These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#7521 - 2016-11-12 11:39:27 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
"Last I checked..."
Anything that increases undock frequencies makes null-sec less safe.

Nothing is as safe as being docked save afk cloaky camping.

Anyone who thinks docked ships in afk cloaky camped systems is good needs to HTFU.

"Does anyone..."

The thread has a cyclic pattern.


Just one little problem with that plan of yours.

Since the nullbears still see the guy in local and cannot be sure what he is doing, the whining will continue and players will stay docked. Also due to intel-channels and local, you will still get the exact same amount of kills.

Your fix changes nothing

Wormholer for life.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7522 - 2016-11-12 11:53:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
Oh Gawd. Functional literacy. So important. So undervalued.

Again:

A 5 hour timers gives afk cloaky campers the choice of logging off, or risking that they might not be back in time to reload the cloak module.

Content points:

Afk cloaky camper logs off - PvE content
PvE players react appropriately to hostile entry in system - Pvp content
PVE players fail to react appropriately when hostile enter system - Pvp content
5 hour, 10 hour, 15, hour 20 hour - players can attempt to probe system to find decloaked camper - Pvp content (probing)
Afk cloaky camper decloaked due to inactivity and probbed down - Pvp content
Afk cloaky camper traps probbing players by feigning timer decloak, then bloping inwarping probers - Pvp content

In addition to the current

afk cloaky camper waits until habituation causes players to undock while afk cloaky camper is in system. Biweekly PvP content.

This is not exactly rocket science. I wait with bated breath for your regurgitation of invalid counterarguments.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#7523 - 2016-11-12 13:27:14 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Oh Gawd. Functional literacy. So important. So undervalued.

Again:

A 5 hour timers gives afk cloaky campers the choice of logging off, or risking that they might not be back in time to reload the cloak module.

Content points:

Afk cloaky camper logs off - PvE content
PvE players react appropriately to hostile entry in system - Pvp content
PVE players fail to react appropriately when hostile enter system - Pvp content
5 hour, 10 hour, 15, hour 20 hour - players can attempt to probe system to find decloaked camper - Pvp content (probing)
Afk cloaky camper decloaked due to inactivity and probbed down - Pvp content
Afk cloaky camper traps probbing players by feigning timer decloak, then bloping inwarping probers - Pvp content

In addition to the current

afk cloaky camper waits until habituation causes players to undock while afk cloaky camper is in system. Biweekly PvP content.

This is not exactly rocket science. I wait with bated breath for your regurgitation of invalid counterarguments.


There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. I've so far been able to understand your poorly supported ideas, your constant insults and dismissive attitude toward other people in the thread as well as your inability to see things from any other point of view except your own.
Your points have been proven wrong by many different people in this thread, myself included, but you keep pushing the same piece of bullshit as it is the gospel and the only truth.

The flaw in your idea comes from the fact that you expect players to act certain way, while it's been shown by their current behavior that they won't do what you think. The carebears won't act any differently even with the cloak-fuel. They will still complain it's too much. They will still dock up before you can catch them, because local and intel-channels will alert them before you even get near them.

As long as local gives free intel, AFK-cloaking is needed. When the intel is changed, we can start to talk about changing cloaks to stop AFK-cloaking.

If you are not at the computer, you cannot do anything in-game. It's your own fear that keeps you from doing things, nothing else. Grow a pair.

Wormholer for life.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7524 - 2016-11-12 13:59:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
You are doing a poor job of demonstrating reading comprehension. But I worry more about your reading retention.

I have no issue with something better than local giving free and comprehensive information to individual players for as long as that information system is not a corporate monopoly.

Players who dislike local as a source of real time information n can always live in wormhole space. CCP has created a niche environment with limitations of that type for players who like it (or liked it until Goons steamrolled their ecosystems into oblivium. Content events on a massive scale pending:).

I have been quite clear that my modest, least intrusive suggestion is far from the only measure CCP can embrace. In fact, my expectation is that CCP intervention will be far, far more intrusive. Nor have I ignored relevant feedback. The entrenched horseoffal you keep repeating is however not relevant feedback. Not that I ever tire of dismissing it of course.

