Player Features and Ideas Discussion

1- Unless he is cloaked. The only way to force a cloak ship out of his cloak is to get close. As there isn't even a reliable way to get on grid, initiative stays completely with the cloaked ship at all times unless he chooses to put himself at risk by his own actions. To engage or not engage is purely his choice. Assuming the defender is a PvE pilot, who wishes to engage in PvE with a ship suited to such wether it be mining, rafting or whatever else, is forced from his chosen activity and into pvp, which his ship is usually pretty thoroughly unprepared for by the very nature of PvE. He can reship and try to meet the invader in the field, but we are now beyond the scope of the discussion and into purely consensual PvP from both parties.

2- Whatever you want to call it, Local is not equivalent to the use of a ship modules. It operates the same for every body, everywhere it exists. If it were to be balanced by other factors they would need to be equally universal, not the result of conditional factors like ship fitting. For instance you might balance local with dscan or other universal ship functions, but cloaking isn't anything like that. I don't claim it could not be changed, and I don't care if it does or does not. The imbalance of cloaks is a separate issue that should be balanced in its own right.

3- The fallacy is claiming that local is somehow providing a different function to you and to your prey. Both receive the same information, in the same way, and as close to the same time as technology allows. The problem is the sense of entitlement that the PvP pilots that exclusively hunt PvE ships feel at losing kills when the PvE ship executes what is often it's sole reasonable defense and leaves the field. There is no win condition for most PvE pilots in a PvP encounter, just loss and more severe loss. There are some who are baiting and are willing to engage, but that is not the average PvE pilot.

4- just as cloaks are not equivalent to mechanics like local, neither are they equivalent to structures like outposts or POS. In fact, POS can be brought down and outposts lost.... But if he chooses a cloak is eternal. Structures require significant effort and resources to put up, incur significant upkeep, and anything coming or going is conceivably at risk. Cloaks are only at risk while coming and going, and at that are still safer barring extremely bad luck, and in most cases retaining complete initiative on when or if a confrontation occurs.

3. The lack of noise on the signal, which is only the case when effort is put forth and maintained to keep it clean.

You cover that in two, but cloaks also count as noise.

Thanks, and within those answers lies the solution.



It is too easy, at a glance, to tell if another player is hostile to you or not. Remove that, and its fixed. Simple as that. And if no one can tell at a glance if you are hostile, it should no longer be any concern if you go afk. So two birds with one stone.

Now why is it that both camps desperately try and have this stay in place, while still get their points across? Easy.

PvE players want their early warning system.
"Enemies" want their ISK deniability.

I'm honestly going to refuse to argue with you anymore. Your entire argument is built upon fallacy after fallacy. You are one of the examples of many people. On why cloak will never be changed. You use fallacies to base your argument upon. we can look at point 4 as an example.

You are basing the entire point around the strength of a cloak. And refuse to acknowledge the weakness side of cloaking. At it full optimal strength, of course a cloaker is going to control the battlefield, he made it into your system, dug himself a hole, and can now monitor you at will. So of course it going to be a ***** to uproot him.

The fact that you ignore the other side of cloaking (IE, the fact that he can't do anything while cloaked, ontop of that, he is vulnerable while moving to said system to entrench. )

You are just an example of why CCP will never change cloaking, so keep posting mate, these fallacies will continue to show ccp that people like you actually don't understand how cloaking vs local mechanics actually work.

I myself grow tired of arguing with someone that base their arguments upon fallacies.

I am not ignoring your point. I just don't think a useful balance for cloaks are the moments that you can't use them. If the cloak is on, that's the end of the story untill the pilot chooses otherwise or made poor decisions. His moments of vulnerability are chosen by him, with freedom of both time and place, and completely informed of his surroundings. That is more advantage than any structure.

Sure, but those drawbacks do not balance the benefits of the module. Nothing else in the game provides the same level of safety combined with the freedom of movement and action that the cloak does. Not every threat a cloaked ship can carry needs a target, and regardless of the immediate threat you can't ignore their presence without being suicidal, so even 'helpless' the ship is effective- and for good reason.

Those reasons should not be immune to being disrupted by the actions of others.

An interceptor allows for quite a bit of safety and freedom of movement. In fact, I'd put it at the cloak level. You can't go AFK like with the cloak, that is about the only distinction.

And the obligatory part: when the vessel with a cloak has its cloak active, you too are 100% safe from that cloaked ship.

Actually, I would settle on the play style becoming more separated, when comparing basic cloaks to covert cloaks.

I view basic cloaks as primarily an AFK tool, or an emergency hiding option that locks you down for the duration.

Covert cloaks, by contrast, I see as intel gathering tools with few limits, but fragile when compared to non-cloaked ships.

Cyno use, by affecting so much in so many ways, deserves specific treatment in order to avoid chilling activities instead.
People expect it too often, and that is affecting too many players who cannot get past their own expectations about them.
Sure, the velator (and other noob ships) is a great way to learn EVE with, but shouldn't this amazingly powerful cyno module require more than a free noob ship to operate?

Bzzzzt wrong. The pilot will have knowledge of who is in system with him. He will have knowledge of what is on d-scan. That is it. Pretty much the same knowledge you have. He has no knowledge of who is “next door”, who is within cyno range, etc. You, on the other hand may very well know who is “next door”, sitting on a jump portal capable ship, etc.

And for ships that can fit covert ops cloaks the very idea is that they are stealthy, sneaky, etc. so if you are going to nerf them like this, then buff the combat capability. Make them much closer to something like a HAC at least then.

My point is that one of your big selling points is not as big as you are making it out to be. You even acknowledge it. The cloaked pilots information is the same as yours, in this regard the cloak offers, literally, no benefit. And you should have the benefit of an intel channel, he does not.

Further, the attack at a place of his choosing is also rather misleading. Have you warped into many anomalies like a sanctum in a cloaked ship? There is lots of stuff that can decloak you.

Also, the cloaked ship is usually in hostile space. Meaning no additional ships, if he is alone, no back up. If he is with a gang, well you guys are seriously lacking if you are letting a hostile gang run around your space like that and you deserve all the problems that entails. Chances are he has no POS either.

So again, you keep trying to only compare ships but the overall situations. Given the drawbacks of cloaked ships...well...I still disagree about their not being balanced.

Edit:

And if the pilot can choose the time and place of his engagement...well he isn't AFK is he?

So, off topic Mike.