These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#8321 - 2017-01-01 01:12:58 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Talking to the hand, bro.

Anyway. I think we have reached a concensus despite this thread's poster selection bias (you can say what you want about people using broken mechanics - be it wormhole space denizens or afk cloaky campers - , but they certainly have enough free time on their hands to post in this thread. That at least is one thing they have going for them).

Afk cloaky camping needs to end now.


You need to learn to play the game first.

Wormholer for life.
Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#8322 - 2017-01-01 15:39:48 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Xcom wrote:

So by your definition the AFK cloaking concept is somehow related to null sec terrorizing? Its interlinked as cloaked ships only should or shouldn't change based on impact they have on other players? I don't know what you have been smoking but AFK cloaking by the accurate definition of the 2 words means going AFK while cloaked. Nothing to do with how it impacts other players.


No, I said local and cloaks should change together, or neither should change. Pick one, not mix and match. Either way you mix or match you create an imbalance.

Quote:
Also in what stupid mindset do you have to have to think that AFK cloaking + null sec terror tactics / camping is a valid and good mechanic. It should be removed, not replaced. This type of mechanic is not constructive for null sec or any other type of space / game play. Just because it is used right now doesn't make it any good and shouldn't take a backseat to any local alterations. Its broken, not justified. Null ratting is not the center keystone of why cloaks shouldn't change.


Because it is NS. It is not supposed to be safe....or more accurately it is only as safe as you make it. If you group together, take sov, have outposts, conquerable stations and put down citadels, etc. Put together an intel channel and so forth, then you can make it safer...via effort. With more effort more safety. When there is the option for something to be player driven or CCP driven, the default option should be player driven.

CCP appears to have forgotten this.

Quote:
Its so narrow minded and idiotic thinking that cloaks shouldn't change until something can replace something as so broken as AFK cloaking + null sec terrorizing. Your bitter old mindset regarding nulls "to safe" makes you really blind to the full scope of the module instead of exploring more options to the area your actually concerned about, null space. If you took the huge stick out of your ass and posted something constructive you might actually come up with an idea that might make the type of space your so bitter about change for the better instead of troll other threads that might even so much as touch null concepts.


Cloaking in general is not broken. AFK cloaking in general is not broken either. It is, I think, arguably sub-optimal, but not broken. Multiple methods to deal with it are available.

Seriously get some buddies, 3 of them. Have them get into procurors and skiffs. Have them tank them, omni tank them. Move them into a mining anomaly or even just a belt. You get into a cloaky nullified T3 and try to take 1...just 1 of them out before they take you out or force you off the field.

The point is that against 3 such mining ships a single cloaking ship is in trouble. Two could probably take out one if he were dumb and off from the other 2.

Funny, the complaint used to be 100s even 1,000s of players went and took sov, and 1 guy! 1 guy!!! Has foiled all the effort of all those people!!!! It is a goddamn travesty!!!

But, you can't rat in a group?

The response is, "What and ruin my ISK/hour!?!?!?!?!?"

Why do you base every argument around null sec? Every mechanic according to you revolves around null. Cloaking is a module and as much as it impacts null it actually isn't based around making null what it is. Null will adapt and have adapted around cloaks. Cloaking though in on its own needs altered, regardless of how null will be impacted.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#8323 - 2017-01-01 16:06:59 UTC
Xcom wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Xcom wrote:

So by your definition the AFK cloaking concept is somehow related to null sec terrorizing? Its interlinked as cloaked ships only should or shouldn't change based on impact they have on other players? I don't know what you have been smoking but AFK cloaking by the accurate definition of the 2 words means going AFK while cloaked. Nothing to do with how it impacts other players.


No, I said local and cloaks should change together, or neither should change. Pick one, not mix and match. Either way you mix or match you create an imbalance.

