These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

AFK Cloaking™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#4301 - 2015-12-11 02:11:31 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Lets see the impact on implicit threat after translating to null-sec

1. sov holder ability to close jump gates (collapse wormholes in wormspeak. I will use gate consistently as we are describing 0-sec).
Yah, that would definitely decrease implicit threats.

2. New gate spawn
Little impact on implicit threat level. The spawn is not player controlled, so is unlikely to spawn at a location with hostiles willing and able to take advantage of it even if it did spawn.

Using an alt to guard on outside any spawned gate would decrease implicit risk, might have hardware requirements (a 2ndary laptop). Alternately a newbro would work (this is more a cyno you can jump through, then camp with eyes on the other side to give warning of anyone approaching to use the cyno if we were to insist on that analogy).

3. Omni damage rats
Definitely relevant. Tanking omni damage lessens perception of vulnerability to exploiting holes in tank (yay drone space)

4. Powerful rats
Definitely relevant. Encourages cooperative ratting (or multi character ratting). The perception of safety is greater in numbers, particularly if omni tanked so people are fitted for pvp capability. If combined with point/scram/web rats, then ratting fleet also has tackle on board to deter hostiles.

5. Ecosystem adaptation (including tactics).
No particular reason to worry much that hostiles are well-versed in the specifics of relevant tactics even if they have tailored fittings and skills to match the local system ecosystem.

6. No local clones.
Decreased implicit threat. Translates effectively to implant choice. Implants cannot be easily swapped, so players will use implants they can afford to lose. Known space pilots have the illusion of implant swap capability, but the 24 hour limit often renders change impractical.

There seems to be a number of mechanisms in wormhole space that decreases implicit threats.


I was making a point that both have their ways of making it safer, but you cannot make it completely safe. But anyway:

1. While you cannot close the gates, yours don't move around.

2. You cannot choose where the wormhole opens up into, but you can make a new one to spawn by closing the static wormhole of the system. If you are hunting for pvp, you can do this for a few hours. It's called ragerolling. You roll the hole until you find something to kill

3. You are saying you want omni-damage rats? Sure, sleepers or sleeper-substitutes all around! Would make thigns more interesting!

4 Even in wormholes, PVE and PVP -fits are different. While sleepers don't like new people on site, they will also switch targets actively so you cannot trust them to be your tackle

5. This one, I don't get

6. You are saying that not having access to a cloning facility in the system is making the danger of getting podded less of an issue? O.o How the hell did you get into that conclusion? There's a reason why pods are high value targets in a PVP-fight in a wormhole. You cannot reship and get back into a fight. In null, it's better to leave you hanging and slowboat to get a new ship

Wormholer for life.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#4302 - 2015-12-11 02:33:31 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Wander Prian wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Wander Prian wrote:
Let me see if I can put something into actual words:

I am a wormholer (big surprise there), but I try to keep up with things in other parts of space too. If someone has something to correct, please help me out here:

Doing PVE in a wormhole:

Any serious WH-corp who thinks of doing PVE will know to minimize possible accidents by critting or closing any extra wormholes to make things safer as well as have a scout looking for extra signatures and possibly making sure nobody jumps through the wormhole, just in case. Usually, if you live in the same hole, you know there's nobody logged off to kill you, but in case you are doing PVE down the chain, you need to make sure the locals won't get you either, so you have a scout there too.

All this work and still it doesn't ensure you don't get dropped on. It happens almost daily in w-space. Somebody somehwere will lose a capital or the whole PVE-fleet, because a new signature had opened up.

Yes we have ways to make risks smaller, but we cannot eliminate it. And IF we get killed, it usually means you are podded out to highsec, which means you are out of the fight completely. We cannot just burn right back into the fight


Thanks Wander...so I'll draw some parallels, let me know if I'm full of Bravo Sierra...

So in a WH, a new WH opening up is like a covert ops cyno in NS, but even worse in that while a capital cannot jump through a cov ops cyno, in W-space that can indeed happen.

You guys actually do have a guy who "stands watch" sits there and scans for new wormholes? If this is true, this is something that those opposed to AFK cloaking really, really dislike. Pretty much it boils down to "not making ISK", IMO.



Yes that is a pretty accurate description, especially since most sites rats scram and web you .
If you do PVE in large scale, be it with capitals or not, you have a scout watching over for new sigs and sometimes even watching the wormholes in case of people jumping in.


