These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#6061 - 2016-05-31 03:55:29 UTC
Could you please just for once answer my goddamn question?

I hear what you're saying but you, Sir, are not listening to the point I am trying to make here. Doesn't matter. We'll see what curveball CCP throws us.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#6062 - 2016-05-31 05:02:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Voidstar
As an aside, I don't bash anyone for not answering any questions I ask. I do call them out when they stop discussing the topic and turn their arguments to how I have no right to my own views because I am not a PvP lover, or I don't live in null/wormholes/lowsec, etc. If my views are so without merit, then challenging them should be easy. I am neither unreasonable nor dogmatic. In fact Teckos has done so successfully at least twice, and my arguments have been amended because of him as a result.

I did address your question, but there is no direct answer because it relies on faulty assumptions:

1. 'built in' safety does not exist. As such you are seeking a default condition that nullifies player efforts at building that safety. You can't have that, you need to work as hard at nullifying it as the ones that put it in place did in getting it there.

2. You assume that the softer target of a hunt must be caught, or 'lose'. This isn't the case. Part of the defensive strategy in use is the denial of soft targets in exchange for more combat ready forces defending the area, or no targets at all. What *must* exist is a chance to lose, not it's guarantee, which does exist.

Which leaves us with how can they be caught, given that they are hiding behind multiple layers of defense and actively preventing themselves from being in that position. The answer to that is just like anyone else not under a cloak- catch them at a bad time, either inattentive (as half the argument in use is the ratters are afk should not be too hard), or flying poorly (either so sure you will move on they don't run, or at the early stages of their PvE fight with rat tackle on them, or caught on debris, ext...).

If cloaks were vulnerable to being hunted you could still interfere with their reliance on an all blue local by making it a point to send rapid sorties into their protected space so often that people stop running, assuming you will move on quickly while fleeing the defensive fleets, which become sluggish in giving chase since you rarely stop long. That would take effort though, and the cloakers can't even be bothered to stay at the keyboard, much less spend actual effort in breaking down security that has taken hundreds of man-hours to build.

Stop arguing Schrodinger's defense- perfect when you hunt, non-existant when you don't.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#6063 - 2016-05-31 09:25:58 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Flat out lie? Ok. There is a cloaked ship somewhere between 100 and 150 kilometers of your ship on grid.


I see you still have a ship that magically teleports into system and need not get there via traditional means.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#6064 - 2016-05-31 11:09:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Voidstar
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Flat out lie? Ok. There is a cloaked ship somewhere between 100 and 150 kilometers of your ship on grid.


I see you still have a ship that magically teleports into system and need not get there via traditional means.




...and? Your ratter had to get there too. They used different means.

Maybe your cloaker drifted in while everyone was asleep. Are you saying that the ratter should be able to set up his rat farm and be safe for all eternity too? Maybe if he self destructs a ship to appease the pvp gods he can be safe for a month afterwards? You are once again trying to use the idea that since a ship with a cloak fit to it cannot use the cloak in certain circumstances that it somehow means a ship using an active cloak is vulnerable to anything other than the most amazing bad luck/poor piloting in existence.

Are you now admitting that you were just reaching for straws by mentioning debris fields and empty ships as a counter to cloaked ships? Or is that how you are currently dealing with enemy cloaked ships in Wormholes. I suspect you are just tolerating them unless you trip over one accidently, but I am willing to hear the wise council of the all knowing wormhole dweller on the subject. I mean, just because I've never seen nor heard of anyone laying and maintaining a 100KM radius debris field of non-scannable objects doesn't mean its not in regular practice right now, as you seemed to want to assert earlier.


At any rate... you are the expert. You call me a liar for saying an active cloak is unbreakable. I'm willing to consider your words, assuming you have any. I'm already even giving you one impossible hurdle for free and placing him on grid with a known approximate distance--- 100 to 150 KM. How do you break that cloak against his will. It does not matter how he got in, could be during the local's inactive time, maybe a fresh wormhole or even part of a zerg rush of several at once who managed to skip in during broad 'daylight', it does not matter except he is there now. Please do tell me how you go about threatening him against his will.
Lugburz
Warcrows
Sedition.
#6065 - 2016-05-31 23:05:46 UTC
Mike voidstar you know once I got attacked in a wh by a cloaky proteus I was like THATS SO UNFAIR so went straight to the forums and complained... LOL sorry I'm lieing, I was in a drake; I dropped ecm drones, jammed him and warped off..