Players screw up. Which will give more kills. I have 0 expectations of changing player nature, but great expectations of the number of screw ups being a function of undocked ships. More ships undocked, more screw ups.

But content is not limited to pvp that generates kills. Everyone knows that. Quality gate crashing is one example of no kill content. Managing to get to safety before a shotgunning gang can catch you is also content for both parties. Player interaction does not have to take place on grid. For as long as it takes place in space (for the purposes of my argument).

If you are not at your computer, you should probably not be undocked. That is true for all decent playing styles except

Enduring afk cloaky camping.

It must end.

Because content.

Stop cockblocking, bro. Grow a pair.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#7525 - 2016-11-12 15:01:05 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
You are doing a poor job of demonstrating reading comprehension. But I worry more about your reading retention.

I have no issue with something better than local giving free and comprehensive information to individual players for as long as that information system is not a corporate monopoly.

Players who dislike local as a source of real time information n can always live in wormhole space. CCP has created a niche environment with limitations of that type for players who like it (or liked it until Goons steamrolled their ecosystems into oblivium. Content events on a massive scale pending:).

I have been quite clear that my modest, least intrusive suggestion is far from the only measure CCP can embrace. In fact, my expectation is that CCP intervention will be far, far more intrusive. Nor have I ignored relevant feedback. The entrenched horseoffal you keep repeating is however not relevant feedback. Not that I ever tire of dismissing it of course.

Players screw up. Which will give more kills. I have 0 expectations of changing player nature, but great expectations of the number of screw ups being a function of undocked ships. More ships undocked, more screw ups.

But content is not limited to pvp that generates kills. Everyone knows that. Quality gate crashing is one example of no kill content. Managing to get to safety before a shotgunning gang can catch you is also content for both parties. Player interaction does not have to take place on grid. For as long as it takes place in space (for the purposes of my argument).

If you are not at your computer, you should probably not be undocked. That is true for all decent playing styles except

Enduring afk cloaky camping.

It must end.

Because content.

Stop cockblocking, bro. Grow a pair.



https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=491023&find=unread

"
* In most cases, the only way to be 100% safe from aggression inside the game is to be docked in a station. Being cloaked in a secret safespot could work too. "

Wormholer for life.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7526 - 2016-11-12 15:40:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
You reposted a link I already dismissed that had absolutely no relevance to the passage you quoted.

You might as well have linked to a picture of a kitten.

You are underlining the concern I have about the state of your functional literacy.

Again:

"could" is conditional. It could work. It could not work. Who knows?

And it is incorrect. A player cloaked at a secret safespot is not 100% safe. One misclick and the ship bumps a station. The secret safespot may not be secure.

The only way to be 100% safe in space is to be afk cloaky camped (and non stationary - slowboat rolling safe). It is important to remove human error as a factor if you want to be safe.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#7527 - 2016-11-12 16:49:53 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
You reposted a link I already dismissed that had absolutely no relevance to the passage you quoted.

You might as well have linked to a picture of a kitten.

You are underlining the concern I have about the state of your functional literacy.

Again:

"could" is conditional. It could work. It could not work. Who knows?

And it is incorrect. A player cloaked at a secret safespot is not 100% safe. One misclick and the ship bumps a station. The secret safespot may not be secure.

The only way to be 100% safe in space is to be afk cloaky camped (and non stationary - slowboat rolling safe). It is important to remove human error as a factor if you want to be safe.


If the person in a safespot is mostly safe, but not completely, then why isn't the person who is at a safespot and not at his keyboard also not completely safe? You are somehow forgetting that the person in a safespot is not the only one in the game. Someone else COULD find themselves in the same safe and decloak the ship. Wouldn't it then be more likely that the person who is AFK dies? Wouldn't that make the person who is in a safe and on his keyboard be less likely to die and then be more safe?

