Player Features and Ideas Discussion

cloaky camping is the worst mechanic i have ever come across in a game, if you're actively hunting then fair enough but to have a mechanic that just stops people logging in and playing your game is beyond ********

Since this topic had come up a few times in the past few days it did get me thinking about it and so I figure I will throw my hat in the ring and let you all demolish my idea.

"Counter covops destroyer"

T2 destroyer variant requires covops skill and cloaking.
Cannot fit a covops cloaking device. But does not suffer speed or targeting penalties from standard cloak.
Thin tank like most covops but with bonuses to short range turrets as per racial flavor.
Special class feature. Can see through cloaks on tactical overlay (not d-scan and not overview. Only the physical overview in space)
Can decloak ships by getting within 5-10km of them (numbers variable according to balance reasons.)
Doing so would uncloak them as well (think the pre-buff cloaking mechanics but with greater range)

The thought process behind the ship is that it addresses the "shroedingers hot dropper" by allowing someone with advanced planning to spot and counter a cloaker slightly earlier. But only if they are actively paying attention. (Or have a friend doing it)

Would not allow a cloaked ship to be spotted unless they where on grid (so safe spots would still be safe)

Would also make travel cloaked ships slightly easier to catch.

Some possible variations.

1: cannot cloak (so the cloaky hunter would be able to tell via d-scan if they are there. I don't like this though because it would discourage explosions)

2: can only detect ships within their targeting range (still couldn't target them while cloaked and would still need to get within 5-10k in order to decloak them. But would make it difficult to have full coverage from all possible approaches. Although with this they would show up on overview. Actually I'm liking this variation more now.

Anyways that's what I've got for now. Please rip it to shreds. Also I feel like I've written the word cloak more timed now than in the past year.

You still can be attacked by a cloaker. Wouldn't even do much to stop a cloaked cyno.

But if positioned right, it could give an early warning. But only if they are paying active attention. And if they are paying active attention (staying aligned etc) then they are already relatively safe to begin with.

This simply provides another tool for that. One that could get more pilots to undock. Which provides more content.

Although the more I've been thinking about it the less I like the idea of them being cloaked.

Maybe instead give them d-scan immunity like recons. So the cloaker would need to be on grid with them.

Warp in at range. Pick your approach carefully and you can still get your kill.

**** up and they get tipped off to your presence early. But you still stand a chance of getting it.

No you can't. The cloaked ship is visible as soon as it lands on grid, well before it can move into position to attack. No surprise, no target, no attack.

AFK cloaking is completely one-sided. Cloaker gets all the intel, and can choose to engage or not.

People on the side opposite the cloaker have no information at all. Maybe the cloaker is AFK, maybe the cloaker is about to drop a cyno and carriers are about to land. Maybe a nearby fleet is going to land on their head.

And an AFK cloaker gets all of the disruptive influence, without even having to look at the screen.

If cloaks took very slow damage in hostile territory, the cloaker could easily get to a safe location, apply some paste, and recloak. It would barely affect active usage.

If defenders were not immune (and I think it's way funnier if it affects just anyone) they can just pop off to the nearest friendly Citadel for easy, free, and quick repair.

And if someone AFK-cloaks, well, after an hour or two, the cloak burns out and stops, and they can be scanned down. Either that, or observatory arrays can slowly pinpoint them. Whatever, as long as they have to act to maintain advantage.


Of course people are defending AFK cloaking. They like having the ability to sneak an alt account into a system, and have all the control, while being impossible to remove. And no amount of investment can prevent it. Then, they just wait until people relax and get sloppy, and then the cloaker calls in a quick fleet and destroy them. Or they never relax, and the cloaker gets the advantage of having disrupted the system, regardless of however much ISK and effort was sunk into defense.

This doesn't matter because all the anti-cloaking ship needs to do is detect the threat and say "WARP OUT". The rest of your ships don't need to know exactly where the threat is, they just need to listen for the initial detection warning and immediately dock up.



Only if the anti-cloak pilot is stupid. A smart player is going to put their anti-cloak alt right next to the ship they're protecting, so there's no way to get within attack range without entering the bubble.

We solved the intel issue.
Once cloaked, your name is removed from local and your (cloaky's) local becomes invisible.
No intel while cloaked without active flying.
No threat from the name.

Business as usual with the added paranoia that you're not alone in the universe.

You do know this will abused like all hell right? Everyone will have one sitting next to them as soon as a neut's name pops up in local, you will make stealth bomber tactics utterly pointless, you will make gate camp running for Blockade runners near impossible, We already have a direct counter to cloaks, which is local, hell local will tell all the 'LOCALS' that someone incoming before you even load grid, in fact, the way most alliances have intel systems set up in sov space, they will know you are coming long before you even reach your destination.

In basics, all you are doing is making cloak even more useless, thanks.

The people that ***** about AFK cloaking are the very same people that dock up well before hostiles enter their system.

That is incorrect, it will still be a zero chance of catching them, an ontop of that, they will still be generating funds, so thus you will have even less impact then before. So you know, you are just making it worse because you skewed it in the direction of even more safety, almost all suggestions have been in favor of more safety in an area of space that suppose to be the riskiest part of eve.... Which is now of course argued, null is safer then high sec is.