Don't try to change game mechanics you dont fully understand if your not even willing to try several defensive or counter measures first please; its simply bad for the game and would leave it unbalanced. There are plenty of measures you could be taking, if you want to do stuff in afk mode either stay in high sec.. or expect losses. Like the rest of the player base.

Easiest way to resolve the issue of cloaky afk camping...

Change your ratting system, have friends/alts with cloaky sabre, wait for camper to move.. it really isn't rocket science, in fact it could actually be seen as a viable military tactic.

I don't have issues with cloaky campers, in fact I usually just chat to them n have a laugh - but then they usually know I'm not an easy catch either ;)
Lugburz
Warcrows
Sedition.
#6066 - 2016-05-31 23:09:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugburz
also arguing the point using large grandiose words and psychology still makes you look damn silly in a game based more on tactics, go learn some, try them out then come back with relative information; as yet I have seen nothing that makes me think you have even attempted a counter - I have killed plenty of cloaky campers, more than have got me.. really looking at that statement id say cloaky camping is broken and needs a buff lol
Lugburz
Warcrows
Sedition.
#6067 - 2016-05-31 23:20:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugburz
warp to anom at 0m, drop anchorable bubble and mjd to range, continue moving away and rat in relative safety; camper warps in, gets dragged into bubble and decloaked; target camper.. help rats kill him.. camper dead.. or simply warp off if cloaky dude is too heavy (like a tengu) if your sat at 0m when a camper comes to your anom really whos fault is that?

Learn about your target, a fair amount of cloaky campers will drop minimal dps support; you can find this info on killboards.

Pirates little helper....

Keep moving...

Adapt your fittings to counter being targeted.. like an ecm burst.. or ecm drones... or to hell with it and band together with some other people and prep an ambush... fit a neut.. use a long range ratting ship like a raven..

You have no "salient" points because I have ten to the dozen counters for campers..

If I have a counter and I can kill them I really don't see the issue.

Learn, Adapt, Survive.


o7
Lugburz
Warcrows
Sedition.
#6068 - 2016-05-31 23:31:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugburz
also, GET RID OF LOCAL CHANNELS IN SOV HELD NULLSEC.

If sov blocks want to run these as their own points in space I see no reason why they shouldn't have to put up their own comms beacons/structures... make them entosible.. really it would actually add to the game and take nothing away.. and it would leave awesome no mans land space in null fraught with solo and small gang pvpers.. the sort that big gangs like to actually hunt and kill for the most part..

I honestly only see this as adding more depth to the game, I really cant see why anyone else wouldn't, hell you could even add some sort of instance in these systems that make drifters and npc pirate groups more prolific and dangerous simply because they bloody well should be; I suppose that would make it all more dynamic and someone would complain they cant farm these places effectively.. because you know.. the game shouldn't be for other people..
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#6069 - 2016-05-31 23:38:16 UTC
So you really do think those hiding under a cloak should be immune to outside interference until they choose otherwise.

Care to justify that?
Lugburz
Warcrows
Sedition.
#6070 - 2016-05-31 23:47:33 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
So you really do think those hiding under a cloak should be immune to outside interference until they choose otherwise.

Care to justify that?



They really don't bother me, when they're in system I'm hunting them [I'm not going to trawl through killmails to justify it] all counters i've listed do work its really as simple as that.. they're not 'perfect' counters but then cloaky camping isn't a perfect way to hunt.

Anywhere that is not highsec is listed as a place where dangerous players will actively seek you out to destroy you, this you must accept...

Instalocking carriers however... bit much I think.. don't mind instalock svipuls, killed a few solo with a ceptor and burned away from larger camps with more success than not.. I expect to get killed in dangerous space, that's the way it is. If you truly wish to make your isk there then you have to accept this as fact and prepare yourself accordingly.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#6071 - 2016-06-01 00:27:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Mike Voidstar
So... The justification for immunity to non-consensual PvP is just that it does not bother *you*.

Everyone should be just like you. Got it.

See, I get not letting an attacker dictate if you play or not. That's the game.

