These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#7901 - 2016-12-04 15:23:55 UTC
doesn't stop covert cyno tho (for clarity's sake)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#7902 - 2016-12-04 15:27:31 UTC
Brokk Witgenstein wrote:
doesn't stop covert cyno tho (for clarity's sake)


True
Prince Kobol
#7903 - 2016-12-04 16:01:11 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Deployable cyno jammer 100km range 2 min to activate and lasts an hour before self destructing.


I which case I see no problem with Cyno's then. I retract my earlier statement about Cyno's needed to be looked at.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#7904 - 2016-12-04 16:53:35 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Deployable cyno jammer 100km range 2 min to activate and lasts an hour before self destructing.


I which case I see no problem with Cyno's then. I retract my earlier statement about Cyno's needed to be looked at.


But I don't retract it, because the sudden application of overwhelming force is just too easy and AFK cloaky camping is part of that attitude.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#7905 - 2016-12-04 16:59:51 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Dracvlad wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Deployable cyno jammer 100km range 2 min to activate and lasts an hour before self destructing.


I which case I see no problem with Cyno's then. I retract my earlier statement about Cyno's needed to be looked at.


But I don't retract it, because the sudden application of overwhelming force is just too easy and AFK cloaky camping is part of that attitude.


Well, how else are you going to kill a bunch of rorquals? Warp the dreads in via gates?

Equally, are defense fleet going to use gates to "hurry" their titans to the defense of a carrier?
Prince Kobol
#7906 - 2016-12-04 17:11:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
Dracvlad wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Deployable cyno jammer 100km range 2 min to activate and lasts an hour before self destructing.


I which case I see no problem with Cyno's then. I retract my earlier statement about Cyno's needed to be looked at.


But I don't retract it, because the sudden application of overwhelming force is just too easy and AFK cloaky camping is part of that attitude.



Well it isn't. With the correct use of the mobile cyno inhib you can effectively create a bubble to stop all but covert op ships from coming in.

There are ways to counter which I am fine with. It is down to the individual/group to come up with ways using the tools which have been provided with to come up with an effective counter, or a counter where, sure we will lose ship but will we take yours with us.

If I had a choice between losing a something like a redeemer or hulk, I would chose a hulk all day long :)

There are so many different ways / ships that can counter a covert ops fleet its untrue. The problem is people seem to have this notion that they should have a right to be able to field huge mining fleet with ships worth billions or rat, run anons in all but near safety without having to take any precautions.

People have become used to it, it is the norm.

Null should be a dangerous place to live, it should require teamwork, it should mean having to think and defend things such as mining fleets.

As I have said, I have lived in null in a small alliance where we had to depend on others for protection against larger forces. We accepted there were thing we could not do, we didn't demand change, we sough out ways to live, earn isk and fight in our way and it worked for a while.

I have also been part of one of the large null blocks and truth be told, I found very boring, so much so it was one the main reason why I quit Eve.

I didn't enjoy being told when to fight, what to fight with, who to fight and I especially didn't enjoy the near perfect safety that I could rat, run anons because I had the vast real time intel system, defence fleets and cyno jammed systems at my disposal.

It was boring.

As I have said previously, something which Baltec1 didn't appear to have a problem with, introduce a mechanic such as some sort of probe which allows the location of a cloaked ship to be narrowed down and then maybe some kind of new bomb with a radius of 100km which will temporary disable a cloak but do nothing else.

This will ensure that the cloaked pilot has to be active. I am sure that a active cloaked pilot will able to evade such tools, but it means he has to be always on the move and thus opens the possibility of a mistake being made.

Here we have a 2 way interaction and people can chose to be either reactive or proactive.

There have been some great ideas which results in players interacting with each other, allows players to be proactive.

However this would have to be done in conjunction to changes being made to local. It is just too damn powerful of an intel tool.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#7907 - 2016-12-04 17:18:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
baltec1 wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Deployable cyno jammer 100km range 2 min to activate and lasts an hour before self destructing.