Quote:
Also in what stupid mindset do you have to have to think that AFK cloaking + null sec terror tactics / camping is a valid and good mechanic. It should be removed, not replaced. This type of mechanic is not constructive for null sec or any other type of space / game play. Just because it is used right now doesn't make it any good and shouldn't take a backseat to any local alterations. Its broken, not justified. Null ratting is not the center keystone of why cloaks shouldn't change.


Because it is NS. It is not supposed to be safe....or more accurately it is only as safe as you make it. If you group together, take sov, have outposts, conquerable stations and put down citadels, etc. Put together an intel channel and so forth, then you can make it safer...via effort. With more effort more safety. When there is the option for something to be player driven or CCP driven, the default option should be player driven.

CCP appears to have forgotten this.

Quote:
Its so narrow minded and idiotic thinking that cloaks shouldn't change until something can replace something as so broken as AFK cloaking + null sec terrorizing. Your bitter old mindset regarding nulls "to safe" makes you really blind to the full scope of the module instead of exploring more options to the area your actually concerned about, null space. If you took the huge stick out of your ass and posted something constructive you might actually come up with an idea that might make the type of space your so bitter about change for the better instead of troll other threads that might even so much as touch null concepts.


Cloaking in general is not broken. AFK cloaking in general is not broken either. It is, I think, arguably sub-optimal, but not broken. Multiple methods to deal with it are available.

Seriously get some buddies, 3 of them. Have them get into procurors and skiffs. Have them tank them, omni tank them. Move them into a mining anomaly or even just a belt. You get into a cloaky nullified T3 and try to take 1...just 1 of them out before they take you out or force you off the field.

The point is that against 3 such mining ships a single cloaking ship is in trouble. Two could probably take out one if he were dumb and off from the other 2.

Funny, the complaint used to be 100s even 1,000s of players went and took sov, and 1 guy! 1 guy!!! Has foiled all the effort of all those people!!!! It is a goddamn travesty!!!

But, you can't rat in a group?

The response is, "What and ruin my ISK/hour!?!?!?!?!?"

Why do you base every argument around null sec? Every mechanic according to you revolves around null. Cloaking is a module and as much as it impacts null it actually isn't based around making null what it is. Null will adapt and have adapted around cloaks. Cloaking though in on its own needs altered, regardless of how null will be impacted.


It's quite simple really. Nullbears are the only ones who have a problem with cloaks.

Wormholer for life.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#8324 - 2017-01-02 00:00:26 UTC
Xcom wrote:

Why do you base every argument around null sec? Every mechanic according to you revolves around null. Cloaking is a module and as much as it impacts null it actually isn't based around making null what it is. Null will adapt and have adapted around cloaks. Cloaking though in on its own needs altered, regardless of how null will be impacted.


You are literally, the only person to complain about cloaks in HS that I know of. Nobody else cares about cloaks outside of NS. Every complaint about cloaks usually boils down to people in sov NS not being able to rat--i.e. AFK cloaking is the complaint. Nothing else.

"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
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#8325 - 2017-01-02 00:08:18 UTC
Wander Prian wrote:
It's quite simple really. Nullbears are the only ones who have a problem with cloaks.

Which is why they don't need changing at all.

The ability to more easily run ratting bots and/or to rat in null in near perfect safety is at the core of why calls for change happen. No one should have a licence to print ISK and cloaky camping is one of the counters to that ability.
Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#8326 - 2017-01-02 03:31:24 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Xcom wrote:

Why do you base every argument around null sec? Every mechanic according to you revolves around null. Cloaking is a module and as much as it impacts null it actually isn't based around making null what it is. Null will adapt and have adapted around cloaks. Cloaking though in on its own needs altered, regardless of how null will be impacted.


You are literally, the only person to complain about cloaks in HS that I know of. Nobody else cares about cloaks outside of NS. Every complaint about cloaks usually boils down to people in sov NS not being able to rat--i.e. AFK cloaking is the complaint. Nothing else.

