These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8141 - 2016-12-15 01:57:05 UTC
There is incentive to pvp in null-sec. Its just inconvenient for casual roamers to find vulnerable assets and to fit ships appropriately in order to trigger combat.

Null-sec is designed around the concept of peak times. When defence has to take place, or control of space becomes degraded.

Its actually more of a problem that would be attackers can extract themselves too easily from pending combat situations if they believe the odds to not favour them. Seen most succinctly with cynos as the stand off distance ensures absolute safety until the decision to commit, but this is true for smaller roams too.

The solution is more and better real time information.

OAs may fix wormhole space. A good suggestion for there.

Afk cloaky camping is of course resolved by making afk anything in null-sec space consistently prohibitively dangerous.

Afk cloaky camp if you like, but risk losing your ship if you do.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1

Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#8142 - 2016-12-15 04:23:57 UTC
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Q7IaLXRf5I0/VgMBhCM1aAI/AAAAAAAADjo/MINI_wFEA18/s1600/eve.jpg

According to that picture about 15% live out in null. Less then 10 systems get cloak camped so assuming its the most populated systems in null it might add up to about 100-200 players tops at any time. Makes no sense arguing on about null getting easier by AFK cloaking removal. What does make sense is opening a new thread about making null more interesting or join all those discussions on null changes.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#8143 - 2016-12-15 06:05:07 UTC
Xcom wrote:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Q7IaLXRf5I0/VgMBhCM1aAI/AAAAAAAADjo/MINI_wFEA18/s1600/eve.jpg

According to that picture about 15% live out in null. Less then 10 systems get cloak camped so assuming its the most populated systems in null it might add up to about 100-200 players tops at any time. Makes no sense arguing on about null getting easier by AFK cloaking removal. What does make sense is opening a new thread about making null more interesting or join all those discussions on null changes.


The problem is that AFK cloaking removal schemes invariable make ATK cloaking very difficult. You yourself have called for a very sharp nerf to cloaks in general...are you moderating that position?

"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

Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#8144 - 2016-12-15 07:32:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Xcom
If the nerf is subtle enough ATK cloaking will be able to avoid detection. A cloaky can just change position in an instant and avoid anyone attempting to get to them. If they can't or are just bad enough to sit in the same spot for to long then it should be expected for them to die. Cloakys should just be harder to find but not like they are currently, impossible.

Assuming cloaking also impacts bombers and in some rare instances recons getting into position. Generally attacks using said ships take about 10-15 min at most. That should be the rough ballpark of how long it should take for someone to find and attack a cloaked ship sitting in the same exact spot, maybe a few mins + / -. Given that during this time someone would be actively looking and attempting to kill the cloaked ship.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#8145 - 2016-12-15 08:19:43 UTC
Xcom wrote:
If the nerf is subtle enough ATK cloaking will be able to avoid detection. A cloaky can just change position in an instant and avoid anyone attempting to get to them. If they can't or are just bad enough to sit in the same spot for to long then it should be expected for them to die. Cloakys should just be harder to find but not like they are currently, impossible.

Assuming cloaking also impacts bombers and in some rare instances recons getting into position. Generally attacks using said ships take about 10-15 min at most. That should be the rough ballpark of how long it should take for someone to find and attack a cloaked ship sitting in the same exact spot, maybe a few mins + / -. Given that during this time someone would be actively looking and attempting to kill the cloaked ship.


I don't disagree with this...provided we also remove local and move intel into the OA. And I am open to having the OA offer even improvements over the status quo depending on how you fit the OA. For example one fitting option might allow for a network effect. If you have OAs in your current and surrounding systems you can get intel on all those systems. Of course, the trade off might be that you can't scan down cloaked ships.

Is this something you'd be open to as well?

That is an honest question. I get the impression most of us are on the same page in terms of eliminating AFK cloaking provided we can also address why it is done. If we can kill both birds with one stone (the OA) then it will be generally good for the game.

"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

Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#8146 - 2016-12-15 09:20:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Xcom
I think that OA as you describe is sounds really nice. It sounds like a well flushed out idea. But I don't think it fits in with any other space other then sov null. It would break the concept of WS and generally be a clunky mechanic in high and low sec, or even null NPC space. If sov null behaved differently then all other types of space then I totally agree that OA would fit perfectly within its place though.

Maybe make cloaks behave differently in sov null depending on the anchored OA rather then the other way around.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8147 - 2016-12-15 13:10:36 UTC
The OA is a nice idea for wormhole space. It does not need to cover all of wh space either (it could only work in certain catagories of wormhole space).

Basically, if you want to talk about removing local, then you are also talking about removing gates. So why not just add local functions to gateless areas and see if its incredible promise leads to clamouring from nullsec for introduction there?

afk anything in nullsec is bad. So it follows that afk cloaky camping needs to stop.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#8148 - 2016-12-15 15:27:09 UTC
Xcom wrote:
I think that OA as you describe is sounds really nice. It sounds like a well flushed out idea. But I don't think it fits in with any other space other then sov null. It would break the concept of WS and generally be a clunky mechanic in high and low sec, or even null NPC space. If sov null behaved differently then all other types of space then I totally agree that OA would fit perfectly within its place though.

