Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I'm sorry for taking my cloaked nap while in your alliance's sov recently...

gold

If AFK cloacking is a "moral harrassement" for you, you must go to see a shrink.. no one force you to play a video game

In fact read Eula of the game, read in French law description of harassment, read this forum and how people speak about perma cloack . It's illegal, to be legal CCP must had a counter other case player can go in justice against CCP. And before you cry : Other game have already some problem with French justice.

Wotsits:
Are they poisonous? No
Are they edible? Yes
Are they orange? Yes

Tangerines:
Are they poisonous? No
Are they edible? Yes
Are they orange? Yes

I guess they must be the same... Yet I hate Wotsits.
It's pretty easy to cherry pick these questions to make things appear the same, but this discussion has gone on long enough for you to know the difference between the two. If you still don't get it then you haven't been reading. The truth is though that you do understand the difference, but you are here to troll, therefore consider yourself ignored until you learn to have a grown up discussion.

lol?

while I don't agree with this guy that it's illegal, or even harassment, EVE isn't made to be harsh in terms of people harassing other players, it's not designed as a place to breed harassment. There's a reason the bonus room guys got banned and CCP didn't simply say "HTFU noobs, this game is harsh". The answer to this guy is that AFK cloaking simply isn't harassment, it's just a bad example of emergent gameplay.

Mate, I'm not goign to continue going in circles with this one. You can watch a guy in a station, you can look right at him and the moment he goes to move you can react. You can;t do that with a cloaker, they can be flying up right next to any ship without looking any different from an AFK player. This has been discussed, numerous times. You are here to troll, not have a discussion, which is why you seem to be ignoring 90% of the posts. I tell you what, when you want to stop circling the same flawed arguments, let me know, until then consider yourself ignored.

Your link is broken.

Yet there's a reason to discuss other points which are irrelevant if the answer is "add an AFK flag"? You aren't here to discuss, you're here to be argumentative. Even if we agreed on every point in this thread you'd find something else to argue with and go round in circles with that too. It's pointless to attempt an adult discussion with someone like that, so good day sir.

Lol, the typical troll tactic. Become as difficult as possible to have a discussion with, then claim victory when the other side refuses to continue circling. Everything you've asked in this post has been answered multiple times by multiple people in this very thread.

This too has been answered, an active cloaker is a very real threat, and an AFK cloaker is indistinguishable from an active cloaker, thus an AFK cloaker must be considered a threat. Therefore an AFK player is able to have the same impact as an active one.

Which I've agreed with, multiple times. But removing local has other effects beyond AFK cloaking. That argument is no different from the argument that removing cloaking would remove AFK cloaking, which is undeniable true. The only reason that's not a good idea is because it would screw over a bunch of players who use cloaks. In the same way, nuking local would also completely screw over a huge number of players, not least of which NRDS groups.

WHs are different from null in a number of different way, which have also been stated multiple times in this thread. No force projection, no static routes (so you can;t just fly directly to someone WH), sealable entrances, mass restrictions (which don't affect defenders building oversized ships), omnitanked PvE (which assists in having a dual PvE/PvP fit).

So yeah, like I said, all of your questions have already been answered. Not even just once. So either you are just trolling or you didn't bother reading any of this thread.

An active cloaker is only a threat when they decloak. While cloaked you can activate a grand total of 0 modules. You pose no active threat until you decloak. Which means if another player is worried about the potential threat they simply remain aligned while doing their activity and warp off as soon as the cloaked ship decloaks on grid. Super simple stuff.

This applies to any potential threat while you are out in space doing something that might make you an engageable target...such as mining, ratting, or plexing. The threat posed by a cloaker exists ONLY when they are not cloaked. Otherwise they can do absolutely nothing to you.



And if players were active in space, they would see people on grids. If you are worried about someone disrupting a PVE event set up a gate camp, you will see the pilots jumping gates show up on grid, where you will also see their standings to you. If you deem that camping a gate is too boring, than that is a choice you make, but does not dismiss the fact that the intel gathering source available from having an active presence at system access points (gates/whs) is very much real, and reliable. You do not need local to see standings, as such NRDS groups will not be impacted...and all pilots (including cloakers) would have to put in a little more effort ACTIVELY gaining intel, instead of it simply being handed out via local.

Do you have an issue with people having to be actively playing the game?



Force projection is last years crutch term. It is greatly diminished and again with pilots being active in systems you should have the intel available to know whether or not a group is in the area with Capitals, or Black Ops...if you don't have the pilots getting the intel then that is an issue with your group, not the mechanics of the game. Additionally routes in NS can be essentially closed off by being bubble ******, and camped. Again if this is deemed to boring or too hard that is your personal opinion and once again is a problem with you or your group, and not the mechanics available.

While its true WH's are different in many aspects NS is not some wasteland of undefendable and openly accessible territory unless you and your group have created that situation yourselves. It is completely possible to lock down entire systems, hell entire regions if you have the man power. NS is probably the safest space in the game currently in terms of threat prevention...just because people don't use the tools available doesn't make this not true.

Again the AFK Cloaker "issue" is one that is entirely psychological and exists only because you can see people in local. Get rid of local and poof all AFK cloakers magically disappear. Unfortunately it will require more players to coordinate their efforts to keep their space free of potential threats, by actively monitoring their space...but **** that right EVE is a solo experience after all.

Except if you only respond to a cloaker when they appear next to your face, it's too late. Quite honestly this has been discussed to death. Plain and simple, if cloakers were irrelevant while cloaked, they wouldn't bother AFK cloaking. There's absolutely no way you are so ignorant of EVE mechanics as you claim to be.

No, I have an issue with the exact oppposite. I also have an issue with you suggesting that people should sit and watch gates as a form of gameplay. That's terrible game design because it's a completely boring role. You understand that EVE is a game right? Designed to entertain players? It's not a career where you can say "your job is to look at this gate intently for several hours". CCP are never going to replace local intel with gate camps, if they replace it will be with a module or structure which gets used passively while doing other things, because they understand at least the basics of game design.

Force projection range has been limited, that;s all. It still exists. And no, gates cannot be sealed off. I've never seen a gate camp that can't be broken past.

And get rid of local and poof, null activity disappears. Again though, removing cloaking would also get rid of AFK cloaking, so let's do that instead, yeah? Oh, that';s right, you care about cloaking so removing that is bad, but it negatively affects other players if they remove local so you don't give a ****. It's also pretty amusing how you bang on about null players having to put in effort while an AFK cloaker can be a new character run in an alt slot which requires zero effort while you sleep, and you seem to think that's fine. Hypocrite.

And that't it mate, I'm done with this circling. When you say something that isn't just repeating the same fallacies you've been repeating all along let me know.