Its not about complaints from players that drive updates. Every aspect should be balanced according to its own. Mechanics shouldn't be kept around just to serve other mechanics. Cloaking fixed or not wont change the fact that null will be balanced in due time. This is a discussion about cloaking fixes and not a null complaint thread or how cloaks are abused in null. If this was a complaint thread then your argument about null should have this or that prioritized would hold some merit. But right now barking at anyone suggesting interesting ideas is destructive and drives people out of this thread and generates meaningless discussions.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#8327 - 2017-01-02 03:35:09 UTC
Xcom wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Xcom wrote:

Why do you base every argument around null sec? Every mechanic according to you revolves around null. Cloaking is a module and as much as it impacts null it actually isn't based around making null what it is. Null will adapt and have adapted around cloaks. Cloaking though in on its own needs altered, regardless of how null will be impacted.


You are literally, the only person to complain about cloaks in HS that I know of. Nobody else cares about cloaks outside of NS. Every complaint about cloaks usually boils down to people in sov NS not being able to rat--i.e. AFK cloaking is the complaint. Nothing else.

Its not about complaints from players that drive updates. Every aspect should be balanced according to its own. Mechanics shouldn't be kept around just to serve other mechanics. Cloaking fixed or not wont change the fact that null will be balanced in due time. This is a discussion about cloaking fixes and not a null complaint thread or how cloaks are abused in null. If this was a complaint thread then your argument about null should have this or that prioritized would hold some merit. But right now barking at anyone suggesting interesting ideas is destructive and drives people out of this thread and generates meaningless discussions.


That's because there is no reason to "fix" cloaks. They already are a balanced and well working module.

Wormholer for life.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8328 - 2017-01-02 04:08:01 UTC
Xcom
Null may already be balanced from a destruction-production perspective. Or at the very least far more balanced than high sec and wormhole space.

Scripio
Increased activity and increased content derived from activity is the common denominator for those wanting afk cloaky camping gone. But thank you for playing.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#8329 - 2017-01-02 06:03:45 UTC
Wander Prian wrote:
Xcom wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Xcom wrote:

Why do you base every argument around null sec? Every mechanic according to you revolves around null. Cloaking is a module and as much as it impacts null it actually isn't based around making null what it is. Null will adapt and have adapted around cloaks. Cloaking though in on its own needs altered, regardless of how null will be impacted.


You are literally, the only person to complain about cloaks in HS that I know of. Nobody else cares about cloaks outside of NS. Every complaint about cloaks usually boils down to people in sov NS not being able to rat--i.e. AFK cloaking is the complaint. Nothing else.

Its not about complaints from players that drive updates. Every aspect should be balanced according to its own. Mechanics shouldn't be kept around just to serve other mechanics. Cloaking fixed or not wont change the fact that null will be balanced in due time. This is a discussion about cloaking fixes and not a null complaint thread or how cloaks are abused in null. If this was a complaint thread then your argument about null should have this or that prioritized would hold some merit. But right now barking at anyone suggesting interesting ideas is destructive and drives people out of this thread and generates meaningless discussions.


That's because there is no reason to "fix" cloaks. They already are a balanced and well working module.

Most people in this thread disagree. That's why this thread exists. If you think its balanced and needs no change then your simply trolling this thread by posting here.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#8330 - 2017-01-02 08:24:14 UTC
Xcom wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Xcom wrote:

Why do you base every argument around null sec? Every mechanic according to you revolves around null. Cloaking is a module and as much as it impacts null it actually isn't based around making null what it is. Null will adapt and have adapted around cloaks. Cloaking though in on its own needs altered, regardless of how null will be impacted.


You are literally, the only person to complain about cloaks in HS that I know of. Nobody else cares about cloaks outside of NS. Every complaint about cloaks usually boils down to people in sov NS not being able to rat--i.e. AFK cloaking is the complaint. Nothing else.