With a few important differences.

Holes open when and where they feel like it. If a covert cyno opens it won't let in capitols, but it's definitely letting in something. It won't sit idle.

The description of securing the space for PvE and doing it in relative safety sounds very similar too, except for much more profit per individual making the additional personnel much more affordable in terms of the profits floor of high sec profits.

It's just all done on a much smaller scale due to the nature of the entrances shifting around. Once your entrances are known and camped/watched you can operate with impunity barring a logoff trap. In NS the same level of security is accomplished with more or less permanant gate camps.

It makes the failures more deadly, but the chance of failure much less.


While we cannot choose where the wormhole opens up, we can roll the connection until we find something we want. Doing this to find PVP is known as ragerolling.

The only wormholes that really give a decent amount of isk for a group are class 5 and 6 wormholes. You can get decent isk for 2-3 players in class 3-4. Class 1-2 are more about decent isk for 1-2 guys.

Even with closed/critted connections and a scout looking for new signatures, you aren't 100% safe. Every day someone gets caught doing PVe in wormholes even though they have taken all the precautions. Even in the safest place, the home of your corporation, you can get dropped in the middle of running sites.
Even when taking all the precautions to be safe, we can have at most 30-60 seconds of warning before there's a fleet landing on the PVE-site

The only way nullsec has that kind of uncertainty is with a cyno.

What if fixing this AFK-cloaking "problem" isn't done through nerfing cloaks or local, but through promoting group-activities in PVE to minimize the fears.

Wormholer for life.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#4303 - 2015-12-11 03:41:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Voidstar
Wander Prian wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Wander Prian wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Wander Prian wrote:
Let me see if I can put something into actual words:

I am a wormholer (big surprise there), but I try to keep up with things in other parts of space too. If someone has something to correct, please help me out here:

Doing PVE in a wormhole:

Any serious WH-corp who thinks of doing PVE will know to minimize possible accidents by critting or closing any extra wormholes to make things safer as well as have a scout looking for extra signatures and possibly making sure nobody jumps through the wormhole, just in case. Usually, if you live in the same hole, you know there's nobody logged off to kill you, but in case you are doing PVE down the chain, you need to make sure the locals won't get you either, so you have a scout there too.

All this work and still it doesn't ensure you don't get dropped on. It happens almost daily in w-space. Somebody somehwere will lose a capital or the whole PVE-fleet, because a new signature had opened up.

Yes we have ways to make risks smaller, but we cannot eliminate it. And IF we get killed, it usually means you are podded out to highsec, which means you are out of the fight completely. We cannot just burn right back into the fight


Thanks Wander...so I'll draw some parallels, let me know if I'm full of Bravo Sierra...

So in a WH, a new WH opening up is like a covert ops cyno in NS, but even worse in that while a capital cannot jump through a cov ops cyno, in W-space that can indeed happen.

You guys actually do have a guy who "stands watch" sits there and scans for new wormholes? If this is true, this is something that those opposed to AFK cloaking really, really dislike. Pretty much it boils down to "not making ISK", IMO.



Yes that is a pretty accurate description, especially since most sites rats scram and web you .
If you do PVE in large scale, be it with capitals or not, you have a scout watching over for new sigs and sometimes even watching the wormholes in case of people jumping in.


With a few important differences.

Holes open when and where they feel like it. If a covert cyno opens it won't let in capitols, but it's definitely letting in something. It won't sit idle.

The description of securing the space for PvE and doing it in relative safety sounds very similar too, except for much more profit per individual making the additional personnel much more affordable in terms of the profits floor of high sec profits.

It's just all done on a much smaller scale due to the nature of the entrances shifting around. Once your entrances are known and camped/watched you can operate with impunity barring a logoff trap. In NS the same level of security is accomplished with more or less permanant gate camps.

It makes the failures more deadly, but the chance of failure much less.


While we cannot choose where the wormhole opens up, we can roll the connection until we find something we want. Doing this to find PVP is known as ragerolling.

The only wormholes that really give a decent amount of isk for a group are class 5 and 6 wormholes. You can get decent isk for 2-3 players in class 3-4. Class 1-2 are more about decent isk for 1-2 guys.

