These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

One possible solution to an age old problem!

First post
Author
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#21 - 2012-12-21 08:27:09 UTC
I Love Boobies wrote:
1) Use a locator agent to find Kingpin Nil.
2) Fly to where he usually hangs out in a cloaky ship.
3) Make safe spot.
4) Warp to safe spot.
5) Cloak if you already haven't.
6) Go watch TV.


it already happens! lol but you were about to explain why players need to go AFK?
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#22 - 2012-12-21 08:27:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Kingpin Nil wrote:
Care to elaborate a bit further unfair?

While actually AFK, you can't do a damn thing to anybody else, so it's not fair others can easily do something to you if you took even the slightest of precautions while remaining AFK.
It is unfair that you get an advantage over a person who logged off instead of going AFK-cloaky when you both return, so THAT is the only thing that needs to be addressed.
AFK cloaking should be made as close as possible to actually logging off. Or conversely, logging off should be made as close as possible to AFK cloaking.

Kingpin Nil wrote:
but you were about to explain why players need to go AFK?

To make you afraid of them being there, even if you shouldn't.
Which they can't do if you can't see them at all.

Of course, there's also LEGITIMATE non-evil reasons to go AFK instead of logging off, and nobody should be punished nor rewarded for picking one above the other.
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
#23 - 2012-12-21 08:31:48 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
I Love Boobies wrote:
1) Use a locator agent to find Kingpin Nil.
2) Fly to where he usually hangs out in a cloaky ship.
3) Make safe spot.
4) Warp to safe spot.
5) Cloak if you already haven't.
6) Go watch TV.


it already happens! lol but you were about to explain why players need to go AFK?



Just because they are sitting there doesn't mean they are actually AFK. They could be gathering valuable intelligence on your operations, lol. Also, might also be doing stuff on other characters, as I do. And I think it's mainly done because people know it disrupts things, and of course, there are the tears it can cause. Or maybe they just like the scenery and are admiring it. Blink
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#24 - 2012-12-21 08:34:06 UTC
I Love Boobies wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
I Love Boobies wrote:
1) Use a locator agent to find Kingpin Nil.
2) Fly to where he usually hangs out in a cloaky ship.
3) Make safe spot.
4) Warp to safe spot.
5) Cloak if you already haven't.
6) Go watch TV.


it already happens! lol but you were about to explain why players need to go AFK?



Just because they are sitting there doesn't mean they are actually AFK. They could be gathering valuable intelligence on your operations, lol. Also, might also be doing stuff on other characters, as I do. And I think it's mainly done because people know it disrupts things, and of course, there are the tears it can cause. Or maybe they just like the scenery and are admiring it. Blink



none of what I propose disrupts any of that! what it does do is eliminates the chances of a player deciding to go AFK
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#25 - 2012-12-21 08:35:12 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Nene Ryuseika wrote:
Why should only sov owners have this ability anyway.

What ability is it that only sov holders have again?

Kingpin Nil wrote:
I propose a POS structure (one per system) to be built only by those with sovereignty

That one.


Thanks. It was such a bad idea my brain refused to process it the first time.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#26 - 2012-12-21 08:35:49 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
eliminates the chances of a player deciding to go AFK

Why ?
I get that it should not be rewarded, I completely agree, and my proposal actually DOES remove that reward.
No, seriously, WHY should going AFK be punished in any way, shape or form ? Why is your proposal even NECESSARY ?
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#27 - 2012-12-21 08:37:12 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
Care to elaborate a bit further unfair?

While actually AFK, you can't do a damn thing to anybody else, so it's not fair others can easily do something to you if you took even the slightest of precautions while remaining AFK.
It is unfair that you get an advantage over a person who logged off instead of going AFK-cloaky when you both return, so THAT is the only thing that needs to be addressed.
AFK cloaking should be made as close as possible to actually logging off. Or conversely, logging off should be made as close as possible to AFK cloaking.

Kingpin Nil wrote:
but you were about to explain why players need to go AFK?

To make you afraid of them being there, even if you shouldn't.
Which they can't do if you can't see them at all.