Its not about complaints from players that drive updates. Every aspect should be balanced according to its own. Mechanics shouldn't be kept around just to serve other mechanics. Cloaking fixed or not wont change the fact that null will be balanced in due time. This is a discussion about cloaking fixes and not a null complaint thread or how cloaks are abused in null. If this was a complaint thread then your argument about null should have this or that prioritized would hold some merit. But right now barking at anyone suggesting interesting ideas is destructive and drives people out of this thread and generates meaningless discussions.


Many of the issues CCP fixes over the years are often accompanied by a cacophony relating to that change. Those in favor and those opposed (the latter camp usually those using whatever mechanic is going to be changed such as tracking titans, the out cry from titan heavy alliances was substantial). And you cannot and shouldn't not balance things in isolation. You need to look at the whole, if I change this "thing here" what will be the broader impacts of those changes. For example, the watchlist change had an effect of making mass wardeccing more of a thing than it previously was. It made targeted wardecs much, much more difficult.

And you keep ignoring that cloaking and local go hand-in-hand. How do you know somebody is in (a NS) system and cloaked? He shows up in local but you can't find him on d-scan or with probes. Nowhere does anyone care. Go to a HS system and see the guy in local....nobody* cares. Cloak use while common in HS, elicits a great big "Meh," from everyone. Because in HS people rarely decloak and start shooting you and by the same token you are pretty much going to never start shooting them.

And you are simply wrong. Here, let me quote the title again,

Quote:
AFK Cloaking™: Ideas, Discussion, and Proposals


I highlighted the part you seem to be missing. And where do we find those who throw hissy fits about cloaks? Null sec. Typically NS renter alliances in fact. It is quite unusual to see PvP alliances show up and complain about AFK cloaking. It is a subset of players who as a general rule do not like PvP at all (which is why they are in a renter alliance) and yet want to have access to the vast wealth of NS. So they go about acquiring that wealth and hand over a share to their feudal masters...the PvP alliance that actually secured the space to begin with.

*Nobody unless you are wardecced or are going to be ganking, then you might look at local.

"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
#8331 - 2017-01-02 08:26:47 UTC
Jerghul wrote:

Scripio
Increased activity and increased content derived from activity is the common denominator for those wanting afk cloaky camping gone. But thank you for playing.


No that is supposedly your position. However you are pretty much alone in this (maybe Dracvlad is on your side, but then again he could be on your side simply because I disagree with you). Just about every AFK cloaking thread prior to this one was by somebody who was pissed they could not keep ratting because some guy logged in then went AFK. Instead of figuring out a way to deal with it in game, they come here crying to Mommy CCP to fix it.

"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
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#8332 - 2017-01-02 08:46:32 UTC
Jerghul wrote:
Scripio
Increased activity and increased content derived from activity is the common denominator for those wanting afk cloaky camping gone. But thank you for playing.

@Jerkoff
Not in my experience of all the threads over the least 3-4 years.
Dracvlad
Taishi Combine
Astral Alliance
#8333 - 2017-01-02 11:01:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Dracvlad
For a long time I have posted on the Eve forums pointing out that balance is needed in Eve, one of the most major issues is the imbalance in terms of skills and ISK between the old players and the new. On important facet about this is that the old players get lazy and rely on instant win type play, you can see it when PL drops supers on everything, you saw it in Delve when the Goons used 30 supers to win against LUMPY and friends in terms of Entosis links.

The success of these entities is based on over whelming strength and weaponised boredom, you notice that alliances will simply cut and run when the realisation hits them that they are being farmed and farmed hard, aka CO2, Test and others running from the north.

For me the AFK cloaky camping is part of this malaise in Eve, the purest example of weaponised boredom allied to the ability to project total overkill and WH players just do not get it, you can discard their point of view on any thread to do with AFK cloaky camping because it does not matter to them, it is not the same as what happens in null and lowsec.

I have seen so many people who were committed and eager to play, get involved in small fleets and roams just disappear after a campaign of AFK cloaky camping, if those players were actually doing stuff in Eve then great, but they got weaponized bored out of null and then bored out of Eve.

