These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
initiatives
Praktor Industries
#161 - 2012-12-22 17:23:02 UTC
I agree with op, afk cloaking blows.


Afk cloaking usually hurts smaller nullsec corps to which is horrible in my opinion anyway.


The argument that afk cloakers are not hurting anyone therefore no one should be able to hurt them is pretty stupid.

Afk cloakers clearly hurt industry and ratting in system that they afk in (pretty obvious, that there action of afk cloaking does serious damage)

1. I propose that afk cloakers have a 10 minute penalty to lighting a cyno after they uncloak (unless they switch systems, dock, or perform any type of related change) (the penalty would only come into effect after 15 minutes of continuous cloaking)



This would make it so afk cloakers are really only dangerous for the first 15 minutes logged in, or in your system. (ofcourse they are still dangerous as they can uncloak and tackle or gather intelligence


or


make it so all characters show up on the account under bio or another tab, so afk cloakers can no longer use anonymity to harass null sec operations.
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#162 - 2012-12-23 03:20:35 UTC
Alice Fiorina wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:


so far only one person has been able to understand the whole point of this thread.


Not agreeing with you is not the same as not understanding.

You think there is a problem with AFK cloaking.

There is not.




Understanding the idea of my thread has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with me either!
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#163 - 2012-12-23 03:21:37 UTC
initiatives wrote:
I agree with op, afk cloaking blows.


Afk cloaking usually hurts smaller nullsec corps to which is horrible in my opinion anyway.


The argument that afk cloakers are not hurting anyone therefore no one should be able to hurt them is pretty stupid.

Afk cloakers clearly hurt industry and ratting in system that they afk in (pretty obvious, that there action of afk cloaking does serious damage)

1. I propose that afk cloakers have a 10 minute penalty to lighting a cyno after they uncloak (unless they switch systems, dock, or perform any type of related change) (the penalty would only come into effect after 15 minutes of continuous cloaking)



This would make it so afk cloakers are really only dangerous for the first 15 minutes logged in, or in your system. (ofcourse they are still dangerous as they can uncloak and tackle or gather intelligence


or


make it so all characters show up on the account under bio or another tab, so afk cloakers can no longer use anonymity to harass null sec operations.



another interesting good idea
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#164 - 2012-12-23 03:31:25 UTC
cBOLTSON wrote:
Sigh.... this topic again.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE CLOAKING MECHANIC!

The only problem is how people react (OR lack of proper reaction)

Nullbear see cloaker and instead of going -
"Hey guys theres a enemy cloaked in our system, lets bait him / trap him / form a fleet in the next system / ANY other idea"

No, instead the nullbear goes - "Waaaahhh theres a cloaker , im going to go dock up as im scared of what he might do to me"

never even realising he could just move a jump or two over or try and kill that cloaker.

Its sad and pathetic.


Maybe if you understood why this thread was created you would understand none of what you just said is relevant!
It’s about going AFK and abusing the use of the cloak!
Nothing I have proposed would change the cloak as it stands!
The same arguments are being used again and again for no reason none of the opposition thus far has even touched upon why someone needs to go AFK while logged into eve for hrs.
We all know why they do this and yet players seem to think there’s no consequence or advantage to doing so! Then why do it?
Would any of you stay docked AFK in jita for hrs on end just to relog back into the game and do it again? Or create multiple accounts to do so? Then try to pass on the excuse that you need to do this because you have some real life issues that need to be attend to? Because we all know that creating multiple accounts for the sake of going AFK and having the need to leave for toilet breaks and food is warrant enough right? lol
Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#165 - 2012-12-23 03:31:50 UTC
Roime wrote:
Two better options:

A. Remove local from nullsec

...but since they couldn't find fights or use their bots and will ragequit, plan B:


B. Make cynos only mountable on BLOPS, change the skill from 5x to 8x, and add Electromagnetic Physics V to prerequisites.

