These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1581 - 2015-03-21 11:56:18 UTC
Marranar Amatin wrote:
that would not change much, a cloaky could still interrupt an entire system with zero risk and zero effort.


I don't think so. Since he cannot be aware of other ships without de-cloaking, locals can do all the PVE things they want in the sure knowledge that they are unobserved.

They would need to spam d-scan of course, but they would be able to detect whether the cloaked pilot was actively looking at/for them since he would start to appear on d-scan whenever he wished not to be blind.

This levels the playing field somewhat, because nervous or unguarded locals then have the opportunity to rat/mine while there is a cloaked neutral in system and return to station/POS if they see him appear on d-scan.

It doesn't remove all the risk of course, but the playing field would be somewhat more level than it currently is.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1582 - 2015-03-21 12:13:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Marranar Amatin
He can simply warp to anos (cloaked) and check the grid... easy, no way to counter.

But even assuming that would not be possible:
how is that supposed to be even remotely balanced when a player that literally does nothing and risks nothing, can force an entire system to spam dscan every few seconds?
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1583 - 2015-03-21 13:35:44 UTC
I agree with you. It does not completely eliminate the area-denial ability of cloaked ships. Nor does it solve the seemingly overwhelming imbalance of a cloaked frigate being able to call in a cyno fleet on top of a bunch of helpless miners.

So perhaps the suggestion could be modified to:

1. while cloaked, a ship does not have access to d-scan

2. when uncloaking, there is a delay before d-scan works for him (sensor stabilisation etc, like the targeting delay)

3. When a cloaked ship arrives on grid, the ship is not visible but the 'pop' sound is heard.

Now everything is fair. Cloaked ships are still good for recon, getting past gate-camps etc but they cannot deny the use of space while the pilot is inactive, since there are now good clues available about his activity.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1584 - 2015-03-21 14:03:33 UTC
Assuming the sound is lound and distinguishable enough so that one can actually react to it , that would be a great improvement, as it would diminish the overwhelming power a little.

It improves the situation, but it does not solve the underlying problem: there is stille zero risk for the camper. And you still cant do anything against him.

Nothing that you can do that has a meaningful impact should be completly riskfree. If there is zero risk, the effect should also be close to zero. Either the effect of cloaky camping has to reduced further, close to zero, or there has to be a mechanic that puts the camper at an adequate risk.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#1585 - 2015-03-21 14:05:12 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
I agree with you. It does not completely eliminate the area-denial ability of cloaked ships. Nor does it solve the seemingly overwhelming imbalance of a cloaked frigate being able to call in a cyno fleet on top of a bunch of helpless miners.

So perhaps the suggestion could be modified to:

1. while cloaked, a ship does not have access to d-scan

2. when uncloaking, there is a delay before d-scan works for him (sensor stabilisation etc, like the targeting delay)

3. When a cloaked ship arrives on grid, the ship is not visible but the 'pop' sound is heard.

Now everything is fair. Cloaked ships are still good for recon, getting past gate-camps etc but they cannot deny the use of space while the pilot is inactive, since there are now good clues available about his activity.

Diminishing the capability of a covops cloaked ship is uncalled for.

I have no concern for ships not equipped with a covops cloak, losing the dscan potential, as they are not effectively on the same level. They were not designed for cloaking in this manner, having had the cloak added post hull design.

Serious intel gathering, is effectively married to the covops cloak.
Change that, and you gimp wormhole play.



Propsoal:

I would be more willing to see a 1 minute cooldown from a cloak dropping, applied to activating a cyno device.
(The power system for the cyno needing to build a charge, previously denied in the interest of undetected cloaking)

I would want the covops ship to be removed from local, effectively, in exchange for this clear nerf to their hot dropping ability.

quid pro quo

I would also consider that removal from local to be grounds for enabling cloaked ships to be hunted.

Local removal proposal:

1. Covops ships are on minimum 1 minute delay when either entering system, or dropping cloak.

2. While cloak is active, the timer delay for being displayed in local is reset to a full minute, and does not start while cloak remains active.

This would mean that no ship could land on grid cloaked, and drop cloak with an immediate cyno.
A potential target would at least see them arrive, or appear, with time to spare for a reaction.
Delegate
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1586 - 2015-03-21 16:03:32 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Change that, and you gimp wormhole play.


