These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Santiago Fahahrri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#281 - 2011-12-25 17:02:06 UTC
Local is broken.

Cloaking is not.
Jenshae Chiroptera
#282 - 2011-12-25 17:29:54 UTC
I would like to be able to drop a light multi-spectrum bomb that has different affects at different distances and does no damage.

Cloaker is:

  • Far away - slight glimmer visually.
  • Within 50 km - pops onto overview for 1.5 seconds so you can Show Info on them.
  • Really close 0 -10 km - they are de-cloaked.


Penalties, types of ships that can use this, I haven't given it much thought yet.

@OP - why do you think there are so many threads that you kept having to reply to?

CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids

Not even once

EVE is becoming shallow and puerile; it will satisfy neither the veteran nor the "WoW" type crowd in the transition.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#283 - 2011-12-25 19:04:12 UTC
Jenshae Chiroptera wrote:


@OP - why do you think there are so many threads that you kept having to reply to?


I felt I needed something... better... than what the people whining about afk cloaked vessels were considering simply due to the fact that they were breaking wormholes with their cloak-breaking ideas, and didn't seem to care.

Someone has to care.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Heisenburg Certainty
State War Academy
Caldari State
#284 - 2011-12-25 20:19:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Heisenburg Certainty
hmm so you put a recon in a -1.0 home system and cloak up at 5 am when no ones on, later that day when faction and t2 battleships are out you uncloak and point and get a 1 bil kill w.o them ever knowing your there...yea thats the answer...wtf is wrong with ppl PVE must be balanced in this game or whats the points of having factions bs's out? yea its mostly a pvp game but seriously remove cloaks form local? this only makes the afk cloak problem 10x worse, grow the **** up and realize giveing cloaky griefers the most power in the game isnt the answer, people that take nullsec space should be able to defend their system, not have all PVE activity shut down by one newb recon pilot who may or may not be afk, especially with the switch to truesec where you can no longer just upgrade 4-5 systems in a row with sancs

edit* cause cloaks to consume fuel slowly if you really want to fix cloaking, would end afk cloaking and sitting in a botters sytem for long enough would cause them to run out..."they'll just script to refuel at a ss can" wel lthen make cans scanable(idk if they are) an kill the botters can...would give a defense to botters and afk cloaks in one swoop
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#285 - 2011-12-25 20:33:36 UTC
Careful, you might break wormholes, and those are sacred. Can't have that.

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

RIP Vile Rat
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#286 - 2011-12-25 23:52:14 UTC
balance is being able to camp a wormhole with enough carriers and dreads knowing I'm safe due to mass limitations and perma-cyno jam, you being able to detect a cloaked guy in your hulk inside a c3 is not.
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#287 - 2011-12-26 00:10:33 UTC
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
hmm so you put a recon in a -1.0 home system and cloak up at 5 am when no ones on, later that day when faction and t2 battleships are out you uncloak and point and get a 1 bil kill w.o them ever knowing your there...yea thats the answer...wtf is wrong with ppl PVE must be balanced in this game or whats the points of having factions bs's out? yea its mostly a pvp game but seriously remove cloaks form local? this only makes the afk cloak problem 10x worse, grow the **** up and realize giveing cloaky griefers the most power in the game isnt the answer, people that take nullsec space should be able to defend their system, not have all PVE activity shut down by one newb recon pilot who may or may not be afk, especially with the switch to truesec where you can no longer just upgrade 4-5 systems in a row with sancs

edit* cause cloaks to consume fuel slowly if you really want to fix cloaking, would end afk cloaking and sitting in a botters sytem for long enough would cause them to run out..."they'll just script to refuel at a ss can" wel lthen make cans scanable(idk if they are) an kill the botters can...would give a defense to botters and afk cloaks in one swoop


So... you actually think that there's a problem with someone planning for hours in advance to get a kill?

Fuel for cloaks means you break wormhole intel. It can take days or weeks of being cloaked up observing a system without being detected. Fuel would completely break that.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Grarr Dexx
Now Look What You've Made Me Do
#288 - 2011-12-26 00:36:19 UTC
Cloaks are just fine. He can't target you, you can't target him, I don't see what is wrong? The cloaker has to sacrifice a slot for a debatable advantage.
Heisenburg Certainty
State War Academy
Caldari State
#289 - 2011-12-26 04:19:07 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
hmm so you put a recon in a -1.0 home system and cloak up at 5 am when no ones on, later that day when faction and t2 battleships are out you uncloak and point and get a 1 bil kill w.o them ever knowing your there...yea thats the answer...wtf is wrong with ppl PVE must be balanced in this game or whats the points of having factions bs's out? yea its mostly a pvp game but seriously remove cloaks form local? this only makes the afk cloak problem 10x worse, grow the **** up and realize giveing cloaky griefers the most power in the game isnt the answer, people that take nullsec space should be able to defend their system, not have all PVE activity shut down by one newb recon pilot who may or may not be afk, especially with the switch to truesec where you can no longer just upgrade 4-5 systems in a row with sancs

edit* cause cloaks to consume fuel slowly if you really want to fix cloaking, would end afk cloaking and sitting in a botters sytem for long enough would cause them to run out..."they'll just script to refuel at a ss can" wel lthen make cans scanable(idk if they are) an kill the botters can...would give a defense to botters and afk cloaks in one swoop


So... you actually think that there's a problem with someone planning for hours in advance to get a kill?