I which case I see no problem with Cyno's then. I retract my earlier statement about Cyno's needed to be looked at.


But I don't retract it, because the sudden application of overwhelming force is just too easy and AFK cloaky camping is part of that attitude.


Well, how else are you going to kill a bunch of rorquals? Warp the dreads in via gates?

Equally, are defense fleet going to use gates to "hurry" their titans to the defense of a carrier?


If I was designing this game I would make it so jump capable cap ships could only jump to Citadels that have the cyno gen and remove that ability from ships, so yes they can move through gates to their final target. It means that conflict between major powers becomes very focused on forward operating bases and the like, then we could have the long range back and no fatigue and more interesting campaign battles.

BLOP's is more of an issue, the ability to jump to covert cyno arrays is one way to do it, but personally I would remove hot drops.

I would expect that is too radical for you old players..., but with this I would happily wave good bye to local and all that other free intel on the map too.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#7908 - 2016-12-04 17:21:45 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Deployable cyno jammer 100km range 2 min to activate and lasts an hour before self destructing.


I which case I see no problem with Cyno's then. I retract my earlier statement about Cyno's needed to be looked at.


But I don't retract it, because the sudden application of overwhelming force is just too easy and AFK cloaky camping is part of that attitude.



Well it isn't. With the correct use of the mobile cyno inhib you can effectively create a bubble to stop all but covert op ships from coming in.

There are ways to counter which I am fine with. It is down to the individual/group to come up with ways using the tools which have been provided with to come up with an effective counter, or a counter where, sure we will lose ship but will we take yours with us.

If I had a choice between losing a something like a redeemer or hulk, I would chose a hulk all day long :)

As I have said previously, something which Baltec1 didn't appear to have a problem with, introduce a mechanic such some sort of probe which allow the location of a cloaked ship to be narrowed down and then maybe some kind of new bomb with a radius of 100km which will temporary disable a cloak but do nothing else.

This will ensure that the cloaked pilot has to be active. I am sure that a active cloaked pilot will able to evade such tools, but it means he has to be always on the move and thus opens the possibility of a mistake being made.

Here we have a 2 way interaction and people can chose to be either reactive or proactive.

However this would have to be done in conjunction to changes being made to local.



I suggested that the OA local is best and in that case those players have to fit a module to impact local reporting, how does that work for you?

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Prince Kobol
#7909 - 2016-12-04 17:25:04 UTC
Dracvlad wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Deployable cyno jammer 100km range 2 min to activate and lasts an hour before self destructing.


I which case I see no problem with Cyno's then. I retract my earlier statement about Cyno's needed to be looked at.


But I don't retract it, because the sudden application of overwhelming force is just too easy and AFK cloaky camping is part of that attitude.



Well it isn't. With the correct use of the mobile cyno inhib you can effectively create a bubble to stop all but covert op ships from coming in.

There are ways to counter which I am fine with. It is down to the individual/group to come up with ways using the tools which have been provided with to come up with an effective counter, or a counter where, sure we will lose ship but will we take yours with us.

If I had a choice between losing a something like a redeemer or hulk, I would chose a hulk all day long :)

As I have said previously, something which Baltec1 didn't appear to have a problem with, introduce a mechanic such some sort of probe which allow the location of a cloaked ship to be narrowed down and then maybe some kind of new bomb with a radius of 100km which will temporary disable a cloak but do nothing else.

This will ensure that the cloaked pilot has to be active. I am sure that a active cloaked pilot will able to evade such tools, but it means he has to be always on the move and thus opens the possibility of a mistake being made.

Here we have a 2 way interaction and people can chose to be either reactive or proactive.

However this would have to be done in conjunction to changes being made to local.



I suggested that the OA local is best and in that case those players have to fit a module to impact local reporting, how does that work for you?