This should deal with the general power projection problem as well.



no.
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#166 - 2012-12-23 05:03:49 UTC
Johan Civire wrote:
Roime wrote:
Two better options:

A. Remove local from nullsec

...but since they couldn't find fights or use their bots and will ragequit, plan B:


B. Make cynos only mountable on BLOPS, change the skill from 5x to 8x, and add Electromagnetic Physics V to prerequisites.

This should deal with the general power projection problem as well.



no.



I don’t know why they keep bringing stuff like this up! So many times players trying to hijack this thread!
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#167 - 2012-12-23 06:03:58 UTC
Your whining is getting to be pretty unbearable.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#168 - 2012-12-23 06:05:45 UTC
And I know exactly why players afk cloak in a ratting system. Yeah, it's annoying. When that happens to me I move to another system. You don't see me crying on the boards about afk cloakers, because I think it's a valid tactic. It's psychological warfare.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Ittos
Beards Confirmed
#169 - 2012-12-23 06:16:49 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
initiatives wrote:
I agree with op, afk cloaking blows.


Afk cloaking usually hurts smaller nullsec corps to which is horrible in my opinion anyway.


The argument that afk cloakers are not hurting anyone therefore no one should be able to hurt them is pretty stupid.

Afk cloakers clearly hurt industry and ratting in system that they afk in (pretty obvious, that there action of afk cloaking does serious damage)

1. I propose that afk cloakers have a 10 minute penalty to lighting a cyno after they uncloak (unless they switch systems, dock, or perform any type of related change) (the penalty would only come into effect after 15 minutes of continuous cloaking)



This would make it so afk cloakers are really only dangerous for the first 15 minutes logged in, or in your system. (ofcourse they are still dangerous as they can uncloak and tackle or gather intelligence


or


make it so all characters show up on the account under bio or another tab, so afk cloakers can no longer use anonymity to harass null sec operations.



another interesting good idea


I'm skeptical that this will fix the afk problem at all let alone fix it without hurting atk cloakers. Seeing as afk cloakers are there for psychological warfare and, by virtue of being afk, cannot light cynos. As far as the characters showing up on the bio, that would **** off a lot of people and severely ruin some meta gamining capabilities.
Regan Rotineque
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#170 - 2012-12-23 06:44:15 UTC
3 simple things. Just 3


1 - let me hunt them, give me probes or special cov ops ship with special probes....would love to hunt em

2 - make cloak consume fuel not gazillion gallons, but say 1hr or 2hr worth of ozone or something like that

3 - cycle the cloak....don't let it run forever - force a reactivation.

My personal preference is to have new tools to hunt cloakies ... But fuel would also provide reasonable limits on them.

~R~
Mag's
Azn Empire
#171 - 2012-12-23 06:52:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
OP why do you avoid my questions?

If you think your idea really is a good one, you should have the confidence to answer them. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#172 - 2012-12-23 07:32:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
Since the OP is not actually seriously discussing things we point out are a problem with any of his ideas and instead is just parroting the same old overused material, let's get down to his level and do something similar.

If you remove cloaked ships from local AND add a 15 sec timer for decloaking (which does make you show up in local before you actually decloak) if last cloaking session lasted more than 15 seconds, how can an AFK cloaker hurt you AT ALL anymore ?

He sure as hell can't make you afraid anymore (the only thing he was actually doing before while actually AFK).
You can still see him in local before he can do anything, and now you know he's not AFK anymore since he had to manually cut the cloak (before, you had no idea when he was AFK vs when he was ATK).
If he doesn't cloak (so is still showing up in local) you know you can find him and kill him (so no problem at all).
Essentially, he's pretty much the same thing as a logged-off person as long as he's actually AFK.

What problem would still remain AT ALL regarding AFK cloaking with that change ?
No, seriously, is there ANY problem left if you do that ? ANY sort of drawback for ANYBODY ? What exactly is it ?

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#173 - 2012-12-23 10:55:50 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
It’s about going AFK and abusing the use of the cloak!
…and those are issues, why exactly? How is the cloak being abused?

