them.
He may or may not be able to tank long enough for the fleet to jump and warp to him. I may be able to kill him or warp away once I see local spike. In any event I have some chances. If his fleet is just litterally sitting on grid with him there is no chance.

Onyx47 wrote:

I guess you should just go mine in highsec, engaging anyone is too much of a risk. Oh, wait, Hulkageddon...


Ok the guy who wants to have his cloaky blob as back up is telling the solo pvper he is too risk adverse. Nice.


Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#193 - 2011-12-21 17:55:07 UTC
What makes you think the carebears will become more profitable than the ones that left? Have you added the auxilliary cost all this preparation, guarding and loss in productivity to your calculations?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#194 - 2011-12-21 17:55:19 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Onyx47 wrote:
Cearain wrote:

Well you kept asking how would solo small gang pvpers get ganked if this proposal was the case.

So you were just pretending to not know about gate aggression timers, that fitting a cloak is not a big deal, that stealthbombers can be very effective dps, that bait ships will usually have a scram so you can't just warp away.


You didn't seem to realize that yoru proposal would allow people to just sit there on grid cloaked in ships and immediately gank anyone who started a pvp engagment. I had to go through allot of basic information about pvp. So you would understand that. I suppose that all went on deaf ears.


Hi. I'm a lone Drake on a gate with a cloaky (but in local) alt with cyno sitting on the opposite side of the gate.


I think your situations will help establish how this mechanic will take all chances a solo or small gang pvper will have.

Ok there you get me once. But then the next time I see your buddy in local on the other side of the gate I don't engage. That is unless this proposal gets passed because if it does I won't see him in local on the other side of the gate anymore.
And yes as a solo pilot I do typically try to find out what is in the system right on the other side of the gate.

Of course if this proposal is passed I won't be able to see that he is there in system so, I won't be able to learn from my first loss and he will catch me every time I engage.



So... without the free intel there's no way for you to get any intel?

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#195 - 2011-12-21 18:03:28 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
What makes you think the carebears will become more profitable than the ones that left? Have you added the auxilliary cost all this preparation, guarding and loss in productivity to your calculations?


Of course. If you're competing with less people for the resources then there's a larger personal share for you to have. To be honest I'd fully support a little boost to the "riches" that can be had in null in exchange... kick the ol' risk/reward thing in the nuts and have it sing soprano for you.

One thing to consider is what the actual affect on risk would be... currently there are people that apparently send alts into null systems to shut them down with afk cloakers, correct? At least that's the allegations I'm seeing. These alts will no longer be effective, so anyone that wants to have an effect on the null systems would now have to incur real risk themselves by sending in mains in ships that actually are threats. Not everyone will do that. I could see a lot less "scary people" in null, but that would be due to less ineffective low skill point alts and their prototype cloaked magnates.

But like I said... it's hard to predict and impossible to predict accurately. Different people will react differently.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#196 - 2011-12-21 18:04:22 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:

So... without the free intel there's no way for you to get any intel?


What are you talking about "free intel?" Do you have to pay everytime you press the dscan button? Do you have to pay everytime you launch a probe? Or are you saying the price you pay in these cases is you have to push a button?

If thats your big gripe with local then fine lets say you have to push a button for local to appear - happy now? Or maybe we would need to pay concord a fee to get the information they have about who jumped into what system.

Your proposal is giving people less intel. By giving people less intel it dumbs the game down. That is because with no intel there is no information to consider or weigh when you make choices. The more intel you have the more things you can consider in making a decision and that makes the game more complex and enjoyable for people who like to use their brains.

Pretend we could get no information at all about the other side until you engage. What would your strategy be? It would be to form the biggest blob possible and hope brought enough. Well everytime you take away intel tools that is what you bring the game closer to.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#197 - 2011-12-21 18:07:10 UTC
There is very little competition right now for resources. Very few mine, I've yet to see more than dumb "why don't you release your wrecks waaah" whine about anoms, so uh, where's this extra profitability coming from?

And it's not all that hard to predict what carebears will do. They've left over anom changes, which is just a matter of lower rewards. Factor in added risk, and as such lower rewards due to losses of time and ships etc, and what can you possibly deduct from that?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Karash Amerius
The Seven Shadows
Scotch And Tea.
#198 - 2011-12-21 18:09:35 UTC
I read the OP, and its a good line of reasoning. One thing to think carefully on however is the use of bombs and stealth bombers in general with this proposed change. I didn't read over the entire thread, but my main concern would be stealth bomber issues.

Karash Amerius Operative, Sutoka
Onyx47
U-208
#199 - 2011-12-21 18:13:16 UTC
Sigh, I didn't get through, did I?

Ok, maybe I just didn't make it clear enough: any reinforcement is in a system YOU HAVEN'T VISITED YET.

Only way to be sure your target has no backup is to scout every surrounding system before engaging. By the time you do that the target might be long gone unless he's totally oblivious. You might have time to get to him before he figures out you're there, but multiple times as you're entering/leaving local checking for "tarps"? No blob will save that guy anyway.

Geez, if there only was a way for you to stay covert while scouting, yeah, that might work!

Also, if I pull a cyno trick on you once you won't remember it the next time? What is this, out of local out of mind?

In PvP there are no winners, only losers. The trick is to be less of a loser than the guy you're shooting at.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#200 - 2011-12-21 18:14:35 UTC
Cearain wrote:

Your proposal is giving people less intel. By giving people less intel it dumbs the game down. That is because with no intel there is no information to consider or weigh when you make choices.


Dumbs it down? Really? Look at wormhole space. More dangerous than null dreamt of being, yet hardly "dumbed down". It would simply require intel gathering to be an active endeavor when cloaked. You'd have to go around and see what's to be seen, watch what needs watching. It would be easier still than wormholes, yet more challenging.

Not everyone considers that a bad thing.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.