Even with closed/critted connections and a scout looking for new signatures, you aren't 100% safe. Every day someone gets caught doing PVe in wormholes even though they have taken all the precautions. Even in the safest place, the home of your corporation, you can get dropped in the middle of running sites.
Even when taking all the precautions to be safe, we can have at most 30-60 seconds of warning before there's a fleet landing on the PVE-site

The only way nullsec has that kind of uncertainty is with a cyno.

What if fixing this AFK-cloaking "problem" isn't done through nerfing cloaks or local, but through promoting group-activities in PVE to minimize the fears.


Wormhole mechanics make you safer compared to known gates and cynos. No one can target you specifically at will. You are able to watch for new holes and assure their safety, or verify the danger. If dangerous you can close them. None of that is without risk, but it's a whole different game from known space.

Outside of a few activities Null is only over high sec levels of income for a single pilot. This is fine as far as a large alliance that can provide all the backbone needed and use tax to keep everything going without individually babysitting every single barge in space. When you start demanding a standing fleet for every single ship in space, PvE stops being viable compared to high sec. There are still plenty of reasons to stay out there and do it anyway under camped conditions, but if your goal is to make money you can do it better and safer in high sec.

Even with scouts, local and Intel channels, and without atk camping, PvE pilots die every day in Null too. I am not saying to remove the dangers of being hunted from anyone. I am saying the dangers of being hunted should apply to everyone. Cloaks should make it more difficult, limit hunting to various hulls or other conditions... But at no point should any ship not in a dock or POS shields be immune to other players, most especially while carrying out vital functions or impacting others from perfect safety.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4304 - 2015-12-11 03:50:00 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:


Wormhole mechanics make you safer compared to known gates and cynos. No one can target you specifically at will. You are able to watch for new holes and assure their safety, or verify the danger. If dangerous you can close them. None of that is without risk, but it's a whole different game from known space.

Outside of a few activities Null is only over high sec levels of income for a single pilot. This is fine as far as a large alliance that can provide all the backbone needed and use tax to keep everything going without individually babysitting every single barge in space. When you start demanding a standing fleet for every single ship in space, PvE stops being viable compared to high sec. There are still plenty of reasons to stay out there and do it anyway under camped conditions, but if your goal is to make money you can do it better and safer in high sec.

Even with scouts, local and Intel channels, and without atk camping, PvE pilots die every day in Null too. I am not saying to remove the dangers of being hunted from anyone. I am saying the dangers of being hunted should apply to everyone. Cloaks should make it more difficult, limit hunting to various hulls or other conditions... But at no point should any ship not in a dock or POS shields be immune to other players, most especially while carrying out vital functions or impacting others from perfect safety.


Mike,

You might want to rethink telling the worm hole guy how worm holes work. He lives there you live in HS.

PvE pilots who die in NS are, IMO, by-and-large AFK.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#4305 - 2015-12-11 03:51:02 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

What Brokk said. No PvE pilot is going to go for those changes. The PvE pilot's idea of securing space is dropping a couple of structures and then watching local. That's it. No more effort beyond that.


Which is precisely why they don't get a say in the matter, because they will always vote selfishly and never with regard to actual game balance.

Their skewed view of the game disqualifies them from any and every balance discussion.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4306 - 2015-12-11 03:52:57 UTC
Wander Prian wrote:


6. You are saying that not having access to a cloning facility in the system is making the danger of getting podded less of an issue? O.o How the hell did you get into that conclusion? There's a reason why pods are high value targets in a PVP-fight in a wormhole. You cannot reship and get back into a fight. In null, it's better to leave you hanging and slowboat to get a new ship



My reading was that because getting podded is such a PITA you'll try to avoid it...and hence avoid PvP. Personally, I find that to be very dubious. After all you guys do rageroll...presumably you do so looking for a fight and are more than happy to risk being podded back to k-space.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#4307 - 2015-12-11 03:53:10 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:

You might want to rethink telling the worm hole guy how worm holes work.


Teckos, how dare you? Mike has every right to dictate game balance from a position of complete, utter ignorance.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4308 - 2015-12-11 03:57:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

What Brokk said. No PvE pilot is going to go for those changes. The PvE pilot's idea of securing space is dropping a couple of structures and then watching local. That's it. No more effort beyond that.


Which is precisely why they don't get a say in the matter, because they will always vote selfishly and never with regard to actual game balance.

Their skewed view of the game disqualifies them from any and every balance discussion.


I have to agree....