I am not sure what you mean by QA local.

Fitting a module to your ship I wouldn't be overly happy with.

Perhaps introducing a new class of ship that is designed to gather intel / disrupt that can fly as part of a fleet, that could be something that I could jump on board with.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#7910 - 2016-12-04 17:59:41 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:


I am not sure what you mean by QA local.

Fitting a module to your ship I wouldn't be overly happy with.

Perhaps introducing a new class of ship that is designed to gather intel / disrupt that can fly as part of a fleet, that could be something that I could jump on board with.


He wants local to be provided via a structure, it would still be instant intel like we have today.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#7911 - 2016-12-04 18:04:46 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
Dracvlad wrote:


I suggested that the OA local is best and in that case those players have to fit a module to impact local reporting, how does that work for you?


I am not sure what you mean by QA local.

Fitting a module to your ship I wouldn't be overly happy with.

Perhaps introducing a new class of ship that is designed to gather intel / disrupt that can fly as part of a fleet, that could be something that I could jump on board with.


OA is a structure.

There has to be a cost and the module created a compromise on fitting, you want the effect fit for it, a specific ship would do the same thing so would work for me.

When the going gets tough the Gankers get their CSM rep to change mechanics in their favour.

Blocked: Teckos Pech, Sonya Corvinus, baltec1, Shae Tadaruwa, Wander Prian, Daichi Yamato, Jonah Gravenstein, Merin Ryskin, Linus Gorp

Prince Kobol
#7912 - 2016-12-04 18:10:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
baltec1 wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:


I am not sure what you mean by QA local.

Fitting a module to your ship I wouldn't be overly happy with.

Perhaps introducing a new class of ship that is designed to gather intel / disrupt that can fly as part of a fleet, that could be something that I could jump on board with.


He wants local to be provided via a structure, it would still be instant intel like we have today.



Okay, I mean it is something I have suggested in the past but I am aware of the downsides, it is far from a perfect idea.

I mean another structure to bash.. urgh.

Then as you say, if that structure basically replicated local as it is now then there is not much point.

There has to be a better alternative then adding another structure.

The more I think about using a structure the more I think it isn't a great idea, the main reason being it is most likely only going to effect that system which in the grand scheme of things is pretty useless.

I like the idea having no local in NPC Null. I like the idea of Sov holding space having local but it be delayed by default by x minutes.

I am not sure what method you would put in place in order to decrease that delay, I feel that would be important, just don't like the idea of tying it to a structure thou.

tricky one.

The whole having a new class of ship that can disrupt local could be interesting to play with. Shouldn't be too hard to implement, be interesting to see what people would do with such a ship.

I suppose the next issue would be D-Scan :)
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#7913 - 2016-12-04 18:35:13 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:


Okay, I mean it is something I have suggested in the past but I am aware of the downsides, it is far from a perfect idea.

I mean another structure to bash.. urgh.

Then as you say, if that structure basically replicated local as it is now then there is not much point.

There has to be a better alternative then adding another structure.

The more I think about using a structure the more I think it isn't a great idea, the main reason being it is most likely only going to effect that system which in the grand scheme of things is pretty useless.

I like the idea having no local in NPC Null. I like the idea of Sov holding space having local but it be delayed by default by x minutes.

I am not sure what method you would put in place in order to decrease that delay, I feel that would be important, just don't like the idea of tying it to a structure thou.

tricky one.

The whole having a new class of ship that can disrupt local could be interesting to play with. Shouldn't be too hard to implement, be interesting to see what people would do with such a ship.

