Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Lets put aside all your unsubstantiated assumptions about other players since clearly you don't understand the basics, and lets focus on other fundamental issues about why the Observation Array is a potentially good thing that can fix the currently broken game mechanics behind cloaking.

There should never come a time when an AFK player is allowed to be deep into enemy territory and completely safe to the degree that they can leave their character unattended for hours on end and expect to come home and find them alive and safe. It's a mechanic so broken that it's insulting to the people who live in the systems they camp. If your'e going to fly into enemy territory, the least that should be expected of you is to be at the controls and actively playing. That's not too much to ask, and having to dodge enemy patrols and countermeasures makes for more exciting and realistic game play both for the hunters and the hunted.

The discussion isn't really about *IF* cloaked campers should be de-cloaked and more about how often and under what circumstances. Should the Observation Array cover an entire constellation and pulse a de-cloaking wave throughout every system regularly? Should multiple OA's send out a stronger and/or more frequent pulse? Should a player's cloaking skill level and ship type affect his chances of being de-cloaked? These are far more interesting issues to discuss.

If you want to carry on about saving the sadistic vestiges of your broken AFK cloaked camping game mechanic there's other threads for that.

• Observatory Arrays--This could tie in with either removing local player listing or allowing players to hide their transponder signal(name) from local.

I would like to see these apply effects system wide and possibly even a constellation wide version at a higher expense. One option for each O.A. at a time. A standings system allowing your allies not to be disrupted by O.A.'s activity and even reep the benefits.
/corp(Higher fuel cost)
/alliance(Highest fuel cost)
/the players you select(Could cost more on fuel) .

Some of the top requested options from both pvpers and pveers.

-- Removing your name from local.
I would rather see local player listing removed for 0.4 and below(at least all 0.0 and below) and then have O.A.'s used as system beacons. This way a fleet could come into a system and temporarily disrupt intelligence creating a need for hands on recon until a new O.A. is onlined. Or you could combine Solar System O.A.'s with the larger Constellation O.A. for a multi layer of protection.

-- Tracking cloaked ships
There should be a timed buffer of some sort to allow cloaked ships to still use their cloak but not over use it. My example, a cloaked ship jumps into a system with an O.A. set for tracking space disruptions/tachyon emissions. Allow the O.A. to gradually increase the sig strength of cloaked ships over a period of time. So when being combat scanned from start to finish a cloaked ship has 5-15 minutes before becoming visible to scanning.

-- Disrupting D-Scan
Looking for selective D-Scan Disruption. As long as your set blue to you can scan. If not, looks like you better have combat scan probes.

-- Disrupting the api/map information.
Easy enough, any player set to blue can still see information. If your not set to blue and the system is being disrupted, 'No Information Available' is what you see. I'm not sure how important this is compared to the other three.

Really local player listing and cloaking are the main areas that need attention. If you don't adjust both at the same time, one side will be overpowered. Not only that, making local intel a commodity rather then a constant you will bring that unknown feel back to EVE. All while still giving PvE players tools to assist them with cloaked hunters and other ships.

Last request, a new mod. The Transponder Disruptor, high slot-When active, the player is not listed in local regardless of sec status.

We will be able to damage/destroy them(and all other structures) one way or another

Anti-Cloaking Structures

• Add a factor of time, and a "soft" mechanic to ensure eventual loss of cloak. In my view, many cloaking ships have the specific purpose of allowing an active player to do a job with stealth. A passive structure based activity should not automatically disable any active gameplay and ship classes.
• Have a system wide debuff that affects your active cloaking systems. This would be visible in the status indicator area. It would require a new type of BORDER around the icon to identify it as a passive system wide effect.
• The system wide debuff should activate a "bracket" based capacitor cost to the cloak. This cost should be based on the % of the ships full capacitor. IT should start very low and increase exponentially as time progression places you in new "brackets". Eventually the cloaked ship will run cap dry, and de-cloak. This is best for afk cloaking because it will leave them cap dry when they are uncloaked. Perhaps a player uncloaked by the cap running dry would trigger a EMP explosion that is detectable on scan like an anomaly for 1 minute. Active players would likely decloak before the capacitor drain gets bad, or to avoid the final detectable emp explosion, and then re-cloak or escape as soon as possible.
• The debuff should also add a recloak delay penalty cooldown timer to all ships. This must be a fixed number so it does affect specialty cloak ships that have no cooldown timers.
• This would allow you to keep the focus on the modules function because it simply affects the attributes of the cloaking module
• This would also allow you to individually tweak ships to, as you may way to keep the option open down the line for a ship that is better at infiltration for intelligence gathering (ex. Special cloak that ignores this effect, but has a cap cost that is not sustainable through passive cap regeneration, or required some other input in order to stay active like a fuel that must be reloaded in the same way that weapons load charges)

Example cloak brackets

@timecloaked(s)/%CapCostperSecond(% cap)/$RecloakPenalty(s)

Bracket 1: @0s/0.5%/5s
Bracket 2: @10s/2%/10s
Bracket 3: @30s/4%/30s
Bracket 4: @60s/8%/60s
Bracket 5: @120s/16%/300s
Bracket 6: @150s/100%/600s

Here is a thought I just had.

It will sever both parties pretty well with what they are asking for, turn of d-scan while cloaked. Only allow specific ships to be able to D-Scan while cloaked Force recons and Cov ops ships. But not allow stealth bombers to see d scan while cloaked. Would make interesting game play then as sure you can afk but at the same time you are not getting any intel either.

Edit: to expand on this further allow multiple towers to be put up in system say 6 at say predetermined grid points. Then allow any ship to interact with these inside a certain range. But allow Cov-Ops and Recons to be able to interact with these system wide and be used exactly as probes. This give the defender a nice tool to use but also opens up the ability for attackers to use the system against the defender if they are not paying attention and or not defending.

I think you missed the point of webbing. This isn't for after you start getting bumped, it's for every jump. Webbing you just after you start aligning for warp changes your alignment speed during alignment, sending you into warp in a couple of seconds. Nobody's bumping you in a couple of seconds. Also Tornadoes aren't used for freighter ganking normally, they're inefficient.

I am not opposed to this idea but what determines AFK? Is it just keyboard or mouse activity on the computer or within that characters window? I have multiple clients up regularly but might not tab into one for an extended period of time. Also there are programs out there the simulate mouse movement that would be a work around for either of these.

Not attacking your idea just asking questions about it.

I would consider any input from a machine onto or over the client would be considered activity.

This really invites a botting solution so I can't help but think it is a bad approach.

a botting solution for NOT being considered afk? What benefit would you get from purposely avoiding not being AFK while you are actually AFK?

Couldn't one just get a wireless mouse and leave it on the washer/dryer? If one truly wanted to be logged in and be in station and not be afk AND they went to that length to avoid it... and end up being banned for using a bot... ok

Because one could ALSO create a bot that just warps your ship between 2 or 3 safes continuously thus avoiding getting pinpointed.... and end up being banned for using a bot.