The idea of securing your space is you do stuff beyond dropping a couple of structures and then staring at local. That isn't securing anything really. If that is all you are willing to do somebody is going to come take that space from you. Look at what the WH guys do...they have a guy looking for new signatures, they do work in groups (though not always) and they do not shy away from a fight. In fact, I bet most of them go looking for a fight.

Imagine a NS player having to go take a spin around the constellation he was going to rat in before ratting. Man, the whine on the forums would be so high only a dog could hear it.

Edit: And I wouldn't mind this, TBQH. I'd just hop in a travel fit ceptor and burn around and see what was what

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4309 - 2015-12-11 03:58:18 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:

You might want to rethink telling the worm hole guy how worm holes work.


Teckos, how dare you? Mike has every right to dictate game balance from a position of complete, utter ignorance.


You're right. Apologies for deferring to the subject matter expert. My bad. P

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4310 - 2015-12-11 04:05:34 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:

Outside of a few activities Null is only over high sec levels of income for a single pilot. This is fine as far as a large alliance that can provide all the backbone needed and use tax to keep everything going without individually babysitting every single barge in space. When you start demanding a standing fleet for every single ship in space, PvE stops being viable compared to high sec. There are still plenty of reasons to stay out there and do it anyway under camped conditions, but if your goal is to make money you can do it better and safer in high sec.


For some of us, the goal is having fun - which encompasses a broad array of activites, both PvE and PvP. For pure PvE you're probably right: the money in highsec IS better. It's the moongoo in null that's worth a dime, not the ratting.

But, you know, you can go rat and scavenge a few mods here and there. Wouldn't call that the goal of sovereignty, though ... in the end, it boils down to building an empire with your friends. And shooting up those who would take it from you or see it burnt to cinders.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#4311 - 2015-12-11 04:09:38 UTC
Uh oh Brokk, now you did it.

You said that people play games to have fun, not to just repeat the same activity a million times in an obscene quest to make the green number get bigger.

Don't you know that's sacrilege?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4312 - 2015-12-11 04:11:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Mike Voidstar wrote:


Outside of a few activities Null is only over high sec levels of income for a single pilot. This is fine as far as a large alliance that can provide all the backbone needed and use tax to keep everything going without individually babysitting every single barge in space. When you start demanding a standing fleet for every single ship in space, PvE stops being viable compared to high sec. There are still plenty of reasons to stay out there and do it anyway under camped conditions, but if your goal is to make money you can do it better and safer in high sec.


A standing fleet, at least in my alliance, is not a fleet of PvP ships on standby. It is a fleet where everyone who is PvEing, in theory, is in the fleet and on coms. This way if one person is attacked everyone else can come to their aid.

So your characterization is just wrong.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#4313 - 2015-12-11 04:15:12 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Mike Voidstar wrote:

Wormhole mechanics make you safer compared to known gates and cynos.



Ratio of Ship kills to NPC kills for 2014, per Dotlan stats:

J-Space: 1 : 73.4

Null: 1 : 346.9

Please, do go on.

I've roamed null for days on end without ever being in any real risk. Hell, without even having to run a gatecamp.

Don't think I've had a day in WH space where someone hasn't at least shot at me.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4314 - 2015-12-11 05:50:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
Teckos Pech wrote:
Jerghul wrote:
Lets see the impact on implicit threat after translating to null-sec

1. sov holder ability to close jump gates (collapse wormholes in wormspeak. I will use gate consistently as we are describing 0-sec).
Yah, that would definitely decrease implicit threats.

2. New gate spawn
Little impact on implicit threat level. The spawn is not player controlled, so is unlikely to spawn at a location with hostiles willing and able to take advantage of it even if it did spawn.

Using an alt to guard on outside any spawned gate would decrease implicit risk, might have hardware requirements (a 2ndary laptop). Alternately a newbro would work (this is more a cyno you can jump through, then camp with eyes on the other side to give warning of anyone approaching to use the cyno if we were to insist on that analogy).

3. Omni damage rats
Definitely relevant. Tanking omni damage lessens perception of vulnerability to exploiting holes in tank (yay drone space)

4. Powerful rats
Definitely relevant. Encourages cooperative ratting (or multi character ratting). The perception of safety is greater in numbers, particularly if omni tanked so people are fitted for pvp capability. If combined with point/scram/web rats, then ratting fleet also has tackle on board to deter hostiles.

