Player Features and Ideas Discussion

While I generally agree with your post, I would be more specific here:
That attacker must be willing to engange, the defender simply must be willing to take the risk of getting engaged. Which is a lot easier to achieve then getting him to actually want the engagement.

I would say the willingness to risk being engaged is the key.

The attacker can be totally oblivious, but be rendered meaningless in the context of possible system denial, so long as the system is not actually denied.

Miners mine, ratters rat, and the cloaked guy stays cloaked.
No complaints here.

Not going to work. Right now the only sensible choice if a cloaky camper is in your system is to move somewhere else and hope there isnt one too.

-pre aligned only works with carriers, and they are really easy to lock, you hardly have any time to react. The risk is too great. I assume there is no ally where you would not get called stupid when ratting in a carrier with a cloaky in system.
-cyno jammer does not work on cov ops cyno
-either the gang is big and the ticks complete ****, or its simply the whole gang that gets killed. the attacker can see how many ships you have
-so you need a bait ship that does not look like a bait ship and a huge fleet on standby, and since bombers are fast and cloaky the dropper still has a good chance to escape after killing the bait... not viable.

There is a good reason hardly anyone really tries what you describe. In general its just a bad idea. And none of the things you describe actually threaten the attacker, which was the point. He threatens you, but you cant do anything besides react.



-our anoms are too small to make it worthwhile to drop a dragbubble
-a dragbubble does not help since the bomber arrives invisible and the rest via cyno
-I never said he has a fleet behind him 24/7, but they are alway only one log in away
-No you dont. Dont even try to pretend that the income of nullsec is close to w-space. w-space is A LOT more. You can have good income in null, but the fact remains: if your ship explodes on a regular basis, you wont be having any income. Or maybe a horrible and crappy income if you use t1 cruiser. But then you could as well go mission running in the perfect safety of high sec.

I dont actually see a point in argueing this. Why do you think no one rats in null with cloakies active? Because everyone is stupid? The reason is it simply is not worth the risk. You loose more then you make.

no, the reason they dont do it is because they can defend themselves perfectly well and effortlessly through the 100% safety of local.

He threatens you, you cant threaten back? you can always PREPARE and DEFEND yourself though.



- no they arent
- MTU's gather a nice spread of wrecks. its not perfect, but this happens and sometimes works in WH's. Drag bubbles and containers are used to catch cloaky scouts.
- so why did you point that out as if it was an extraordinary threat as oppose to WH space, or any space for that matter where any unkown you havent run a locate on or is in a WH can log in and shoot you?
- who said anything about null space rewards being close to WH space rewards? im saying you can quickly afford to replace ships with null ratting, which is completely true when you make between 100-200mil in a few hours sesh.

No you dont lose more than you make, Ive never read such bull-**** on these threads. You can easy make 100-200mil in a couple hours anom ratting. You can buy a T2 fit battleship twice a freaking day if you have a good session and no one, and i mean no one, has lost over 700 battleships in a year, no one has even lost 100 (fleet fights and SRP's aside). People use AFK ishtars and carriers FFS because the isk rolls in so much faster than you can be killed. You clearly havent even tried ratting with hostiles in local, or you're trying it with a stupidly bling ship.

If you read the thread (and the killboards), people clearly are ratting with hostiles in local. Jennaside even gave you a 'how to' on ratting with no f***s given to local. I myself have done a 6month carebearing stint in null sec and rat with cloakies in local for possibly a third of that. With all the hours spent with reds in local, i was attacked three times. Once i lost a noctis and the others i bailed out of easy. Not once was cyno used in any of these attacks. So clearly not every cloaker ever has a cyno or a gang ready to drop and these AFK cloakers are not so active such that you cannot get a good few hours ratting in through the week, pay for your ship, bills+tax, any extras and still make a profit.

You blow up the 'problem' into something its really not. You are just too used to the comforts provided by local. Now CCP are 'shaking up'nullsec and perhaps its not for you and those like you anymore.

But dont worry, if you leave, there are now plenty of underdogs eager to take your place.

ok then , if I have your logic right here you could say the same thing for the ore site scanning mechanic. If the person was too lazy to scan the ore sites then he couldent warp to them and catch miners? Many changes that CCP have made have had many intended and unintended results. but if my boosting toon can get knocked offline for inactivity then why cant the same thing be done when someone is just sitting in space taking up bandwith?

correct me if I am wrong but isn't one of the rules in the TOS that you can do nothing that intentionaly interfears with others gameplay ?

I have been threatened by a GM before for bumping a miner out of an ice belt in HS, but now that CODE is doing it it is perfectaly legal? what is the difference? if your sitting in a system with the intention of disrupting game play with no reward is that not a violation of the TOS?

If the player is AFK for whatever reason then they cannot harm you at all, only your perceived threat levl will cause you issues. Give players the means to hunt (with very high difficulty) those ships that are active (i.e. moving, scanning etc) and you give them the means to determine whther they believe a player to be AFK but there is still a level of paranoia as to whether they are really AFK or not. If the players keep scanning/watching d-scan for probes then they can go about their business without issue.

This forced behavior you refer to.

If we diminish the wildcard threat of hot dropping, so that it can be managed by strategy....

AND

If we establish confidence that PvE fitting and hull combinations, can be combat effective against a cloaked player...

Noone will be forced to leave the field.
It will be up to them whether they accept playing a game where another player can oppose them, in exchange for increasing their PvE yield up from nothing to whatever their skills and more limited ship options allow.

You realise this still is a terrible argument, right? Since you can;t tell whether or not a player is AFK, you have to react to them. Therefore an AFK cloaker is forcing a behavioral change in his target. Once again, to force any behavioral change you should have to be active.

The current idea is to give players a way to hunt a cloaker which is easily avoided by an active cloaker. That to me ticks all the boxes. It doesn't degrade the current cloak mechanics, it doesn't force fuel or timers buttons to click, it simply means you have to be there to respond if a players chooses to hunt you. It should be trivial to avoid being hunted by simply moving grid and cloaking back up during warp. What it stops though is players who park an alt, hit cloak, and sod off to bed. Those players will wake up podded, as they deserve to be for assuming 100% safety is their god given right.

If the solution is to force one side into an encounter, both sides should be susceptible to it.

Being able to hunt a cloaked player is comparable to hunting a PvE player inside a POS or outpost.
If you don't want such a vulnerability, don't suggest it for the other side.
(And yes, it is quite possible to come up with a mechanic allowing such infiltration and assassination, be it a mini-game or a more direct play mechanic, such as a mini-drone sent into the target hangar for espionage)

Forced activity in exchange for being logged in is a bad idea, on both sides.

I believe it makes more sense when both players are willing to have the encounter, by managing the perception of the overpowering wildcards like hot dropping, and differences in expected combat ability.