As you said, cloaked in a safespot COULD be safe. The human element that brings the danger may not be self-inflicted. That's the beauty of Eve. Everyone else is a potential threat.

But you know, this is all hypothetical, as is your idea and reasoning for it.

Wormholer for life.
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#7528 - 2016-11-12 18:34:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Sonya Corvinus
Jerghul wrote:
Nah, its off-peak time. So nothing to do in null-sec that I have not already taken care of. Besides cloaky camp. But I could post her and do that at the same time (which coincides with a nice selection bias in this thread. You can say what you want about afk cloaky campers, but they do have enough time on their hands to whine on and on and on about how their lifestyle deserves special protection).

My ranking is actually pretty decent. Which illustrates quite firmly how disasterously afk cloaky camping kills content.

The level of your being wrong is laughable. So of course I will laugh when the afk cloaky camping nerf comes to pass. It may not be my 5 hour timer tweak. It will probably be something far more intrusive.

afk cloaky camping kills content

So will be fixed.

Deal with it and HTFU.


Your ranking is decent?

You have killed maybe 1 or 2 people per month since you started the game. You're nothing but a carebear. You don't PvP.

Wait, I forgot. You can't get kills because of cloaky campers, not because you don't PvP. If I'm wrong I assume we will all see a dozen or so more kills on your KB by the end of the weekend.

If I see that, I'll say publicly that I've been wrong this whole time and you have been right. The ball is in your court.

Or, you know, stop trolling and get back to your PvE, you nullbear
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7529 - 2016-11-12 19:04:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
"would it not be more likely...."

No.

But thank you for sharing how little you understand this game.

"You ranking is...."

OMG. At least have the courage of your convictions. HTFU.

================

Edit
Against my better judgement and just because it worked out this way last fleet:

Bounty payment
From: CONCORD
Sent: 2016.11.12 19:54

For your termination of xxxx we have paid you 6 008,35 ISK from their bounty pool.

From: CONCORD
Sent: 2016.11.12 19:34

For your termination of xxxx we have paid you 77 511,03 ISK from their bounty pool.


================

Stunningly, it looks like being an F1 monkey is not the only thing people do in fleets.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#7530 - 2016-11-12 21:00:09 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
OMG. At least have the courage of your convictions. HTFU.


Agreed. You're calling for changes for the purposes of PvP. You are not a PvP player. Until you show you actually undock in fleets, your voice holds no weight in changes based on getting into more PvP.

I personally don't PvP much, so I don't call for changes to it. See how that works?

I'm still waiting for you to get a few kills this weekend to prove you're more than talk.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7531 - 2016-11-12 21:11:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
Reading comprehension. Its so important. Try to stop failing at it. It makes you look silly.

I just documented I was in a fleet that got two bounties. And yah, I see that you do not pvp much if you think being an F1 monkey is the only role people have in fleets (I have never bothered to check your z-board, because frankly I don't care what you do or do not do).

I am in the top quintile of most active pvp players even just by using the kill metric from z-boards. The threshold is very low.

afk cloaky camping is by definition not pvp. I am calling for changes to the afk contribution to cloaky camping. Which specifically is not pvp. Worthless git drinking another beer at the pub versus player perhaps. But not player versus player.

And no, it does not work that way. How does CCP staff do on the z-killboards? You know. The developers.

And perhaps try holding your breath and spamming the refresh button on z-boards. There will be more kills there any time now. Just hold your breath and spam that refresh button to see.

And hold that hoop up high. I am sure to jump through it any moment now. Just because you tell me to.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#7532 - 2016-11-12 21:39:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Sonya Corvinus
Jerghul wrote:
I am in the top quintile of most active pvp players even just by using the kill metric from z-boards. The threshold is very low.


No, no you aren't. You have 165 kills in eight years. That puts you squarely at the bottom of the rankings.

Again, when you care to actually start PvPing, let us know and we can start taking you seriously.

Again, stop trolling please.

You want me to take you seriously? Get a dozen kills this weekend that show up on your killboard. Until then? keep on being a nullbear looking for nerfs
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7533 - 2016-11-12 22:05:00 UTC
My ranking is actually listed on z-board. I am in the top quintile of EvE players.

