Player Features and Ideas Discussion

In a parenthesis noted, my dear friend. We shall see if there is a major chinese influx. But that is for the future.

I am more than happy to accept that the pending chinese server closure is neither pertinent, nor germaine.

Ratpack
Why shucks, bro. Thank you!

Omnathious
Indeed. It is quite convenient.

I love the contradictions that are inherent in Brokk'sposts that he is unaware of. AFK cloaking keeps up number, AFK cloaking suppresses numbers.

It is hilariously obvious, one AFK cloakers will keep anywhere from 1 to many players from playing and thus logging off....but that one guy in space will compensate for that. But then again...when you are have a posting main and alt and are trying to create two separate personalities it does require quite alot.

Just call him Brokk, it is simpler.

Link

Link

Brokk, you outed yourself in that link. But well played. I've been aware of your game from pretty much that day.

Ratpack
Anyway, now that you have convinced yourself of a forum trinity Jerghul-Brok-Olivia - praised be their/its name(s), perhaps we can shift back to on topic?

12 hour cloak capacity is not aligned with burst charge capacity. I think CCP put some thought into why the new link system should last for 5 hours without needing direct player input (so could be run afk) instead of say 1 hour, or 12 hours.

So I am running with that.

It is always good to emulate people who know stuff when information is limited.

There is no real contradiction with accepting chronic loss in player retention (bleed-offs of players frustrated with the afk cloaky camping mechanics as is, and who log on less, then stop logging on at all) and not wanting catastrophic drops in server activity (I would be hard pressed to quantify this presicely, but introducing cloak charges would certainly see 100ds of less players online. In that order of magnitude. Simply because people have lives and cannot check EvE every 5 hours all the time).

This is a big number thing, so its ok if you cannot or don't want to get it.

Dude. He ain't me, although I could pull off a Jerghul if I really set my mind to it.

You may find some contradictory elements in there, because I allow my point of view to be influenced by other posters-- if they're right, they're right. And also because I try to discern the true motivation behind them. I don't buy all the 'intrinsic psychological effect' bullcrap. Never have, never will. I don't like to find every ratter docked everywhere we go, and I do believe standing fleets are necessary for accurate intel and protection- which is not a contradiction by the way since standing fleets do offer fights.

But my perspective did shift away from "everything is fine" when Baltec started arguing AFK cloaking must exist. Couldn't believe what I saw- made a nice post about it, which got ignored. There is a big difference between accepting AFK cloaking as a temporary evil (and tabling the discussion until more details are released concerning the OA), and advocating it as a good thing.

I'm the one who always said I don't care if you're AFK or not-- whatever happens to your ship when you're not there is calculated risk as far as I'm concerned.

Then there's you and Baltec, always harping on and on and on about gankers and freighters -- more specifically "stupid, impudent" AFK miners and autopiloting freighters. Got so tired of reading the same drivel over and over again I just blocked the both of you; "muh Hulkageddon" and "risk seeking freighters" -- yeah yeah got it, didn't need to repost 400 times in every thread. Ergo: blocked.

Now, unlike me, you *cannot* claim to not care about AFK; you condemn it at every turn. So don't start advocating that an AFK cloaker is indeed a highly valued playstyle that must not be nerfed in favour of ATK players. Please? When the trolling gets too thick I simply lay back with a bucket of popcorn and look for something sensible to come out of it.

So you see, I DID listen to all arguments presented but I also took into account who posted them. While at first I was opposed to cloakcampers (because I like to shoot all the things), I learnt to accept their existence because I'm even more opposed to entitled ratbears. Whatever is going on these last 10 pages does not concern me-- I've probably learnt all there was to learn for this thread; but to my surprise, Jerghul argues in favour of fights! Woohoo, bless you son. Other than that it's still same old Jerghul and I'm still very much me.

I don't know what you and Baltec were arguing (because blocked) probably still the same post over and over again but until I got dragged in there somehow, I didn't feel a need to respond to any of it. He's legit alright. The one and only Jerghul.

Dude/Jerghul, you were posting exactly like Brokk with those "points". Mike also picked up on it. You can just hang it up now and post with one character...if anyone still wants to consider your point of view...seems like most have lost interest at this point though...tends to be a problem when using sock puppets.

Couldn't figure it out at first either. The Like Button disappears due to adblock (the more you know ... ;-)

As for cloaks in general, I feel there's a lot of untapped potential in them. Risk-free ratting (or risk-free anything in fact) is a big nope, but as soon as CCP releases some of their new intel structures I suspect a devblog detailing counter-cloaking won't be far behind.

The way the wind blows, destructible citadels, on-grid boosts, rorqs in belts, they're going places. More things to shoot, more things to interact with. No more sitting safe behind POS shields-- and following that train of thought, the days of 24/7 safety hiding under a cloak are numbered.

Hence why I prefer thinking about potential change rather than denying it's coming. My guess would be it'll be something along the lines of (1) delayed local chat with the option to subvert intel by patching into the intel network nextdoor, coupled with (2) sonar probing. It'd make cloaked ships (and roaming gang who came prepared) invisible rather than invincible, and would probably result in more deaths on either side.

Eternal blueballing is not particularly enjoyable for the 'potential targets' and the other guy is having such a good time he can't even be bothered to actually play the darn game. So, I suspect they'll get around to changing that. Eventually. Some day. Soon (tm) LOL

Loading charges in a cloaking device, especially a 5 hour count, would suffice for most playsessions but if you're unlucky and you have about three hours in the evening to play you may still find yourself in the company of a character that cannot be interacted with. Some have argued out of fear, uncertainty, lazyness or entitlement -- I have little compassion for those. Others put emphasis on skirmishes and counter-espionnage... and that's what we need more of imho.

Let's just hope we can get a less cheesy 'counter to local'. Some of the textbook tricks will have to adapt, but I too doubt it'd be the End of EvE.

That said ... back into lurker mode I go. Keep the ideas coming! o7