Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Baltec
I think it a bit off-topic to explain to you how speed tanking makes it almost impossible to catch a ship by probbing it down.

Suffice to say that you are incorrect.

afk cloaky camping is 0-effort by definition.

An opportunity cost is a different matter. Which might help you grasp the opportunity cost afk cloaky campers inflict on others. Your one character opportunity cost inflicts a disproportionate opportunity cost on potentially endless other players who must stay docked unless they are willing to make a mistake and undock.

If a counter to local does not work where local exists, then it is not a counter to local.

Afk cloaky camping It may be percieved as a counter to something else (for example unreasonable isk/hour expectations), but that is an issue that would need to be discussed on its own basis.

The distinction between concord keeping people safe and concord retaliating is vitally important to understand. Though off-topic in this thread of course.

Baltec
You certainly have the right to your opinions. Feel free to have as many of them as you like.

You remain incorrect in your pot's musings. But I will defend with my life your right to be wrong.

Ratpack
Its actually called an ad-hominen. But don't sweat it. Sarcasm is hard to master.

Sensor Arrays that have an opportunity cost greater than ship module sized are disproportionate and would function poorly.

So the array would simply amount to some form of ship fitted decloaking device with certain limitations.

Which seems to me a bit heavy handed an approach.

As to removing local. Remember if you will that in wh space, the compensation for lack of local is the ability to close gates. For an inkling of the scale of compensating measures that would be on the table if local is to be limited in null-sec.

Also a bad idea.

Cheap, low volume (m3) cloak charges with infrequent reloading needs (once ever 5 hours) is the least intrusive measure CCP can make.

Ideally of a type similar to link bursts being introduced in November. Standarization being the friend of all learning curves.


In sum. Shotgun tactics by small gangs give sufficient attrition in null-sec if afk cloaky camping is nerfed. The biweekly kills at the afk cloaky campers convenience will simply have to be nerfed.

The adverse effects of keeping ratting and mining ships docked up is too detrimental to small gangs that would otherwise be catching some of them.

Human error is a great content provider. If we just allow for mechanisms that let human error take place.

Hi! Long time WH resident here. You might have remembered me from the last time we disagreed in this thread.

Have you ever lived in a WH? You can close roaming WHs, but doing so you're risking either several couple hundred million ISK battleships or risking an orca, so more risk than null ratters have. Additionally, you get static holes to critical, you don't close them completely, since a new one will simply open.

You can get the mass of a HIC down to frigate size if you know what you're doing, so a small group of frigs and a HIC can still get through a critical mass WH, which is still extremely dangerous. Especially with WH effects. The only way to be 100% safe in WHs is to crit each hole, have a bubble and an insta-locking ship on every incoming WH, and drop everything you are doing to scan every time a new sig pops up. If null ratters payed that much attention the AFK cloaker could never get into the system to AFK cloak in the first place.

One of the biggest problem with null in my opinion is people try to hold more space than they can defend. If you don't have 10-15 active players in EVERY system you own 24/7, you have too much space. With those kind of numbers, AFK cloakers are a non-issue.

Ratpack
Doubtless the reopening closed gates counter-play would be part of any removal of local discussion. But that is of course a discussion for a different thread. A thread involving entosis links no doubt. Local turns off along with a gate in a system when you entosis it (allowing for entry by cyno, log-off trap relogging, or other gates). For an example of the measure of magnitude you are looking at when wanting to remove local.

As pointed out repeatedly, afk cloaky camping is not a counter to local. If there had been, then you would see it done in high sec.

Afk cloaky camping may be percieved as a counter to something else (for example a counter to extreme isk/hr expectations).

And in system xx-yy3, 0 rats died. Ships docked is a huge problem! We can randomly cite anectdotal evidence to the cows come home if you like. Hell, I can even use dotlan next time if you like. Though invented systems give anectdotal evidence all the weight it deserves.

It remains true that small gangs need undocked ships to shotgun. Afk cloaky campers rooster-block the effectiveness of shotgun tactics by keeping ships docked and seriously degrading target density.

Human error is a premier content provider. But only if ships are undocked.

Re irony meter: That which is broken cannot break.

Confirming you have never spent in WHs. Give me any J-sig and I can will find a route then in no time. It's very easy to find a specific WH.

...no **** mwds help. Even with a higgs rigged BS and going through hot, it takes a half dozen passes to close a WH (assuming it's not a C1, in whih case it takes forever...) which means you have a 300 million ISK ship that's not fit for combat on field for a long time. Which mean you have a standing defense fleet to rescue it as you work. If every ratter in null had a standing defense fleet when doing dangerous things, AFK cloaking wouldn't be a big deal.

What percent if the time when you're ratting are you personally in a standing fleet and on comms? Hopefully that answer is not less than 100%

You seemed to ignore my point completely. WHs stay safe by preventing hostiles from getting in the system in the first place. . That's something people in null can do now. How did that AFK cloaker get into your system? Why didn't you catch him on a gate when he first jumped in?