Fuel for cloaks means you break wormhole intel. It can take days or weeks of being cloaked up observing a system without being detected. Fuel would completely break that.



WTF theres a huge problem with a ****** recon pilot being able to point a faction or t2 bs pretty much anytime they wanted, you can already spike local 10 sec scan and warp and be in there sanc within 20-30 secs of appearing on local what more do you want? are you seriously proposing ur ****** recon should be able to go in system cloak, doesnt even have to be late at night if they jump in and disappear from local who knows if they're still in system or not, and then wait till a faction bs is out and unlcoak in they're system SURPRISE ive been here all along...yeahhh right get ******* real pve must be balanced or wtf is the point of null sec it will become a desolate place with only indy pilots and blob warfare for r64 moons and all pve will be incursions and lvl4s and you cloaky griefers will barely have targets
Grarr Dexx
Now Look What You've Made Me Do
#290 - 2011-12-26 09:02:57 UTC
And there's only one kind of person responsible for that sort of risk averse behaviour: you.
Luh Windan
green fish hat bang bang
#291 - 2011-12-26 09:42:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Luh Windan
so as someone that sometimes flies cloaky boats I can't really see what the problem is.

Yes I can sneak around intel gathering but you are compromising your options in so many ways by having the cloak that if I am actually doing anything - even PvE in wormholes- I'd usually rather rely on actively moving between safes and being alert than giving up the slot or using a sub-par ship.

These 'ooh someone had cloak in local so I couldn't play' comments sound like the carebear miners "ooh there are bad people spoiling our game". The miners are better because even though people can shoot them they only moan and still play.
Heisenburg Certainty
State War Academy
Caldari State
#292 - 2011-12-26 10:14:46 UTC
lol yes t2 bs and faction bs pilots that stay docked with a cloaky in system are responsible for that "risk adverse behavior" you guys are scrubs, you say the dozen more skilled people an afk cloak keeps docked are being "carebears" and "risk adverse" while you cloak up invulnerable and make a cup of tea or go to work, risk multiplied by value is known as equity, its a common concept in professional gambling, if you make nullsec less worthwhile and valueable overall then players that pve will start leaving for lvl 4s and incursions and null sec will become desolate, null sec should have the best pve as it should be an incentive to hold that space, and get the real carebears out of high sec and into systems where this is actual risk, aka more targets for you. The dozen pilots docked due to an afk cloaky are NOT responsible for that risk adverse behavior, the game mechanics made it the logical descision and all null sec alliancies policy on ratting with an afk in system reflects this. 1 afk cloaking in system makes it the logical choice to stay docked, counter fleets can be tried but its still not worth having faction or t2 bs's out due to hotdrops. Remove local or disconnecting from local only makes this 10x worse and unless the null sec pve rewards were upped along with it would be a terrible choice and would discourage play by the many to favor the cloaky griefer few. I'm not saying a ship shouldn't be able to be cloaked in your system, or they're should be "cloak probes" like some scrubs, but a slowly burning fuel would prevent faggotry afk cloaking while preserving the real use of the cloak
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#293 - 2011-12-26 11:27:51 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
hmm so you put a recon in a -1.0 home system and cloak up at 5 am when no ones on, later that day when faction and t2 battleships are out you uncloak and point and get a 1 bil kill w.o them ever knowing your there...yea thats the answer...wtf is wrong with ppl PVE must be balanced in this game or whats the points of having factions bs's out? yea its mostly a pvp game but seriously remove cloaks form local? this only makes the afk cloak problem 10x worse, grow the **** up and realize giveing cloaky griefers the most power in the game isnt the answer, people that take nullsec space should be able to defend their system, not have all PVE activity shut down by one newb recon pilot who may or may not be afk, especially with the switch to truesec where you can no longer just upgrade 4-5 systems in a row with sancs

edit* cause cloaks to consume fuel slowly if you really want to fix cloaking, would end afk cloaking and sitting in a botters sytem for long enough would cause them to run out..."they'll just script to refuel at a ss can" wel lthen make cans scanable(idk if they are) an kill the botters can...would give a defense to botters and afk cloaks in one swoop


So... you actually think that there's a problem with someone planning for hours in advance to get a kill?

Fuel for cloaks means you break wormhole intel. It can take days or weeks of being cloaked up observing a system without being detected. Fuel would completely break that.

