These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#5741 - 2016-03-10 23:43:53 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
.

AFK cloaking only works because of local.

Local is too powerful...and needs to go. In its place should be a player deployed structure like just about everything else that can be attacked and destroyed or subverted.


How convenient that's exactly one of the functions of the proposed new structures.

But really you just don't have anything to work on so you're desperately grasping at straws now.

If you go afk in space there should be a way to kill you. Even if it is just a special D-scan.


And local should not be invulnerable to attack. My view is that so long as that is the case, then AFK cloaking should absolutely remain. Dumbing down the game is just bad.

"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

Moonacre Parmala
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5742 - 2016-03-11 07:47:43 UTC
How about providing the capacity to 'ping' and actively hunt down the AFK cloaker?

Similar to a submarine being pinged by sonar. Deploy probes with a slow scan time, to allow the "ping" to reach a target and be reflected back, at the same time give the cloaker a indication that they're being 'pinged'. repeat with a closing circle of probes and say after an average of 10-15 minutes work you'll have a rough location of the cloaked ship, whilst giving them the chance to run away.

If you wait long enough you can get a location, within say 5000m of the ship, then it's a case of warping in and dispatching a ship that is just being an annoyance. The flip side being, if the claoker is active then all they need do is warp off and the scan becomes null and void, that way you've established you've an active threat or an popped cloaked ship.

Law Number III: There are no lazy veteran lion hunters.

Law Number VI: A hungry dog hunts best. A hungrier dog hunts even better.

Law Number XXXVIII: The early bird gets the worm. The early worm....gets eaten.

If in doubt , SHOOT !

Pandora Carrollon
Provi Rapid Response
#5743 - 2016-03-11 18:37:26 UTC
So... 288 pages and you guys have this all worked out, right?

C'mon guys, clearly CCP thinks that AFK cloaking is valid and isn't going to do anything about it.

It seens to be an equal tool for the stalker as much as it's an anti-stalking tool.

If you don't like someone cloaked, be vigilant, or cloak up yourself and mess with them. How nervous do you think they'd be if 20 members of a corp they are stalking are also 'in system', not in-dock, and can't be scanned down?

It's up to you to determine how you react. The tool is useable by anyone.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#5744 - 2016-03-11 19:24:46 UTC
Moonacre Parmala wrote:
How about providing the capacity to 'ping' and actively hunt down the AFK cloaker?

Similar to a submarine being pinged by sonar. Deploy probes with a slow scan time, to allow the "ping" to reach a target and be reflected back, at the same time give the cloaker a indication that they're being 'pinged'. repeat with a closing circle of probes and say after an average of 10-15 minutes work you'll have a rough location of the cloaked ship, whilst giving them the chance to run away.

If you wait long enough you can get a location, within say 5000m of the ship, then it's a case of warping in and dispatching a ship that is just being an annoyance. The flip side being, if the claoker is active then all they need do is warp off and the scan becomes null and void, that way you've established you've an active threat or an popped cloaked ship.


Not unless you are willing to give up local. Why should you have your cake and eat it too?

"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
#5745 - 2016-03-12 09:13:46 UTC
coz cake is gud.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#5746 - 2016-03-13 06:34:51 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
coz cake is gud.


Well...there is that...

"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

Moonacre Parmala
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5747 - 2016-03-14 11:24:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonacre Parmala
I personally think you should have the ability to once a week have local go down...... either through sustained ECM or Physical attack like prior to an attack,
Exactly like our (My) forces initial actions, remove communications, remove logistics/re-supply, remove moral then remove the opposing force.
That way you provide a whole new game dynamic to be utilised. It could then be 'policed' by CCP to reduce total abuse and reduce knock on effect to (too many) innocents but would make for fun times... but it think that'a slightly off topic :)



(or knock it out but allow it to be repaired in game.........)

Law Number III: There are no lazy veteran lion hunters.

Law Number VI: A hungry dog hunts best. A hungrier dog hunts even better.

Law Number XXXVIII: The early bird gets the worm. The early worm....gets eaten.

If in doubt , SHOOT !

Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#5748 - 2016-03-14 18:31:29 UTC
Moonacre Parmala wrote:
I personally think you should have the ability to once a week have local go down...... either through sustained ECM or Physical attack like prior to an attack,
Exactly like our (My) forces initial actions, remove communications, remove logistics/re-supply, remove moral then remove the opposing force.
That way you provide a whole new game dynamic to be utilised. It could then be 'policed' by CCP to reduce total abuse and reduce knock on effect to (too many) innocents but would make for fun times... but it think that'a slightly off topic :)



(or knock it out but allow it to be repaired in game.........)


What would you attack or ECM?