5. Ecosystem adaptation (including tactics).
No particular reason to worry much that hostiles are well-versed in the specifics of relevant tactics even if they have tailored fittings and skills to match the local system ecosystem.

6. No local clones.
Decreased implicit threat. Translates effectively to implant choice. Implants cannot be easily swapped, so players will use implants they can afford to lose. Known space pilots have the illusion of implant swap capability, but the 24 hour limit often renders change impractical.

There seems to be a number of mechanisms in wormhole space that decreases implicit threats.


First, I'll note you left local off the list. And of course removing local basically removes the implicit threat. People only freak out about AFK cloakers because they can see them.

Also, it is an attitude thing. Worm holers are fine with no local. PvE pilots who complain about AFK cloaking...they never live in worm holes.

Further, I contend that 1 can lead to a false sense of safety and 2 should actually increase the implicit threat level. Just as with a cloaked player in local and not knowing when he'll go active...you don't know when a worm hole or more than one will form. And based on the two players experienced with worm hole life...they are prepared for that eventuality pretty much all the time.

Compare this to the typical PvE pilot in a bling boat to max ISK/hour. Where the idea of a scout one system out is horrible because it means less ISK/hour. Having a standing fleet....you mean I might have to stop ratting and go help a guy out? WTF have you been smoking!!!


Goodness Peckos, removing local enhances implicit threats. Wormholers are fine with no local and fine with cloaky campers because of other compensating mechanisms. I have mentioned this several times.

But you are quoting a rough draft. The point I had finished was drones 2.0 a few posts below.

Edit

"1. Rats 2.0
Break up the tailored tanks by adding more omni damage rat fleets (imagine the rats cross trade ships. Mix it up a bit)
More ewar rats that can act as surrogate tackle for ratting vessels
A bit stronger sites to make it more small gang pvp'ish

These measures would protect ratters from themselves basically. Trend towards making ratters more small gang pvp ready."

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4315 - 2015-12-11 06:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Jerghul wrote:


Goodness Peckos, removing local enhances implicit threats. Wormholers are fine with no local and fine with cloaky campers because of other compensating mechanisms. I have mentioned this several times.

But you are quoting a rough draft. The point I had finished was drones 2.0 a few posts below.

Edit

"1. Rats 2.0
Break up the tailored tanks by adding more omni damage rat fleets (imagine the rats cross trade ships. Mix it up a bit)
More ewar rats that can act as surrogate tackle for ratting vessels
A bit stronger sites to make it more small gang pvp'ish

These measures would protect ratters from themselves basically. Trend towards making ratters more small gang pvp ready."


So does having worm holes form randomly....yet you leave that on your list as reducing implicit threat levels.

And I disagree...an "implicit" threat works because you don't have to make it explicit--i.e. local is what makes AFK camping so effective. Remove it and there is zero reason to do it. Instead you could just go hunting while ATK. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

You are like Mike, being a tryhard to justify keeping local while nerfing everyone else's play style.

Edit: And if omni damage rats become a thing due to what you have written Mike, et. al. will hate you long time. Ratters do not want to be small gang PvP ready. As I noted I suggested omni tanks like 100 pages ago.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4316 - 2015-12-11 06:05:42 UTC
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

Wormhole mechanics make you safer compared to known gates and cynos.



Ratio of Ship kills to NPC kills for 2014, per Dotlan stats:

J-Space: 1 : 73.4

Null: 1 : 346.9

Please, do go on.

I've roamed null for days on end without ever being in any real risk. Hell, without even having to run a gatecamp.

Don't think I've had a day in WH space where someone hasn't at least shot at me.


I think that post proves Mike's point.

A sleeper rat is the equivalent of how many null sec rats? 10?

I am single blatting frostline frigates in a T1 battle cruiser. Sleeper drones are a whole different calibre of rat.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#4317 - 2015-12-11 06:14:45 UTC  |  Edited by: SurrenderMonkey
Jerghul wrote:


I think that post proves Mike's point.




The thing he literally said is that WHs mechanics make you safer. The actual fact is that, relative to other space, the death rate in comparison to economic activity is profoundly higher in wormholes.

Quote:
A sleeper rat is the equivalent of how many null sec rats? 10?


In what class of hole?

Have you ever actually been in a wormhole, or is everything you "know" about them gleaned from an evelopedia article you once read through the window of a speeding train?