Actually the last several posts broke scanning profession, bomber fleets and any on-grid use of covops cloak. This was already discussed extensively in this thread. But expecting posters to read the thread and come up with something relevant (and accounting for the arguments put forward thus far) is clearly too much.
Either way I see this discussion slowly becoming irrelevant. Once sov mechanics hit mid this year I expect renting will fall apart. Null will likely be inhabited by larger, well organized alliances and perhaps some smaller hardened groups. And for a while now CCP is implementing a stream of changes intended to make the game more combative.
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#1587 - 2015-03-21 17:05:22 UTC
Delegate wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

Change that, and you gimp wormhole play.


Actually the last several posts broke scanning profession, bomber fleets and any on-grid use of covops cloak. This was already discussed extensively in this thread. But expecting posters to read the thread and come up with something relevant (and accounting for the arguments put forward thus far) is clearly too much.
Either way I see this discussion slowly becoming irrelevant. Once sov mechanics hit mid this year I expect renting will fall apart. Null will likely be inhabited by larger, well organized alliances and perhaps some smaller hardened groups. And for a while now CCP is implementing a stream of changes intended to make the game more combative.



Yep

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)

Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1588 - 2015-03-21 18:25:57 UTC
Just wanted to respond to the three comments.

Firstly, wormhole play. This is something I know a lot about, having been living exclusively in wspace for 4 years. It certainly makes ganking a site-runner a little more challenging, but not much.

Having said this, is anomaly runners in w-space were a little harder to gank (and let's face it, they are sitting ducks), then we may find that more people come to w-space and we have more targets against which to pit our patience and skills.

Secondly the scanning profession. I am not convinced that the requirement to be uncloaked to use d-scan significantly changes things for anyone using probes. I didn't propose a change to probe use while cloaked. The probes themselves are evidence that the cloaked ship is not afk.

Lastly, bombers. These are in my opinion too overpowered for their cost in fleet warfare. Giving a 'pop' warning when they land on grid would allow the defending fleet an opportunity to evade if alert. The bombers would still be disruptive to the defender, but would not guarantee the annihilation of an entire battleship fleet as they do now.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1589 - 2015-03-21 19:49:41 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
I think you are ignoring the fact peoples stream like DaOpa's proves pretty much everything people have been saying about AFK cloaking. He is sitting in war zones and has very little danger of losing anything.

How he plays shows several of the issue people have with AFK cloaking.


No, it actually proves my point, IMO. Unless somebody is watching that feed and does something in game then it is useless. All it does is remove/reduce some need for alts.

As for the more pertinent issue, PvE, this proves, literally, nothing.

You and one other person are the only ones complaining about twitch streaming in null while AFK. In all the threads on AFK cloaking, the best you got is streaming for intel purposes and nobody cares.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1590 - 2015-03-21 19:51:40 UTC
Coelus Kugisa wrote:
Since a plethora of new structures and structure changes seems to be in the works; how about a decloak station weapon upgrade. You fire it like a pos gun and it doesn't allow any cloaking in a system for say...5 minutes, on a 6 hour cool down timer. One gun limit per system.

An active cloaker bounces pings for a few minutes and goes back to camping. An afk cloaker dies like the cancer afk-anything should.


Not without a change to local. Otherwise the current balance is completely thrown out of whack.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1591 - 2015-03-21 19:58:07 UTC
At the structure presentation at FanFest this morning they indicated that one of the features the Observatory structure could have is "Cloak Pinpointing". They were scant on the details, but it seems like the days of AFK cloaking could soon be at an end...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1592 - 2015-03-21 20:14:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
AFK cloaking has and always will revolve around the basic idea of using a cloak to hide in a system. Fozzie and others want to call it area denial, some call it trolling, some call it PVP, and others just ignore it but never has AFK been limited to just PVE activities. You cant just redefine the term to fit your argument. You cant just narrow the field of discussion when it best suits your stance.

I have pointed out issues with SOV space and this will be the second or third time I have pointed out issues with PVP.

Are you trying to say that the situations provided in my previous examples regarding PVP are ideal game play, or even closely working as intended?

So far all you have done is attempt to marginalize my examples or say they are off topic. You have offered no counter on why an AFK cloaky should be able to just float free and safe in space.



It is PvP. Just about everything in this game is PvP. Even if I'm selling crap I invented its still PvP I'm trying to get the best deal I can which means getting more of another player's isk. That other player is trying to get my stuff for as little isk as possible. It is a sub-area of non-cooperative game theory...or at least that is how it is studied. Note the non-cooperative part, for us we'd translate that as PvP. And alot of it is done whilst I am AFK. I set up a sell order and away I go. I come back later to adjust prices to market conditions.