Maybe make cloaks behave differently in sov null depending on the anchored OA rather then the other way around.


I agree. sov null is the only area that has issues with AFK cloaking. It makes sense that an OA can only be anchored if you hold sov. It would definitely break WH space.

Since I know Jerghul is still reading this and trolling the WHers in this thread, I won't bother to respond to his latest attempt to annoy people. I get what he's trying to do, it's just sad...decent trolling has to be subtle enough that it's not obvious what's going on.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8149 - 2016-12-15 16:49:16 UTC
On the stats

For the purposes of undocked activity:

Highsec: 60%
Lowsec:15%
Nullsec: 25%
whspace: 5%

Total greater than 100% due to rounding.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1

Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#8150 - 2016-12-15 16:59:48 UTC
Xcom wrote:
I think that OA as you describe is sounds really nice. It sounds like a well flushed out idea. But I don't think it fits in with any other space other then sov null. It would break the concept of WS and generally be a clunky mechanic in high and low sec, or even null NPC space. If sov null behaved differently then all other types of space then I totally agree that OA would fit perfectly within its place though.

Maybe make cloaks behave differently in sov null depending on the anchored OA rather then the other way around.


I disagree, the issue is that AFK cloaky camping also affects NPC null and lowsec, but both of those can be countered by limiting your activity to running missions which require gates or probing down, belt ratting and anoms are of course just as risky as those in sov null. Two very intense campaigns of cloaky camping that I went through were in Stain.

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

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#8151 - 2016-12-15 17:01:25 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
On the stats

For the purposes of undocked activity:

Highsec: 60%
Lowsec:15%
Nullsec: 25%
whspace: 5%

Total greater than 100% due to rounding.


An elephant's resting heartbeat is 37x slower than that of a canary, as long as we're giving out useless information
Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#8152 - 2016-12-15 17:16:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Xcom
Dracvlad wrote:
Xcom wrote:
I think that OA as you describe is sounds really nice. It sounds like a well flushed out idea. But I don't think it fits in with any other space other then sov null. It would break the concept of WS and generally be a clunky mechanic in high and low sec, or even null NPC space. If sov null behaved differently then all other types of space then I totally agree that OA would fit perfectly within its place though.

Maybe make cloaks behave differently in sov null depending on the anchored OA rather then the other way around.


I disagree, the issue is that AFK cloaky camping also affects NPC null and lowsec, but both of those can be countered by limiting your activity to running missions which require gates or probing down, belt ratting and anoms are of course just as risky as those in sov null. Two very intense campaigns of cloaky camping that I went through were in Stain.

I'm actually referring to this. Cloaky camping in null might make null sov safer so OA is the solution to null sov becoming to safe whiles rest of eve still will suffer from cloaking in general. I don't know if it even makes sense to nerf cloaks in all other types of space other then null sov. I just think cloaking needs nerfed and null sov could have OA somehow tie into real time pvp bait. Cloaked camping might not have to be directly tied into OA in general. Its not like camping ever had any positive attributes to have to stay. With more suttle nerfs to cloaks you could just as well never have to disable any OA structure to cloak in null sov. You would simply disable intel networks and any ship would behave like a cloaked ship and cloaked ships would have the added benefit of being very hard to track down without the intel network disabled, just not impossible.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8153 - 2016-12-16 08:02:29 UTC
Half a trillion isk was destroyed in the null-sec system M-0EE8 quite recently. CCP is opting for the epic ways of making null sec less safe it seems.

The afk cloaky camping makes null sec more safe. That is one of its the huge issues. That which does not undock, cannot be harmed.

Nerfing local would make null sec even safer. Trending towards wormhole levels of safety (wormhole space has 10% the ship losses null sec does).

The correct way to go is to use OA to enhance wormhole space. Which is by any activity measure completely broken.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#8154 - 2016-12-16 16:14:31 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Half a trillion isk was destroyed in the null-sec system M-0EE8 quite recently. CCP is opting for the epic ways of making null sec less safe it seems.

The afk cloaky camping makes null sec more safe. That is one of its the huge issues. That which does not undock, cannot be harmed.

Nerfing local would make null sec even safer. Trending towards wormhole levels of safety (wormhole space has 10% the ship losses null sec does).

The correct way to go is to use OA to enhance wormhole space. Which is by any activity measure completely broken.


gone full blown troll mode now, huh?

1/10, try harder
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#8155 - 2016-12-16 19:39:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Jerghul wrote:
Half a trillion isk was destroyed in the null-sec system M-0EE8 quite recently. CCP is opting for the epic ways of making null sec less safe it seems.

The afk cloaky camping makes null sec more safe. That is one of its the huge issues. That which does not undock, cannot be harmed.

Nerfing local would make null sec even safer. Trending towards wormhole levels of safety (wormhole space has 10% the ship losses null sec does).

The correct way to go is to use OA to enhance wormhole space. Which is by any activity measure completely broken.


gone full blown troll mode now, huh?