But you didn't list a single counter to a cloaked ship. You listed a few specific instances where one that chooses to warp to you would have a few seconds trouble. But nothing that you can apply to them without their first breaking their own safety.

All your efforts, according to some of the afk cloaking crowd, should still be useless. They would count as 'built in' safety for ratters that the game must clear away to ensure that you get caught and destroyed by default.

But you still are missing the point. It's not, and never has been, what you can do to defend yourself from an afk cloaker, or hunter of any description. All your preparations work against any hunter, afk cloaking or not--assuming you keep them up with due diligence. In fact, your arguments undermine a large part of the afk cloaker argument, since you are apparently willing to at least let a hunter get on grid before running, and potentially even engage them in combat.

What it is about, and always has been, is what can be done to the guy under a cloak. Not what he can be tricked into doing to himself, not what can be done to him in circumstances where the cloak won't work. What can actually be done to a cloaked ship against the pilots will? It does not matter what he is, or is not doing. It's unimportant that he wants to disrupt PvE, or scout for his fleet, or just avoid those who want to blow up his titan until downtime. What is important is what can be done to him, against his will, as he sits in space. EVERYONE IN SPACE IS SUPPOSED TO BE VULNERABLE TO SOME FORM OF PVP. Not just the targets, but the hunters too. Process that, and stop dragging the argument back down to ' lazy null bears are too safe '. Not only is it a false statement, but it has nothing to do with the afk cloaker, and those lazy null bears are vulnerable to being hunted even without cloaks that work at 100% efficiency until the end of time.

This is an important point, and has impacted the design of other modules in the past---its why we don't have Ancillary Armor Repairers that run cap free the way the Ancillary Shield Boosters do, as one example stated specifically by the Devs. Everything you do while in space is supposed to be vulnerable to disruption by other players.

So, again... How do you justify exempting a pilot from non-consensual PvP, especially deep in enemy territory and to the point that he can AFK indefinitely in absolute safety? Try for a more objective answer than "It doesn't bother me".
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#6072 - 2016-06-01 16:19:38 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:

3. Irrelevant. The camps are fine. The camps being 100% Safe for all time without any effort on the part of the camper is not.



Ahhh this old chestnut.

Yes, no effort. No effort to get into the system. No effort avoiding gate camps. No effort putting the ship together. No effort learning to use the ship effectively. No effort in setting up safes and perches/pings.

Yep, no effort at all.

GMAFB.


Litterally all of that is true no matter what you do in game. It's not exclusive to cloaks, or even combat ships. Locals had to get there too, they used diplomacy rather than gate crashing.

There is no point of merit here.


Wrong, this is still effort. That one has a cloak on is irrelevant, but it does not mean there is no effort. Only by being blindingly and deliberately obtuse can one first admit that there is effort then claim there is no effort.

Mike, you are stuck on stupid.

"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
#6073 - 2016-06-01 16:20:42 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
You know what someone in a station isn't going to do? Pop out behind you and start shooting.




WTF? Sure they can. Jesus, try living in NPC NS or LS. Happens all the time. Roll


From inside a station? Neat trick.

They were in a known place, which could be monitored.


No. You undock, they undock. Happens all the time.

Maybe you should work on your ability to write a cogent and clear sentence if you find your meaning is not coming across.

"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
#6074 - 2016-06-01 16:22:19 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
You mean well, but everyone should have the obligation to ensure their own safety.


Talking out of both sides of your mouth I see. How exactly do you propose to have your cake and eat it too? Oh yeah, you'll eat someone else's cake and keep yours.


No, you whine that some one was paying attention and evaded, and call that 100% protection as if local somehow magically shielded them from harm while they were afk. That only actually works for cloaks.


You are still talking out of both sides of your mouth. On one hand you claim people with cloaks should be responsible for their own security (and they are, they fit a cloak, set up a safe--i.e. they took steps to be safe). On the other hand you want to reduce the level of effort for you to remain safe. Truly ironic.

"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
#6075 - 2016-06-01 16:29:25 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:

It's important that you cannot compel a CloakED ship into risking itself because there is also no way to bring risk to a CloakED ship against its will. This is kind of important because a key point of EvE is non-consensual PvP, which is the very thing you are claiming the null bear is not risking even as they actively evade your attacks.


And that "CloakED" ship cannot bring risk to you so long as the player insists on the level of safety that has your underwear in a knott.