Quote:
Nothing I have proposed would change the cloak as it stands!
You mean aside from the idea you proposed in the OP?

Quote:
The same arguments are being used again and again for no reason
Well, why don't you stop doing that then and instead start to address the many many issues people have been bringing forth about your ideas? Why don't you start answering the fundamental questions about this whole problem you're seeing?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#174 - 2012-12-23 11:04:14 UTC
Regan Rotineque wrote:
3 simple things. Just 3


1 - let me hunt them, give me probes or special cov ops ship with special probes....would love to hunt em

2 - make cloak consume fuel not gazillion gallons, but say 1hr or 2hr worth of ozone or something like that

3 - cycle the cloak....don't let it run forever - force a reactivation.

My personal preference is to have new tools to hunt cloakies ... But fuel would also provide reasonable limits on them.

~R~
What about the cause of AFKing? If you want to keep balance, then the cause should also be nerfed at the same time.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
ISD Praetoxx
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#175 - 2012-12-23 12:10:50 UTC
Thread moved to the Features & Ideas Discussion

- ISD Praetoxx

ISD Praetoxx Lieutenant Community Communication Liasons (CCLs) Interstellar Service Department
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#176 - 2012-12-23 17:32:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael Harari
If anything, I think afk cloaking needs a buff. Maybe allow covops ships to hack poses and offline their modules, or a covops interdictor or something.

Edit: I know, how about covops combat probes that dont show up on dscan?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#177 - 2012-12-23 18:04:45 UTC
Kingpin Nil wrote:
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!

Great words of wisdom!

If we have determined that AFK play is against the core principles of EVE, let us address this more completely!

This is just a start, but letting people clutter up the list in local who CANNOT BE FOUND is making this source of intel questionable at best.

Sure, it's an outpost. The guy in it should not be there, but he is. You can dock, and see him in the list.
What good is local doing us if docked up people can be listed? They ain't even in space to BE found, that's worse than cloaking.
It's ridiculous to suggest we need to camp the outpost in case he decides to undock. Local is not telling us anything useful beyond being in system, and he is using it against the legitimate residents.

Put him on a timer to be undocked automatically, if he makes no actions. This is a PvP game, and his behavior is violating the quality of intel we use.

How are we supposed to play with this threat hanging above our heads?

Also, I want to eliminate POS shields entirely. Too many off grid boosters mucking up things.

And if a pilot enters system that has kill rights on you, by war dec or regular means, only stations owned by your alliance will allow you to dock, otherwise not allowing you to dock in the interests of remaining neutral in a conflict.
You can face them, run in circles from them, or leave the system to avoid them.

D-Scan should allow you to track their IFF signal and get a direction for such targets, creating opportunities for more PvP.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#178 - 2012-12-23 21:29:12 UTC
ISD Praetoxx wrote:
Thread moved to the]Features & Ideas Discussion

May it rest in peace there Smile

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#179 - 2012-12-24 04:41:15 UTC
Akita T wrote:
ISD Praetoxx wrote:
Thread moved to the]Features & Ideas Discussion

May it rest in peace there Smile



Kinda hilarious how such simple discussions can bring people to such anger and misunderstanding!
Kingpin Nil
Care-Bears UNITED
#180 - 2012-12-24 04:45:27 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Kingpin Nil wrote:
It’s about going AFK and abusing the use of the cloak!
…and those are issues, why exactly? How is the cloak being abused?

Quote:
Nothing I have proposed would change the cloak as it stands!
You mean aside from the idea you proposed in the OP?

Quote:
The same arguments are being used again and again for no reason
Well, why don't you stop doing that then and instead start to address the many many issues people have been bringing forth about your ideas? Why don't you start answering the fundamental questions about this whole problem you're seeing?


1) again why would you considering going AFK for hrs on end?

2) how would discontinuing to allow players to AFK cloak hurt the mechanics of cloak warfare? while their actively playing!

3 ) I'm trying to keep people on topic! i have addressed the many issues hopefully from both sides of this argument! remember my first post?