I can quite easily just log out my main and make ISK on another toon doing level 4's, but I find that boring, I like roaming gangs coming in, I like the thrill of escaping them then coming back in ships to kill them, that is what I miss from null sec sov space.

I know that small and medium sized alliances have a lot of fun, until some older groups see them and decide to play their way and then the fun dies. Like it or not this is the reality of null sec sov space and why AFK cloaky camping is such a bind, it is boring people out of the game by two aspects, round the cloak uncertainty and the overwhelming power projection, yes they may have earned that right over the long haul, but Eve is not going to be fun if that is all there is.

So for CCP it is simple, they have to find some way of removing this weaponised boredom from their game as much as they can without destroying the core value behind Eve, and AFK Cloaky Camper applying weaponised boredom with no counter is something that has to end, period.

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
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8334 - 2017-01-02 12:26:33 UTC
Scripio
Then your "experience" is of little value. But thank you for playing.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Xcom
US Space Force
Black Rose.
#8335 - 2017-01-02 14:53:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Xcom
Its pointless arguing honestly. Some people think that its ok to camp for weeks abusing the safety of cloaks. Others realize there should be balance where all the responsibility of safety shouldn't sit on pve activity. I guess going around in loops won't change much, people like techus and baltec are hell bent on making there ideas heard an top of everyone else. Like those loud people in a conference that won't shut up, forcing there ideas on others. Bitter vets I guess, would do them alot of good to quit eve and try something new. Same would go for the idiots who enjoy taking out there frustrations by camping. When you get to that point you should start thinking if its really worth spending that 15€ sub a month just to stick to some guy playing in a belt.

Overall economy of eve won't be altered much by the removal of the AFK portion of cloaking. Probably would impact it less then adding or removing new items like the drone AI module that caused a massive mission running rush. Change in some areas of this game would free up more activity. I don't think even those who are opposed to changing cloaks would mind having more players in null. More targets, more activity, more pvp more of everything.

I'm sure most people go into the cloaking discussion and just happen to gravitate towards one side. Then defend it with tooth and nail, not even hearing the opposing side or find actual concrete solutions. Just run around in circles trying to find another loophole in the post above.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8336 - 2017-01-02 15:32:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerghul
I agree with the sentiment except perhaps for the false equivalence.

Most people who want to nerf afk cloaky camping do accept that some afk time might be acceptable while under the protection of cloaks. The target for change is the sustained nature of afk cloaky camping.

The time-frame of what afk time we find acceptable may vary from a few minutes to up to 5 hours.

AFK aficionados are uncompromising on their position that afk needs to be 23.75 hours and broken only by server downtime, while any discussion needs to be tabled until activity killing local nerfs are first introduced.

That position amounts to fanaticism.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#8337 - 2017-01-02 15:45:44 UTC
Balance would require there to be some changes to the PVE-side as well, to make sure it doesn't become even more safe than it currently is.

Wormholer for life.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8338 - 2017-01-02 17:23:56 UTC
Another 700 billion isk (0.7 trillion isk) destroyed in an epic null-sec battle yesterday. Good call by CCP to increase rat bounty payments last patch. The destruction is legendary and pvp players corporations and alliances need to scramble to replace losses.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#8339 - 2017-01-03 11:22:30 UTC
Jerkoff wrote:
Good call by CCP to increase rat bounty payments last patch.

Nope. Wrong again:

https://community.eveonline.com/news/patch-notes/patch-notes-for-yc118.10-release

It's like you think we as players have the ability to make changes to cloaking so scoring points is somehow important. It's only CCP that can make any changes and bullshittg to them isn't going to get far.
Jerghul
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#8340 - 2017-01-03 13:05:11 UTC
Scipio
Yepp. and no.

But thank you for playing.

Blocked list: Teckos, Sonya, Wander, Baltec1