"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

Moonacre Parmala
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5749 - 2016-03-16 11:11:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Moonacre Parmala
Teckos Pech wrote:
Moonacre Parmala wrote:
I personally think you should have the ability to once a week have local go down...... either through sustained ECM or Physical attack like prior to an attack,
Exactly like our (My) forces initial actions, remove communications, remove logistics/re-supply, remove moral then remove the opposing force.
That way you provide a whole new game dynamic to be utilised. It could then be 'policed' by CCP to reduce total abuse and reduce knock on effect to (too many) innocents but would make for fun times... but it think that'a slightly off topic :)



(or knock it out but allow it to be repaired in game.........)


What would you attack or ECM?


i'd use it for a system attack, or if that way inclined use it to go for a POS or just to give ultimate cover for piracy/covert ops.

as to physical actions against a comm's array, that could be 'policed' by local security or hired out to players to defend. And to prevent repeated attacks have CONCORD jump in to effect repairs and protect until it can be re-attacked at a suitable time period. Plus would make it a fleet operation to take it down, be it stealth bombers in a hit and run or bs's in a stand and slug it out job.

Just not a lone captain balckbeard in a frigate who wants to cause problems.

Law Number III: There are no lazy veteran lion hunters.

Law Number VI: A hungry dog hunts best. A hungrier dog hunts even better.

Law Number XXXVIII: The early bird gets the worm. The early worm....gets eaten.

If in doubt , SHOOT !

Evander1992
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#5750 - 2016-03-16 18:15:49 UTC
If i remember the EVE lore correctly, ships in a system are connected to the local network by gates, as they provide connection services for everyone inside.
Saying this, two options come to mind, regarding the balance of afk cloaking. First you make cloaked ships scannable by a ping system with probes, as Monacre suggested, and then you:

- Give the ability to manually control a ship communication array: turning them off would disconnect you completely from the gate network, making you disappear from local. The disadvantage would be that is disconnected you obviously only have access to the wh-style delayed local chat, as no real time info are received from your ship

or

- Give gates by default separate service upgrades, for example: CONCORD bounty network service, Standing Relay service, real time communication service and so on. Obviously, theese services can go offline if brought down by using the enthosis on every gate in the system. If all the services are down, no local and afk cloaking paradise :3
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#5751 - 2016-03-17 12:54:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Barrogh Habalu
Moonacre Parmala wrote:
I personally think you should have the ability to once a week have local go down...

So once a week people call an "op" to take down the local when it's most convenient for them, so that you don't do it at the most inappropriate moment.
Lyissa Serine
Clathrate Hydrates
#5752 - 2016-03-17 22:03:37 UTC
I have a cloaky camper in my system, there have been no attacks on any ships, not even a sighting since he first appeared many hours ago.

Most of the residents have logged off, but in the hope that he occasionally looks at his screen, I now keep my alt logged in at the station, with luck this may persuade him to stay in the system rather than go and camp another, more active system.

So now we are both (probably) afk and not playing Eve.

Is this really what the developers of Eve had in mind for the game?

I don't think so.

Personally I have no problem with someone actively cloaked and hunting but please give me the tools to hunt down someone who has not pressed a key for hours and who is no longer active in the game.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#5753 - 2016-03-18 11:13:00 UTC
Lyissa Serine wrote:

Is this really what the developers of Eve had in mind for the game?


How the might of the strongest null coalition can be cowed into inactivity by a single grey name in the local channel?
That you're too scared to use your own sovereign territory because someone might shoot you?
Frankly, I doubt it. I doubt it very much.
Up to you if you want to use your space or not.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#5754 - 2016-03-18 18:34:36 UTC
Evander1992 wrote:
If all the services are down, no local and afk cloaking paradise :3


Your post is not all that different from what has been proposed regarding the upcoming observatory array.

As for the bit I quoted, nobody will AFK cloak in a system without local....well unless they are taking a bio, answering the phone, making a sandwich, etc. Strategically doing it will no longer be a thing.

"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

Electra Magnetic
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5755 - 2016-03-18 19:57:22 UTC
I'm going to post my original idea again since I still think it would work in solving the problem.

Require cloaks to use cap while activated at a slow rate and do not allow capacitors to recharge while cloaked.

This solves a couple issues. One, it prevents people from AFK'ing in space for long amounts of time in order to "cloaky camp" and prevent other players from enjoying the game. Second, It balances pvp in the game by reducing the benefit cloakers get when they burn off and cloak so that they can regen cap to come back in for another surprise attack in order to remain untouchable.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#5756 - 2016-03-18 21:48:27 UTC
Electra Magnetic wrote:
I'm going to post my original idea again since I still think it would work in solving the problem.

Require cloaks to use cap while activated at a slow rate and do not allow capacitors to recharge while cloaked.

