Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I suppose if you lump every form of PvE into 'one playstyle'.

The solutions supported by me go from a system of false positives that must be eliminated to find a cloaked ship, and making people not show in local under a gate cloak.

Both are designed to have as mild an impact as possible while still providing an option other than one side or the other just dies.

No, they cannot. They can't do anything, activate any module while cloaked.

The only thing that removes content is the kind of cowardice that makes you refuse to play the game at all unless you have zero risk.

And CCP should never change one thing about the game for that reason.

Actually, that's an attempted deflection at something that is very relevant to the argument.

See, what you're trying to say is that, to you, it absolutely does not matter what his capabilities are or aren't. You cannot stand the uncertainty.

You're saying that facts don't matter, just how you feel about it. And you're also saying that some part of this game needs to be drastically altered just because of your feelings.

It is not possible to be any more in the wrong than that in a game balance discussion.

Ummm.... how about "no" ? The camper removes content for whom exactly? For ONE guy? Sure it does. For 8 guys? Not so much -- a nuisance at best.

The core problem is people everywhere with the sole exception of die hard carebears in deep sov null can deal with non-blues in local. They keep looking for direct counters to The Neut, despite the fact there are MANY mechanics in game without direct counter (regular cyno comes to mind, as well as corp spies, caps warping straight within the docking ring or -yes: aligned ratting ships), many systems where neuts come and go as they please ...

In a multiplayer game, you cannot address every problem as a 1v1 type of situation. One would think that working together as a team goes without saying in sovereign space, no? Instead of focusing on niche situations like Solo ratters (<< yes, SOLO is the problem here), could you give me an example of a group worth its sov that lost it due to cloaked ventures?

A solo ratter has no more business in sov null than a Slasher running incursions. It's ridiculous. Stop it. As has been pointed out time and time again: the cloaky camps will not stop until the sovereign alliance puts appropriate protection in place. Requiring alliances to keep defenses up is at the very core of the sov game: you can no longer jump back and forth (fatigue), small subcap gangs can put pressure on your assets (entosis links); and forcing your enemies to keep a watchful eye and dedicate some troops to defense is clearly part of the Art of War. It might be bluff. There might not be a cyno. The camper may be a trollish dickmove but it's certainly a valid battle strategy.

So would you please stop spinning tales and give us a solid example of when which alliance was evicted from where exactly? I'm not buying this whole "player attrition" crap -- thus far, everything is this thread except me (I was hoping to pinpoint offgrid boosters but CCP is going to fix that for all of us YaY!) has pointed towards apparently 1-man alliances trying to make metric tons of ISK. We need solid examples here, man; really.

Brokk
Conversely, you could say that 1 afk cloaky camper has as much business permanently removing content from an entire system, as a slasher does running incursions. But I would prefer keeping the normative (what should be) issues to the simple question of determining the degree of player attrition and for developers to determine if that level is acceptable, or if corrective measures need to be taken.

Which is ultimately what you are asking for (even if I were to provide examples of alliances in say the Brave collective losing swaths of members and dramatic drops in activity before losing sov over in Catch, it would still remain anecdotal and the cause effects unclear).

Kaarous
You are familiar with forum rules I trust? Please try to focus on the topic at hand.

Its more a question of accepting that null sec afk-cloaky camping may negatively effect Eve player retention and think it fine that the developers look into it.

If we can accept that is true, then of course it is entirely possible to move on and talk about what measures might be appropriate if dev action were to be taken.

Do you guys have any idea how savage a nerf anoms would take for this?

And besides that, CCP will have exactly no sympathy for people not prepared to move systems. Not even high sec miners have that level of entitlement lol

It's effective if you're a pussy.

Except it's so cheap, effective and easy whole swaths of space for many jumps have had this happen.

I agree with everything... Right up until someone wants to go pop their perfect safety bubble and it's not possible.

The hunters are losing their minds because an active pilot evaded them at the cost of their entire playsyle, and think it's ok that they themselves be safe enough to afk until the end of time while maintaining their own.

If they have to be continually evasive just like the people they are hunting... Fine. But to be immune to interaction entirely... Not balanced.

Let's have a way to make the camper move systems too, or have to dodge his hunters.

Except that is completely untrue.

The side making money afk is demanding that they should have less uncertainty in their game.

Like always, carebears say "more effort for thee but not for me."

And you've even had the gall to say that you should have to give up absolutely nothing in exchange for ruining cloaking devices. Heck, half the suggestions in the recent parts of this thread would ruin cloaks completely, especially in wormholes.

You do not have the right to demand that parts of this game be irrevocably broken because you're too chicken to rat with a neut in local. And that's the only problem, you are literally asking that no one be allowed to make you feel insecure.

Too. Bad.

You know why cloaks can't be found easily? Because that is the benefit they get for their inherent weaknesses, both of the mod itself and their ship classes. If you ruin cov ops cloaks, you have to rebalance the ship lines of every single thing that can fit them.

Cloaks are already balanced. Everywhere. But because you think you're entitled to rat afk in an anom, you want to claim that they're broken for nullsec.

They are not. Local is broken by allowing you so much safety in nullsec. If anything needs to change, it's that.