See what I mean? Nevermind what happens to nullsec with his changes, but the instant there's a single change to his precious, precious wormholes, and it's just a bad idea.

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

RIP Vile Rat
Valei Khurelem
#294 - 2011-12-26 12:28:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Valei Khurelem
Santiago Fahahrri wrote:
Local is broken.

Cloaking is not.


This post pretty much makes the whole 14 or so pages in this thread completely redundant.

Everyone knows what the problem is, there are just a few bunch of whiners who don't want their exploits fixed.

"don't get us wrong, we don't want to screw new players, on the contrary. The core problem here is that tech 1 frigates and cruisers should be appealing enough to be viable platforms in both PvE and PvP."   - CCP Ytterbium
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#295 - 2011-12-26 15:00:21 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Ingvar Angst wrote:
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
hmm so you put a recon in a -1.0 home system and cloak up at 5 am when no ones on, later that day when faction and t2 battleships are out you uncloak and point and get a 1 bil kill w.o them ever knowing your there...yea thats the answer...wtf is wrong with ppl PVE must be balanced in this game or whats the points of having factions bs's out? yea its mostly a pvp game but seriously remove cloaks form local? this only makes the afk cloak problem 10x worse, grow the **** up and realize giveing cloaky griefers the most power in the game isnt the answer, people that take nullsec space should be able to defend their system, not have all PVE activity shut down by one newb recon pilot who may or may not be afk, especially with the switch to truesec where you can no longer just upgrade 4-5 systems in a row with sancs

edit* cause cloaks to consume fuel slowly if you really want to fix cloaking, would end afk cloaking and sitting in a botters sytem for long enough would cause them to run out..."they'll just script to refuel at a ss can" wel lthen make cans scanable(idk if they are) an kill the botters can...would give a defense to botters and afk cloaks in one swoop


So... you actually think that there's a problem with someone planning for hours in advance to get a kill?

Fuel for cloaks means you break wormhole intel. It can take days or weeks of being cloaked up observing a system without being detected. Fuel would completely break that.

See what I mean? Nevermind what happens to nullsec with his changes, but the instant there's a single change to his precious, precious wormholes, and it's just a bad idea.


The difference, however, is that I'm trying to preserve the dangerous aspects wormholes and even null sec are supposed to have. You're trying to create Hello Kitty Space Adventure.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#296 - 2011-12-26 18:11:27 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
The difference, however, is that I'm trying to preserve the dangerous aspects wormholes and even null sec are supposed to have. You're trying to create Hello Kitty Space Adventure.

So we're running around in "hello kitty space adventure" now, are we?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Mag's
Azn Empire
#297 - 2011-12-27 09:31:58 UTC
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
later that day when faction and t2 battleships are out
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
a faction or t2 bs pretty much anytime they wanted
Why don't you rat in PvP fit ships instead? Or don't you think you should have to reduce the risk and feel it's your god given right to farm at maximum ISK per hour?

Ingvar Angst wrote:
Lord Zim wrote:
See what I mean? Nevermind what happens to nullsec with his changes, but the instant there's a single change to his precious, precious wormholes, and it's just a bad idea.
The difference, however, is that I'm trying to preserve the dangerous aspects wormholes and even null sec are supposed to have. You're trying to create Hello Kitty Space Adventure.
Mate you're wasting your time. Just re-read his posts, you'll understand. Big smile

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
#298 - 2011-12-27 12:21:06 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
later that day when faction and t2 battleships are out
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
a faction or t2 bs pretty much anytime they wanted
Why don't you rat in PvP fit ships instead? Or don't you think you should have to reduce the risk and feel it's your god given right to farm at maximum ISK per hour?

Do you have any numbers on how much that'd affect the ISK/hour rate, and how much time they'd spend regaining the lost isk when they've lost a ship to a gang?

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

RIP Vile Rat
Ingvar Angst
Nasty Pope Holding Corp
#299 - 2011-12-27 13:54:01 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
Mag's wrote:
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
later that day when faction and t2 battleships are out
Heisenburg Certainty wrote:
a faction or t2 bs pretty much anytime they wanted
Why don't you rat in PvP fit ships instead? Or don't you think you should have to reduce the risk and feel it's your god given right to farm at maximum ISK per hour?

Do you have any numbers on how much that'd affect the ISK/hour rate, and how much time they'd spend regaining the lost isk when they've lost a ship to a gang?


So, in a nutshell, you want null space to be as safe as it can in order to maximize the ISK/hr potential.

Six months in the hole... it changes a man.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#300 - 2011-12-27 14:10:12 UTC
Ingvar Angst wrote:
So, in a nutshell, you want null space to be as safe as it can in order to maximize the ISK/hr potential.

Nope. Safe enough (with some vigilence) that people will actually bother living there. Nice strawman, though.

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

RIP Vile Rat