As for non-consensual PvP there are two places in game where it really cannot take place.

1. Docked in a station.
2. Cloaked up at a safe.

Both of these put considerable constraints on what you can do in game so long as you want to maintain that level of safety.

"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
#6076 - 2016-06-01 16:31:24 UTC
X Mayce wrote:
Can you finally after years of having this bullshit mechanic, just introduce t2 probes, or whatever type of probes you want, that specifically just can probe down cloaked crap.

Reasoning:
if afk and cloaked: gets raped
if not afk, sees probes and can warp off from current position

It's that simple, it doesn't kill of cloaked crap, it simply gives inhabitants of a system the chance to actual fighting off an enemy, instead of being the possible victim to an enemy for 23/7.

but hey, that would kill some accounts, that are currently used for cloaky camping, so what the hell do i know.


if you now come up with the would kill off bomb-run people, just disallow cloaking while using that sort of probe launcher/probes, so you could easily kill that guy to actually prevent him from using the anti-cloaked stuff.



Scanning is actually pretty fast. So if you aren't watching your d-scan all the time this is also a nerf to ATK cloaking ships.

No, to anything that simply nerfs cloaks in general and does nothing about the true root of this problem...local. Both have to be addressed.

"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
#6077 - 2016-06-01 16:32:58 UTC
Jessie McPewpew wrote:
Honestly, just make cloaks require stront or some type of fuel. Maybe ozone? It prevents people from going on cloaking runs without a care in the world. If you have to pay attention to fuel levels then you are more likely to plan your fit and cargo allocation to extra mods and ammo more carefully.


Again, this is also a nerf to ATK cloaking ships so, no. You don't nerf play that is not the problem to get play that is the problem.

"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
#6078 - 2016-06-01 16:34:32 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Please explain how removing local makes cloaks less invulnerable to detection than they are now? Seems they get stronger in wormholes, not weaker.

Unless you mean that's the trade-off you are willing to consider? I mean... How would you deal with the fallout. The local roster was put in for good reasons, and is vital for many things. Surely you have a plan that does not turn all of EvE into wormholes only worse?

Considering how much of your contribution to the topic has been extreme mental gymnastics involving how cloaks *must* stay invulnerable to all detection lest we break titans, fleet ops, wormholes, and God knows what else, I would have thought an inane 'remove local' response that implies it would balance something would be pure poison for your agenda.


Also, if I am AFK, Mike would not know I'm there and could rat in peace....well maybe not. Now that he had no idea if I was there, he'd live only in HS. Oh, wait he does that already. Never mind. 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
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#6079 - 2016-06-01 16:38:13 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
His risk goes up if he is an idiot. I mean, I suppose he could warp around and look on grid at everything, but he could also just launch some probes and cloak back up, know right where everything was. I mean, no one ever manages to warp at range while cloaked so as to not bump into their target or anythingRoll. Ships with cloaks die all the time. Cloaked ships only die to extreme bad luck and pilot error once once in a long while. Citing the vulnerability of a ship that cannot use the cloak it has equipped is no where near proving the vulnerability of a cloaked ship.


Sure, I can deploy probes. But those show up on d-scan. Kind of means the jig is up once I do that. I have basically said, "Hostile in system!!!"

And no, cloaked ships do not die just to pilot error or extreme bad luck. There is the opponents skill at decloaking as well. Some players are good at it, others are not. How nice of you to denigrate the skills of such players.

"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
#6080 - 2016-06-01 16:50:08 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:

Flat out lie? Ok. There is a cloaked ship somewhere between 100 and 150 kilometers of your ship on grid. Feel free to tell me, having already managed to knowingly get on grid with a cloaked ship and know it's approximate distance from you (currently impossible) how you will go about breaking the cloak...


Yes, that ship is at its “safest” but it is also impotent. It can do very, very little. It could provide a warp in for fleet members if they are in the correct position. They can provide intel to a fleet several jumps out. But other that they can do nothing…until they decloak and become vulnerable to attack.

However, warping into an anomaly carries with it the risk of decloaking, some anomalies have gas clouds or debris, and there are always wrecks and maybe cans that can result in decloaking.

So, your contrived what-if scenario is cute, but it is simply contrived to down play the risks when using a cloak and provide a biased argument for your view.

"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