I don't give a rats ass if you take me seriously our not. You are not the choir I am preaching to.

The merits of the agument are independent of F1 button bashing.

Trolling? You say that a lot. Not true. Just because you are frustrated, does not mean you have been trolled.

A null bear looking for nerfs would be looking at a different solution than I am. A 5 hour timer has significant statistical impact on content in null-sec, but would not change day-to-day null-bearing in any significant way.

(I would actually not want any changes to cloaks, and would rather be arguing that insta locking should end and that BRs need a buff. The moon-goo must flow and nanite repair paste must run and all that. The dime and nickel stuff is for younger characters. Barring goon style industrial organization of ratting of course).

So read my lips:

I don't care what you think beyond what limited feed back of value you might provide. I read your posts carefully enough on the off-chance there might be some actual content.

Even a blind hen finds grain occassionally.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#7534 - 2016-11-12 23:09:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Sonya Corvinus
Jerghul wrote:
My ranking is actually listed on z-board. I am in the top quintile of EvE players.


A player who killed one person and never shot anyone again would be in the top quintile by your ranking. You never actually PvP. You've shot maybe two people per month since you started playing.

You're a nullbear. Nothing wrong with that, but be realistic. If you need to think differently to stroke your ego, go right ahead, but stop blaming game mechanics for you not getting kills when it's the simple fact that you don't PvP.

You're doing nothing but looking for a way to make your AFK ratting even safer than it is right now. Any actual PvPer would be up in arms against that suggestion. Once you actually have some experience PvPing, you'll understand.

But hey, you can prove me wrong. I'm still going to check your KB on monday and see if you have any more kills. If you have a dozen more, I won't reply to this thread again. Stop talking and actually back up what you say.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7535 - 2016-11-12 23:45:26 UTC
What hyperbole. Borderline hysteria even.

And yet, I am in the top quintile my total number of kills places me there. Its a low threshold. Which is in part the fault of afk cloaky camping.

There are lots of ways to pvp that does not show up on any killboard. I was party to two kills today. Meaning I was in the same systems in the same fleet that killed two players that had bounties (I posted the concord emails earlier). How could that possibly have happened? What roles could I possibly have been doing?

I am looking to make ratting less safe than it is now by increasing the number of ships that actually undock.

Because content.

You don't get it, so assume malice and ulterior motives. Which is always a mistake. At least have the common cognition to assume stupidity.

Stupidity is usually the case when people don't get it. I should know.

I have been dealing with the non-malice thingy for 100ds and 100ds of posts.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#7536 - 2016-11-13 00:06:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Sonya Corvinus
Jerghul wrote:
What hyperbole. Borderline hysteria even.

And yet, I am in the top quintile my total number of kills places me there. Its a low threshold. Which is in part the fault of afk cloaky camping.


Talk is cheap. Actions are not. Prove to us that you're an actual PvP player and can get more than one or two fights per month. Until then, cheers.

Still waiting to see more kills on your KB this weekend. Until that happens, well...keep trying nullbear (given 100% of your suggestions do nothing but make ratting safer than it already is in sov null)
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7537 - 2016-11-13 00:54:56 UTC
lulz@the "make mommy proud Honey Boo-Boo" school of debating techniques.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#7538 - 2016-11-13 00:59:31 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
lulz@the "make mommy proud Honey Boo-Boo" school of debating techniques.


It's still miles ahead of yours.

Wormholer for life.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7539 - 2016-11-13 01:16:41 UTC
My techniques are actually very dynamic and quite sophisticated (within reason. This is not a scholarly paper after all).

But I respect your right to not see that.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#7540 - 2016-11-13 01:27:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Wander Prian
Jerghul wrote:
My techniques are actually very dynamic and quite sophisticated (within reason. This is not a scholarly paper after all).

But I respect your right to not see that.


Your "technique" is ignoring any points when they disagree with yours

Wormholer for life.