This solves a couple issues. One, it prevents people from AFK'ing in space for long amounts of time in order to "cloaky camp" and prevent other players from enjoying the game. Second, It balances pvp in the game by reducing the benefit cloakers get when they burn off and cloak so that they can regen cap to come back in for another surprise attack in order to remain untouchable.



No. Nerfing people who actively fly cloaking ships is just bad.

"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

SandKid
Sunset Logistics Company
#5757 - 2016-03-22 21:13:17 UTC  |  Edited by: SandKid
Teckos Pech wrote:
Electra Magnetic wrote:
I'm going to post my original idea again since I still think it would work in solving the problem.

Require cloaks to use cap while activated at a slow rate and do not allow capacitors to recharge while cloaked.

This solves a couple issues. One, it prevents people from AFK'ing in space for long amounts of time in order to "cloaky camp" and prevent other players from enjoying the game. Second, It balances pvp in the game by reducing the benefit cloakers get when they burn off and cloak so that they can regen cap to come back in for another surprise attack in order to remain untouchable.



No. Nerfing people who actively fly cloaking ships is just bad.


I see that at Page 288 there are still only two ideas...

1) Change Local to where it behaves like WH Space in Nullsec (You have to chat to show up)

2) Nerf Cloaks to where they cannot last permanently OR Develop a method for hunting cloaked ships


Personally I like both...as in do both. Remove active local in Null AND create a module/scanner that after some effort allows the pinpointing of cloaked ships. Active flyers will easily avoid this module if that's all they are trying to do (i.e. scouts).

AFK cloaking would cease to exist because A) Local stops the perception and B) The module acts as an intel creator and creates risk for cloaked pilots without destroying the effectiveness of their tactics - i.e. either you have a dedicated scout-finder in each system or you just accept the fact someone might be scouting you and now you REALLY don't know.

I think it creates a bit of a thrill for cloaky pilots (having roamed null myself just for the sake of seeing more of EVE) as well as puts to bed the whole nonsense of afk cloaking. These changes would also make covops more useful (blank local) while not rendering their potential targets totally defenseless (the module).

I'd see the module as acting something akin to a D-Scan, it can detect cloaks for certain in a small radius (say 2 AU) but it's ability to detect decreases with radius increase. At maximum (say 30), it only have a 10% chance of registering a cloaked vessel in system. As for actually scanning down a cloaked ship, the module would require you to narrow the scanner (like D-Scan) to increase strength. Once a cloaked ship is fully spotted by D-Scan, the hunter could warp to that ship and decloak it.

Keep in mind this would be quite difficult to do - so the cloaky is pretty safe unless actually AFK. Really, the module/scanner allows a hunter to potentially detect a covops attack by seeing multiple cloak signatures within a small band...hinting at a possible attack incoming.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#5758 - 2016-03-22 21:23:28 UTC
Those are ideas from people who have not really read the thread nor have they looked at some ideas discussed in the thread about the Observatory Array.

Your idea of a finding cloaked ships will likely be a feature on the OA. There have been rather strong hints that local will go away...well will become just another chat channel vs. a source of intel.

Hopefully this will be what happens.

"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

Tian Toralen
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5759 - 2016-03-28 18:33:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Tian Toralen
Ultimate idea to stop AFK cloaky campers. The fact that they are AFK is the most annoying fact. Look at this CCP:
http://i.imgur.com/HdiLhS8.jpg
A certain corporation, has 1 pilot in each of these systems. They don't own the systems, in fact they are enemies with the people there. They have been there since 1 week at least (my knowledge). Is this the future of this game? Plex accounts just to park them in enemy territory - AFK. Pay to keep the enemy under constant threat with no danger to yourself. Or is this convenient to CCP?

It's not a system upgrade, because all null systems would need one. And if a system upgrade that can decloak ships exists, bombers for example will never be sure when it will be activated.

All cloaked ships should prove they are not AFK, using a reasonable time interval, like 10 min. If they don't - they get decloaked.

All cloak modules will ask a certain random letter/number to be entered at 20 min intervals, with 1 min timer. If it is not entered corectly, ship gets decloaked. No big deal, if the pilot is not AFK, he will just recloak. Also on activation of the module the letter/number must be entered, during a 1 min time interval. This is to prevent bots, a bot that is just pressing a key to look like he's not AFK. Also once the bot gets decloaked he can't just F1 and cloak back up, he will need to enter the key combo to cloak, or lose his cloak after 1 min.

It may look as an extreme solution, but this is required, unless CCP has some very good anti-bot software. And this targets only AFK cloakers. This threatening the enemy with no danger to yourself system, must go.

About non-AFK cloaky campers - it's their bussiness what they do with their time.
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#5760 - 2016-03-28 20:17:28 UTC
AHAHAHAHAHAHA

And this coming from Karmafleet, your Number One griefer corp? That's rich.

How about you read some of this thread before resetting us back to page 3?