Of course, there's also LEGITIMATE non-evil reasons to go AFK instead of logging off, and nobody should be punished nor rewarded for picking one above the other.



again why would you decide to go AFK? why would you get an advantage over someone that logged off as opposed to someone deciding to go AFK for a while?
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#28 - 2012-12-21 08:38:20 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
eliminates the chances of a player deciding to go AFK

Why ?
I get that it should not be rewarded, I completely agree, and my proposal actually DOES remove that reward.
No, seriously, WHY should going AFK be punished in any way, shape or form ? Why is your proposal even NECESSARY ?


for the same reason CCP frowns upon AFK players
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#29 - 2012-12-21 08:40:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Kingpin Nil
Malcanis wrote:
Akita T wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
Nene Ryuseika wrote:
Why should only sov owners have this ability anyway.

What ability is it that only sov holders have again?

Kingpin Nil wrote:
I propose a POS structure (one per system) to be built only by those with sovereignty

That one.


Thanks. It was such a bad idea my brain refused to process it the first time.


how long have you been playing for? and what's hard about understanding what I said?

look I understand there's going to be people out there that instead of actually discussing ideas they leave subtle insults in the hopes to come off as though they know what their talking about! but if you seriously had troubles understand such a simple concept! it really reflects more on you then it does on myself.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#30 - 2012-12-21 08:44:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Kingpin Nil wrote:
again why would you decide to go AFK?

Let's see...somebody could call me do something fast, and I expect to be back in a few minutes or even seconds, and I don't want to lose the fleet position or other open stuff I might have that does not remain as such when I log off and log back on, but then those few minutes turn into many minutes or even several hours. Or maybe you're just watching a gate gathering intel about inbounds and only look at the window whenever you hear the WHOOSH. Or maybe you just don't like logging off because it takes too long to log back on on your machine. Or any other number of things where being mostly AFK is perfectly reasonable.

Kingpin Nil wrote:
Quote:
No, seriously, WHY should going AFK be punished in any way, shape or form ? Why is your proposal even NECESSARY ?

for the same reason CCP frowns upon AFK players

CCP frowns upon AFK players getting something profitable done just as well or even better than somebody that stays ATK.
A cloaked ship by design can do nothing except observe and move around inside a system. Which is the only purpose for cloaks existing in the first place. There's no direct profit to be made while cloaked, be it ATK or AFK. CCP has absolutely nothing against AFK cloakers as long as they remain AFK.
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#31 - 2012-12-21 08:50:34 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
again why would you decide to go AFK?

Let's see...somebody could call me do something fast, and I expect to be back in a few minutes or even seconds, and I don't want to lose the fleet position or other open stuff I might have that does not remain as such when I log off and log back on, but then those few minutes turn into many minutes or even several hours. Or maybe you're just watching a gate gathering intel about inbounds and only look at the window whenever you hear the WHOOSH. Or maybe you just don't like logging off because it takes too long to log back on on your machine. Or any other number of things where being mostly AFK is perfectly reasonable.


none of those issues affect my ideas! you can still go about doing them if you so wish! an hour was just an example but an hour is an hour! its still a long time to move to another safe spot if you so wish! if you 're having drama outside of eve then maybe you should reconsider playing for that time slot!

the same could be said about roaming in a fleet! would you expect the enemy just to stay docked while your sort your life out and come back to playing when it suits you?
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#32 - 2012-12-21 08:55:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Kingpin Nil wrote:
none of those issues affect my ideas

Really ? Because the "leave for 5 minutes and stay away for 3 hours" sure does sound like it would.
Kingpin Nil wrote:
the same could be said about roaming in a fleet! would you expect the enemy just to stay docked while your sort your life out and come back to playing when it suits you?

I would expect to remain safe as long as I am docked myself.
Same way I would expect to be almost completely safe cloaked in a random safespot, the only chance of not being safe relying on a freak accident with practically zero chance of happening.
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#33 - 2012-12-21 08:55:54 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
again why would you decide to go AFK?

Let's see...somebody could call me do something fast, and I expect to be back in a few minutes or even seconds, and I don't want to lose the fleet position or other open stuff I might have that does not remain as such when I log off and log back on, but then those few minutes turn into many minutes or even several hours. Or maybe you're just watching a gate gathering intel about inbounds and only look at the window whenever you hear the WHOOSH. Or maybe you just don't like logging off because it takes too long to log back on on your machine. Or any other number of things where being mostly AFK is perfectly reasonable.