AFK cloaking as area denial is also PvP. I don't think it is good game play though.

While AFK cloaking might have uses outside of area denial the vast majority of players do not care about it. I would also suggest that by and large its impact on the game is trivial. The best you got are twitch feeds substituting for active intel gathering which strikes me as rather weak. Yes, it could make intel gathering somewhat easier, but it still requires somebody to be watching the feed for it useful.

What point about Sov have you made? The intel gathering...meh. You got anything else that might be even vaguely interesting?

As for ideal game play...again meh. I've already stated it is not ideal, but it is balanced and any change needs to also be balanced. Change that is imbalanced could be very, very bad. For example the brain dead idea of a decloaking pulse, absent any change to local/intel networks, would be imbalanced. The balance would shift substantially towards ratting. How is that bad....oh lets consider post WWI German and hyper-inflation. That is a Bad Thing™. That is too much isk might flow into the Eve economy resulting in rapid price increases. Holding on to isk would be amazingly dumb. Players would have to spend it faster and faster which would exacerbate the problem.

This is why CCP looks at things like isk flowing into the economy. Not sure what kind of rules/approach they use, but most people that look at these things agree on some sort of targeting whether targeting the growth of the money supply or the inflation rate itself.

As for why we should not change AFK cloaking by itself, the reason is simple and you have not shown anything to counter it:

AFK Cloaking balances the local effect with regards to intel.
Local intel balances AFK cloaking.
The two mechanics are in balance.
Changing just one would throw off the balance which, as I note above could be rather bad.

In fact, suppose CCP in a fit of blind bleeding heart kindness nerfs cloaks with the POS decloaking burst. You ratters could end up really, really regretting it. Because if inflation starts to run amok, then CCP might nerf YOUR income source where you end up right back where you were with AFK Cloaking....maybe even more. Maybe they'd just remove rat bounties across the board and make you guys rely solely on loot drops. Which would mean refining and moving that loot to market...and if you try to compensate by simply ratting more the law of supply will reach out and smack you silly.

So maybe everyone who thinks all the various nerfs to cloaks without changing local are a good idea should have a nice cup of STFU, then HTFU and GTFO.

Edit:

Way, way off topic, but the economist in me would love to see what would happen in EVE with hyperinflation. Would players come up with a new form of currency like say a specific type of ammo. That would be interesting in that trying to engage in trade across systems would be....very interesting as you might actually have to have your wallet be vulnerable to ganking!

What would CCP do? One thing would be to turn off the flow of isk. In the context of the above where hyperinflation is due to anomaly runners, I'd zap rat bounties everywhere and give back NOTHING. You get current loot drops and nothing else. At least until the inflation rate would be back under control.

Yes, yes...way off topic, but for those who'd like ratting with enhanced security/reduced risk...might want to consider the implications beyond the immediate effects to your wallet. Roll

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1593 - 2015-03-21 20:15:10 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
At the structure presentation at FanFest this morning they indicated that one of the features the Observatory structure could have is "Cloak Pinpointing". They were scant on the details, but it seems like the days of AFK cloaking could soon be at an end...


Hopefully with local becoming like WH local then too. Otherwise it will cause an imbalance in the isk flow, IMO.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#1594 - 2015-03-21 20:56:20 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
I think you are ignoring the fact peoples stream like DaOpa's proves pretty much everything people have been saying about AFK cloaking. He is sitting in war zones and has very little danger of losing anything.

How he plays shows several of the issue people have with AFK cloaking.


No, it actually proves my point, IMO. Unless somebody is watching that feed and does something in game then it is useless. All it does is remove/reduce some need for alts.

As for the more pertinent issue, PvE, this proves, literally, nothing.

You and one other person are the only ones complaining about twitch streaming in null while AFK. In all the threads on AFK cloaking, the best you got is streaming for intel purposes and nobody cares.


You're deflecting the topic my obtuse friend. I am not talking about him streaming as being any form of issue. I am saying that you can readily go to Twitch and see a player doing everything that people have been talking about here. It doesnt matter that he is streaming. That isnt even something I care about. I stream. What I am trying to point out to you is that is a player that can be easily found that shows the good and bad side of cloaking.

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)

Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#1595 - 2015-03-21 21:33:57 UTC
Techos. I can understand your point on hyperinflation of the market. Makes perfect sense. However doesnt it seem more like a work of fiction than actual fact.

