These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Defeating AFK Cloaking

Author
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#61 - 2013-01-03 02:36:23 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
RoAnnon wrote:
Can we stop trying to implement a mechanic that aims at preventing someone from doing something you can only guess they're doing?


i hope this one is done.

see u all at the next one. same day next week?

Next week? You think it will be that long, im guessing Friday or Saturday.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Juan Thang
Optimistic Wasteland Inc.
Fraternity.
#62 - 2013-01-03 05:07:49 UTC
Lol didnt realise posts like this were this common, literally posted the same thing about 2 weeks ago, even with the same idea :P
Mag's
Azn Empire
#63 - 2013-01-03 06:49:02 UTC
Juan Thang wrote:
Lol didnt realise posts like this were this common, literally posted the same thing about 2 weeks ago, even with the same idea :P
Yes, this section is full of ill conceived ideas. With the posters seemingly having little understanding of their topic.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#64 - 2013-01-03 11:24:50 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Juan Thang wrote:
Lol didnt realise posts like this were this common, literally posted the same thing about 2 weeks ago, even with the same idea :P
Yes, this section is full of ill conceived ideas. With the posters seemingly having little understanding of their topic.


...or the search function

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#65 - 2013-01-03 14:24:39 UTC
I find it amusing how they seem to come in with the attitude that balance is being perverted against them somehow.

They have this baseline experience that null or low sec simply means watch local closely, so you can avoid PvP.
(Why avoid PvP? Well, for starters, you would need a ship properly fitted, and probably need some friends to help too!)

They don't realize they are care bears, because all they had to do was watch local to avoid problems.

Then the big bad PvP'er comes along, using a cloaky ship since they realize that's the only tactic with any hope of catching something....

Shortly after that, a thread like this appears, complaining about the apparently unavoidable nature of PvP in null or low.
(They is cloaked, see, and wouldn't leave! I tawt dey was gonna shoots us too!)

There there... tell us where the mean cloaky touched you....
Buzzy Warstl
Quantum Flux Foundry
#66 - 2013-01-03 14:59:44 UTC
One could PvE in PvP ships, but that means settling for lower ticks, and maybe only hitting anomalies that are appropriate for your skills.

Or fleeting up and *sharing* the isk.

http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm Richard Bartle: Players who suit MUDs

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#67 - 2013-01-03 15:19:52 UTC
Buzzy Warstl wrote:
One could PvE in PvP ships, but that means settling for lower ticks, and maybe only hitting anomalies that are appropriate for your skills.

Or fleeting up and *sharing* the isk.

Exactly.

They feel these are not reasonable suggestions, and instead look for ways to avoid needing them.
Like the idea this thread suggested.

The decloaking pulse.... just another way to avoid needing to change their PvE style.
So long as PvP is strictly on their terms, they can keep being care bears.
Mike Voidstar
Voidstar Free Flight Foundation
#68 - 2013-01-03 15:20:41 UTC
Or, instead of complaining about not being able to catch targets you could sit at the keyboard, turn the cloak off and actually PvP the people who find you.

Works both ways, really. There are other ways to pvp than ganking. You might have to accept some risks, maybe even take some losses.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#69 - 2013-01-03 15:27:53 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
Or, instead of complaining about not being able to catch targets you could sit at the keyboard, turn the cloak off and actually PvP the people who find you.

Works both ways, really. There are other ways to pvp than ganking. You might have to accept some risks, maybe even take some losses.

Oh? So you can't pick and choose how you PvP then?

So why is it we have PvE pilots using local to completely avoid PvP encounters?

What kind of risks are they accepting, by getting safe any time something dangerous enters the system?

Are you saying their level of risk is appropriate, when they have demonstrated that they can avoid it completely?

Would you suggest this is balanced game play?

What game mechanic are they using to remain safe, that is also causing them stress when a cloaked vessel is present?
A vessel that is openly acknowledged as incapable of causing harm while remaining cloaked.
Eagle Dares
Doomheim
#70 - 2013-01-03 16:23:39 UTC
I'm not sure if the real issue has been tackled here to be honest. AFK cloaking to a point is a tactic. It becomes stupid when one player with a huge amount of alts decides to camp numerous systems. I believe that becomes an exploit of a game mechanic and CCP need to deal with that.