I suppose the next issue would be D-Scan :)


Problem with that ship is you can track its movements simply by watching local get snuffed out
Xcom
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7914 - 2016-12-04 21:04:21 UTC
Don't worry boys I know how to fix this. Lets remove local and see what will happen. I also suggest that if s**t hits the fan and everyone moves into empire we should man the f**k up and keep the local change cause HTFU. Lets go into every thread on this forum and spam this s**t till it happens mkay. Including the cloaking thread.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#7915 - 2016-12-04 21:22:52 UTC
Xcom wrote:
Don't worry boys I know how to fix this. Lets remove local and see what will happen. I also suggest that if s**t hits the fan and everyone moves into empire we should man the f**k up and keep the local change cause HTFU. Lets go into every thread on this forum and spam this s**t till it happens mkay. Including the cloaking thread.


Said the guy bitching about a ship that cant move, cant target and has nobody behind the controls.
Xcom
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#7916 - 2016-12-04 21:33:20 UTC
STFU I'm an anti local fan now, fully support its removal cause why not. Lets remove the thing and see what happens. I'm sure nothing will go wrong.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#7917 - 2016-12-04 22:22:59 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Xcom wrote:
LOL rekt

baltec1 just wants spontaneous death to ratters, as if it was a great solution to riskless farming. But noone is stupid enough to rat with AFK cloakers so they use the next system over tactic. Who in there right mind thinks its a good game mechanic to have invisible attackers coming out of cloak right on top of you and blapping you. Even worse for the active roaming gang tactics are a waste of effort because you can put in a tenth the effort to catch idiots who rat or farm with a cloaky in system.

Nothing about AFK cloaking is good for anything to anyone. It reduces activity in a very targeted system. It makes the game a chore and really s**ty when you have try hards camping. PvPers activity is reduced because system renters can earn income to support there pvp activity. Content is reduced from the game in all aspects. Its a giant hole that leeks game content for anyone involved, even for the AFK cloakers themselfs. What kind of mindset is needed to tryhard for a kill, is that kind of pvp even constructive and thrilling? Do they have fun logging for all those hours to just get one kill?

If AFK cloaking disappeared you could still log out in the targeted system then catch people in belts getting around the so called "intel network" by logging in. But the same idiots who want AFK cloaking also want there incursions to enemy space risk free. The problem is logging out with safety after stirring up the hornets nest so they want a way to get around that with cloaks.


The second you log in they warp off because you show up in local before you finish loading into the system.


Wow, it is like some people do not understand how the game, and in particular local, work.

"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
#7918 - 2016-12-04 22:24:11 UTC
Xcom wrote:

WTF am I reading hahaha. You want people to just role over and die?


Nobody wants this at all. This is just errant dishonest nonsense and you spew it because you can't put forward a well thought out and logical argument.

"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
#7919 - 2016-12-04 22:27:51 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
What we have at the moment is two sides of the argument trying to score points of each other and refusing to try and meet in the middle.

I can see both sides of the argument having been on both sides.

I look at it this way. Any mechanic where me as a player can not counter another player without waiting for them to make a mistake or an action needs looking at. Basically any action were you can only react to an event.

So with local, until that player has bad luck or derps there is nothing I can do. I can not force him to fight, I can not force him to even move. I can only react, there is nothing I do proactively.


Fixed it for you.

Your attempt at the middle ground failed in that you failed to take into account that the very same arguments one marshals against AFK cloaking apply pretty much towards local. Further, it is totally obvious and logical that with no local no AFK cloaking (there is no point to it).

The middle ground is to....nerf local and cloaks.

"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
#7920 - 2016-12-04 22:31:49 UTC
Prince Kobol wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Quote:


Remove cyno's I am game.


Both sides can use them and removing them will help attackers more than defenders.


I would possibly look at if a cyno's is active another one could not be activated within a certain radius.. maybe 100km or something. Just a quick thought


Tell you what go try and catch a carrier ratting and Delve and see what happens. My guess is that carrier will light a cyno and you'll get 5 carriers, a couple of supers and a poop load of sub capitals dropped on your head in short order.

There is a reason that there are so many rats killed in Delve and so much high end mins and ore coming out of Delve. The only way to stop it is to take their space, but good luck doing that without IWI's isk.

"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