Overall AFK cloaking in a sov system is rare at best. It tends to get done by people trolling certain corps in hopes of destroying their operations but does it honestly happen? From my experience, actually living in null. Not so much. Sure it has some effect but overall, most people simply move systems.

The amount of isk brought in now would likely be the same if some insane idea like a pulse was created.

From my person stand point I have never seen AFK camping as a threat to my isk making. I have always argued from the stand point that cloak is far too safe, allows a player to be completely immune to combat for an indefinite amount of time.

You do understand that I have said that I support the idea of changing local in exchange for cloak detection. Though I dont completely agree with the reasons why, I do think that for better game play it would be the best decision. That doesnt mean that I wont speak up when I see something I disagree with.

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)

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#1596 - 2015-03-21 22:26:18 UTC
Just an FYI, i assume the suggested anti-cloak structure will be entirely defensive (if they even go through with the feature).

that is to say, it will help evict an afk cloaker from your system so you can rat. But does nothing to address the 100% safety of cloaks beyond that.

I anticipate cloaking in high/low/WH's and in null systems you dont own will remain untouchable.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1597 - 2015-03-21 22:45:38 UTC
Haywoud Jablomi wrote:
Techos. I can understand your point on hyperinflation of the market. Makes perfect sense. However doesnt it seem more like a work of fiction than actual fact.

Overall AFK cloaking in a sov system is rare at best. It tends to get done by people trolling certain corps in hopes of destroying their operations but does it honestly happen? From my experience, actually living in null. Not so much. Sure it has some effect but overall, most people simply move systems.

The amount of isk brought in now would likely be the same if some insane idea like a pulse was created.

From my person stand point I have never seen AFK camping as a threat to my isk making. I have always argued from the stand point that cloak is far too safe, allows a player to be completely immune to combat for an indefinite amount of time.

You do understand that I have said that I support the idea of changing local in exchange for cloak detection. Though I dont completely agree with the reasons why, I do think that for better game play it would be the best decision. That doesnt mean that I wont speak up when I see something I disagree with.


No consider the issue surrounding incursions. They were nerfed because it was way too much isk. Consider the anomaly nerf shortly after Dominion. Again, too much isk. CCP watches the isk faucets very closely. Read the CSM minutes.

As for AFK cloaking being rare, it is hard to say since there is not hard data for this. But based on the rage posts on the forums it is not as rare as you claim. But lets suppose it is...then who cares. If it is a rare phenomenon then ignore it. Leave local and AFK cloaking as is and just ignore the rage posting ratters.

As for the POS pulse idea, that assumes that AFK really is a non-issue...and given the vast number of pages on this topic (probably more than any other topic here, ever) I don't think this is the case.

As for the safety of cloaks...yes they are safe, and so are you. Cloaked players pose zero threat. Yes, they might have a cyno, but when cloaked it is inoperable. They can only use it by turning off the cloak at which point they are vulnerable.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1598 - 2015-03-21 23:32:22 UTC
I really doubt that the removal of cloaky camper will do more then a slight increase in isk overall, probably it wont even be noticeable.
The idea of this leading to hyperinflation is ridiculous. The number of systems affected is simply not high enough to have a serious impact.

But just because it does not affect enough systems to have a major impact on the economy is no reason to leave a bad mechanic in place. It still annoys a lot of people and is extremly imbalanced.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#1599 - 2015-03-21 23:40:18 UTC
Marranar Amatin wrote:
I really doubt that the removal of cloaky camper will do more then a slight increase in isk overall, probably it wont even be noticeable.


Even though the vast VAST majority of isk comes from null bounties and afk cloakers allegedly 'shut down systems for weeks'?

Either the amount of isk goes up by a massive amount with its removal, or the people whining about afk cloaking have massively exaggerated its effects.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Marranar Amatin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1600 - 2015-03-21 23:56:32 UTC
Thats not how this works.
Cloaky camper have a massive effect, they can shut down constellations for weeks. Thats not exagerated. It has a massive impact, but only for the systems that are camped, and only for the players that rely on the systems that are camped. Their complaints are valid since they are strongly affected by an uncounterable and zero risk, zero effort mechanic.

But to seriously effect the economic that is not enough. Its not enough when there is simply a high number of players that get griefed by this. The numbers of systems blocked has to be high in relation to the number of systems that are not blocked. And that is simply not the case.