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#4318 - 2015-12-11 06:32:05 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
SurrenderMonkey wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

Wormhole mechanics make you safer compared to known gates and cynos.



Ratio of Ship kills to NPC kills for 2014, per Dotlan stats:

J-Space: 1 : 73.4

Null: 1 : 346.9

Please, do go on.

I've roamed null for days on end without ever being in any real risk. Hell, without even having to run a gatecamp.

Don't think I've had a day in WH space where someone hasn't at least shot at me.


I think that post proves Mike's point.

A sleeper rat is the equivalent of how many null sec rats? 10?

I am single blatting frostline frigates in a T1 battle cruiser. Sleeper drones are a whole different calibre of rat.


No you have it exactly backwards. SurrenderMonkey's statistics imply the following


  • On average a "ratter" in j-space will expect to kill 73 rats before himself being killed.
  • On average a "ratter" in NS will expect to kill 347 rats before himself being killed.


Or to put it differently a NS ratter will kill almost 5x as many rats before dying than a j-space ratter....j-space is actually less safe.

As for the value it depends doesn't it. A NS rat puts ISK right in your wallet. A sleeper rat does not. Not directly. You have to get the goodies out. Liquidity has value...so it is not that simple to just pick a number out of thin air like you just did.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
ISD Supogo
ISD BH
ISD Alliance
#4319 - 2015-12-11 08:19:56 UTC
Removed a post.

Quote:

Forum rules

2. Be respectful toward others at all times.

The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to be courteous when disagreeing with others.

4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not conductive to the community spirit that CCP promotes. As such, this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.

ISD BH Supogo

Bughunter

Equipment Certification and Anomaly Investigations Division (ECAID)

Interstellar Services Department
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#4320 - 2015-12-11 08:54:40 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Jerghul wrote:
Lets see the impact on implicit threat after translating to null-sec

1. sov holder ability to close jump gates (collapse wormholes in wormspeak. I will use gate consistently as we are describing 0-sec).
Yah, that would definitely decrease implicit threats.

2. New gate spawn
Little impact on implicit threat level. The spawn is not player controlled, so is unlikely to spawn at a location with hostiles willing and able to take advantage of it even if it did spawn.

Using an alt to guard on outside any spawned gate would decrease implicit risk, might have hardware requirements (a 2ndary laptop). Alternately a newbro would work (this is more a cyno you can jump through, then camp with eyes on the other side to give warning of anyone approaching to use the cyno if we were to insist on that analogy).

3. Omni damage rats
Definitely relevant. Tanking omni damage lessens perception of vulnerability to exploiting holes in tank (yay drone space)

4. Powerful rats
Definitely relevant. Encourages cooperative ratting (or multi character ratting). The perception of safety is greater in numbers, particularly if omni tanked so people are fitted for pvp capability. If combined with point/scram/web rats, then ratting fleet also has tackle on board to deter hostiles.

5. Ecosystem adaptation (including tactics).
No particular reason to worry much that hostiles are well-versed in the specifics of relevant tactics even if they have tailored fittings and skills to match the local system ecosystem.

6. No local clones.
Decreased implicit threat. Translates effectively to implant choice. Implants cannot be easily swapped, so players will use implants they can afford to lose. Known space pilots have the illusion of implant swap capability, but the 24 hour limit often renders change impractical.

There seems to be a number of mechanisms in wormhole space that decreases implicit threats.


First, I'll note you left local off the list. And of course removing local basically removes the implicit threat. People only freak out about AFK cloakers because they can see them.

Also, it is an attitude thing. Worm holers are fine with no local. PvE pilots who complain about AFK cloaking...they never live in worm holes.

Further, I contend that 1 can lead to a false sense of safety and 2 should actually increase the implicit threat level. Just as with a cloaked player in local and not knowing when he'll go active...you don't know when a worm hole or more than one will form. And based on the two players experienced with worm hole life...they are prepared for that eventuality pretty much all the time.

Compare this to the typical PvE pilot in a bling boat to max ISK/hour. Where the idea of a scout one system out is horrible because it means less ISK/hour. Having a standing fleet....you mean I might have to stop ratting and go help a guy out? WTF have you been smoking!!!


Goodness Peckos, removing local enhances implicit threats. Wormholers are fine with no local and fine with cloaky campers because of other compensating mechanisms. I have mentioned this several times.


Still waiting on what those "mechanics" are.

I'm not holding my breath though.