1/10, try harder


I suppose in a way he is right....AFK cloaking removing local wold make things so unsafe nobody would play there thus rendering it safe....I guess.

Edit:
OFC is nobody is playing there then going there and ratting and mining would be a veritable gold mine. Obviously the solution is, in game theory terms, a mixed equilibrium. I know for example that Goons would adapt just fine to NS without local and an OA set up. Thee would not be the only ones either.

"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

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#8156 - 2016-12-16 19:46:24 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
I suppose in a way he is right....AFK cloaking removing local wold make things so unsafe nobody would play there thus rendering it safe....I guess.

Edit:
OFC is nobody is playing there then going there and ratting and mining would be a veritable gold mine. Obviously the solution is, in game theory terms, a mixed equilibrium. I know for example that Goons would adapt just fine to NS without local and an OA set up. Thee would not be the only ones either.


I fundamentally disagree that no one would play without local. We would adapt very quickly, and more people would play.

My point in my last few posts is simply to call out Jerghul's childishness. I call for a nerf to local in sov null (where he does his PvE) which makes it more like WHs (a good thing to get more PvP happening), so he calls for a nerf to wormholes in response. It's painfully obvious what he's doing, and I'm not playing his games.

He needs to try harder.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#8157 - 2016-12-16 20:10:56 UTC
Sonya Corvinus wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
I suppose in a way he is right....AFK cloaking removing local wold make things so unsafe nobody would play there thus rendering it safe....I guess.

Edit:
OFC is nobody is playing there then going there and ratting and mining would be a veritable gold mine. Obviously the solution is, in game theory terms, a mixed equilibrium. I know for example that Goons would adapt just fine to NS without local and an OA set up. Thee would not be the only ones either.


I fundamentally disagree that no one would play without local. We would adapt very quickly, and more people would play.


I agree with the first part, the second part I would think depends on what adaptions happen.

Quote:
My point in my last few posts is simply to call out Jerghul's childishness. I call for a nerf to local in sov null (where he does his PvE) which makes it more like WHs (a good thing to get more PvP happening), so he calls for a nerf to wormholes in response. It's painfully obvious what he's doing, and I'm not playing his games.

He needs to try harder.


Maybe he needs a new sock puppet. Smile

"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

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#8158 - 2016-12-16 20:51:10 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
I agree with the first part, the second part I would think depends on what adaptions happen.


It would take some adjustment, but everyone I've dragged from null into WHs has basically said "why didn't I try this sooner?" The only people who would fight it are the people who want risk free mining in null (which I know is a decent amount). I'm not about min/maxing ISK, I'm about decent fights and enjoying the game as a game, not a job, so I know a lot of PvE-ers in null will never agree with my suggestions.

Now I'll wait for Jerghul to read this and propose another nerf to WHs. The ball's in his court Big smile
TEMPO Secheh
Doomheim
#8159 - 2016-12-16 20:57:34 UTC
Please indulge me, whilst I share a few suggestions:

Mobile Signature Override Generator: It's a deployable structure. Once activated, after a few minutes delay it removes every pilot from the local chat channel like in a WH (or it delays local if that's too harsh, you get the idea), reduces the deviation and increases the strenght of all probes so as to being able to scan cloaky ships with the right skills. it is shown system-wide in the overview just like the cynos are, but lasts until it is deactivated by its owner or destroyed.

It can only be deployed in nullsec, just like bubbles. No WHs either because natural phenomenas or another kind of space-magic.

Signature Override Generator: It works like a cyno. It increases the strengh and reduces the deviation of the combat probes of its user. The ship can't move for 5 minutes, it is shown system-wide in the overview, it can only be fitted in certain ships (Cover ops?) but it allows to scan down cloaky ships.

Cloak-override pulse: it throws a big pulse that decloaks every ship on grid after a certain delay. If the cloaker warps out it has no effect.

Thank you.

Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#8160 - 2016-12-16 21:04:52 UTC
TEMPO Secheh wrote:
Please indulge me, whilst I share a few suggestions:

Mobile Signature Override Generator: It's a deployable structure. Once activated, after a few minutes delay it removes every pilot from the local chat channel like in a WH (or it delays local if that's too harsh, you get the idea), reduces the deviation and increases the strenght of all probes so as to being able to scan cloaky ships with the right skills. it is shown system-wide in the overview just like the cynos are, but lasts until it is deactivated by its owner or destroyed.

It can only be deployed in nullsec, just like bubbles. No WHs either because natural phenomenas or another kind of space-magic.

Signature Override Generator: It works like a cyno. It increases the strengh and reduces the deviation of the combat probes of its user. The ship can't move for 5 minutes, it is shown system-wide in the overview, it can only be fitted in certain ships (Cover ops?) but it allows to scan down cloaky ships.

Cloak-override pulse: it throws a big pulse that decloaks every ship on grid after a certain delay. If the cloaker warps out it has no effect.

Thank you.


My stance this entire time is if you have a structure that can remove local (or grant it) in sov null, then you can use it to also try and find cloaked ships. For obvious reasons, sov null only. However that's implemented I am fine with.