So carebears like to live in null and low sec. Isn't that what CCP wanted and encouraged?

To the people whining about Null sec "carebears". When ur next out in ur pvp ship hunting that shiney kill. Where did that ship come from? who built it? the fiitings? where did they come from? somebody had to build them to put them on the market for you to use?

Getting rid of local i think would cause an inbalance. Yes local is a chat channel that can be used as intel but how many times has it worked in your favour?

My idea would be to introduce a Cloak Fuel. This would mean that people could still "AFK" cloak but with risk. It stops people with multiple accounts camping numerous systems in cloaked ships for 23hr periods.

The above is only MY opinion that i am entitled to. I don't care if you agree or disagree. I don't care if u flame me whine and cry. I sit on neutral ground and simply offer thoughts and ideas.

Fly safe all...
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#71 - 2013-01-03 16:36:20 UTC
Eagle Dares wrote:
I'm not sure if the real issue has been tackled here to be honest. AFK cloaking to a point is a tactic. It becomes stupid when one player with a huge amount of alts decides to camp numerous systems. I believe that becomes an exploit of a game mechanic and CCP need to deal with that.

I see no reason for use of numerous alts to be considered significant. Many miners also use this mechanic, should we consider them to be a problem as well?

Eagle Dares wrote:
So carebears like to live in null and low sec. Isn't that what CCP wanted and encouraged?

The players, yes.
The play style, no.

Eagle Dares wrote:
To the people whining about Null sec "carebears". When ur next out in ur pvp ship hunting that shiney kill. Where did that ship come from? who built it? the fiitings? where did they come from? somebody had to build them to put them on the market for you to use?

Mine were all manufactured by elves who were unionized at the north pole.
Seriously, this point aspect is not worth the text wasted making it. Noone is suggesting they stop playing, simply that they start playing the appropriate version of the game. If they want to care bear, that's what high sec is for. Implying that the ships and fittings will become too expensive is a topic for another thread.

Eagle Dares wrote:
Getting rid of local i think would cause an inbalance. Yes local is a chat channel that can be used as intel but how many times has it worked in your favour?

Never worked in my favor, ever. It always gave my opponents just as much intel as I had, which in many cases created more problems for me and my allies than it solved. And yes, that is from a miner's perspective.
As to removing it, I am pushing for simply removing non PvP capable elements from it. And they in turn could not see it either.

Eagle Dares wrote:
My idea would be to introduce a Cloak Fuel. This would mean that people could still "AFK" cloak but with risk. It stops people with multiple accounts camping numerous systems in cloaked ships for 23hr periods.

The above is only MY opinion that i am entitled to. I don't care if you agree or disagree. I don't care if u flame me whine and cry. I sit on neutral ground and simply offer thoughts and ideas.

Fly safe all...

Your idea for cloak fuel creates a limit that benefits the care bear play style exclusively, and breaks cloaking specifically.
You can find numerous threads explaining the details on that idea's issues.
Eagle Dares
Doomheim
#72 - 2013-01-03 16:46:47 UTC
Ok so if carebearing should be hi sec only as u suggest then maybe all minerals should be available in hi sec which would ruin the ABC ore profiles and almost certainly crash the market.

I take your points but how would the cloak fuel idea only benefit the carebear? It would simply mean that cloakers would have to take a risk the same as any other player when currently there is minimal risk with cloaking campers.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#73 - 2013-01-03 16:53:18 UTC
Eagle Dares wrote:
Ok so if carebearing should be hi sec only as u suggest then maybe all minerals should be available in hi sec which would ruin the ABC ore profiles and almost certainly crash the market.

I take your points but how would the cloak fuel idea only benefit the carebear? It would simply mean that cloakers would have to take a risk the same as any other player when currently there is minimal risk with cloaking campers.

Mineral placement is a topic for another thread. All I will say is let balance point out how it should be handled.