Kingpin Nil wrote:
Quote:
No, seriously, WHY should going AFK be punished in any way, shape or form ? Why is your proposal even NECESSARY ?

for the same reason CCP frowns upon AFK players

CCP frowns upon AFK players getting something profitable done just as well or even better than somebody that stays ATK.
A cloaked ship by design can do nothing except observe and move around inside a system. Which is the only purpose for cloaks existing in the first place. There's no direct profit to be made while cloaked, be it ATK or AFK. CCP has absolutely nothing against AFK cloakers as long as they remain AFK.


ok lets entertain this notion! then why do they AFK cloak in a system for a while?
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#34 - 2012-12-21 09:00:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Kingpin Nil wrote:
ok lets entertain this notion! then why do they AFK cloak in a system for a while?


Sigh...

Akita T wrote:
To make you afraid of them being there, even if you shouldn't.
Which they can't do if you can't see them at all.


Also, again, it is unfair that you get different treatment from a person who logged off instead of going AFK-cloaky when you both return, so THAT is the only thing that needs to be addressed, and something my proposal ACTUALLY ADDRESSES, while yours does not.
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#35 - 2012-12-21 09:03:47 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
none of those issues affect my ideas

Really ? Because the "leave for 5 minutes and stay away for 3 hours" sure does sound like it would.
Kingpin Nil wrote:
the same could be said about roaming in a fleet! would you expect the enemy just to stay docked while your sort your life out and come back to playing when it suits you?

I would expect to remain safe as long as I am docked myself.
Same way I would expect to be almost completely safe cloaked in a random safespot, the only chance of not being safe relying on a freak accident with practically zero chance of happening.


again if you're experiencing problems outside of eve then you need to reconsider playing an online game with others! why do you think your life dramas should affect others?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#36 - 2012-12-21 09:06:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
I give up trying to discuss this with you in here now because we've had this topic beaten so many times on these forums, it sickens me when the same old misconceptions just won't stay dead as a good horse should, and I am nauseated by reframing fallacious arguments.
The only problem with AFK cloaking is when an AFK cloaker returns, not with him remaining AFK. Attempting to address the AFK part is pointless and counterproductive, since CCP will never care about your argument. If you want to do something that has any chances, address the ADVANTAGE AT RETURN and nothing else.
I've said all that needed to be said, feel free to go back and re-read it.
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#37 - 2012-12-21 09:07:33 UTC
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
ok lets entertain this notion! then why do they AFK cloak in a system for a while?


Sigh...

Akita T wrote:
To make you afraid of them being there, even if you shouldn't.
Which they can't do if you can't see them at all.


Also, again, it is unfair that you get different treatment from a person who logged off instead of going AFK-cloaky when you both return, so THAT is the only thing that needs to be addressed, and something my proposal ACTUALLY ADDRESSES, while yours does not.


I give different treatment? how so? both are completely different from one another!

I noticed you avoided my question?

Elrich Kouvo
Doomheim
#38 - 2012-12-21 09:08:14 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
Akita T wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
none of those issues affect my ideas

Really ? Because the "leave for 5 minutes and stay away for 3 hours" sure does sound like it would.
Kingpin Nil wrote:
the same could be said about roaming in a fleet! would you expect the enemy just to stay docked while your sort your life out and come back to playing when it suits you?

I would expect to remain safe as long as I am docked myself.
Same way I would expect to be almost completely safe cloaked in a random safespot, the only chance of not being safe relying on a freak accident with practically zero chance of happening.


again if you're experiencing problems outside of eve then you need to reconsider playing an online game with others! why do you think your life dramas should affect others?


Wow!.... Just wow!
Yuri Wayfare
Suddenly Ninjas
Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service
#39 - 2012-12-21 09:09:12 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
constrictive feedback

Kinky.

"Suddenly, trash pickers! HUNDREDS of winos going through your recyclables." -Piugattuk

Be careful what you wish for.

Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#40 - 2012-12-21 09:13:16 UTC
Akita T wrote:
I give up trying to discuss this with you in here now because we've had this topic beaten so many times on these forums, it sickens me when the same old misconceptions just won't stay dead as a good horse should, and I am nauseated by reframing fallacious arguments.
I've said all that needed to be said, feel free to go back and re-read it.


Actually for the most part you’re just trying to justify playing eve while AFK! The whole point of eve is to play! Why do you think CCP have tried so hard to eliminate the AFK players! When I ask you why players engage in these tactics it’s not always done just to annoy others! There’s a lot of isk to be made while doing so!