Player Features and Ideas Discussion

No, you are making a factual statement, that AFK cloaking is a sov war technique. But, IMO, Kaarous is right that is a lie. I have fought in many sov campaigns in the north, the west, and the south and south east...and never once was there ever an order to AFK cloak any system, ever. Cloaks were used, but not AFK.

So trying to hide behind, "Well it is my opinion, you poopy head," is just a load so horseshit.

Edit: Oh, and as far as sharing our experiences, I've already given a partial list of the sov wars I have fought in...where is yours?

In addition, in looking at your employment history my guess is you have fought in precisely zero sov wars. Not one. You have spent 6 of your 7 years in game in an NPC corp. Yeah, NPC corps fight sov wars. GMAFB.

And if this is not your main...post with your main so we can get an idea of your experience with Sov wars.

IMO, you have been unmasked as a wannabe. Seriously, go join a feeder alliance and get in on some actual sov wars and not just the made up baloney you think is how it happens.

Sure, not you. Whatever.

Making ISK isn't a crime. We have been over many times how it's not about max ISK/hr, or really ISK at all.

It's about having an affect on active players from complete and uncountable safety.

It does not matter why I want that space. It does not matter what either of us gets from it. I want it, you want to kill me in it, and your hunting keeps me from fully using it. Maybe I want to practice synchronised space dancing. Maybe I want to practice super sekret combat moves. Maybe I just like how it looks and want to take screenshots in private. It does not matter.

What does matter is that if I find your presence objectionable, then there should be a way to affect you so that elsewhere is someplace you would rather be.

That cannot happen under current cloaking mechanics. In all of EVE, you are the safest because you are under a cloak. Stations in high sec are less secure.

So the consensus then is to ask devs to review if null-sec AFK camping impacts on Eve player attrition?

Without the neut in system, you're also completely and uncounterably safe: anyone enters system, ratter POSses up. Every. Time. Be it a flock of Mackinaws, a Rattlesnake or a bloody Thanatos. Aligned = safe, and that's all there is to it. Your "effort" is somewhat exaggerated, and surely no greater than the effort it takes to fly to a system and cloak up. You speak of effort but merely "aligning" does not grant you the right to a system's wealth.

Now, if this happens in somewhat acceptable (cheap) vessels or in protected space that's okay and nobody will care. But if you're making ISK around the clock in too blingy a ship, without any kind of defence whatsoever, people will notice.

And then those people will challenge your claim to the system.

WHEN the battle is fought is not up to you.
HOW the battle is fought, however, is.

It's real simple at that: can you, or can you not muster a sufficient force to protect you PvE activities? If the answer is no, then it doesn't even matter if you find the cloaky or not. For if you had something to fight him with, he wouldn't be there in the first place. If you don't, then your right to be in said space is no greater than his'.

You cannot make him leave, but you can render his presence futile. That is a win. That's one of the possible counters to a cloaky camper.

What advocates of fuel or cycle timers absolutely DEMAND is proof that the cloaker is at his keyboard. WHY? Why is it so important he's at his keyboard? What difference does it make to you? Shall we remove auto-cycling stripminers and logging off your market toons too while we're at it? Nope. This is nothing more than demanding a sacrifice out of spite, because you simply can't face the fact you FAIL AT DEFENDING YOU SPACE.

There. I said it. You can't even deal with one neut in local -- no matter if he's logged on, logged off, flying an interceptor or flying a cloaky Proteus. I've seen carriers run from our Stiletto. Like, for real. "To the POS!!! It's the Stiletto of Mighty Gargantuanness!!!" People who **** their pants when there's a non-blue in system do NOT own the system and do NOT have a right to any richess. Either you cease your activities, or you start defending your space. Period.

The cloaker has an economic impact while not actively doing anything, and that's the Big Argument why it should be nerfed. Yet, what does that say about you? If you're crying in your soup over ONE vessel, how exactly do you intend to defeat it IF you were given the tools to catch it??

At this point we've heard it all: PvE ships should be made combat capable ... (except you'd still refuse to fight so why bother?) The cyno should be removed! People should hit a dead-man's-switch every 5 minutes to prove they're still "active" ....... We need fuel! Cycle timers! Let me tell you what you need: you need to learn to work together and organise some defenses. That's what you need.

The more you guys whine, the more I'm convinced the nay-sayers were right all along: what you really want, is a PvP flag you can flip off. Or a separate PvE server. The truth is: nullsec is not for you. You belong in highsec. And that's okay -- I have nothing against highsec; it exists for people like you. Go there and be merry. This is a multiplayer game. You have no business flying unarmed, all by yourself, in nullsec.

Of course that's what they want.

The ultimate goal of every carebear is Trammel, and eventually the death of this game.

OMG, you nearly made me spill my martini....

I just have to ask...how do you figure this?

I don't know, lets ask this "safe because he was cloaked" little guy

I've been killed everywhere there is in eve, except a station. Does not compute.

You should petition that, apparently you were meant to be safer than in a high sec station.

/chortle

The funny thing is .... at some point during the debate, I too felt these goddamn cloakers were feeling a tidbit too comfortable in our space. Now they're getting rid of off-grid boosters that doesn't bother me anymore, because they'll be vulnerable when performing their duties. I can wait till they show themselves- so as far as I'm concerned, all is well and good again.

Nullified cloaky T3s could maybe use some rebalancing in the way of reduced agility when fitting the nullification subsystem, but meh. That too is okay I suppose.

But, ya know .... it's the carebearing man. It really got to me. I flipped a s.h.i.t right there. Apologies to anyone I may have offended. Peace out.

Didn't we just cover this bit of idiocy?

I guess I should just start saving an entire list of definitions and conditions for every syllable since you folks are so simple minded you can't keep even a single idea in your head at one time under discussion.


No one, myself included, has ever claimed merely having a cloak module fit to your ship makes you safe from anything.

However, if you are in a position where you can actually use that cloak, are smart enough not to hump something you should not be near, then no force in EVE can do anything at all to you ever, until such time as you choose to take an action that drops the cloak.

Which makes you safer than in a station, because you have full mobility, full situational awareness, with every piece of information available to any pilot in space upon which to make your decisions, and no one can do anything to you at all except by the most extraordinary luck combined with your own incompetence. At least in a station your location can be verified and the undock camped. Cloaks don't even allow that miniscule opportunity.

It would in many ways be more balanced if there was a module that allowed a ship to project POS shields, just sized for them.

Again, if you have to twist what I say into something completely different to make your point, then you should probably reconsider if you have a point to make at all.