As to cloaking fuel, not needed.
Simply remove the free awareness of cloaked vessels by making them not displayed in local.
In exchange, they should not see local either.
Then add in a balanced means of hunting them, and you have it.

Noone can AFK cloak effectively, if they are not broadcast to the system. If they do make their presence known, it will result in their being hunted.
In exchange, defense pilots will need to be more proactive, which is appropriate in parts of the game where group effort dictates control of space and the resources it contains.
Eagle Dares
Doomheim
#74 - 2013-01-03 17:08:00 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:


As to cloaking fuel, not needed.
Simply remove the free awareness of cloaked vessels by making them not displayed in local.
In exchange, they should not see local either.
Then add in a balanced means of hunting them, and you have it.

Noone can AFK cloak effectively, if they are not broadcast to the system. If they do make their presence known, it will result in their being hunted.
In exchange, defense pilots will need to be more proactive, which is appropriate in parts of the game where group effort dictates control of space and the resources it contains.



I'm not seeing the local thing to be honest. Ok so ur saying that if a cloaky comes in to system he doesn't appear in local nor can he see local. That surely ONLY benefits the cloaky pilot from a defense point of view. Remember some "carebear" ships also have cloaking capabilities. How then, if u can't see a cloaky pilot in local, are you able to detect and defend?

He would have to make an attack on a player. If he then evades being killed he cloaks and leaves system and thus is totally invisible once again. This is in total favour of the cloaky. only visible when he wants to be and free to do whatever he likes. Him seeing local is not important because he just warps cloaked to sites to take on surprised pve and mining players.

On your point of the whole anti carebear thing. Surely players have the option to decide what they want to do and where and when they like. You are almost saying that null sec should be strictly pvp. Thats nuts... It would wreck the game. My alt does pvp, pve and sometimes mining are you then saying i should move out of null if i want to mine and also if null is for pvp should pvp be stopped in hi sec? Anyway slightly off topic but something that needed to be expressed in response to you.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#75 - 2013-01-03 17:34:18 UTC
Eagle Dares wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:


As to cloaking fuel, not needed.
Simply remove the free awareness of cloaked vessels by making them not displayed in local.
In exchange, they should not see local either.
Then add in a balanced means of hunting them, and you have it.

Noone can AFK cloak effectively, if they are not broadcast to the system. If they do make their presence known, it will result in their being hunted.
In exchange, defense pilots will need to be more proactive, which is appropriate in parts of the game where group effort dictates control of space and the resources it contains.



I'm not seeing the local thing to be honest. Ok so ur saying that if a cloaky comes in to system he doesn't appear in local nor can he see local. That surely ONLY benefits the cloaky pilot from a defense point of view. Remember some "carebear" ships also have cloaking capabilities. How then, if u can't see a cloaky pilot in local, are you able to detect and defend?

He would have to make an attack on a player. If he then evades being killed he cloaks and leaves system and thus is totally invisible once again. This is in total favour of the cloaky. only visible when he wants to be and free to do whatever he likes. Him seeing local is not important because he just warps cloaked to sites to take on surprised pve and mining players.

On your point of the whole anti carebear thing. Surely players have the option to decide what they want to do and where and when they like. You are almost saying that null sec should be strictly pvp. Thats nuts... It would wreck the game. My alt does pvp, pve and sometimes mining are you then saying i should move out of null if i want to mine and also if null is for pvp should pvp be stopped in hi sec? Anyway slightly off topic but something that needed to be expressed in response to you.
The local thing is quite easy, answer me this. When someone is AFKing, what mechanic are they using to interact with you?
The idea is that if you remove the reason for AFKing, it fixes the issue people have with it and stops the reason to AFK for long periods.

As far as being able to detect and defend is concerned, it's the same as before. Always assume someone is there and take precautions before hand. But there could be other balances to cloaks introduced at the same time, depending on changes made.

Now when it comes to PvP, you must accept the fact that almost every aspect of Eve is PvP based. Mining, industry, trade etc etc is all PvP. Combat is only a subset of PvP and should always be available in any security space. Null is just designed to enable total freedom from NPC consequences of combat PvP. This is why you should accept that even if you hold sov, everyone else has the right to try and shoot you.

So far from wrecking the game, Eve is in fact PvP centric. Even ship spinning, is PvP.

One thing you and many others fail to realise is, that you already have the upper hand with cloaked vessels. For even though they are designed to cloak and hide, local tells you they are there. AFKing simply attempts to subvert the instant intel local is giving. Whether this works, is out of the hands of the cloaker and relies firmly on the system residents. So unlike local that is guaranteed to give intel 23.5/7, AFKing has no guarantee to work.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#76 - 2013-01-03 17:35:45 UTC
>>>>As to cloaking fuel, not needed.
Simply remove the free awareness of cloaked vessels by making them not displayed in local.
In exchange, they should not see local either.
Then add in a balanced means of hunting them, and you have it.

Noone can AFK cloak effectively, if they are not broadcast to the system. If they do make their presence known, it will result in their being hunted.
In exchange, defense pilots will need to be more proactive, which is appropriate in parts of the game where group effort dictates control of space and the resources it contains.


Eagle Dares wrote:
I'm not seeing the local thing to be honest. Ok so ur saying that if a cloaky comes in to system he doesn't appear in local nor can he see local. That surely ONLY benefits the cloaky pilot from a defense point of view. Remember some "carebear" ships also have cloaking capabilities. How then, if u can't see a cloaky pilot in local, are you able to detect and defend?

He would have to make an attack on a player. If he then evades being killed he cloaks and leaves system and thus is totally invisible once again. This is in total favour of the cloaky. only visible when he wants to be and free to do whatever he likes. Him seeing local is not important because he just warps cloaked to sites to take on surprised pve and mining players.

Please understand what it means to be proactive. It is the difference between taking preventive steps, and trying to compensate by responding to an issue afterwards. Responding to issues afterwards is called reactive.

It is already accepted practice to establish gate camps, to prevent entry into a system. These can obviously tell you when the gate fires, which becomes significant if a name is not added to that pilot roster in local. Setting at LEAST a scout to monitor entry gates to sensitive areas should be expected.

If you feel the potential for a cloaked vessel's presence warrants the effort, send out a patrol to sweep the system. If you seriously want to wait until after they attack before acting, and being purely reactive, that is your call.

Eagle Dares wrote:
On your point of the whole anti carebear thing. Surely players have the option to decide what they want to do and where and when they like. You are almost saying that null sec should be strictly pvp. Thats nuts... It would wreck the game. My alt does pvp, pve and sometimes mining are you then saying i should move out of null if i want to mine and also if null is for pvp should pvp be stopped in hi sec? Anyway slightly off topic but something that needed to be expressed in response to you.

Your perspective is skewed by your sticking to specific terms to view it with.

Null is not strictly PvP. It IS strictly group effort.
If your group is an alliance that secures it's borders solidly, your job may resemble solo play, but you still owe it to the other players who established the threat free area you operate in.
Eagle Dares
Doomheim
#77 - 2013-01-03 18:32:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Eagle Dares
lol...

I know the difference between reactive and proactive. And as you very rightly said null is about team work. why then are you so against the "carebear" who has to be a part of that team. In the deepest depths of null, Jita is a far away myth so ores have to be mined, refined and used to build things so that the PVPer and pve player can go and do what he or she wishes. The group aspect suddenly shines like a bright light and reveals carebears and PVPers living as one... THE HORROR!!!!

Seriously, back to what this is really about. The fact remains that every time something is inserted into the game which doesn't benefit the null sec pvper directly they get upset. Incursions? pvp whined they got nerfed. Tengu's? pvp whined they got nerfed. Whats next? Hulks only have one laser? you can only dock for 30secs because big bad pvper wants to KM hoard?

Cloaks are great and i'm all in favour. I partake in many aspects of this game and I can see all sides of the fence however at the moment everything favours the Cloaky and it's very unbalanced. As they said at fanfest everything should have a risk and a consequence and cloaky just doesn't have either (unless they are unlucky or learning).

Thats MY Point of view and while i will listen to constructive points of view from others i have to time for people whining because it doesn't suit them. I'm all for balance and fairness to ALL players not a specific group.

That said if null sec is purely a group thing why do people SOLO PVP and SOLO AFK Cloak camp?? The mind Boggles.....
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#78 - 2013-01-03 18:43:10 UTC
Eagle Dares wrote:
Cloaks are great and i'm all in favour. I partake in many aspects of this game and I can see all sides of the fence however at the moment everything favours the Cloaky and it's very unbalanced. As they said at fanfest everything should have a risk and a consequence and cloaky just doesn't have either (unless they are unlucky or learning).

Cloaking has already been broken for some time. It is balanced, however.

Sound like a contradiction? Then you also assume balance implies functionality, which it does not.

Cloaking is broken by local reporting it, in an absolutely reliable manner. This is broken.

It is however, balanced by:

You absolutely cannot locate a cloaked vessel, unless they let you, or make a mistake. This is also broken.

Since both sides are countering each other, it is in balance.

Eagle Dares wrote:
Thats MY Point of view and while i will listen to constructive points of view from others i have to time for people whining because it doesn't suit them. I'm all for balance and fairness to ALL players not a specific group.

That said if null sec is purely a group thing why do people SOLO PVP and SOLO AFK Cloak camp?? The mind Boggles.....

Who said you could not solo play? The point of null is it favors a group over a solo player, assuming all other details to be equal.

As to cloaked vessels... it is not that cloaks should not change, but this stalemate effect is countering the free intel being given out by local.

We have right now, a case of: "I know you are there, but I cannot find you"
(Absolute presence awareness countered by absolute location concealment)

You cannot change one side without the other, and still have balance.

Too much focus on how to remove AFK cloaking. You are addressing a symptom of a problem, not the problem itself.

If you want to remove AFK cloaking's game impact, remove cloaked ships from displaying in local.

When this is done, it becomes reasonable to consider means to hunt cloaked vessels. NOT before this happens.

So long as people in a system magically know cloaked pilots are present with them, cloaked vessels should not be vulnerable to being hunted effectively.

Cloaking will be earned when cloaking awareness is earned. Balance must be maintained.
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
#79 - 2013-01-03 20:49:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Barbara Nichole
Zen Dijun wrote:
As hard as CCP works to make it so folks can't benefit from paying EVE away from the keyboard, I would like to suggest (and yes, I am sure it's been suggested before) the decloaking pulse.

This module could be ship or POS based and would force the cloaked pilot to tap a button to remain cloaked. If they're AFK, it would expose their ship and prevent the AFK nature of their encampment. If a cloak pilot has to tap a button every few minutes or so to remain cloaked, it would force them to focus on that activity rather than just log an account in and change screens for the rest of the day.

Another idea might be an "AWACS" ship specialized for scanning/decloaking/intel.

Is CCP planning on addressing the AFK nature of camped cloaked ships?


-- Zen



You are right, it's been brought up over and over...and it’s still a bad idea. Any module that decloaks system wide is simply over powered and will affect the game negatively. Then too, cloaking scanners with cloak scanning ships would suddenly become more popular than cell phone texting... there would be dozens in each system and at gate camps there would be enough to ensure no one would ever be able to successfully run a blockade ..And wormholes would become even more of a nightmare of stagnation. They would render cloaking of any type infunctional.

Both of your ideas have been posted... If like I suspect you already know this and are just a nerfherder trying to wear down players and CCP with your repetitious nerf idea, I welcome you immediately stop using cloaks.

As was stated, this is not the appropriate counter for people who are not at their keyboard. By the way AFK is not against the Eula as long as you use no macro and no bots. The true way to address your complaint remains removing the cloaked from the free intel channel, local.

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]

Mikhael Taron
Four Winds Industry
#80 - 2013-01-03 21:06:59 UTC
Cloaking is a valid tool of psychological warfare. If someone wants to pay to have a toon just sitting cloaked and winding up the nulsec carebears, that's legit.

I think nothing needs to be done. Leave it as it is.

You can fool some of the people all of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. You can make a fool out of yourself anytime.